Comment on Stevie G – The Real Deal? by easyJambo.

    Note that Sky just signed a five year deal with the EFL, worth £595m (£99m a season).


    I can't count £595m/5 = £119m

    easyJambo Also Commented

    Stevie G – The Real Deal?
    I would be careful of the spin that will undoubtedly be put on the latest exclusive 5-year TV deal with Sky.

    It isn't clear what the headline figure is as yet. I've seen estimates varying from £20m to £30m a season. The current contract with BT & Sky involves 60 live games, while the new deal only covers 48 + 6 play-off games. 38 of them will most likely be allocated to covering all Celtic and Rangers away games, with 4 Edinburgh derbies and a few random others including the probable title winning game(s). 

    The distribution for last season (Premiership teams) was based on a pot of c. £23.75m (domestic and overseas income).

    1st 13.4% £3.176m
    2nd 9.6% £2.28m
    3rd 8.25% £1.96m
    4th 7.25% £1.72m
    5th 6.75% £1.6m
    6th 6.25% £1.48m
    7th 5.75% £1.36m
    8th 5.5% £1.3m
    9th 5.25% £1.24m
    10th 5% £1.19m
    11th 4.75% £1.13m
    12th 4.5% £1.07m

    Note that Sky just signed a five year deal with the EFL, worth £595m (£99m a season).

    Stevie G – The Real Deal?
    An informative read on the employment of referees in Scotland and England. The linked cases are also worth a read.

    Laura Sports Law‏ @laurasportslaw

    NEW BLOG POST The Relationship between Referees and Governing Bodies

    * Appointment of referees

    * Management of referees

    * Continual monitoring of referees

    *Protecting integrity

    *Disciplinary & Laws of the Game

    http://www.sportslawscotland.co.uk/2018/11/referees-appointment-management-and.html …

    Stevie G – The Real Deal?
    A petition to the CoS from the rolls, that might be of interest to Aberdeen fans.

    P719/18 Pet: No Kingsford Stadium Ltd for Judicial Review – Gillespie Macandrew LLP

    It's an "unstarred" motion, meaning that the presence of counsel is not required. A similar petition was presented a month ago, so it still looks procedural at this stage.


    I assume that this action is the latest objection to plans for Aberdeen's proposed new stadium.



    Recent Comments by easyJambo

    Dear Mr Bankier
    I see that the Herald has caught up with the story of BDO seeking an out of court settlement with Henderson & Jones (on behalf of Wavetower/TRFCG).


    IIRC Whyte had a deal where he would get on third of any sums received.

    Dear Mr Bankier
    At the recent TOP v King hearing, I joked with Chris McLauglin, asking if he was allowed to ask Dave King a few questions outside the court room. He responded by saying "I'm not sure if he is allowed to speak to me".

    Dear Mr Bankier
    Homunculus 9th December 2018 at 11:41


    I have a fairly simplistic view of HMRC's acquiescence on the "penalty" amount.  They are satisfied that they have the Supreme Court judgement in their back pocket. That will allow them to recoup much more of a return from companies and individuals, rather than concern themselves about a few pence in the pound dividend from a liquidated company.

    Dear Mr Bankier
    The dividends paid to date amount to £9,265.47 for preferential creditors and £4,620,599.40  to unsecured creditors.

    There is only £7,757,414.44 left in the pot.

    Needless to say, BDO (£4,414,671.13 plus outlays of £58,679.66) and their legal fees (circa £10.5m) have consumed the majority of the cash. (remember £24m was received from Collyer Bristow's insurers).

    The Oldco still has a claim of £28m against Duff & Phelps outstanding, although there is a claim of £18m against the Oldco, on behalf of Wavetower, still on the go too.

    Dear Mr Bankier
    Billydug 8th December 2018 at 23:16

    BDO creditors update https://t.co/NywPrll5Nu?amp=1


    HMRC's Big Tax Case claim significantly reduced, and potentially could fall further.

    A significant proportion of the Big Tax Claim of c£74m related to interest and penalties (c£36m). The penalty element of the claim was c£23.9m and was levied at a particularly high rate. The Joint Liquidators, on behalf of the Company, disputed both the quantum, and the principle, of the penalties applied by HMRC.

    Following discussions and meetings with HMRC, we submitted an appeal to the HMRC Penalty Review Consistency Panel (“the Panel”). This set out the reasons why the Joint Liquidators considered the penalties to be incorrectly levied. We are pleased to advise that the Panel has recently agreed with our submission in its entirety, and the element of HMRC’s claim pertaining to penalties has now been withdrawn in full.

    HMRC also acknowledged that a further small element of their claim had been overstated and it has now submitted a revised claim of £68.3m (ie a reduction of c£26m in total).

    HMRC has calculated the principal element of its claim in respect of the Big Tax Case on a “grossing up” basis. This element remains under review with further representations to be made to HMRC following discussions with the Joint Liquidators’ tax advisors.