He completely owns the airline, though it's not against the rules for the owner to sponsor his own club's stadium, King Power do it, Ashley tried to make St James' the Sports Direct stadium and Stoke will be playing at the Bet365 Stadium next season. The issue comes if it's obvious that you're flouting the fair play rules, so the rules state that sponsorship deals should not be significantly different to other clubs deals, though they're very vague rules.
I love the fact that one translation of Etihad is United. I couldn't give a **** if it's not strictly true, I'm sticking to that version.
But by what method is it decided if a deal is significantly different ? If Man U sold the naming rights to Old Trafford it'd be worth hundreds of millions. But that doesn't set the 'going rate' as it were because they're the biggest club in England. It's a very grey area.
" FLOUTING THE RULES " They clearly are bending the rules to suit in many cases without breaking them.
Same as me, that's what you would think, it's their/your money to spend as they/you please ....... oh no it isn't, under the original (ludicrous) FFP rules owners couldn't give their club money, which is why they took so long to roll it out to the top leagues of each country, the rules now have been watered down to such an extent the really wealthy clubs can pretty much do as they please.
It was known at time of the promotion that they had broken FFP guidelines/rules. The media love in with the story wasn't ever about Bournemouth - usually always about Howe.
By looking at deals done by clubs with a similar status. If we owned ours to sell them they'd look to compare us to clubs like Bolton and Bournemouth who both did deals in this division. If Man City do it they'd look to other latter stage CL clubs like PSG, Real Madrid, and Arsenal, possibly extending to other PL sides if they're out of line with CL sides but it can be shown it's typical for a PL club.
