Unbelievable

Can always rely on Bloomberg to spread Saudi's fairy tales.. no longer worked ffs The US' stance on the majority of Qatar's claims in the WTO report is also unceremoniously pro-Saudi. BeIN has been widely available legally throughout the last year in KSA, as I have said previously. Has it? Then what is the big deal anymore? You don't get off for previous illegal behaviour just because you've stopped doing it. I didn't realise the PL O&D test was a legal affair like. Surely all the PL are concerned about is earning as much money as possible. If they can get Saudi money in the league as well as pacify BEIN by this development allowing them to exercise their broadcasting rights, the PL will definitely not want to block the deal and reverse the situation with respect to BEIN (apparently) being available legally in KSA. First I've heard of this though. Think people are confusing beoutq having stopped broadcasting sometime in 2019 with BEIN being allowed back in by KSA. If the latter is true that's a fresh development isn't it?

Can always rely on Bloomberg to spread Saudi's fairy tales.. no longer worked ffs The US' stance on the majority of Qatar's claims in the WTO report is also unceremoniously pro-Saudi. BeIN has been widely available legally throughout the last year in KSA, as I have said previously. Has it? Then what is the big deal anymore?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-16/ruling-against-saudi-clouds-prospects-for-newcastle-soccer-deal I can't read it like, but presumably it's from this article..

One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrrorist, innit?

Only relating to part of the claims, i.e. for Qatar not being able to get legal council, but not for KSA not acting against piracy supposedly conducted by some of its subjects.

Having watched the full 7+ minutes of that BEIN legal bloke being interviewed I think it's quite clear what the PL will be trying to achieve and what the holdup is, because it suits their needs: they want KSA to allow BEIN to broadcast its content in their country. Presumably the PL will also hope that SA become a competitor to BEIN for MENA broadcasting rights, so they will want Qatar to reciprocate should SA win the TV rights after 2021. And therein might lie the solution: are SA prepared to end their BEIN embargo to get this deal through or not. The PL want a bidding war and their content to be available freely to paying customers in both of the countries and their "allies" in this cold war they've got going on. Human rights and other things most normal people would be concerned about don't even come into the equation imo.

'Only way to watch PL football in SA is through illegal streams' Well i can see why this happened then. This is all on the PL, they created this mess. Open to correction but Bein bought the rights to show it in Saudi and then the Saudis refused and pirated it instead no? No indeed

I love how that BEIN bloke explains how them paying huge money for TV rights is money that trickles down directly to the communities in which the PL clubs reside. He obviously isn't very aware of what's been happening here at NUFC if that'sof any concern to him

Yep, but the wording in the tweet is directly copied from the Times article. Shoddy writing from a supposedly quality newspaper.

FYP

Sounds positive

Ridiculous comparison. We know The Stavely bid has serious money behind it, to the tune of eclipsing the fortune of other PL club owners. Nobody knows even the first thing about the wealth of this American guy.

Thanks mate. I’ll keep that in mind.

Pahahaha, what a fucking imbecile! It’s never a pretty sight when people self-flagellate in the company of others even if everybody knows they are of course absolutely correct and justified in doing so . You shouldn’t be too hard on yourself mate, especially on a public forum.

BeoutQ has been closed down, last August, what more can they do? Allow Qatar to prosecute the individuals concerned? That's basically what the entire WTO thing is about, Saudi Arabia's refusal to allow this to happen. There’s servers in the UK offering illegal streams, how many prosecutions do you hear of. It’s not easy to catch the perpetrators as you think and I guess it’s the same in any country. That's irrelevant. They've literally been denied the right to prosecute on the grounds of diplomacy, what, 9 times they've tried? So as to "what more could they do?" the answer is clear - Allow those prosecutions to take place. That's not saying they must convict, but they should at least have the right to be tested in a court. Have they arrested anyone? You presume that they know who the perpetrators are so enlighten me. There is an IP-focused report by the US Trade association from 2019 that confirms that arrests have been made and offices raided in Riyadh, concerning beoutQ. By who the Saudi Government? Yeah, I'll try to find it. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2020_Special_301_Report.pdf Page 31: "BeoutQ, the notorious online and satellite piracy service reportedly operating out of Saudi Arabia, was taken offline in August 2019, and the Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property has since raided stores selling illicit streaming devices and conducted IP awareness campaigns to combat online piracy." The section on Saudi Arabia is on page 54. The report is actually from April 2020. It doesn't actually mention arrests but some sort of crackdown has apparently happened and the US are pretty much the only country that's allowed some forms of independent monitoring in KSA, so if anybody knows it's them. Raiding stores selling set top boxes is a far cry from arresting the people behind it mind. I’m still far from convinced that even if BEIN had the option to use the KSA legal system they would have actually been able to go after anyone. I presume they would have to present a reasonable case to even get the KSA prosecutors to consider it.

WTO have that right. PL just have their test, part of which is not having been involved with piracy, which imo this report is miles from proving as far as PIF is concerned. The problem is, from what I gather, the Premier league don't need watertight "proof" to reject it; if they think that the Saudis are responsible (either proactively or by turning a blind eye) or that they're not doing enough, they can reject the takeover on the grounds of reasonable belief. I've read plenty to contradict the above as well mind, and the money that's already been put down may well cause a legal shitstorm, so who knows. (Nobody, it seems) It's clearly up in the air, but at the stage we're now at I don't really understand those who are jumping on people with a more negative perspective, at the moment the takeover is clearly in the balance and could go either way. It's certainly not a cast iron certainty that it will go through and this place will be a mess if it doesn't. That’s my understanding too. The O&D test gives the PL plenty of wiggle room to decide however they wish (legal challenge possible, but not very likely imo to revert their decision), so it basically comes down to: what do the PL want? Which let’s be honest is the one thing they exist to accomplish, which is to maximise their and the PL clubs’ revenue streams. The PL will use this as leverage to pit the Qataris and Saudis against each other commercially to strike the best possible TV deal they can when the current one expires. I believe BEIN’s reaction to the WTO report acknowledges and pre-empts that in a desperate last ditch attempt to create doubt in the PL’s mind that approving the takeover may see them walk from the negotiation table for the next round of talks. Will the PL buckle to their pressure or call their bluff? If they believe in their product they will do the latter imo.

WTO have that right. PL just have their test, part of which is not having been involved with piracy, which imo this report is miles from proving as far as PIF is concerned.

The Saudi state broke international law, as ruled by the governing body of that piece of international law. Not that this was ever in serious dispute. Given the violation centred on the IP rights of a Premier League broadcaster, it would obviously be wildly inappropriate to allow that state to then purchase a Premier League football club. That's why the takeover will be rejected. Have you read the conclusion yourself? The first bit you bolded is negated by section 8.1.c.i. The second bit about Saudi Arabia not having "provided criminal procedures and penalties to be applied to beoutQ despite the evidence establishing prima facie that beoutQ is operated by individuals or entities under the jurisdiction of Saudi Arabia" is not, but the investigation panel's final recommendation is "that Saudi Arabia bring its measures into conformity with its obligations under the TRIPS Agreement." That's a small slap on the wrist at the very most. I can't see the PL using such a weak conclusion as grounds for a rejection. The KSA, let alone PIF, or anyone directly involved with the NUFC bid is not even close to being accused of being involved with or facilitating piracy. All the report concludes is that intellectual property holders should get access to the SA justice system to file a complaint and have their case considered.

If that is true it's safe to say that the "PIF is a separate legal entity from the KSA so legally there is nothing the PL can do within their D&O test as it is to stop this deal going through" was entirely misconceived. The PL and its rights holders are holding KSA to account through PIF's involvement in the NUFC takeover. I have a feeling it will all unravel from here, in typical Newcastle United style.

Yes that is true, but it doesn't happen immediately. It takes a few years of success for any particular team to generate money for the PL. Leicesters year was the most entertaining in bloody ages, but almost certain the PL income was down that year, as they didn't have the reach of the traditional 'big' teams I'd love to see some sort of study on tv viewing figures for all games, social media engagement etc etc comparing the figures between seasons where theres a tight title race with Leicester (or hell Chelsea or City) winning and Man Utd or Liverpool running away with it (obviously can't really use this season due to the disruption). My guess is there would be higher viewing figures and general engagement when Man Utd or Liverpool are winning it compared to Leicesters title win. Seriously doubt that like. I know a lot of casual fans of English football were tuning in when Leicester were on their magic run to the title and there was tremendous hype from the media that wouldn't have been there had one of the usual suspects run away with it. I think after a few years of domination by any one team things become stale and a lot of casual fans lose interest. Obviously die hard fans will always tune in, but that is not their growth market I don't think. They need big stories and big games, and the more teams capable of challenging at the top the better. Same goes for a big team underperforming massively; another reason why casual fans might be more inclined to tune in.

On a legal level waving through the takeover has nothing to do with Qatar/Bein does it? They own the broadcasting rights for a specified period of time for a specified region. Surely they don't have a say in which teams are in the league and who their owners are? On an informal level I understand they can exert huge (commercial) pressure on the PL, but I don't see how they could legally challenge beyond that option being open to any other outsider to the specific deal in question.

That whole thread is probably the most enlightening I've read on the whole piracy subject, well worth a read. Feeling a bit more positive after reading that too. The bit where he argues both failing to control piracy and directly starting/running the channel are "crimes deserving of hefty punishment" has me confused to be honest although admittedly I'm not very well versed in copyright law. How can a sovereign nation commit a crime by "failing to control piracy"? I mean, I understand that the PL and the right holders might have their views on what SA should have been doing with respect to stopping Beoutq stealing their content, but a crime..? Isn't it a soverign state's perogative to either pursue or not pursue piracy just like it is their perogative to do many other things people may find objectionable?

Imagine if this breaks down at the last hurdle man