APT Rules - Declared Void

[Zippity]

I do wonder if we have documents that show investments companies were prepared to make if it hadn't been for these rules.

Otherwise, I don't see how we can prove lost earnings.

It would be fantastic if our owners took the PL to court and absolutely fucking ruined them.

[Ragatino]

I do wonder if we have documents that show investments companies were prepared to make if it hadn't been for these rules.

Otherwise, I don't see how we can prove lost earnings.

It would be fantastic if our owners took the PL to court and absolutely fucking ruined them.

There seems to be some confused around the whole process.

1. City had a new sponsorship deal with Ethihad & First Abu Dhabi Bank rejected

The development comes after City took the Premier League to court having seen proposed sponsorship deals with Etihad Airways and First Abu Dhabi Bank blocked in 2023, with the club claiming that the division's Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules were unlawful.

Based on this rejection which was unlawful City brought the APT case against the Premier league and won.

Subsquently City are now able to sue the Prem for the 'loss of earning' to the amount of the proposed contract offered by Ethihad & First Abu Dhabi Bank.

Any other club who has also had a similar sponsorship deal rejected under these 'unenforceable rules' is also in a position to sue to be compensated for the loses of each contract rejected.

2. The points deductions have nothing to do with it

Breaching the FFP / PSR rules are doesn't mean that Everton or Forest can sue the Prem for loss of earning. That is a completely different situation not covered by the findings of the panel of 3. The deductions were allocated due to the clubs 'overspending' their PSR limit. Had the clubs had an Associated Party Transaction sponsorship offered rejected that directly impacted their revenue taking them over their PSR limit then lawyers can argue the case that the impact of the 'unenforceable rules' were the root cause of the to breach and subsequent points deductions.

At which point the loss of earning for any potential reduction in Prem Prize money for a club finishing one or two places lower in the league could part of the compensation claim. It's understood that each place in the prem table is worth £2.5m. Should a club finish 16th instead of 14th they will have lost £5m.

That amount could in theory then be claimed back by the club in addition to the 'loss of earning/revenue' from any sponsorship deals rejected under the 'unenforceable rules'.

The APT 1 findings are not a silver bullet to open the flood gates for any clubs to sue the prem for damages. Nor does it facilitate a free-for-all in terms of uncontrolled APT sponsorship deals.

To think that Aramco or another Saudi company are just gonna sign a £1billion / season sponsorship deal with NUFC is utterly ludicrous fearmongering by the cartel and their PR mouthpieces SkySportsPR (News) & TalkSht.

Board member of the separate 'PiF' entities are duty bound to ensure they run their businesses within the constraints of annual budgets. A portion of money will be allocated to Marketing and advertising. They employ the most elite marketing brand managers such as Sachi & Sachi to ensure they get the best RoI from their global marketing campaigns. Saudi's Expect Bang for Buck with a guide of $2 profit for every $1 spent.

Hope this makes more sense.