Connect with us

Published

on

The Premier League has called a halt to talks about a landmark financial settlement with the rest of the professional football pyramid in a sign of deepening divisions about the scale and structure of the proposed deal.

Sky News has learnt that Richard Masters notified the 20 top-flight clubs just before Christmas that the Premier League would “pause further discussions with the EFL [English Football League] for the time being” after failing to secure a mandate to sign an agreement.

The decision to postpone further negotiations with its lower-league counterparts reflects unrest among many Premier League clubs about the £881m ‘New Deal’, with no imminent prospect of the required majority of 14 clubs voting in favour.

Owners and club executives have grown increasingly unhappy in recent months because of the overall cost of the subsidy to the EFL, as well as the lack of certainty about the scope of English football’s new independent regulator.

The agreement would effectively see close to £900m handed out by Premier League clubs to their 72 EFL counterparts over a six-year period, with the overall cost potentially being reduced from £925m to £881m if an immediate £44m payment was ratified.

However, the Premier League did not put two ‘New Deal’ resolutions to a formal vote of shareholders at a meeting earlier this month, with clubs instead being asked to respond to written resolutions shortly before Christmas.

Sources said there remained a dearth of support both for the overall quantum of the deal as well as a funding model that would be used to deliver it.

More from Business

Earlier this month, Sky News revealed that Premier League clubs had been asked to support a £44m up-front payment to the EFL in the latest attempt to kickstart the funding settlement – talks about which have been ongoing for many months.

One source close to the situation said on Tuesday that there had been growing calls among top-flight executives for the New Deal to be approved alongside – rather than prior to – agreement on financial controls, with consultation on a new package of reforms expected to be launched in the new year.

They added that the Premier League was also working through details of a funding mechanism that would reflect the diversity of views among its clubs.

The key for the Premier League was to find a viable lasting agreement in the best long-term interests of the game, rather than sign a ‘quick-fix’ deal, the source added.

The EFL is said to have been notified about the Premier League’s decision to temporarily “pause” talks about the New Deal.

Nevertheless, the latest development is likely to disappoint Whitehall, with pressure having been exerted by ministers and cross-party MPs for the New Deal to be struck months ago.

Mr Masters wrote to clubs during the summer to express optimism that it would be signed shortly after.

Pressure has been growing on the Premier League to reconcile emerging fractures on critical issues of financial and sporting integrity, even after it signed a £6.7bn four-ytear domestic broadcast rights deal with Sky, the immediate parent company of Sky News.

Some club executives from outside the ‘big six’ – comprising Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur – have been issuing private warnings that the proposed New Deal settlement could cause serious financial damage to them.

At least one club in the league’s bottom half is understood to have raised the prospect of having to borrow money this year to fund its prospective share of the handout to the EFL.

Proposals for a bespoke licensing regime floated by the government has created distinct unease among a number of Premier League clubs, some of which believe that the New Deal should remain unsigned until there is greater clarity about how the regulator will operate.

Some also want tougher rules on associated party transactions which govern player and commercial deals with connected companies, or clubs which are under the same ownership structure.

Under a blueprint outlined to clubs during the autumn and revealed by Sky News, the New Deal would run for six years, with the deal worth £190m to the EFL in the 2028-29 season, the final 12 months of the period.

The funding for lower-league clubs would be in addition to existing annual solidarity payments of £110m and further funds earmarked for youth development.

In a white paper published earlier this year, the government said: “The current distribution of revenue is not sufficient, contributing to problems of financial unsustainability and having a destabilising effect on the football pyramid.

The document highlighted a £4bn chasm between the combined revenues of Premier League clubs and those of Championship clubs in the 2020-21 season.

The impetus for a new regulator has gathered pace since the Conservative Party’s 2019 general election manifesto, with Rishi Sunak pledging to continue reforms set in motion under Boris Johnson.

The Premier League declined to comment.

Continue Reading

Business

Apple sued by Which? over iCloud use – with potential payout for 40 million UK customers

Published

on

By

Apple sued by Which? over iCloud use - with potential payout for 40 million UK customers

Consumer rights group Which? is suing Apple for £3bn over the way it deploys the iCloud.

If the lawsuit succeeds, around 40 million Apple customers in the UK could be entitled to a payout.

The lawsuit claims Apple, which controls iOS operating systems, has breached UK competition law by giving its iCloud storage preferential treatment, effectively “trapping” customers with Apple devices into using it.

It also claims the company overcharged those customers by stifling competition.

The rights group alleges Apple encouraged users to sign up to iCloud for storage of photos, videos and other data while simultaneously making it difficult to use alternative providers.

Which? says Apple doesn’t allow customers to store or back-up all of their phone’s data with a third-party provider, arguing this violates competition law.

The consumer rights group says once iOS users have signed up to iCloud, they then have to pay for the service once their photos, notes, messages and other data go over the free 5GB limit.

More on Apple

“By bringing this claim, Which? is showing big corporations like Apple that they cannot rip off UK consumers without facing repercussions,” said Which?’s chief executive Anabel Hoult.

“Taking this legal action means we can help consumers to get the redress that they are owed, deter similar behaviour in the future and create a better, more competitive market.”

Apple ‘rejects’ claims and will defend itself

Apple “rejects” the idea its customers are tied to using iCloud and told Sky News it would “vigorously” defend itself.

“Apple believes in providing our customers with choices,” a spokesperson said.

“Our users are not required to use iCloud, and many rely on a wide range of third-party alternatives for data storage. In addition, we work hard to make data transfer as easy as possible – whether it’s to iCloud or another service.

“We reject any suggestion that our iCloud practices are anti-competitive and will vigorously defend against any legal claim otherwise.”

It also said nearly half of its customers don’t use iCloud and its pricing is inline with other cloud storage providers.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

How much could UK Apple customers receive if lawsuit succeeds?

The lawsuit will represent all UK Apple customers that have used iCloud services since 1 October 2015 – any that don’t want to be included will need to opt out.

However, if consumers live abroad but are otherwise eligible – for example because they lived in UK and used the iCloud but then moved away – they can also opt in.

The consumer rights group estimates that individual consumers could be owed an average of £70, depending on how long they have been paying for the services during that period.

Apple is facing a similar lawsuit in the US, where the US Department of Justice is accusing the company of locking down its iPhone ecosystem to build a monopoly.

Apple said the lawsuit is “wrong on the facts and the law” and that it will vigorously defend against it.

Read more from climate, science and tech:
The almighty row over climate cash that’s about to boil over
Oil state Azerbaijan is ‘perfectly suited’ to hosting a climate summit, says Azerbaijan

Big tech’s battles

This is the latest in a line of challenges big tech companies like Apple, Google and Samsung have faced around anti-competitive practices.

Most notably, a landmark case in the US earlier this year saw a judge rule that Google holds an illegal monopoly over the internet search market.

The company is now facing a second antitrust lawsuit, and may be forced to break up parts of its business.

Read more: Google faces threat of being broken up

FILE PHOTO: The logo for Google LLC is seen at their office in Manhattan, New York City, New York, U.S., November 17, 2021. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly/File Photo
Image:
File pic: Reuters

And in December last year, a judge declared Google’s Android app store a monopoly in a case brought by a private gaming company.

“Now that five companies control the whole of the internet economy, there’s a real need for people to fight back and to really put pressure on the government,” William Fitzgerald, from tech campaigning organisation The Worker Agency, told Sky News.

William Fitzgerald at Lisbon's Web Summit, where he spoke to Sky News
Image:
William Fitzgerald at Lisbon’s Web Summit, where he spoke to Sky News

“That’s why we have governments; to hold corporations accountable, to actually enforce laws.”

Continue Reading

Business

Homebase deal leaves 2,000 jobs at risk

Published

on

By

Homebase deal leaves 2,000 jobs at risk

The jobs of more than half of the workforce at the DIY chain Homebase are at risk after the retailer’s owners called in administrators following a failed attempt at a sale.

Sky News reported earlier on Wednesday that around 1,500 people were set to keep their roles as 75 of the 130 stores were set to be snapped up by the saviour of Wilko in a so-called pre-pack deal.

The Range, also a general merchandise specialist, was confirmed as the buyer later in the day.

Teneo, which is handling the process, is understood to have been working to find a buyer for as many of the chain’s sites as possible.

Teneo said in a statement on Wednesday afternoon that up to 70 stores were confirmed to be included in the deal – saving up to 1,600 jobs out of 3,600.

It leaves 2,000 jobs at risk.

Forty-nine other stores will continue to trade while alternative offers are explored.

Sources told Sky’s City editor Mark Kleinman that there had been many expressions of interest in the remaining stores, despite the gloom being felt across the retail sector over the higher tax take demanded in the budget.

The sector has warned of higher inflation and job losses arising from the measures, which include increased employer national insurance contributions and minimum wage levels.

The pre-pack deal – which typically allows a buyer to cherry-pick the assets it wants – brings to an end a six-year ownership of Homebase by Hilco, the retail restructuring specialist.

Teneo had initially been attempting to find a buyer for the whole Homebase business.

The partial sale comprises all those stores in the Republic of Ireland and the Homebase brand and its e-commerce business.

Read more on Sky News:
Post Office faces backlash over proposed job cuts
P&O’s cost of firing and replacing workers revealed

The Range is part of CDS Superstores, which is controlled by the businessman Chris Dawson – nicknamed “the Del Boy billionaire” because of the distinctive number plate on his Rolls-Royce Wraith.

Last year, it paid £7m to buy the brand and intellectual property assets of Wilko, which had collapsed into administration.

Since then, Mr Dawson has opened a string of new Wilko outlets.

Continue Reading

Business

P&O spent £47m sacking and replacing 786 mainly British seafarers in 2022

Published

on

By

P&O spent £47m sacking and replacing 786 mainly British seafarers in 2022

P&O Ferries spent more than £47m summarily sacking hundreds of seafarers in 2022, helping it cut losses by more than £125m and putting it on a path to profitability, according to accounts due to be published in the coming days.

The dismissal of 786 mainly British seafarers, and their replacement with largely non-European agency staff earning as little as £4.87 an hour, was hugely controversial, drawing criticism from across the political spectrum and threats of a consumer boycott.

The controversy was rekindled last month when Sky News revealed that DP World, P&O‘s Dubai-based parent, considered withdrawing a £1bn investment at its London Gateway port following criticism of P&O by the Transport Secretary Louise Haigh.

Read more: Why P&O Ferries’ pariah status may never change

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Chancellor quizzed over P&O ferries

P&O has always maintained the restructuring was necessary to allow it to compete with its rivals on cross-Channel routes, and prevent a total collapse of the company with the loss of more than 2,000 jobs.

In financial statements for P&O Holdings, filed 11 months late and seen by Sky News, the company says the restructuring cost £47.4m including legal fees and consultants, allowing it to cut the overall wage and salary bill by £21.3m.

In a note accompanying the accounts submitted to Companies House, P&O’s directors describe the restructuring as part of a “transformational journey” that will help it return to recording a profit before tax this year.

“The business has been on a transformational journey as it has recovered from the challenges of the global pandemic, Brexit and the impact of disruption caused by the change in the crewing model,” the directors say.

“The group believes that the transformational actions that commenced in 2022 and continue through into 2024 will equip the business to grow profitably when demand rises in the coming years.”

Read more:
Boss admits he couldn’t live on wage his staff are paid
Fury as firm behind sackings given major freeport role

Brexit and COVID financial distress

The accounts reveal the financial distress in which P&O found itself in 2022.

Having recorded losses of £375m the previous year as it struggled to recover from the pandemic-era decline in passenger numbers and post-Brexit complications, it was in breach of its covenants to external lenders underwriting the construction of new hybrid cross-Channel ferries.

Despite the restructuring costs, revenue increased by £83.3m to £918m in the financial year, but the company still recorded a loss of £249m and was reliant on loans totalling £365m from parent company DP World to remain a going concern.

An additional £70m was made available this year, with 4.5% interest rolled up and not requiring any repayment until 2028 at the earliest.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

The financial statements also reveal that P&O was forced to sell one of the new cross-Channel ferries to a French subsidiary to pay off an external financing loan of £76.9m, and then lease the vessel back from its ultimate owner.

In a statement, P&O Ferries said: “Our 2022 financial accounts show the challenges faced by the business at that time, and why the business needed to transform into a competitive operator with a sustainable long-term future.

“P&O Ferries has taken steps to adjust to new market conditions, matching our capacity to demand, and adopting a more flexible operating model that enables us to better serve our customers.”

Continue Reading

Trending