Clubs demand clarity on Man City APT settlement

Clubs Seek Clarity Over Manchester City’s APT Settlement

Premier League clubs are demanding more information about the recent legal settlement between Manchester City and the league concerning Associated Party Transaction (APT) regulations — rules designed to prevent inflated commercial deals with owner-linked entities.

On Monday, the Premier League informed clubs that City had accepted the APT regulations as “valid and binding”, ending their legal challenge. However, multiple clubs have expressed unease, stating they have not been informed of the terms or implications of the settlement.

What Are the APT Rules?

Introduced in December 2021, following the Saudi-backed takeover of Newcastle United, APT regulations aim to ensure that commercial deals with companies linked to club owners reflect fair market value.

These rules came under legal fire from Manchester City, who argued they were “unlawful and void”, particularly after a 2024 tribunal sided with them over shareholder loan classification and competition law breaches.

Despite adjustments to the rules, City launched a second challenge in February 2025 — now abruptly settled.

Etihad Deal Fuels Suspicion

At the heart of the dispute are two Abu Dhabi-linked deals, including a new sponsorship agreement with Etihad Airways. The Premier League had blocked this deal in 2023 for failing fair market value tests, a move that contributed to City’s legal action.

There are rumors that the Etihad deal will now be approved, yet the Premier League insists all such deals will still be subject to market value assessment. Officials deny any softening of rules for state-backed clubs like City or Newcastle.

“It’s hard to say anything because we have no idea of the details,” one anonymous Premier League club executive told BBC Sport.

Clubs Want Answers

Premier League chief executive Richard Masters will speak to concerned clubs

Rival clubs expect Premier League executives Richard Masters and Alison Brittain to provide clarification at the upcoming shareholders meeting. The lack of transparency has raised eyebrows despite relief that core APT rules remain intact.

While the settlement’s confidential nature prevents the league from disclosing full terms, some clubs worry about the precedent this sets.

Legal Fatigue & Cost Pressures

Legal expert Richard Cramer suggests the move could represent a mutual de-escalation:

“Neither party is a winner or loser… but City can now likely close sponsorship deals at higher values.”

He added that the burden of legal fees — especially in drawn-out arbitration — may have influenced both sides:

“Even City, with untold wealth, may have decided this wasn’t good for the sport.”

Unrelated to 115 Charges

The Premier League clarified that this APT settlement is unrelated to the 115 charges of alleged financial breaches still facing City. That case concluded its hearing nine months ago, but a verdict has yet to be delivered.

Summary

• City dropped its lawsuit against APT regulations

• Premier League clubs demand clarity over settlement terms

• Etihad sponsorship remains under scrutiny

• The agreement does not affect City’s 115 FFP charges

• Many see the move as an attempt to ease legal tensions and costs