Yes good analysis. What I will say, is that there will be quite a large toxic hole of money that is due to be paid from this. People will have fronted a LOT of cash on the proviso of even bigger returns. They will have spent enormous amounts of manpower and time, and as a hedge fund will look weak as F if they just let people walk away scott free (operating in what is a very competitive and cut throat area). They can't really be seen to be that weak.
There will be a value too in this. Just like when you buy a house you put upwards of 10% down as a deposit and the house as collateral a hedge fund will want it's collateral. A hedge fund will demand a fair bit more collateral than a high street bank too (for a number of reasons but mainly as it's a riskier proposal, and they aim to make bigger gains than high streets bank). Let's put it this way, an entire department will probably be being laid off if it doesn't go ahead and they don't get paid back. Their investors, who they will have convinced to put money in are likely to be v wealthy and probably powerful people will be getting angry their funding has gone.
The question then becomes who will repay this value. You have 3 groups currently. The hedge fund, the teams that have stayed and the teams that have left. There are a myriad of possibilities that could play out. It could be that the Hedge fund guys don't see the court case as sufficient to take liability off the remaining members. It may be that that they accept it and drop claim, or put the claim into those who left. There's all sorts of possibilities beyond this.
What will be critical is what's in the small print, in either direction about leaving having signed up. Most contracts will have some sort of break clause, but they will also have a whole manner of small print that make it very difficult. I have just had a contract returned this morning as it happens where the person I have sent it to feels they have an opt out option, but in reality it would not be worthwhile for them to pursue it due to the small print that exists. The likelihood is, that the nature of this small print is going to underpin exactly who or what is liable.
But yes, this will rumble on. For those PL clubs they are stuck in a very tough spot. The whole football world has made it clear they hate the product, including most of their core fans (who still provide most of the money). A handful of glory hunters from elsewhere who watch on streams are not going to fill grounds or frankly spend the same to make up for the core business fans who will probably boycott. The PL seems to have talked itself into a position whereby if they go and pursue playing in it, they will probably have to leave the PL or at worst face enormous initial points penalties (and probably worse from broadcasters etc). Yet on the flip side they have this toxic debt situation whereby very wealthy hedge funds and investors want to claw a lot of lost revenue back.
It's not uncommon in this scenario for a hedge fund to also pursue not just lost money, but also proposed lost profits, if the contracts have been ended with a breach. It is a far more unregulated world compared to mortgages. But imagine your bank can pursue you not just for the value of the loan, but also the value of any proposed interest payments that are due.
