Jump to content

Montey

Member
  • Content Count

    690
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I don't know if this is relevant in any way to the takeover... But apparently MASH Holdings has borrowed some money (I couldn't see how much) from HSBC. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/06861426/filing-history
  2. This (the lack of criticism by Ashley) is my glimmer of hope that this is a tactical decision on Ashley's side. If the delay was entirely due to the Premier League I would expect Ashley to put on the cleats and go in hard with both feet. The fact that he hasn't suggests that the delay is not entirely (if at all) caused by the Premier League. If the delay to arbitration is because of an alleged lack of disclosure by the buying consortium (i.e. PIF) then it's a question of whether the arbitration tribunal has unfairly made such a decision or whether the consortium really
  3. A few thoughts: #1 It is very evident (from the NUFC Takeover and the ESL debacles) that the Premier League is thoroughly corrupt and needs action from the UK government and the FA to either shut it down entirely (reverting English football back to the EFL system). As things stand, English football desperately needs the NUFC Competition Arbitration Tribunal case to succeed and for this to result in cartel charges being levelled by the Crown Prosecution Service against the Premier League's executives - with a resultant investigation of their personal finances. There is almost
  4. Amanda was a little disorganised in the message she was trying to convey during the beginning of her call-in. Jordan then riled her up and she got sucked in to responding to his antagonistic comments about NUFC supporters. But, his firing her up allowed her to come across quite well and quite passionately during her closing remarks. So, it was a long way from a "car crash" - but it started weak, got a little ugly, but she came home strong.
  5. Is it time, in the best spirits of Monty Python, to form a new NUFC supporters organisation? The Newcastle United People's Front (NUPF) - who's purposes is specifically to be a protest organisation, that will actually be seen by NUFC supports to be doing things without caring what their relationship is like with Mike Ashley, the Premier League, or any other sporting/political elite.
  6. From Johnson's point of view, PIF purchasing NUFC and investing into the local area (as happened with ManCity) is the easiest and cheapest way for Boris to say at the next election, "look how I kept my promise to the North East - I said we'd bring investment to the North East and here it is!" This is why I would think that Johnson would/should be very pro-active about helping the takeover be completed.
  7. It suggests to me that the Premier League either doesn't know how to respond or is, at the least, still trying to decide how or if they will respond.
  8. Doesn't their "Diary" page (https://www.catribunal.org.uk/diary) suggest that the case we're interested in isn't in the near-term schedule? I would have thought we'd see 'our' case listed there, as other cases appear to be listed.
  9. Likelihood: 51% = "more than 50% chance they'll own us." Likelihood 49% = "less than a 50% chance that they'll ever own us." Only 2% apart from agreeing.
  10. You're wrong because you're either not paying attention at all, not paying attention to details, or only paying attention to the stuff that reinforces your existing viewpoint. Ashley nor his lawyers are required or compelled to provide any public disclosure of what they have or have not been doing. It is a completely wrong assumption that because you've heard nothing about what is happening that nothing is happening. When you're at work (assuming you've got a job) and hear nothing about what your friend did during their day, do you assume that your friend did nothing, do you a
  11. When you have a large pile of problems that all need to be solved, you sort them in order of easiest to solve to hardest to solve, and solve them in that order. If you try and solve the hardest problem first you get stuck on that and don't get to solve any other problems. If you work on the easiest problems first, by the time you get to the hardest problem all the other problems are solved. So, in answer to your question, yes! We solve the takeover issue, we get rid of Ashley, we get a club that is worthy of support, and once that and associated problems are solved th
  12. 4 weeks ago: 8 -> 7 3 weeks ago: 7 -> 5 2 weeks ago: 5 -> 4 3 days ago: 4 -> 2 Today: 2 -> 1 I won't go lower than '1' because the PL are a bunch of bastards who could use some sort of issue (e.g. court action against them related to the takeover, FFP after takeover completion, something else I haven't imagined, etc) to deduct points and cause us to be relegated.
  13. The Oracle service, if you read the statement, is for a particular function (operating a new statistics service) and has nothing to do with PL internal office, business, communications (e.g. email), or file server functions. In other words, that Oracle announcement has no relation nor impact on the CAT case nor the arbitration process. The Oracle announcement can be completely ignored.
  14. But a court (probably the CAT) can be convinced to order the PL (and associated parties, including member clubs and those with a commercial relationship with the PL) to hand over materials and/or allow the Claimant to send in their own forensic investigation team (to search paperwork, emails, hard drives, etc). If the CAT's order was ignored then there would be criminal sanctions against those disobeying the directions of the tribunal. If the PL, member clubs, or anyone else so-ordered was found to have destroyed evidence then that would likely face a separate prosecution, possibly under a c
  15. Many criminals have been brought down by their own arrogance (over-confidence) rather than by any investigative brilliance (which, by the way, is why the earlier comments, about how easy it is to forensically destroy evidence, were ridiculous. Plenty of white-collar criminals have been undone by their belief they didn't need to delete/shred things because they were smarter than everyone else; or they deleted/shredded things in a way that was clear destruction of evidence, which can also be a criminal offence or cause the loss of a civil case.)
×
×
  • Create New...