Chris_R

On what basis are we all concluding this guy has no money? Because there's literally nothing anywhere to suggest he has any money at all. If you can find anything to the contrary, please share it. The companies he owns now are 2-bit nothings with no revenue streams as such. He'd be Ashley Mk2, probably renaming the stadium after his shitty nothing brands and plastering us with more free adverts but with the finances of the club actually leveraged against the purchase to boot. Honestly, I'd rather keep Ashley.

The Grauniad and Telegraph are determined that this takeover shouldn’t happen...I don’t suppose the PL would look into American racism or police beatings as part of their Directors test? They won't care about this one because he hasn't got 2 pennies to rub together, it'd get waved straight through. A lot of the protests against this one are as much about people who support another team not wanting us to have unlimited money as they are about actually caring about human rights abuses. This guy is about as able to buy Newcastle as I am, so nobody would give a shit. He'd have to take out a loan against the club value, like the Glazers did. At least Ashley can afford us.

It must be such a relief to them to find the club is finally available after all this time patiently waiting.

Henry Mauriss doesn't have any money ffs. Only way he can possibly buy us is by doing what the Glazers did.

Really don't want American owners. Not seen one lot yet who are doing anything other than trying to fill their pockets. Just be less cunty versions of Ashley.

This simply isn't true though. The French court case ruled that Arabsat was indeed carrying the signal, and they're headquartered in Riyadh. The bit you're citing is that they said that because Arabsat doesn't really have much impact in France, they couldn't award damages because in France there wasn't "clear and illegal disruption" to French revenues and broadcasts. It's not like Arabsat were found innocent, quite the reverse. They just couldn't be sued in Saudi because they were blocked from doing so by the Saudi government, so they tried to sue in France. And although the French court was happy that Arabsat were carrying a pirate signal, the reach of the satellite signal wasn't strong enough for it to impact French revenues. People need to stop painting this like the French court looked into Arabsat and found it was absolutely fine. Yes but everyone seems to be overlooking that Arabsat is owned by about 25 middle east countries including Egypt, SA and Qatar to name just a few. SA has something like a 38% share of the business and is the major shareholder, but Qatar are also a shareholder of Arabsat with something like an 18% shareholding. I would have thought that as a shareholder surely they would also be judged culpable if Arabsat was providing a platform for a pirate signal? Qatar own 9.8%, to the best of my knowledge. But it's moot. The Saudi's plus Kuwait have a controlling majority. If they're exercising that majority, they have some culpability. But you're not automatically responsible for a company's actions just because you're a shareholder, that's crazy talk. I've got shares in several companies but I have no responsibility for any of their actions.

Indeed, and hopefully that helps. It's main shareholder is Saudi Arabia though, it's headquartered in Riyadh, and Qatar only have a 9.8% stake. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait together have a 51% shareholding which seems significant, in that if they vote together they can do what they want. These things are not normally accidental. But this isn't about Arabsat as such, it's about BeoutQ. The French court ruled that yes, that was being transmitted through Arabsat. The big question is who is behind BeoutQ?

This simply isn't true though. The French court case ruled that Arabsat was indeed carrying the signal, and they're headquartered in Riyadh. The bit you're citing is that they said that because Arabsat doesn't really have much impact in France, they couldn't award damages because in France there wasn't "clear and illegal disruption" to French revenues and broadcasts. It's not like Arabsat were found innocent, quite the reverse. They just couldn't be sued in Saudi because they were blocked from doing so by the Saudi government, so they tried to sue in France. And although the French court was happy that Arabsat were carrying a pirate signal, the reach of the satellite signal wasn't strong enough for it to impact French revenues. People need to stop painting this like the French court looked into Arabsat and found it was absolutely fine.

Poor geezer must be sick to the back teeth of it. I mean yeah, but it is his job. There's plenty of people earning about a third of what he gets who have to spend 8 hours a day answering shit, repetitive questions from customers. He puts out one Tweet every day or 2. I think we need a little perspective here.

It's starting to seem that way.

After all this time, absolutely nothing is worth anything unless it is either - Official confirmation that the deal is complete - Official confirmation that the deal has failed It's been "nearly done" according to "reputably sources" for about 6 weeks now.

Ashley will just be hoping he can take the money and the new owners will have to do the refunds.

There was no takeover test then. Yes there was.

I jst scroll down the page to see if there are any tweets embeded. If there is, I stop to read what its about. If not, fuck it I go to the next page. This is the way How did you both find that post, then?

Nah, it'll never fit.

If the deal you're trying to do is hanging in the balance and may get rejected, how does throwing your toys out the pram help your chances exactly?

I'm sorry, I can't agree with this. It's 2-4 weeks, historically all deals have taken that kind of time to ratify. The Man City one with 3 owners, one from the middle east as a major holder and 2 other minor holders, took what, 22 days? It is a process, yes. It is a complicated process, yes. But it's one with an expected timescale which has been massively exceeded and I don't agree that we cannot infer there might be problems from this. Similarly, people mention "project restart" as if the PL is an organisation of 3 people who all have to do any work that comes in, like they'll down tools on this to prioritise work on that when in reality the PL is a massive organisation with dedicated teams for different things and in this case they're two entirely separate things. This is taking way longer than it should, way longer than we'd expect it to, and that is worrying. It’s a complicated deal and we are living in unprecedented times due to Covid-19, any deal of this nature will automatically take longer as a result and to consider otherwise would be crazy, whether the PL have 1 man or 20 man working on this. Again, patience is the key and everyone not to worry, there is nowt anyone of us can do anyway and willing it to happen yesterday won’t work. People can work remotely just as efficiently as in an office these days. It certainly doesn't double the timescales on anything. You're right that there's nothing we can do apart from wait, but I disagree about the "not to worry" bit for exactly the reasons I've mentioned. I think these are precisely the time and circumstances in which to worry. This is overdue. This is taking longer than it should. The silence is concerning. Whilst you can postulate about this and that and clutch at straws to explain the delay, the simplest and most obvious reason why it's taking so long is because there's a problem.

I'm sorry, I can't agree with this. It's 2-4 weeks, historically all deals have taken that kind of time to ratify. The Man City one with 3 owners, one from the middle east as a major holder and 2 other minor holders, took what, 22 days? It is a process, yes. It is a complicated process, yes. But it's one with an expected timescale which has been massively exceeded and I don't agree that we cannot infer there might be problems from this. Similarly, people mention "project restart" as if the PL is an organisation of 3 people who all have to do any work that comes in, like they'll down tools on this to prioritise work on that when in reality the PL is a massive organisation with dedicated teams for different things and in this case they're two entirely separate things. This is taking way longer than it should, way longer than we'd expect it to, and that is worrying.

If you go through his comments he says a lot of waffle and a lot of stuff which indicates he’s not ITK at all. All he’s done is throw out a load of guesses. He even admits his latest comment is guess work. If you're talking about the same user, he doesn't? And if he is ITK, it's only though knowing someone at the law firm. So he obviously has quite a narrow and limited perspective on what he knows.. Anyone want to provide a link?

Tell me what's funny then Well, for starters people have said "If it's not this week, it's time to worry" for about the last 4 weeks. For what it's worth, I think there are clearly issues holding this up or it would be through by now. I don't think we need to wait until the end of this or any other week to see that.

We have never been anywhere near "this stage" in any proposed takeover in the past. I don't know when any announcement will be made, I have no idea at all . . . but I am certain that it will be worth the wait! We never had an official 'end' to the BZG takeover The PL are still processing their Directors' test.

Glad the threads back but I'm not surprised that post has gone.

#canned

Tomorrow is certainly a day.

I've made my (reasonable!) opinion clear, I've no wish to argue legalities when I'm not qualified to do so and the consensus seems to be that it would drag through the courts forever anyway. I'm just saying this isn't unstoppable, so I'll shut up now and we'll let nature take its course. Time will tell, like everyone I hope this goes through.