Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[Yorkie]

Have found it very challenging to get my head around all of this, but can we assume that the interest-free loan reveal will provoke a 'back to the drawing board' re-hash of PSR rules? Surely, with so many teams suddenly liable to massive PSR implications, there's going to be some hastily-organised amendments?

[lovejoy]

Just now, Yorkie said:

Have found it very challenging to get my head around all of this, but can we assume that the interest-free loan reveal will provoke a 'back to the drawing board' re-hash of PSR rules? Surely, with so many teams suddenly liable to massive PSR implications, there's going to be some hastily-organised amendments?

You'd imagine so.

 

Not sure anyone has a clue what comes next tbh, but we're going to soon find out.

[bobbydazzla]

16 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

 

He can just sell them to himself as I understand it. We've done the same thing whenever PIF/Reubens have wanted to put cash into the clubs accounts.

 

Aye, but then his money is still tied up in his own Brighton shares

 

I'm on about how he gets his £300m investment out of the club, if he wanted to reduce the £300m that is currently a loan that can be recalled but under new rules might have to be equity

 

To release his equity he needs to either sell shares to a 3rd party, or pay himself in cash via a dividend and take a tax hit

 

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by bobbydazzla

[Boey_Jarton]

18 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

 

sad

The majority of football journalists are financially illiterate.

 

Jacob Whitehead completely misses the point. 

 

Man City have proven that financing activities (i.e. owner loans) need to be in scope of APT, otherwise they are unlawful.

 

I.e. they have proven that the premier league cannot just arbitrarily pick and choose which transactions are under the scope of APT and which are not, based on nothing more, than what suits certain clubs at a particular point in time. 

 

This casts a major shadow over PSR and undermines the whole concept.

 

Many clubs could be plunged into PSR deficits (e.g. Brighton). 

 

How on earth can they determine the fair value of a loan to each club?

 

The fair value of a loan is based on the risk free rate plus a margin to compensate the investor for risk. Risk is based on a multitude of factors (market based risk, the risk of default) that are bespoke to each transaction. 

 

The premier league would need to create a cottage industry just to assess owner loans and related party commercial deals, and even then , every single decision they make could be challenged as there is no right or wrong answer. 

 

[lovejoy]

Just now, Boey_Jarton said:

The majority of football journalists are financially illiterate.

 

Jacob Whitehead completely misses the point. 

 

Man City have proven that financing activities (i.e. owner loans) need to be in scope of APT, otherwise they are unlawful.

 

I.e. they have proven that the premier league cannot just arbitrarily pick and choose which transactions are under the scope of APT and which are not, based on nothing more, than what suits certain clubs at a particular point in time. 

 

This casts a major shadow over PSR and undermines the whole concept.

 

Many clubs could be plunged into PSR deficits (e.g. Brighton). 

 

How on earth can they determine the fair value of a loan to each club?

 

The fair value of a loan is based on the risk free rate plus a margin to compensate the investor for risk. Risk is based on a multitude of factors (market based risk, the risk of default) that are bespoke to each transaction. 

 

The premier league would need to create a cottage industry just to assess owner loans and related party commercial deals, and even then , every single decision they make could be challenged as there is no right or wrong answer. 

 

 

 

I think the majority miss the point tbh.

[Nucasol]

2 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

Have found it very challenging to get my head around all of this, but can we assume that the interest-free loan reveal will provoke a 'back to the drawing board' re-hash of PSR rules? Surely, with so many teams suddenly liable to massive PSR implications, there's going to be some hastily-organised amendments?

Then people will challenge amendments on legal grounds from their various angles and it ends up with the PL being penetrated via more directions than a porn star in a gangbang.

[lovejoy]

Just now, lovejoy said:

 

 

I think the majority miss the point tbh.

 

sorry, just re-read the first line, you've said exactly this 😂

[gjohnson]

Impossible to say whether it's of any use to us at all. It could be good or it could be nothing. It's not detrimental to us, but will make it harder for certain clubs.

 

At worst it's not bad for us. At best it could mean bigger and more sponsorships.

 

Who the f**k knows. Need to be a lawyer or accountant to understand football nowadays

[r0cafella]

4 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

Have found it very challenging to get my head around all of this, but can we assume that the interest-free loan reveal will provoke a 'back to the drawing board' re-hash of PSR rules? Surely, with so many teams suddenly liable to massive PSR implications, there's going to be some hastily-organised amendments?

I’d imagine the later, because ultimately it comes down to politics. Yes city won this battle but ultimately it’s a ruling about what isn’t allowed not what is allowed. 
 

The politics have not changed; if anything both sides ie cartel clubs and the underlings position will become more entrenched. 

[Jack27]

 

Going all out eh?

[lovejoy]

How will they get anything passed going forward?

If 7 clubs team up, then nothing will go through will it?

 

 

[r0cafella]

Just now, Jack27 said:

 

Going all out eh?

You love to see it though.   

[r0cafella]

Just now, lovejoy said:

How will they get anything passed going forward?

If 7 clubs team up, then nothing will go through will it?

 

 

Absolutely aye, it becomes a question of do they have the votes or can they find them. Just need one to change side; I don’t imagine that will be too difficult. 

[lovejoy]

2 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

 

Going all out eh?

 

 

This is just fantastic 😂

[Ikon]

It’s like they have a 30-man squad in their U20’s full of Nick de Marcos  

[lovejoy]

This is going to go off.

 

In a letter seen by The Times, Cliff has described the summary of the panel’s award as “not correct” and warns of further legal disputes if clubs bow to pressure to make some swift amendments to the rules on Associated Party Transactions (APT).

An emergency meeting of the clubs is due to be held next week but it will take place against the backdrop of this war of words as well as the continuing hearing into City’s 115 alleged breaches of financial rules.

Cliff tells clubs that the Premier League’s “summary is misleading and contains several inaccuracies”.

“Of even greater concern,” Cliff adds, “is the PL’s suggestion that new APT rules should be passed within the next ten days.”

The league said that, after the two-week private arbitration hearing in June, the tribunal had actually backed its APT rules, identifying only a “small number of discrete elements . .. which do not, in current form, comply with competition and public law requirements”.

 

 

 

Cliff said: “When the PL consulted on and proposed the original APT Rules in late 2021, we pointed out that the process (which took several weeks) was rushed, ill-thought-out and would result in rules that were anti-competitive. The recent award (conclusion of the panel) has validated those concerns entirely.

“The tribunal has declared the APT rules to be unlawful. MCFC’s [Manchester City’s] position is that this means all of the APT rules are void, and have been since 2021.

“In recent correspondence, the PL agreed with MCFC that this is an issue which will need to be resolved by the tribunal. It is therefore remarkable that the PL is now seeking to involve the member clubs in a process to amend the APT rules at a time when it does not even know the status of those rules.”

A warning from Cliff then follows, suggesting there has been a loss of trust in the league.

“We will be writing separately about this to the PL but in the meantime, given the findings in the award, this is the time for careful reflection and consideration by all clubs, and not for a knee-jerk reaction,” he writes. “Such an unwise course would be likely to lead to further legal proceedings with further legal costs. It is critical for member clubs to feel that they can have trust in their regulator.”

 

 

Edited 7 hours ago by lovejoy

[lovejoy]

But remember folks, this will not make a single jot of difference to NUFC.

 

We must not forget that part. 

[gjohnson]

1 minute ago, lovejoy said:

 

 

This is just fantastic 😂

It certainly is. Shows you can do whatever you want in football and just tie it up in legal for years. By the time any wrong doing is proved, it's 15 years later and no-one cares anymore.

 

In a world of criminals, the only crime is being caught...and if you've got good lawyers it can be delayed indefinitely 

[UpTheToon]

Man City must be pushing the deals that were originally rejected to now be accepted.  That latest article stating their belief that the ATP rules are not relevant (and have never been) because of the ruling.  If they announce those deals then it's floodgates open time...

[lovejoy]

Just now, UpTheToon said:

Man City must be pushing the deals that were originally rejected to now be accepted.  That latest article stating their belief that the ATP rules are not relevant (and have never been) because of the ruling.  If they announce those deals then it's floodgates open time...

 

Sure is.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, lovejoy said:

But remember folks, this will not make a single jot of difference to NUFC.

 

We must not forget that part. 

It impacts the entire league no matter which way it goes. Anyone suggestion otherwise isn’t paying attention. it’s the level of impact which is what we have to pay attention to. 

[Ikon]

No matter what it’s time for some MJ popcorn. Having said that, football is a sad state of affairs (long before this) 

[TRon]

6 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

 

Going all out eh?

 

 

Don't blame them. There was an internal email within PL circles which specifically mentioned the rules were aimed at Gulf clubs which sort of got brushed aside by the arbitration. Not surprised they feel there is room for a harder kick to the PL balls.

[SuperFlat]

This whole episode has really exposed which journalists are in the PL's pocket, like.

[lovejoy]

Just now, r0cafella said:

It impacts the entire league no matter which way it goes. Anyone suggestion otherwise isn’t paying attention. it’s the level of impact which is what we have to pay attention to. 

 

Agreed.