City v Prem over APT rules

[Jammy89]

So City and the prem have settled out of court.

Whilst it is being presented as win for the prem, they have totally caved and have agreed that City can have their mega deal with Etihad. If they hadn't, then in court it would just prove that PSR isn't fit for purpose.

In doing so it sets new precedents for close sponsers to owners and what can be put in.

This gives our new CEO (who has a background in big commercial deals) a chance to really get some stuff sorted.

Although it does stink a bit and I bet the 115 charges will disappear next.

[Zippity]

The whole situation is an absolute farce.

[Jammy89]

The whole situation is an absolute farce.

Course it is - but hopefully a farce we can use to our advantage.

[Guybrush]

My head hurts 😆

So Prem are claiming a win, their APT rules stopping Man Citys stadium sponsor are valid.

But

Man City are going to re submit their Stadium sponsorship proposal again and expect it to be passed.

So from what I can tell, and I may be being a little thick here.

The APT rules, that have stopped Man City?s new stadium sponsorship to date, are valid and can be upheld - lovely, I understand

The same stadium sponsorship proposal is now going to be submitted for approval under the same APT rules and will be accepted - totally understandable is it clearly falls within the rules.

So under the APT rules, the Prem were right to block the deal, and there is nothing to stop the Man City deal going ahead.

So clearly both parties are absolutely 100% right, neither were wrong, so they both rightly get their own way knowing they have come out on top after trading some punches in the schoolyard, shook hands and walk away knowing they both punched the other harder than they got punched back.

I think I?m getting it 🙄

[Jammy89]

Seems about right.