Geordie Ahmed

Should the fiancé now write open letter to the world to boycott Disney, Facebook and Starbucks?

Those investments to my knowledge weren't subject to a test like ours is

The investment in us is a tiny, tiny portion of the total PIF assets. The letters are clearly about raising awareness which is understandable but those are huge companies so you would expect similar letters at least addressing the concerns even if the end result is just a bit of awareness

sigh

 

Aye, its the worst argument of all time.  Awful.

 

Not really the worst is it though

 

If you think the takeover should not be allowed to go through on moral grounds (which btw is a stance anyone is entitled to and it's understandable) but then you happily view/consume content/products in which they also have investments it's hypocrisy, now some people are comfortable being selective and again that's their prerogative but the hypocrisy can be called out

 

No it is not hypocrisy at all. These things are not comparable. I have to put petrol in my car, and even if i didn't I get the bus, so that consumes petrol. I have to get home from town, so I use an uber. There are things that you use in a society because you have to. The argument that I should quit using uber is ridiculous. If we applied that logic unilaterally, nobody could disagree with anything. Hate capitalism mate, well you've got an iphone! Check mate!

 

Take away the essential products then, you don't need Disney products or need to use Facebook or need to have Starbucks etc

 

That's where the hypocrisy lies, I don't expect people to stop driving but if you object to the takeover on moral grounds but you blast through Disney+ then aye that's a bit dodgy and selective

 

So what you're saying is that Newcastle United is the same to you as any other business? That's fine if that's your position but it's a bit of a weird one for most football fans.

 

NUFC is the worldwide representative of my city so I'm inclined to want to be able to feel proud of it and what it stands for.

 

The only way it's comparable with Uber or Disney is if you have an emotional stake in those businesses. I couldn't give two fucks if they went under tomorrow so it's not the same in the slightest.

 

I care more if someone kills my wife than if someone kills your wife. That's not hypocrisy, it's life. I care more about things I care about than things I don't.

That's not my position at all, I want the takeover to go ahead even if I can at the same time accept the SA regime has issues

If you (or anyone else) don't care about those businesses and whether they go under then it's easier to leave those things in comparison to the emotional investment of nufc

I've previously said there is an element of hypocrisy in us all, I've said if it was the Israeli government buying us I would object but i'm not oblivious to the fact it would be hypocritical

sigh

 

Aye, its the worst argument of all time.  Awful.

 

Not really the worst is it though

 

If you think the takeover should not be allowed to go through on moral grounds (which btw is a stance anyone is entitled to and it's understandable) but then you happily view/consume content/products in which they also have investments it's hypocrisy, now some people are comfortable being selective and again that's their prerogative but the hypocrisy can be called out

 

No it is not hypocrisy at all. These things are not comparable. I have to put petrol in my car, and even if i didn't I get the bus, so that consumes petrol. I have to get home from town, so I use an uber. There are things that you use in a society because you have to. The argument that I should quit using uber is ridiculous. If we applied that logic unilaterally, nobody could disagree with anything. Hate capitalism mate, well you've got an iphone! Check mate!

Take away the essential products then, you don't need Disney products or need to use Facebook or need to have Starbucks etc

That's where the hypocrisy lies, I don't expect people to stop driving but if you object to the takeover on moral grounds but you blast through Disney+ then aye that's a bit dodgy and selective

sigh

 

Aye, its the worst argument of all time.  Awful.

Not really the worst is it though

If you think the takeover should not be allowed to go through on moral grounds (which btw is a stance anyone is entitled to and it's understandable) but then you happily view/consume content/products in which they also have investments it's hypocrisy, now some people are comfortable being selective and again that's their prerogative but the hypocrisy can be called out

PIF have bought shares in Disney, Facebook and Starbucks.

Good Grief 3 hours away and no new posts in the positive thread, really worried now

 

I've veered from mildly optimistic to increasingly concerned that the premier league are going to finally grow some balls and quite rightly tell the Saudi's that the answer is no for anyone of a myriad of reasons. The thought of leaving us with Ashley and Bruce is just too horrible to contemplate, I would like to say that I'll be finished with football and the club but it's not so easy after supporting them for over 50 years.

I don't think I can be finished with football but the thought of Ashley/Bruce remaining is nauseating

Was the rumoured second bidder identity ever leak? or was it Richard keys bollocks?

It was that Henry Mauriss, think most people rubbished it

Hearing that the Premier League are preparing to reject the proposal but will leave the door open for PIF to purchase or invest in a club in the future subject to them clearing what will be a modified owners/directors test. All should be clearer by the weekend 

That makes no sense, so they are going to fail the current test but get told to bid again in the future which will involve a more stringent test than the one they failed?   

Things went way OTT in here.

 

It's still probably happening, right? Just annoying that this tedious torture will continue for yet another week.

I see no reason for it not too. I think Midds has summed it up well.

A document of alleged proof from a 3rd party (who likely have political motives) will not be considered enough evidence to prevent a takeover. It would have to have been proven in a court of law.

 

Aside from that, that is assuming the Premier League consider PIF and the Saudi government to be one and the same, they have alluded that they do not.

 

when did they allude to this?

In their reply to Amnesty the said a company based in Saudi Arabia, not sure whether that means a great deal really

"I write in reply to your letter on April 20 concerning the putative takeover of Newcastle United FC by a company based in Saudi Arabia.

"You will appreciate that these matters are often subject to media speculations but at their heart are due processes required by UK law and by the Premier League's own rules, which can't be conducted in public and on which we can't comment.

"However, I can assure you that these processes go beyond those required by UK company Law and they are applied with equal rigour to every single prospective purchase of a Premier League club."

How many of our centre-backs would you put in the top 6 clubs?

 

 

Probably none. Hard to say as others have mentioned we play a system that suits them. Maybe Schar and Lejeune could get in as backups. That’s not the point though, we will be limited by ffp. If a time comes when cb is our weakest position, we can go out and get one.

 

This is it, with FFP we will be limited as to what we can spend, the logical thing is to focus on your weakest areas and that is not at centre back

 

Think the FFP talk is a bit of a red herring. £150m is the figure being banded around and the doesnt take sales into account. Furthermore, the rules are likely to be relaxed and there will be alot more value in the market due to the current climate.

 

There is a huge amount going in our favour here.

Maybe it's the Ashley effect but does the £150m include wages? 

I don't think we'll generate that much from sales but let's say that becomes £180m to spend, I still think other areas of the squad are a priority that CB should be left until all of those are sorted

Whilst I like our set of CB's if we want to kick on there is always better, it's just a matter of focusing on the priority (central midfield, striker, full backs)

How many of our centre-backs would you put in the top 6 clubs?

 

 

Probably none. Hard to say as others have mentioned we play a system that suits them. Maybe Schar and Lejeune could get in as backups. That’s not the point though, we will be limited by ffp. If a time comes when cb is our weakest position, we can go out and get one.

This is it, with FFP we will be limited as to what we can spend, the logical thing is to focus on your weakest areas and that is not at centre back

I think it's hilarious, I remember the grief they gave us over the 6 in a row (Thanks Pardew) and then when we got relegated

At the time I remember telling a couple of Mackems that us getting relegated is bad for them as were the only thing keeping them up for the last few years, I didn't quite expect them to fall this far but it's a bonus

I don't want to see them back in the premier league until they've at least humbled themselves (which is probably never)

Before going into administration would the guys that gave the £10 loan not take ownership of the club? Would administration benefit them or would they be better off investing a few quid and getting them into The Championship?

That last £25m should have been left in the club, but Ellis's pride wouldn't let him do that. Supporters might have grumbled, but they would have understood better if the parachute had been used to clear a debt that was still in the club's books.

 

 

Poor fucker spent a fortune on them clearing the debt yet he's being begrudged taking a comparatively little chunk out.

That's brutal, he's lost millions after bankrolling that club, his mistake was appointing the wrong managers and then pandering to the fans, their entire season and world revolved around us and the derbies

The 6 in a row they love so much has partly contributed to them being in the situation they are in

lots of talk of keeping bruce on until end of season. sounds logical but do we really think poch/rafa/whoever else is linked would do worse than bruce in the last 9 games?

 

if not then would it not be worth getting a new manager in sooner?

 

even if the new manager got 2 wins that would be fine

 

i was pro continuinty until end of season sticking with bruce but thinking about it more the lack of progress with him over the season so far what do we have to lose by getting someone more talented in sooner?

Yeah, I was initially for Bruce staying on but not sure there is any major benefit in doing so, if the takeover goes through I'd rather a new manager in asap so they can get to work on addressing the squad and focusing on next season

I don't want the season to restart so we can bin him and plan for next season but don't think there is any real danger of us going down

We are 8 points from safety and probably good for another couple of wins

 

That was disgusting, that.

 

Worse was that horrible twat Martinez defending it afterwards.

I'm sure Dave Whelan also defended the tackle as well, prick

Just had an email come through from NUFC. I hurriedly opened it to see what it was. It was just a standard club news update.

Same 

PPG with a two up / two down, no play offs...this brings the season to an end and clubs can start preparing for 20/21 without the ongoing distraction of not knowing when “project restart ?” will be implemented

 

OK Liverpool win the league but realistically they are going to under most scenarios

 

Mackems miss out so are consigned to another year of obscurity

 

The cup should be awarded to the team that are still in and have played the most games....???

This for me is the best solution

It's not fair on some teams but you will never get a solution that's fair on everyone, it's impossible

The suggestion of playing again but no threat of relegation is just absurd

Buyers claiming the deal is pretty much done. Ashley leaking that he has doubts. What could possibly go wrong?

 

If only we'd seen this pattern before...

Where has ashley leaked hes had doubts?

 

Fuck knows

 

Luke Edwards mentioned it earlier.

He claims to be speaking with someone from the selling side, I suspect he's full of shite and trying to remain relevant in all this as it's the likes of Caulkin people are clinging on to

Could do like we do here in Denver. The football stadium is always “Mile High” (the original name of the original stadium) and everyone here calls it as such but it’s official name due to sponsorships is always along the line of “Invesco Field at Mile High” so we always have that name in it.

Even if it was to be sponsored everyone that matters (the fans) would still call it by it's original name

I honestly don't think fans would be that bothered providing there was transparency, if they said the name change would bring in say £15m per season (just a random figure, no idea what the going rate is) then people would mostly accept it

This Jason Burt fella at the telegraph does seem itk. It was him who broke story about papers being filed with prem league in first place. He obviously has some source there feeding him info, I think the positive being that his article tonight expects this to still go through and it’s only been delayed days.

 

I would imagine prem league are checking there’s no way Bein can cancel deal if they chuck toys out of pram when this goes through. I would imagine they pay 500 mill over 3 years and this where the concern is, as other prem clubs would hoy a wobbler if they lost tv income at this time.

 

Ultimately though even if this was case I still can’t see how they can legally block our takeover as it would be very difficult to link pif directly to piracy.

They have a contract so would still have to pay for the seasons left (leaving aside any potential missed games due to Covid-19), it's what happens when that contract ends, hopefully the rumours about the Saudis fighting for the rights will keep clubs from kicking off too much