Initial 10, then reduced to 6 + 2 Point Deductions

[BlueandBald]

We could twist it the other in years to come,say if things went bad for us this season, sayings things like if City/Chelsea got relegated, lose lots of points, that we would have stayed up etc, and we want money for that for example

I'd rather us not be one of those crying, snitchy clubs and not be on the receiving end of one such claim. Can't clubs just play football without worrying about all these point deductions their owners have caused.

 

[Nymzee]

Pretty neat summary of what happened for any lurkers or thick people like me:

 

[kenada_blue]

A shop where the prices just stopped going up.

The latest increase is below inflation.


Yes, I even acknowledged that.


Yes, and the customers in those territories wanting to watch the PL would pay the PL directly.


From their perspective, because there's more money to be made.


There's no reason why that couldn't continue. Netflix isn't the same service worldwide, nor is Prime or Disney+.


I agree with that. This is the only sticking point. They've had plenty of time that could've been spent investing in infrastructure and expertise. They have four more years now to do exactly that.


No, there are fewer doors open than if the league owned its own television rights worldwide. They could sell sub-packages in whatever manner they wished.


Because cutting out the middleman is more profitable - and the market just stalled.

Inflation is currently out of control due to world wide factors and will soon reduce. So when people say "it doesn't match inflation" is based on now and not the projected figures they no doubt drummed up years prior.

The market hasn't stalled, it was based on estimates that didn't take into consideration major world events. When the overseas rights are up for takers, if that's not close to double what it is now then you're probably right. But until then the domestic rights

The 19-22 rights were £4bill dropping from £5bill in 2016. That was a more worrying time. Since then it's gone up.

Owning a streaming service is a messy business they probably don't want to get into when you look at costs of going alone. Operating costs are ridiculous where all the services are looking to cut costs.

Netflix is 20billion a year operation costs alone for example.

The PL will no doubt have small operating costs that don't gobble up the £5bill they receive. While mathematically it's true that they'd make a ton more selling subscriptions to individuals....the costs of running the thing world wide would probably not make it all that worthwhile...hence why at this moment no one in any sport has done it on that scale and leave to the companies that have tje infrastructure

 

[Ruairi77]

They can try that, but we'd take it further, not a chance the club accepts this.

what would that look like?
not sure the club will take it further
but I also doubt the PL wont bend a little.

 

[ForestBlue]

If they do reduce our points deduction then several clubs could at least theoretically argue their position was materially changed through no fault of their own by any reinstatement of points to us. Even if it was only for small number of weeks from the initial deduction to however long the panel take to make a decision.

Therefore the easiest thing for the PL to do right now is nothing. So I suspect the points deduction will stand.

Hope I'm wrong though obviously

 

[Goodisongang]

what would that look like?
not sure the club will take it further
but I also doubt the PL wont bend a little.

Of course they will, especially in the middle of a takeover, the cost to the club for this deduction is already millions given the prize money it will affect, if we were to go down by a small number of points it could he in the 100s of millions.

 

[allen]

Inflation is currently out of control due to world wide factors and will soon reduce. So when people say "it doesn't match inflation" is based on now and not the projected figures they no doubt drummed up years prior.

The market hasn't stalled, it was based on estimates that didn't take into consideration major world events. When the overseas rights are up for takers, if that's not close to double what it is now then you're probably right. But until then the domestic rights

The 19-22 rights were £4bill dropping from £5bill in 2016. That was a more worrying time. Since then it's gone up.

Owning a streaming service is a messy business they probably don't want to get into when you look at costs of going alone. Operating costs are ridiculous where all the services are looking to cut costs.

Netflix is 20billion a year operation costs alone for example.

The PL will no doubt have small operating costs that don't gobble up the £5bill they receive. While mathematically it's true that they'd make a ton more selling subscriptions to individuals....the costs of running the thing world wide would probably not make it all that worthwhile...hence why at this moment no one in any sport has done it on that scale and leave to the companies that have tje infrastructure

Inflation is always in flux, and you can't disregard it as a factor. It's the only way we have of measuring relative value over time.

But I think you're right that the international rights will be the thing that makes the league decide whether they've wrung as much out of the current rights model as possible.

It's all a question of money, ultimately. Streaming is getting technically easier all the time and the expertise is broadening.

Personally, I think it's a question of when and not if.

 

[Big Duncs Megadrive]

Pretty neat summary of what happened for any lurkers or thick people like me:

Good summary that.

One thing I don't understand is why the stadium naming rights was mentioned as a potential source of income though when the stadium is not even finished yet?

Wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to rename Goodison?

 

[roydo]

Inflation is always in flux, and you can't disregard it as a factor. It's the only way we have of measuring relative value over time.

But I think you're right that the international rights will be the thing that makes the league decide whether they've wrung as much out of the current rights model as possible.

It's all a question of money, ultimately. Streaming is getting technically easier all the time and the expertise is broadening.

Personally, I think it's a question of when and not if.

Me too.

100 million global subscribers at £10 pm, is what, £10 Billion a month?

 

[brieverton]

Is there any actual legal issue with the commission using a sanctions formula that was created after the club was charged?

As a lay man other than it appearing unfair and perhaps unethical there is not a legal problem with it under the terms in which the commission was established?

It seems to me that as a deterrent if nothing else, one would like to know the consequences of a breach of the rules before they are alleged to have been broken, but that's all.

I guess the issue is more with the extreme nature of the sanction and the precedent relied upon.

Just trying to understand a bit better outside of the arguments around accounting technicalities and what figure goes in what column. With the stadium development it does seem to be very harsh on us. Surely we have a good cause here.

 

[Ruairi77]

Of course they will, especially in the middle of a takeover, the cost to the club for this deduction is already millions given the prize money it will affect, if we were to go down by a small number of points it could he in the 100s of millions.

I'm not having a go, just wondering what this might look like.
If the penalty stays the same, the club sue the PL?
I'm not sure they'd have a leg to stand on.
It's a private business signed up to be a part of a bigger private business.

 

[RD2910]

Is there any actual legal issue with the commission using a sanctions formula that was created after the club was charged?

As a lay man other than it appearing unfair and perhaps unethical there is not a legal problem with it under the terms in which the commission was established?

It seems to me that as a deterrent if nothing else, one would like to know the consequences of a breach of the rules before they are alleged to have been broken, but that's all.

I guess the issue is more with the extreme nature of the sanction and the precedent relied upon.

Just trying to understand a bit better outside of the arguments around accounting technicalities and what figure goes in what column. With the stadium development it does seem to be very harsh on us. Surely we have a good cause here.

No, the rules say that the commission can basically do whatever they like. If they did use a sanctions formula (considering they didn't use the Premier League's new formula), it was at their discretion to do so.

The argument is that in drawing up the new formula and submitting it to the commission, the Premier League trampled on the independence of the commission, unduly influencing the strength of the eventual punishment. I reckon it's a strong argument, but I'm not sure I hold out much hope for the independence of the appeal board.

 

[Tipp blue]

If they do reduce our points deduction then several clubs could at least theoretically argue their position was materially changed through no fault of their own by any reinstatement of points to us. Even if it was only for small number of weeks from the initial deduction to however long the panel take to make a decision.

Therefore the easiest thing for the PL to do right now is nothing. So I suspect the points deduction will stand.

Hope I'm wrong though obviously

Would be an extremely weak argument that.

 

[MIKE85]

Is there any actual legal issue with the commission using a sanctions formula that was created after the club was charged?

As a lay man other than it appearing unfair and perhaps unethical there is not a legal problem with it under the terms in which the commission was established?

It seems to me that as a deterrent if nothing else, one would like to know the consequences of a breach of the rules before they are alleged to have been broken, but that's all.

I guess the issue is more with the extreme nature of the sanction and the precedent relied upon.

Just trying to understand a bit better outside of the arguments around accounting technicalities and what figure goes in what column. With the stadium development it does seem to be very harsh on us. Surely we have a good cause here.

Sorry, but are you referring to this rule change, or is that another one they did?

 

[Cool_Blue]

If they do reduce our points deduction then several clubs could at least theoretically argue their position was materially changed through no fault of their own by any reinstatement of points to us. Even if it was only for small number of weeks from the initial deduction to however long the panel take to make a decision.

Therefore the easiest thing for the PL to do right now is nothing. So I suspect the points deduction will stand.

Hope I'm wrong though obviously

I think so too. I’ll be amazed if we get anything at all back.