Aston Villa owner Nassef Sawiris says he is joining Manchester City in voting against proposed associated party deals as the “struggling” Premier League needs a “fresh start”.
Egypt’s richest man also raised concerns about the “astronomical” costs of legal challenges and the need to provide a “united front” to the government as regulation looms.
Becoming the first Premier League owner to make his position public, Sawiris said the league should delay Friday’s vote in an attempt to heal divisions that “started with the failed attempt to launch a Super League in 2021”.
He spoke after Telegraph sport revealed on Tuesday how Villa had sided with City in the escalating feud with the APT in a letter telling other clubs that the league’s ongoing civil war “critically weakens” the top tier .
Explaining his view, Sawiris, 63, has now confirmed “we will vote against the proposed APT rules” as clubs need time to reach a unanimous position.
“In our view, a vote in 90 days on amended terms taking into account the Tribunal’s findings will be much more likely to secure the unanimous support of all 20 Premier League clubs,” he said in a statement.
“Importantly, a unanimous vote will mark a fresh start for a struggling Premier League which began with the failed attempt to launch a Super League in 2021. With the imminent arrival of the government’s independent football regulator, it is more important than ever that the Premier League can come before the regulator with a united front. In our opinion, this will be much easier to achieve if the PTA vote takes place in February and is unanimously supported by all clubs. »
The league has been consulting with clubs for more than a month on changes to its PTA rules after an arbitration panel deemed some of the rules illegal. The APT rules in force since 2021 effectively involve the application of fair market value tests to any sponsorship or transfer agreement entered into where a club owner may have a financial interest on both sides of the agreement .
Clubs are voting on changes – including proposals to subject shareholder loans to fair market value tests – at a league meeting in central London on Friday, although champions City and now Villa have said the amendments should not be adopted hastily.
In June, shortly after City’s hearing against the APT rules began, Sawiris for the first time admitted his concerns about the Premier League’s profitability and sustainability rules in an interview with the Financial Times. In September, other clubs also privately expressed concerns about the legal costs associated with all of the league’s high-profile cases, including those against City.
In his new statement to Telegraph sportSawiris expresses concern that costs will continue to skyrocket, with the city warning of further potential legal action if the PTA amends following the vote on the court’s findings.
His statement added: “It is notable that legal expenditures to date on this issue have already reached astronomical amounts; New challenges and increased costs could be avoided by reaching consensus. Ultimately, a unanimous vote will mark the emergence of a new era of clubs capable of competing vigorously on the pitch but working together to strengthen the Premier League and its global appeal.
Telegraph sport has previously reported how Villa’s owners have become increasingly sympathetic to the Abu Dhabi-owned club’s cause, but the club’s major intervention ahead of the crucial vote is the first time a rival has publicly expressed his support.
In a separate letter written to Premier League clubs, Villa argued the next vote should be postponed and warned the Premier League would be “weakened” by any further public conflict with City.
They wrote: “It is now abundantly clear that any vote (if passed) will immediately result in further litigation from Manchester City FC and associated defense from the EPL. [English Premier League]leading to significant additional costs, distractions and unnecessary waste of time on this issue.
“It is highly likely that the court will conclude within the next three months and that a PTA rule taking into consideration the court verdict will be supported by all clubs and cannot be challenged.”
Despite concerns, the Premier League still intends to move forward with a vote on amendments to the APT rules, following a legal challenge brought by City after the league rejected a new contract agreement. huge sponsorship with Etihad, because it did not have a fair market value. The independent tribunal has yet to provide full clarification on the status of the league’s PTA rules following its ruling.
Villa’s intervention comes after City and the Premier League fiercely attacked each other in other letters sent in recent days. City have written to their rivals to tell them they are voting “blind” on amendments to the PTA rules which remain “void” while a court clarifies a 175-page ruling last month.
The league, however, sent a lengthy letter rejecting the club’s interpretation of the findings and particularly objecting to criticism made in an earlier letter from City regarding its role as regulator.
At a Premier League meeting in June, Villa also failed with a proposal to increase allowable losses over three years to £135 million.
Current rules state clubs can lose £105m over the three-year reporting period and Villa’s argument to increase this by £30m was rejected.
Telegraph sport reported in September how concerns over legal costs had grown behind the scenes at several clubs following the Premier League’s appeal over the award of costs in the Everton case for PSR. In her submissions to the commission, the club’s general counsel, Celia Rooney, described some of the prices paid by the Premier League for its legal fees as “mind-blowing”.
The Premier League views spending on fighting legal action as fundamental – both to enforce the rules and to defend against legal challenges.
These costs are financed from the Premier League’s central funds, meaning all clubs bear them equally.