Financial Fair Play investigation

[catcherintherye]

You haven't got a clue what you are talking about.

The Premier League isn't a professional body. It is a company owned by the members of the Premier League.

Ok. And it can be sued. Lots of teams are considering legal action.

One company, can sue another company, even if it is a majority shareholder.

And if we are to be pedantic, it is both. It fulfils numerous functions, which is sort of why independent regulation is required.

 

[wainy]

I dont accept that, tbh.

I think we're more likely than not to get out of this relegation scrap and that any punishment we receive wont hand us an impossible task in terms of survival next season.

There's lot of people losing their heads at the minute - helped along by mischevious media reports. But if we survive this season I think we'll be ok.

I think we avoid it this year. But then the real questions start, who will be sold? Pickford and onana? How much of them funds will be available and what punishments will we have taken for the transgressions of the last few years?

Tbh I haven’t read any media, it’s all there in black and white. We’re right up it without a paddle, the clubs losing money hand over fist and we have complete morons at the helm who have no idea how to turn it around. We are literally relying on one man to keep throwing good money after bad, it’s a cycle that can’t continue.

 

[Damo_1878]

Really ?

As there is no punishment metered out as of yet there is no recourse from either side.

In the event there is, there are a few mitigating circumstances that would prompt legal action.

Assurances from the Prem we were compliant.Plus notifying the rest of the league there is no case to answer.
Even allowing the club to bring in transfers.
Constant dialogue with the Prem throughout this period.
The obvious Covid connection.
The unforseen Russian invasion of Ukraine and subsequent withdrawal of the clubs major sponsor.
Continual compliance over the last few seasons to meet the rules.

Legally wise nowhere near as clear cut as you think.

That is all very well and good.

None of that allows us to launch a legal action

None of it

It has to go to the independent commission

@gwladysnight and @Mrk will confirm

 

[catcherintherye]

They can't until the processes they have signed up for have been exhausted. We are 1/20th of the company that makes the rules we signed up to.

Of course we could. If we felt the processes were being held in an unfair way, we could open up a legal challenge.

It probably wouldnt work, but it could be done.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Not off the top of my head, but according to their arbitrary figures, we have lost over 105m over the last 3 years.

You keep using the term arbitrary figures, that's kind of the point of a voted on loss limit?

 

[Neiler]

So we reported a loss of £44.7m, representing a £76m (63%) reduction on the loss of £121.3m for 2020/21.

However the detail is this, we generated £67.7m of profit on player trading transactions.

Without selling Digne and Richarlison etc, we would have made a £112 mill loss, a loss down only 8 mill from the season before.

The business is a basket case, not much is improving fundamentally, we‘re just selling our biggest assets to stay afloat.

Put it this way, we didn’t sell Richarlison or Digne to reinvest and improve. We sold them to pay our losses and in selling them, we didn’t even do that, with a £44.7 mill remainder. We sold them for about 60%odd of our loss.

Awful set accounts really, don’t fool yourself things are improving. The fundamentals here are a lot worse then I thought they’d be. It’s concerning.

 

[catcherintherye]

That is all very well and good.

None of that allows us to launch a legal action

None of it

It has to go to the independent commission

He is a lot more on the money than you.

 

[gwladysnight]

For about the 8th time. Yes I know.

You dont need to keep pointing out the parameters for how teams can sue. We get it mate. The whole forum knows this, apart from you about 1 hour ago.

Except you.

The legally binding conditions of our membership of the Premier League mean we cannot sue.

We entered into a legal agreement that means we have to abide by Premier league rules. That means we agreed to an Independent panel followed by an arbitrary panel.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Yes as I indicated about 25m over their arbitrary, none inflation adjusted figure.

Which in the EFL would be worth a 12-15 points deduction.

 

[Damo_1878]

He is a lot more on the money than you.

He's literally not.

You keep trying to tell me about something I earn my living in.

 

[catcherintherye]

You keep using the term arbitrary figures, that's kind of the point of a voted on loss limit?

I dont think it was ever voted upon, and the number is arbitrary.

 

[catcherintherye]

Which in the EFL would be worth a 12-15 points deduction.

We are not in the EFL.

 

[Damo_1878]

Except you.

The legally binding conditions of our membership of the Premier League mean we cannot sue.

We entered into a legal agreement that means we have to abide by Premier league rules. That means we agreed to an Independent panel followed by an arbitrary panel.

I endorse this post.

 

[catcherintherye]

He's literally not.

You keep trying to tell me about something I earn my living in.

You earn money by telling people how law doesnt work?

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

We are not in the EFL.

I dread to think what sanctions they'd push for if a Championship club those losses in a £39m limit. Ie £13m, £111m and an average of £130m albeit pre allowances etc.