Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[LFEE]

9 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

I’m on about the CAT hearing that was streamed live and tens of thousands of people tuned in to watch it unfold 

 

It was a car crash for the PL lawyers, I was blown away at how easily their scam was exposed 

 

Few days later the takeover was approved 

 

 

 

Yes remember the one. Wasn’t sure if it was actually part of the CAT case or just prelims of the CAT case. Think that was next in line.

 

Anyway like you say not long after the takeover went through but only because SA paid £1b to cover the piracy issue.

[bobbydazzla]

38 minutes ago, LFEE said:

Yes remember the one. Wasn’t sure if it was actually part of the CAT case or just prelims of the CAT case. Think that was next in line.

 

Anyway like you say not long after the takeover went through but only because SA paid £1b to cover the piracy issue.

It was around a week from the jurisdiction hearing (prelims) taking place, to the takeover being approved

 

A takeover that had been held up by the PL refusing to approve it since April 2020. 18 months of stalling. 

 

At the prelim hearing the PL could see they were about to be exposed for looking after the interests of a cartel of clubs who didn’t want a wealthy NUFC, so the piracy deal got sorted in a couple of days, after 18 months of the PL dicking PIF about and hoping they’d walk away

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by bobbydazzla

[Keegans Export]

48 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

 

They already sponsor their shirts so it's not a new relationship. Still a hefty chunk of cash mind.

[Ben]

Just now, Keegans Export said:

They already sponsor their shirts so it's not a new relationship. Still a hefty chunk of cash mind.

Just chucking some chicken feed down before they announce the proper deal 

[Gazzaschicken]

Can't wait till I next go to st James and take a piss in a £30m sponsored Saudi urinal 

[NWMag]

Hypothetically could we see PIF/PIF linked companies giving out sponsorship deals elsewhere to raise the ceiling of our own future deals in terms of FMV?

[Vaj]

11 minutes ago, NWMag said:

Hypothetically could we see PIF/PIF linked companies giving out sponsorship deals elsewhere to raise the ceiling of our own future deals in terms of FMV?

Was just thinking this. Can’t really argue that it isn’t market value when they are giving out sponsors to unrelated parties of the same value. 

[dcmk]

12 minutes ago, NWMag said:

Hypothetically could we see PIF/PIF linked companies giving out sponsorship deals elsewhere to raise the ceiling of our own future deals in terms of FMV?

It's certainly possible. Personally I doubt it though and the only reason being is when Saudi were spending huge money on players such like Ruben Nerves and Mitrovic, I thought along the same lines as you, and they were deliberately inflating all the transfer fees so when it came to purchasing our cast offs they could justify it easier.

 

But that never materialised.  Although we sold ASM that summer we certainly didn't get an inflated fee.

[Heron]

9 hours ago, WilliamPS said:

Man City say yes, the PL says no. Be another legal scrap before we know who is right 

That lasts 5 years.

[Stifler]

58 minutes ago, NWMag said:

Hypothetically could we see PIF/PIF linked companies giving out sponsorship deals elsewhere to raise the ceiling of our own future deals in terms of FMV?

Yeah, it certainly helps. If Atletico Madrid can get that for their stadium, then NUFC would argue that we could get similar. Assuming we are not regularly in the Champions League, we would argue that we are in a bigger more globally recognised domestic league, and have a larger capacity, which would balance it out.

 

In all honesty, if PIF could have their time again, I’m sure they would have singed commercial deals with the club under Ashley, with break clauses in it in the event that he never sold the club to them. That way the deals would have been there before the takeover and suspicion, and new rules came along.

[Stifler]

4 hours ago, Ben said:

Simon Jordon has said the regulator won't have a central budget which means it will have hardly any staff, just another useless govenment quango

Look at the regulators we have now.

We have OFGEM who sided with the energy companies and increased fuel prices far above what was required, and is still keeping them high.

 

OFWAT who allow the water companies to pump your shits out to sea, instead of cleaning the water, and letting Thames water be on the verge of bankruptcy.

OFCOM who allow BNPNews to call itself a news channel, but not regulate what they say, whilst the BBC got bollocked that one time they never towed the Tory party line.

 

I full expect an independent football regulator to have a board of Jim Ratcliffe, John Henry, Stan Kroenke, Daniel Levy, and chaired by supercunt Rick Parry who has spent his whole career trying to hand the footballing world to Liverpool.

 

 

Edited 30 minutes ago by Stifler

[et tu brute]

1 hour ago, Heron said:

That lasts 5 years.

I hope it does as the rules have been found to be unlawful (even on one point if found true, but it's three points according to City). As a result currently those rules in APT have to be null and void until either corrected or removed. This is just the start

[Stottie]

None of the main European Super League clubs, Liverpool, Man U, Arsenal and Tottenham have any credibility in talking about the "integrity" of the Premier League. They wanted to reduce it to something they played their reserves in. To something that would not reward any other club with a European place.

 

 

Edited 11 minutes ago by Stottie