Football club finances / FFP

[chef]

Only to the extent that they'll now be subject to the same rules as every other club.

I think the bigger impact here is the interest free loans. Which really is no different to an annual owner cash injection.

Interesting it was Chelsea, Everton and Newcastle who were the only clubs to come out to help you guys.

 

[moomba]

Interesting it was Chelsea, Everton and Newcastle who were the only clubs to come out to help you guys.

Yeah. Not sure if there will be a way around it (some talk about converting loans to equity) but I'm sure a bit more will come out in the next day or so.

 

[moomba]

 

[moomba]

Like this

 

[ossie_21]

Usually I’d think there is absolutely no way they could move the goalposts and all of a sudden completely change how PSR is calculated, but then I remembered this is the Premier League we’re talking about.

Time for Dick Master to resign in shame, the league to actually decide on things moving forward and everyone starts on a clean slate with time to prepare for whatever actually fit for purpose rules get decided on.

This whole thing is a ****ing shambles and the league keep posturing and then losing lol

 

[Jatz]

Governing body going from strength to strength.

 

[moomba]

I think the Richard Masters issue is one that isn't going away. Surely his position is long beyond untenable.

 

[Sphynx]

Hopefully this reignites the super league proposition.

 

[Zidane98]

Shareholder loan exclusions and 2 out of 25 transaction assessments found to be in breach. Not much of a victory.

 

[Zidane98]

Of note in the report



A finding that in general APT rules are lawful.

 

[moomba]

Shareholder loan exclusions and 2 out of 25 transaction assessments found to be in breach. Not much of a victory.

It's very much a victory. The rules are going to have to be totally rewritten to comply with competition law. Exactly what we wanted.

Hopefully we'll get some good compensation as well.

I guess the tribunal mustn't have received your legal brief insisting that it was against the rules for us to even take this to tribunal.

 

[moomba]

Of note in the report

View attachment 2135392

A finding that in general APT rules are lawful.

Absolutely. And if we didn't think that was the case we would have challenged them when APT rules were introduced, not when they were amended.

 

[moomba]

Richard Masters. Liar, liar, pants on fire.

 

[Zidane98]

It's very much a victory. The rules are going to have to be totally rewritten to comply with competition law. Exactly what we wanted.

Hopefully we'll get some good compensation as well.

I guess the tribunal mustn't have received your legal brief insisting that it was against the rules for us to even take this to tribunal.

If you call the part about shareholder loans being a victory go right ahead.

Rules regarding Inflated sponsorships to associated parties will not change and have been found to comply with competition law shareholder loans aside.

This is the main thing your club had issue with being an extension of the Abu Dhabi investment fund.

Would have been easier to resolve that small issue by vote at a shareholder meeting.

 

[moomba]

If you call the part about shareholder loans being a victory go right ahead.

Yes I do. I don't see the difference between a club getting an interest free loan from an owner and an owner dropping a bucket load of cash on the doorstep. One used to be illegal, one wasn't. Much fairer now.

Rules regarding Inflated sponsorships to associated parties will not change and have been found to comply with competition law shareholder loans aside.

I know this is hard for you to process but the rules have been declared illegal by the tribunal. Page 164 of the decision. They are currently unenforceable and will need to be re-written.

This is the main thing your club had issue with being an extension of the Abu Dhabi investment fund.

The main thing we were concerned with was that the rules were against competition law. We were proven right on that. If we had a problem with the idea of APT we would have taken the league to tribunal when it was introduced.

Would have been easier to resolve that small issue by vote at a shareholder meeting.

Given we would need 14 votes to get a rule changed, and eight clubs gave evidence against us I'd say it wouldn't have been easier to resolve at a shareholders meeting.

 

[Zidane98]

Yes I do. I don't see the difference between a club getting an interest free loan from an owner and an owner dropping a bucket load of cash on the doorstep. One used to be illegal, one wasn't. Much fairer now.

A minor issue that could easily have been resolved by vote at a shareholder meeting. Wouldn't see many clubs at all against that amendment.

I know this is hard for you to process but the rules have been declared illegal by the tribunal. Page 164 of the decision. They are currently unenforceable and will need to be re-written.



The main thing we were concerned with was that the rules were against competition law. We were proven right on that. If we had a problem with the idea of APT we would have taken the league to tribunal when it was introduced.

In most part it was found that the rules were compliant with law. Only the shareholder loan part was found to be a breach. This is an exceedingly minor issue, if you picked apart every rule and regulation in most competitions one could find issues if they wanted to.

Given we would need 14 votes to get a rule changed, and eight clubs gave evidence against us I'd say it wouldn't have been easier to resolve at a shareholders meeting.

Nothing will change apart from the shareholder loans amendment. The APT market valuation rules were found to be generally correct in law apart from this.

The main challenge as far as your mob were concerned was unfair APT valuations. On this City failed spectacularly. 23 out of 25 of your challenges were found to be incorrect on APT valuations. You won't be able to challenge these again.