Manchester City’s court case, which was brought against the Premier League’s hastily written Associated Party Transaction (APT) sponsorship rules, has resulted in both sides claiming a victory. A slew of articles and features released on Monday 7 October issued varying degrees of victory for each side, with the Twitter/X accounts of sports journalists across the land doing the same. The waters are certainly muddied.
What is clear is that the implemented APT rules and amendments from December 2021 and earlier this year in February have been deemed “unlawful” and are a breach of UK competition law. The breach centres around the deliberate exclusion of shareholder loans, which bizarrely, where exempt from APT rules, and as a knock-on effect PSR calculations too. An article in the Times highlights how Arsenal have around £200m of unaccounted shareholder loans which when considered could see them fail to comply with PSR rules. It’s worth highlighting that this is something Newcastle would’ve fallen foul of under the Ashley ownership as he gave the club upwards of £100m worth of interest-free loans.
However, it’s not all the APT rules that have been deemed “unlawful”, the ruling has stated the need for regulation of APT sponsorships, and the Premier League have stated that they will continue to operate an APT ruleset as they are “necessary” to enforce the leagues PSR rules. These rules will be amended ASAP by the Premier League “taking into account the findings” and “can quickly and effectively” be amended, the Premier League said further in its statement.
So, what does all this mean for Newcastle United? Well, it certainly clarifies, or should that be crystalises, that the December 2021 APT rule changes where all about stopping the clubs upward mobility under new ownership at the behest of the Premier League and certain member clubs. Rules that were so hastily implemented (and have been running for three years) they have been found ‘unlawful’ but conveniently didn’t consider a mechanism of financing football operations favoured at Arsenal, Manchester United, and Chelsea.
The ruling also potentially opens the door for lawsuits centred around discrimination and loss of earnings, specifically around Manchester City’s two aborted sponsorship deals with Etihad, but also around any other deals that were in the process of being negotiated before or during the rule changes. This could be a watch this space moment for Newcastle as there has never been any indication that the club was pursuing these sorts of deals prior to the rule changes.
Monday 7 October 2024 could be a red-letter day in the history of Newcastle United but with the Premier League keen to present the ruling as business as usual it’ll be interesting to see how much more bureaucracy will start to impact on the football pitch at the highest level of English football.
What is clear is that the Man City lawyers clearly felt the new APT rules where “scaremongering”, as Mail Sport put it, after the PIF takeover of Newcastle and used this in their arguments with the Premier League and the tribunal. This has certainly been proven to be true, partially, by todays ruling.
Frankly, this is something any Newcastle United fan could’ve told you in December 2021.
We all knew the new rules were aimed at NUFC. We now know, however, that the EPL is a busted flush and that nice man Mr Masters will be looking for a new job quite soon.
davewallace(Quote)
Good to see a well informed, balanced piece of writing untainted by the shameless gaslighting currently being carried out by the PL, BBC and certain other scurrilous members of the mainstream media (even if the author doesn’t know the difference between ‘were’ and ‘where’).
Pete Woffenden(Quote)
I think it’s also the fact that it targeted Newcastle only 5 days after the sale .. a deliberate attempt to prevent investments .. apart from unfair trade practices in order to protect a monopoly/cartel in the prem league there is a strong whiff of islamaphobia with all this US hedge funds involved in dodgy business ok .. Arab states not ok and accusations of sport washing .. PIF invests in many things like McDonald’s ..is that burger washing ?!
Mike(Quote)
I think the PL will find another way to stifle us with a few tweaks here and there.
The only chance we will have is if we can prove they have stifled deals that were in the pipeline and we could therefore be looking at some form of compensation.
The other issue with loans to Arsenal, Everton and the rest where the rules should have been applied, how on earth do the PL govern that retrospectively.
They will probably get away with it.
I wonder who the coward of a CEO is who drafted the original eleven clubs clamp down on Newcastle to the PL and has had his name redacted.
Joseph(Quote)
Interesting topic! Curious to know how this unlawful APT rule finding will specifically impact Newcastle. Hope the article clarifies it.
Jeffrey(Quote)