West Ham explain why they went against Man City in major Premier League vote

West Ham were one of eight clubs to provide evidence in support of the Premier League against Man City ahead of a controversial vote this week.

West Ham and Premier League champions Manchester City don’t have much in common on the pitch nowadays.

But the two clubs have shared a close bond down the years, on and off the pitch.

Man City and the Hammers have spent much of their existence living in the shadows of bitter rivals.

So West Ham and Manchester City fans revelled in the fact one another were crowned champions of Europe at the same time last summer.

The friendship between the east Londoners and the club from east Manchester dates back to a famous game between the Hammers and Cityzens in 1987.

There was a big love-in between supporters of both clubs when West Ham lost 3-1 at the Etihad on the final day of last season to ensure Arsenal did not win the title.

It’s perhaps fitting then that West Ham boss Julen Lopetegui and his Man City counterpart Pep Guardiola are close friends too.

Although while Guardiola has confirmed he will be around for another year at least with his contract extension, how much longer Lopetegui will be at West Ham remains to be seen.

Good relations between these old friends has been jeopardised this week, though, by a civil war that’s quite literally dividing the top flight.

Premier League claim victory in major APT vote

Premier League clubs have approved changes to the competition’s Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules despite the challenge of Manchester City.

There was confusion last month when both Man City and Prem chiefs claimed victory after an arbitration panel found that some elements of the league’s APT rules were unlawful.

But the Premier League secured the minimum 14 votes it needed from member clubs to pass the amendments this week.

Notably Man City, Aston Villa, Newcastle and Nottingham Forest are understood to have voted against them.

Sky Sports has revealed Arsenal, Bournemouth, Brentford, Fulham, Liverpool, Manchester United, Wolves and West Ham were eight clubs who supported the league with evidence during the summer’s arbitration.

Premier League bosses asked clubs to vote on changes it believes will make the rules lawful and compliant with UK competition law.

That included adding shareholder loans to the fair market value (FMV) assessment, the removal of some of the amendments made to APT rules earlier this year and changes to how clubs access the league’s databank, which is used to make FMV decisions.

The Hammers sided with the league over their old friends.

Now West Ham have explained why they went against Man City in the major Premier League vote.

A spokesman for West Ham’s board has exclusively explained the club’s position after the vote.

West Ham explain why they went against Man City

“We want the league to be competitive,” the spokesman for West Ham’s owners told Hammers News.

“With inflated sponsorship from related companies of owners, it isn’t.”

Football finance expert Kieran Maguire believes the APT vote raises more questions than answers.

The Price of Football author believes the Premier League will be relieved but warns West Ham and others ‘the war is not over’.

“1: If an amnesty is given for loan conversions to equity until January does that also apply for commercial deals (to be consistent)?” Maguire said.

“2: What interest rate being charged on owner loans? If it is at a FMV, presumably so to be consistent with commercial deals, then this would result in different interest rates being applied to different clubs as 1) some loans are secured and others are not and (2) each club has a different credit risk, those with a change of relegation having a higher one than the clubs for whom relegation is highly unlikely. This will accelerate the gap between SuperLeague Six and other clubs for PSR purposes.

“3: Owners could create complex financial instruments that have some characteristics of debt and some of equity, how will these be treated? Owner could convert loans into redeemable preference shares with no fixed redemption date & would be classified as equity, even though they could be repaid.

“4: Some clubs have shared ownership, if one of the owners also had loans and they converted into equity this would dilute the share of the club owned by other existing shareholders.

“5: Given that the PL said that owner loans interest free were previously allowed to ‘encourage investment’ does that mean the PL is now actively pursuing a strategy of not encouraging investment? If so why?

“Whilst the Premier League will be relieved with the 16-4 vote, the war is not over.”