Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[Scoot]

8 minutes ago, JonBez comesock said:

 

 

"Significant"

[timeEd32]

7 minutes ago, JonBez comesock said:

 

 

"All that I can say is we are living in the most exciting time for sports law."

 

Good thing it's just as exciting as a 25 yard thunderbastard that hits the underside of the bar or Willock's pass to Isak in the 6-1.

[Shearergol]

24 minutes ago, Dokko said:

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.

Takes the piss that Brighton are being run using interest free loans but can afford to buy our prospects 

[andycap]

It stated in the Samuel article that six clubs sided with them. 

11 conspirators take Ipswich Southampton out the equation. 

So I reckon 

Arsenal

Spurs

Man utd

Westham

Palace

Liverpool

Brighton

Wolves

Bournemouth 

Fulham

Brentford

 

[astraguy]

In this arbitration process, Chelsea, Newcastle and Everton all acted as witnesses for City.

Witnesses for the Premier League included Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Tottenham, Brighton and West Ham.

Brentford, Bournemouth, Fulham and Wolves wrote letters in support of the rules.

[RodneyCisse]

1 minute ago, Shearergol said:

Takes the piss that Brighton are being run using interest free loans but can afford to buy our prospects 

Doesn’t really seem right, given they’d be able to sell him at a profit eventually.

[Decky]

We need to fire some big deals in now asap before the cunts put another rule in. Although its hard to see how they could ever block these deals now. 

 

The shareholder loans stuff must be encouraging news for restructuring PSR rules too. 

[gbandit]

It’s interesting how many clubs are happy to be in bed with the cartel clubs who have absolutely zero interest in their existence and wanted to burn the league to the ground with the European super league. Fucking idiots 

[Jackie Broon]

8 minutes ago, Stifler said:

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.

 

It's pretty likely they've been doing the same with us as well.

[astraguy]

3 minutes ago, Decky said:

We need to fire some big deals in now asap before the cunts put another rule in. Although its hard to see how they could ever block these deals now. 

 

The shareholder loans stuff must be encouraging news for restructuring PSR rules too. 

can't see it being that easy,Jan window will be the same as the summer one. next summer is key

[Hudson]

3 hours ago, TRC said:

Just because your owners are rich, you shouldnt beable to put unlimited money into something that is a competitive sport imo. Success should be on sporting achievement not luck of having a rich owner.

 

Just my opinion.

Football has always been that way, just the numbers are way bigger now. 

[Steve Charlton]

The gloves will have to come off after these findings surely.Proven in court to be a cartel fuck sake

 

I wonder if we have had sponsorships blocked? Citeh seeking damages aswell

 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by Steve Charlton

[Heron]

18 minutes ago, Stifler said:

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.

If one of which was deemed to be £80m for the year then that could mean a claim for what? £20m? For just one of said deals to Man City - is that correct?

 

I wonder how much the PL actually has/rakes in once all the competition money is divvied back out to clubs etc. This is just one as well, there could be a multitude of similar claims and the screw also getting turned by the likes of Arsenal et al as they collectively shite their pants.

 

The PL could be fucked.

 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by Heron

[Holloway]

why are west ham sucking cartel cock, have they had enough of dildos

[Hudson]

45 minutes ago, LFEE said:

 

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.

People have forgot the noise at the time when it became apparent what The Cartel Clubs had done behind closed doors in getting Masters the Job.

 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by Hudson

[LFEE]

15 minutes ago, Stifler said:

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.

Probably the reason we found ourselves scrambling to meet PSR in July. Have said that the club had sponsorships they expected to go through being delayed and delayed.

 

That aside the club have played a blinder using Man City as the stalking horse in all that. Might not be as groundbreaking initially as some think/hope but definitely the start of better times for us and certainly not a good look for some of our competitors.

[Miggys First Goal]

16 minutes ago, astraguy said:

In this arbitration process, Chelsea, Newcastle and Everton all acted as witnesses for City.

Witnesses for the Premier League included Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Tottenham, Brighton and West Ham.

Brentford, Bournemouth, Fulham and Wolves wrote letters in support of the rules.

 

Fuck all of them.

[Hudson]

5 minutes ago, Heron said:

If one iof which was deemed to be £80m for the year then that could mean a claim for what? £20m? For just one of said deals to Man City - is that correct?

 

I wonder how much the PL actually has/rakes in once all the competition money is divvied back out to clubs etc. This is just one as well, there could be a multitude of similar claims and the screw also getting turned by the likes of Arsenal et al as they collectively shite their pants.

 

The PL could be fucked.

Tried to look on company house, but they have not posted accounts for 23 and are about 6 months late on normal accounts posting date of April.

 

Are they skint ?

[Cronky]

1 hour ago, Keegans Export said:

I don't think that's true, the interest on the loan still counts.

 

Lets say you take a £100m loan to build a new training ground and it costs you £15m/year in interest. The £100m doesn't get included because it's infrastructure but the £15m does.

 

If you take the same loan and buy two players with it, both the amortisation & wages get included plus the £15m interest on the loan.

 

 

Now that makes sense, thank you.

 

The rule about interest in relation to infrastructure projects still seems a bit unfair. The clubs with the wealthier owners wouldn't need to provide the money in the form of a loan.

[duo]

1 hour ago, Fak said:

Are we about to lift off? 

I guess time will tell...

[LFEE]

 

[Hudson]

5 minutes ago, Hudson said:

Tried to look on company house, but they have not posted accounts for 23 and are about 6 months late on normal accounts posting date of April.

 

Are they skint ?

They just reported in a different manner than normal.

[Miggys First Goal]

2 minutes ago, LFEE said:

 

 

Points deductions galore about to drop!

[Wolfcastle]

The whole thing is a mess really. By the letter of the rules Man CIty have been bending them and yet the only reason they or anybody else seeks to do that is because of rules brought in when the elites decided they didn't want anymore Chelsea's. Clubs spending more money than anybody else had never been a problem until then and neither apparently was dominance (Man United, Liverpool)

 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by Wolfcastle

[SUPERTOON]