Joelinton7 Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 1 hour ago, Stifler said: Yeah, they think it is a defence that they were always going to do this, but actually it’s incriminating that they actually were never going to implement them. In the space of 3 years before we were taken over, and 2 years before our takeover was proposed, they would have done it. They clearly ignored it, hoping the team taken over by Saudi or equally similarly rich countries/individuals was one of Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal, or Spurs. Yep, as long as it was money coming into the cartel it would have been fine. Dancing in the streets of sky sports would have abounded. So they were always intending to review/change the rules, it just so happened to come two days after Newcastle United’s takeover by Saudi PIF. Okaaay then 👍 🤪 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 3 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: Ashley had a 50m loan with us at some point. I think it was repaid as part of the sale? That might be why other clubs do it. To raise funds we seem to put funds into the shares Yeah, they do it as a way of putting money into the club in a way that means they can get it back in the future with much lower personal risk. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upthemags Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 25 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said: Not sure how true but… Bodes well for our January spending - many will need to offload talent to make ends meet before the next acct period closes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 21 minutes ago, Stifler said: The loans thing is going to fuck yo quite a few clubs. Even if they aren’t using that avenue, it’s now been taken away from them. They won’t be happy. So far they have tried to block our takeover, block us from buying and selling players, block us from sponsorships, and all they have done is blocked their own clubs from accessing a source of revenue, or cheat code. I can’t see how Masters survives much longer. He’s not done anything any of the clubs have wanted him to do, he’s now put them in a weaker position. On top of this he has presided over the only Premier League broadcast deal to not increase on the previous one, when the likes of the NFL, and even the EFL are increasing theirs. He’s also lost long term supplier/sponsor Nike. Every discussion about the Premier League now is either FFP issue, or a VAR issue, with Everton, and Forest having points deductions. Great point in your first paragraph. However as for your second he’s done everything they’ve asked and thats why we are where we are now. In an illegal quagmire and a less attractive league to many due to strangled competition. Ultimately Masters is just a Patsy. He has absolutely no control. Just a figurehead to take the praise and blame and keep attention away from various owners with too much sway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 Any reference to APT has to be taking out of the rules as it' unlawful or the rules amended to match up with UK law Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 Buy Minteh back for £50m charging the PL the difference. After all, we were forced to sell him due to their illegal restricting of trade. So many cases like this about to head their way. Goodbye PL. You are fucked. Proper fucked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
astraguy Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 32 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said: Not sure how true but… how our man utd not in this? though owe billions Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoot Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 5 minutes ago, et tu brute said: Any reference to APT has to be taking out of the rules as it' unlawful or the rules amended to match up with UK law APT as a whole are now unlawful. Not really sure how anyone can claim this doesn't really change much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodneyCisse Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 1 minute ago, astraguy said: how our man utd not in this? though owe billions Premier League when Man U walk by with a bag of debt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 (edited) We were 2 days into a takeover and hadn't even started spending any money or making sponsorship deals and yet 11 x clubs were already scheming behind the scenes with the PL to block our financial capabilities Gang of cunts Edited October 7 by bobbydazzla Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
astraguy Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 Just now, bobbydazzla said: We were 2 days into a takeover and hadn't even started spending any money or talking about sponsorship deals and yet 11 x clubs were already scheming behind the scenes with the PL to block our financial capabilities Gang of cunts do we know the clubs? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBez comesock Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 3 minutes ago, Scoot said: APT as a whole are now unlawful. Not really sure how anyone can claim this doesn't really change much. So why no rule change ? Seems like Man City won a few minor points ? I’ve tried to read as much as possible on it and no real definitive answer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eveready Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 4 minutes ago, astraguy said: how our man utd not in this? though owe billions Mostly banks and other financial institutions, not shareholder loans I think. They pay interest on it which harms their PSR/FFP position as far as I'm aware. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoot Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 2 minutes ago, astraguy said: do we know the clubs? All the ones who gave evidence on behalf of the PL in this APT tribunal may hold a few clues... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 1 minute ago, astraguy said: do we know the clubs? Staveley talked openly about Spurs and Liverpool being the two biggest anti-NUFC protagonists Beyond that it's just educated guess work on the rest Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoot Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 Just now, JonBez comesock said: So why no rule change ? Seems like Man City won a few minor points ? I’ve tried to read as much as possible on it and no real definitive answer The rules will be changed in regards to APT. How can they not. They're "unlawful" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 8 minutes ago, et tu brute said: Any reference to APT has to be taking out of the rules as it' unlawful or the rules amended to match up with UK law That's not my reading of the decision, it is clear that the rules are only unlawful on limited grounds: (i) that the APT Rules are unlawful on account of being in breach of sections 2 and 18 of the Competition Act 1998 because they exclude from their scope shareholder loans and for no other reason; (ii) that the Amended APT Rules are unlawful on account of being in breach of sections 2 and 18 of the Competition Act 1998 as they exclude from their scope shareholder loans and because of the pricing changes in Appendix 18 of the Amended APT Rules and for no other reason; (iii) that APT Rules and the Amended APT Rules are unlawful on account of being procedurally unfair because a club is unable to comment upon the comparable transaction data relied upon by the PL before the PL determines whether a transaction is not at FMV and for no other reason; Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 2 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said: We were 2 days into a takeover and hadn't even started spending any money or making sponsorship deals and yet 11 x clubs were already scheming behind the scenes with the PL to block our financial capabilities Gang of cunts In fairness the takeover was 2 year in the making so they’ll of been aligning their ducks in fear we made a breakthrough with it I seriously think they thought they had us backed into a corner until PIF paid £1b to sort the piracy issue out and showed how serious they were and remove the last obstacle of any merit. Quite ironic it was 3yrs today for the takeover Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 (edited) Also, we were a club that had been hollowed out to its bare bones, declining massively on and off the pitch for 14 years This wasn't a rich club getting richer, it was a club that had been fucked over by a parasitic owner getting the chance to rebuild and compete again. And 11 x PL teams and the PL itself schemed away to stop it happening Edited October 7 by bobbydazzla Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pubteam Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 From my reading of this I don't think it changes much, they just need to change the wording, but the monstrosity that is FMV is here to stay. Football is fucked, the cartel have won. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty66 Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 7 minutes ago, astraguy said: do we know the clubs? Not officially but from little bits of info on various things I've seen over many months you can basically nail on Liverpool,Spurs,Man Utd, West Ham,C Palace,Arsenal for a start. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBez comesock Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Charlton Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 Matt Lawton: "Crucially, the panel deemed the rules to be unlawful, and in breach of competition law “by object”, a serious and damning infringement akin to price-fixing by cartel members" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 Just now, bobbydazzla said: Also, we were a club that had been hollowed out to its bare bones, declining massively on and off the pitch for 14 years This wasn't a rich club getting richer, it was a club that had been fucked over financially getting the chance to rebuild and compete again. And 11 x PL teams and the PL itself schemed away to stop it happening Yep. One of my main issues with PSR etc. It punished us for what many deemed a safely/well run and ultimately the ultimate PSR club. It highlights its not what the rules are for at the end of the day as those in debt can do what they wish as they just argue projections are big enough to service the debts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted October 7 Share Posted October 7 Interesting to note that the Premier League have been deemed guilty of delaying an outcome on their sponsorships to be approved or rejected at 3 months, and 2 months, both of which are ‘unreasonable, unjust, and outside of their own riles, and guidelines.’ So basically the Premier League twice delayed making a decision on sponsorship deals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now