SUPERTOON

Mid Jun according to the Guardian article from last week, unless things have changed since then.

Only in delaying a decision till the final report, not in actually blocking the takeover.

Caulkin is pretty close to Bruce as well, so he isn’t going to write anything negative about him.

Does this WTO report carry any clout in terms of whether they can reject the takeover based on what is said in it? Have a look at the twitter link I posted previous page as it gives an insight to this Just this second read it. I take it as the WTO report is nothing to worry about? Yep, other than it delaying it even longer, no matter what is in it, it can’t stop the takeover legally.

So surely the final copy must be different from the draft copy to warrant them waiting for it. It must also contain new evidence to what they already have, otherwise what would be the point in waiting.

I am all in with the Saudis, and have always been since they first pitched in. I am not really interested in American owners, or for that matter most of the other options mentioned. As others have mentioned, they'll probably just load the club with debt Glazer style. I think this is a once in a lifetime chance with Stavely. Reubens and PIF, if it falls through, not really arsed if we get sold or not. Same, and it’s not exactly a quick process even if someone else does come in.

That’s the one he is on about

This the one where they harp on about cats? No. Won’t be anything new from the buyers still confident line.

In terms of legal action from outside influences should the takeover pass, can anyone actually sue the league if they let it through with the piracy issues, or is it simply a case of it’s the premier leagues and it’s up to them what happens with its matches.

If it was as simple as you make it sound, surely it would not still be an issue.

No and it’s what Caulkin’s said from the start, it’s a two way discussion. If they were going to fail it they would have by now. They’re ensuring all bases are covered and it’s legally bottomed out. You could also argue after this time that if they were going to pass they would have done by now. Wouldn’t really listen to Caulkin anymore since all along he has said no red flags, when clearly the piracy issue is a big one. Depends on your definition of red flag I suppose. The fact there going back and forth would suggest it’s not a deal breaker, they might well be just seeking certain assurances. Regardless this Matty Longstaff situation just spells out how much we need this, as if we already didn’t know. The thought of being stuck with this lot makes me feel physically sick. It will be worse than ever before if we are stuck with this lot, that is guaranteed.

And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months.

Would be a great move under Ashley and his rudderless ship, but if the takeover goes through, hanging around would be the better move I would think. How long can he hang round for ? His contract may be up before the takeover is sorted, and who knows how long the offers he has will be on the table.

No and it’s what Caulkin’s said from the start, it’s a two way discussion. If they were going to fail it they would have by now. They’re ensuring all bases are covered and it’s legally bottomed out. You could also argue after this time that if they were going to pass they would have done by now. Wouldn’t really listen to Caulkin anymore since all along he has said no red flags, when clearly the piracy issue is a big one.

Back and forth over piracy suggests they are trying to iron it all out. It's not a negative to me at all. George even said this morning, confidence is still high. It’s surely still a red flag which we have been told since the start haven’t come up.

He also said they had been told 4 weeks in April. Looks to me what he's being told is probably assumptions made by his sources. It's been quite noticeable that all the bullish media banging the drum on checks completed, no red flags etc. etc. have started to backtrack the last couple of weeks. Yep, looks like piracy is a major issue and still possible it could block the deal.

He will probably be out of contract before it.

But of backtracking from George there? He has said all along no red flags, this seems to be one.

You would assume that the buyers are absolutely certain in them being separate before going through with all of this.

So going of what Jason Burt said and from Caulkin, are we right to think the checks are done and now waiting for the executive board to meet ?

I wonder if whenever this is finally done and if it does pass, we find out if there ever was any issues or it literally was just slowed down because of covid and project restart

In my line of work we wouldn’t put anything in front of the exec board until we were certain we had what we think we would need to get waved through. In this instance it won’t go through to the exec board until those doing the core work were certain about their recommendation. But regardless the exec board could still go against a decision. Or ask for more information. No I would say it can fail, but would still have to go through the Executive Board for confirmation. This decision would then be sent to the seller/buyer with the reasons why and the articles of any appeal process included. Cheers ?

So I may be wrong here, if it goes to an executive board, does that mean it can’t fail before that stage regardless? As in they my well have found proof of piracy, but it would still go to the executive board ?