Zero

Yea that catch my eye as well. Failed?

What?

I hope Rocker source is correct. So at the very least it is still “on-going”

step 2 is wrong. According to Staveley it’s the PL request to put SA as director. step 2 is wrong. According to Staveley it’s the PL request to put SA as director. I will bow down to a more knowledgable person who can show me in company law where a country can be a director. You are hanging on to this as if it’s gospel when it is so clearly not right it’s laughable. As I said all parties except PL are saying this is the case. PL is silenced. Go ahead. You are wasting my time.

step 2 is wrong. According to Staveley it’s the PL request to put SA as director.

More precisely it’s the whole SA that is subject to the test. Now let’s think, how to prove that “a country” can pass all the requirements? A country? Everyone in SA? No, it’s just the owners of the PIF, the whole country doesn’t own the PIF. There will be trustees that PIF are putting forward but in reality the rulers will own the PIF. So who is it? And why are these people not prepared to take the test. I just don’t know why it took so long to get to that single question. Staveley said PL request to put SA as the director, not just the owner of the PIF. That means SA is subject to the test. You got it wrong Staveley is talking bullshit there though. That’s not possible. She means the government not the whole of SA. That would be and easy win if that is indeed what they said, which they wouldn’t. The directors of the PIF are not the controllers, the SA public are not the controllers. Who pulls the strings? They’ve maintained all along that PIF are a separate entity. As soon as others are brought in to the test it goes against that stance. However, the PL are not in a position to decide who is classed a director or not. Nope they are not but the test is owners and directors. They have an obligation to identify the owners. Very complicated as everything will be in trust for the good of SA as a whole, but, someone will be the ultimate decision maker. If the PL are not convinced by what they are being told and PIF are not putting forward the names of the controlling party then it’s stalemate. This won’t go through unless MBS takes the test or the whole deal is restructured. I believe they had reassurance that the current structure would be good enough but incorrectly so. I don’t understand why would you assume PIF not putting forward the names of the controlling party? And in fact why would you assume BSA could not pass the test?

More precisely it’s the whole SA that is subject to the test. Now let’s think, how to prove that “a country” can pass all the requirements? A country? Everyone in SA? No, it’s just the owners of the PIF, the whole country doesn’t own the PIF. There will be trustees that PIF are putting forward but in reality the rulers will own the PIF. So who is it? And why are these people not prepared to take the test. I just don’t know why it took so long to get to that single question. Staveley said PL request to put SA as the director, not just the owner of the PIF. That means SA is subject to the test. You got it wrong Staveley is talking bullshit there though. That’s not possible. She means the government not the whole of SA. That would be an easy win for Staveley if that is indeed what they said, which they wouldn’t of said. The directors of the PIF are not the controllers, the SA public are not the controllers. Who pulls the strings? How do you know she is bullshitting? Now all parties involved say this is the case (Staveley Ashley Reuben) and PL is silenced. Unless PL makes a statement and explained what happened and why they did not make any decisions for 4 months how do you know Staveley is bullshiting? Yea that’s why it is fucking ridiculous that SA is the director. And I can tell you even if it’s SA government it’s also idiotic. So ALL SA gov individuals need to disclose details and subject to checking? Instead of those who really got the power? So say a street cleaner employed by the SA gov also need to be tested? Are you for real?

however when that country would have an 80% stake in a club and it would have no influence at all on the running of the club? I find that difficult to believe so lord knows what the premier league think on it. Even if that’s the case I think you should at least identify the individual who has the influence on the club but not the country. Say you can put BSA or even his relatives who got the power etc. Not the country. I remember someone said PIF already agreed to gave all personal details of people under PIF to PL in exchange of dropping this ridiculous requirement. Surely this would also includes BSA.

More precisely it’s the whole SA that is subject to the test. Now let’s think, how to prove that “a country” can pass all the requirements? A country? Everyone in SA? No, it’s just the owners of the PIF, the whole country doesn’t own the PIF. There will be trustees that PIF are putting forward but in reality the rulers will own the PIF. So who is it? And why are these people not prepared to take the test. I just don’t know why it took so long to get to that single question. Staveley said PL request to put SA as the director, not just the owner of the PIF. That means SA is subject to the test. You got it wrong

And normally you need to disclose the details of that director in order to pass the test right? Now change this into “SA”, is that SA need to disclose all the peoples details to PL in order to pass the test? It’s just ridiculous to put a country as a director.

More precisely it’s the whole SA that is subject to the test. Now let’s think, how to prove that “a country” can pass all the requirements? A country? Everyone in SA?

The key is the PL in fact has no grounds to reject the test. That’s why they tried to delay the decision till the end of the world. That’s a dirty move. The rationale behind does not matter. That shouldn’t affect the test, which is why the PL can’t reject. As I have mentioned, they are playing with fire. Once PIF and KSA escalate this to national level and as a stand off with Qatar (which a lot here have predicted) they would not hold back anymore. Money is no longer the question or consideration. Legal proceedings and country level trade deals would become the new battlefield.

The PL is getting into real trouble here. KSA is escalating this bid and the unfair treatment to national level.

Look, Golfmag is not infallible. Look at it this way: You have primary ITKs. These are people who have direct inside involvement and know exactly what’s going on with whatever they are tasked with handling. Unless it’s a golf deal, this is not Golfmag. You then get secondary, tertiary etc ITKs who have access to those one above them in the chain (and may also witness physical presence of others without context). These ITKs only have access to the information that their source chooses to disclose. The source can put any spin on what they say to get their propaganda across. It’s still useful but must be considered and digested in that basis. Caulkin and Golfmag fit into this group. Agree with above

Because that basically confirms what AS said is correct and it’s PL who is solely responsible for this fiasco.

Or gms source is heavily biased towards the PL due to their connections, not expecting the lid to be blown off the way it has. PL have been leaking things for weeks, gm may have even been used in this case. Exactly what I think. I guess GM realises this now as well, after reading what Staveley said.

AS already stated that once PL passed the test, even now, the deal can wrapped up immediately. All parties involved agreed on this. And today Lee Charnley acknowledged the statement which means Ashley’s stand is the same. They can do the deal at any time. So obviously it’s GMs source that is bullshiting. I do trust GM though.

Aye. You can interpret that GMs source is from PLs perspective. Obliviously is putting the blame on the other side. I am sitting with AS though. Dragging 17 weeks is unexplanable. And the key is if the test is on the brink of being passed, just why don’t they announce it now? Just do it. We will all know who is holding up the deal in the end.

I don't doubt that he still wants to sell. I do doubt that any other group would be willing to match his price, especially after this. They're (I'm trying to stop saying we're) f***ed. That’s why they still want to do a deal. Ashley needs the money to save his baby SD and there won’t be a lot of buyers during Covid crisis. Let’s see if the consortium can change its composition and reconstruct the deal. I do think there is some internal issues within the consortium which needs to be compromised.

Aye, it’s just step one. If this is step one, how long does the whole plan take? I expect one year including legal proceedings, if needed.

Aye, it’s just step one.

That problem is the reason the deal is dead. Aye. But this can be resolved. 1. Use public pressure to force PL to withdraw the ridiculous requirement. This is what they are doing. 2. Cut down PIF involvement so that they are no longer ultimate owner. As said this can be done as long as Reuben is willing to. I can win the lottery, but doesn't mean it's likely. 1. The PL won't care about "public pressure" from a number of NUFC fans. Why would they? 2. There was a reason they looked for investment from other parties. It's not going to happen with just AS and the Ruebens. 1. Well I don’t think it is impossible. No harm to try. And as I said this requirement is unfair, as clear as fuck. If the PL bows down to the public pressure, fine. If not, reconstruct the deal. 2. Yea but what I get from ASs interview is PL is asking to put SA as director because “the involvement of SA on PIF and in-turn PIF on the club is too significant”. Which is the composition of the 300m. If report is correct PIF is funding 80% of the amount (I.e. 240m) and thus they will be the majority shareholder. That also means as long as Reuben is willing to increase his shares, up to the point where he is the majority shareholder, the requirement might be lifted. In fact I wonder what would happen if the club changes their composition of shareholders in the future, say Reuben sold 20% of his shares back to PIF. Does this constitute as a takeover and subject to O&D test again?

I admit I am over optimistic this time because probably that’s the first time I know Ashley and the buyer are on the same boat. I genuinely think the deal could still happen (but need external help).

That problem is the reason the deal is dead. Aye. But this can be resolved. 1. Use public pressure to force PL to withdraw the ridiculous requirement. This is what they are doing. 2. Cut down PIF involvement so that they are no longer ultimate owner. As said this can be done as long as Reuben is willing to.

I do think the deal is not dead yet. The key is, unlike prior takeovers, this time Ashley do willing to sell and the buyer do willing to meet his asking price. They are on the same boat. Even if this got rejected as long as Staveley can come up a new deal the process can restart very quickly. That also probably explains why Staveley put no blame on Ashley and we also didn’t hear any bad words from Ashley against Staveley (Unlike last time). They still can make a deal. The problem is how to get SA funding AND pass the O&D test.