Montey

Exactly, never mind the PL having project restart and the legal ramifications around to sort it out.

Time to watch Companies House again for a Director appointment?

I presume you've already smashed the bottle with the picture of Ashley on it.

Does anyone seriously think concerns weren't raised by other league clubs when Chelsea or ManCity were taken over by billionaires? Heck, those same clubs probably complained when NUFC was taken over by Ashley.

Ashley is going to do all he can for this deal to go through. It's not just about the money he gets from this transaction, it's also about establishing a trusted business relationship with one of the largest investment funds in the world. If Ashley completes the transaction and is considered trustworthy by PIF then he potentially has access to a massive source of funds for future business opportunities. He will not want to be seen as the cause of this deal collapsing (especially not because of some man-child temper-tantrum).

<Can we please take the whinging about the forum and each other to another thread?>

I suspect an increased police presence around St. James' Park will be an indicator of an impending announcement.

Aye but if they havent seen the current training ground that makes a decision quite difficult. They are right to wait. I suspect they would have had advisers that have seen all of the club's facilities (opened every gate, every room, every cupboard). Nobody buys an organisation without inspecting the assets (to over simplify, you don't buy a house without inspecting it first and getting an engineering professional to give you a report). During the due-diligence phase of the negotiation they would have been given access to all NUFC facilities and would have a very good idea of what needs to be done - anyone who's been involved in a proper due-diligence process (not what Ashley did when he bought NUFC) can tell you how thorough they can be. Due-diligence processes can be some of the most invasive experiences of any organisation.

Exactly - that's what's asinine about headlines proclaiming that MBS might order Sheffield United to lose. If that could really happen why wouldn't MBS just order the Sheffield United owner to sell their club and avoid the whole alleged conflict of interest issue alltogether?

I wouldn't be surprised if the government is lobbying on behalf of the deal succeeding. Johnson made promises to the North of England (to invest and re-energize) before and after the last election; having the Saudi's invest heavily in Newcastle is an easy and cheap way for Johnson to be able to say, "see, I kept my promise".

- Horse Punching

It'll be an electronic bank transfer, likely via an escrow service.

In my non-lawyer but well read opinion, any commercial liability (e.g. fines) would likely remain with the club, but any criminal liability would likely remain with the individual.

If Ashley was smart he should have asked to be paid in barrels of oil, given how low the crude oil is priced at the moment. The Saudi's probably would have seen that as a bargain too and paid over the odds for the club.

On the assumption that the Amnesty International and BeIN Sports complaints are actually about what they have presented themselves about (i.e. human rights and piracy) then both organisations are missing a massive opportunity by protesting the sale of NUFC to PIF, hence they are massively misplaying the situation. To my knowledge, there are no large-scale, populist calls within Saudi Arabia to improve their human rights situation or to reduce media piracy. Indeed I suspect, without doing any real research on Saudi Arabia specifically but having observed related matters in other authoritarian regimes, that within Saudi Arabia any criticism of their human rights practices or media piracy is spun to be about external agencies attempting to interfere in the lives of Saudis and consequently it becomes a matter of populist, nationalist pride to tell Amnesty International and BeIN Sports to eff-off (in arabic). As long as Amnesty International and BeIN Sports maintains their current objections it will only increase the inclination of Saudis to ignore their message. The opportunity being missed here by Amnesty International and BeIN Sports is to endorse the sale of NUFC to PIF and to then run human rights and anti-piracy messaging, about Saudi Arabia, in a form that gets it seen within Saudi Arabia. Whilst the Saudi leadership can prevent some forms of advertising reaching their people, they can not stop it entirely. Using the Premier League as a conveyor of anti-piracy and human rights messages, e.g. via pitch-side advertisements at NUFC away games, would yield far better results. Leaders change their attitudes to reflect the desires of their people, if they don't they become despotic and risk a populist uprising - if Amnesty International and BeIN Sports used the Premier League to get messages into the Saudi people, this is more likely to cause the Saudi leadership to change attitudes than direct attacks on those leaders and their investments.

They probably need to get the announcement done as soon as they can so that the virtue-signalers lose any real traction. As long as the impression exists that the takeover could, in any potential way, be impacted then the vested interests will continue their attacks. Once it has been confirmed and the Companies House records changed to reflect the takeover, the virtue-noise will settle down (it won't go away completely, but the news-media will move on).

https://www.arabsat.com/english/media-center/news-press-and-events/corporate/press-release-arabsat In Summary: beIN SPORTS attempted to prosecute a case against the Arab Satellite Communications Organization (Arabsat) in the French legal system and the French courts ruled the lawsuit as invalid. In short, Arabsat was found to have no case to answer - this is a non-issue.

My suspicion (pure guess work) is that they will keep Bruce until the end of the season but they may immediately appoint a Director of Football. The DoF would be someone already approved by whomever they are planning to hire as the new manager and the DoF can spend the remainder of the season laying the groundwork for the new manager.

I'm very concerned at the related article saying Steve bruce to be handed 200m war chest.....as if As I see things, there is no way that Bruce get's handed a substantial amount of money. If they can't get rid of Bruce immediately, for whatever reason, they are likely to appoint a DoF immediately who will control the money. They could then inject the required funds knowing the DoF will oversee recruitment based on what the new manager wants and not based on what Bruce wants.

Should probably lock the "New Member" functionality of the forum until a few months after the takeover is completed. Once the hype (positive & negative) cools down a little bit then open it back up.

Watch this video (10m37s) by a couple of lawyers who support NUFC discussing the Fit & Proper Test and the ability/likelihood of Ashley pulling out. It's very good and easy to understand.

Whilst the UK does not have the concept of "good faith" within English contract law, there are likely clauses in any agreement that the parties have signed that mean if Ashley were to withdraw from the agreement, without cause (that is to say, without a specific and justifiable reason) he could be sued for damages (i.e. sued for the costs incurred by Staveley, Ruben Brothers, and possibly PIF - e.g. the cost of very expensive lawyers & accountants could be millions.) It is very significant that SJHL (St James Holding Limited) has a contractually binding agreement with Staveley because that agreement exists for a reason, and if Ashley caused SJHL to breach the agreement (without a justifiable cause) then SJHL would be subject to a lawsuit by Staveley. He was able to walk away from other acquisition scenarios, without cause or cost, because he didn't have any signed agreements in place.

Knew fuck all until twitter pointed out the CH changes, then it’s now direct sources. This was submitted 6 days ago, sure his direct sources would have said something then. To be fair, Companies House docs are usually reported as submitted on one date, but don't become available for public viewing until a week or so later. I think I saw on one document that whilst the Companies House listing date was 9th April (Last Thursday) the certificate issuing date was 14th April (today). If Friday and Monday were Easter public holidays in the UK (as it was here in Australia) then those two days are only 1 work day apart.

I've said this before and I'll keep on saying it until Ashley is gone. Mike Ashley will not sell Newcastle United Football Club until it provides no commercial benefit to or is a commercial drag on Sports Direct. Mike Ashley's sole motivator (likely in all things within his life) is the success and value of his Sports Direct brand. Everything he does is either an expansion of the Sports Direct empire or is designed to increase the value of the Sports Direct empire. NUFC falls into the latter of these two and only exists to increase the value of Sports Direct. Our issue, as fans, is that we believe that NUFC should be at the top of its owner's priorities and all things should be subservient to the needs of NUFC. What fans have failed to accept is that, in effect, NUFC is just an project within the marketing department of Sports Direct. The attractiveness of NUFC to Mike Ashley is the club's ability to increase the brand awareness of Sports Direct and to increase the brand value of Sports Direct, with very limited amounts of money from Sports Direct to achieve those outcomes. Essentially, NUFC is an ideal investment for Mike Ashley because it boosts the global brand awareness of Sports Direct without the need for Sports Direct to actually pay for an equivalent brand awareness marketing campaign. This means that Mike Ashley will not sell NUFC until one of two things happens, either: [*]The club becomes a financial burden to Sports Direct - that Sports Direct (Mike Ashley) is having to regularly, over a number of years, inject money into the club to keep the club in a position to promote the brand of Sports Direct; or [*]The brand value of club is a negative to the brand value of Sports Direct - if association with the club becomes toxic to the image of Sports Direct and thereby lowers the value of Sports Direct. Option 2, above, is why when protests have become more significant (e.g. protests outside of Sports Direct stores; AshleyOut.com banners; etc) Ashley has dusted off his wallet and has paid to bring in some players. Because at that point the brand of NUFC has become a drag on the brand of Sports Direct and Ashley knows the flakiness of NUFC fans means they can be bought off with a modest amount of investment. Option 1, above, is why I think it will take a number of successive relegations (like Sunderland have experienced) before Ashley will sell. I think a number of successive bad performances causing the club to do a double drop (to League 1) would then cause successive years of financial loss for NUFC, which would cause Ashley to have to put in substantial investment to get the club back to a position to being useful to Sports Direct (as a marketing tool), which Ashley won't want to do and hence he will sell. So, in my opinion, if the fans want Ashley gone without the need for a double relegation then they need to pursue Option 1 above more aggressively and damage the brand of the club in a way that causes damage to the brand of Sports Direct. If fans are not prepared to do this then they have to wait until successive relegations (or at least being well and truly stuck in the Championship for a few years).

If supporters want to take action against Ashley they need to realise what the value of NUFC is to Ashley and attack that value. The value that NUFC has to Mike Ashley is all about raising and improving the profile of Sports Direct, the club is a branding and awareness tool (marketing) to raise and improve the profile of Sports Direct. It's a bonus that the club makes Ashley a profit, but that's not the principle value the club presents to Ashley - hence impacting the profitability of the club won't be as effective. If people want to remove Ashley they need to remove the value the club provides to Ashley. This means that where the club provides a positive marketing outcome to Sports Direct today, fans need to attack that marketing value so that it lowers the brand value and sales revenue of Sports Direct. Sports Direct needs to see its association with NUFC as toxic to the Sports Direct brand - this is when Ashley will sell. This is why Ashley has reacted, through player purchases and new managers, when people have started protesting outside of Sports Direct stores. Supporters need to take action to ensure that every Sports Direct sign, advertisement, event, store, etc has a negative message coming from NUFC. This needs to be done with a large amount of energy and persistence so that Ashley knows that this isn't going to blow over and the only way to save Sports Direct is to disconnect it from NUFC. Mike Ashley doesn't give a stuff about NUFC, its failure or success. Mike Ashley only cares that Sports Direct is succeeding and he will react to protect that.