FloydianMag

Probably, the top six in the PL.

It is, here’s the report if you want to read it, just skip to the last para in all honesty. https://www.footballlaw.co.uk/articles/newcastle-united-fc-takeover-and-the-premier-leagues-owners-and-directors-test If you have seen my previous posts over the last week or so, I have simply said that the Premier League need the evidence of the "published" WTO Report, for everyone to see, to support their decision to approve (what the Media have drummed up to be) this controversial (their words) takeover. I have seen nothing to change my view on this. It is just plain, simple LOGIC . . I have no inside information. How will it support their decision to approve the takeover if it unquestionably incriminates KSA? You make no sense. It’s about PIF and the degree of separation as a legal entity, were PIF responsible for piracy, if no then the takeover should proceed. Hasn't that already been stated? I'm sure some legal expert on twitter posted a screenshot of it dated June 2nd? Didn't that come from the WTO report? Yes it has, however most go on about MBS as de facto head of state therefore it implicates PIF, I don’t think it does, and he’ll not be chairperson of NUFC. I thought that was just his footnote from his article about documents he had seen. Don't think it was actually from the WTO report Here’s the report https://www.footballlaw.co.uk/articles/newcastle-united-fc-takeover-and-the-premier-leagues-owners-and-directors-test

If you have seen my previous posts over the last week or so, I have simply said that the Premier League need the evidence of the "published" WTO Report, for everyone to see, to support their decision to approve (what the Media have drummed up to be) this controversial (their words) takeover. I have seen nothing to change my view on this. It is just plain, simple LOGIC . . I have no inside information. How will it support their decision to approve the takeover if it unquestionably incriminates KSA? You make no sense. It’s about PIF and the degree of separation as a legal entity, were PIF responsible for piracy, if no then the takeover should proceed. Hasn't that already been stated? I'm sure some legal expert on twitter posted a screenshot of it dated June 2nd? Didn't that come from the WTO report? Yes it has, however most go on about MBS as de facto head of state therefore it implicates PIF, I don’t think it does, and he’ll not be chairperson of NUFC.

I think it’s already been accepted that there’s no mention of Newcastle in the report.

If you have seen my previous posts over the last week or so, I have simply said that the Premier League need the evidence of the "published" WTO Report, for everyone to see, to support their decision to approve (what the Media have drummed up to be) this controversial (their words) takeover. I have seen nothing to change my view on this. It is just plain, simple LOGIC . . I have no inside information. How will it support their decision to approve the takeover if it unquestionably incriminates KSA? You make no sense. It’s about PIF and the degree of separation as a legal entity, were PIF responsible for piracy, if no then the takeover should proceed.

well one side is paying the premier league £500m for the tv rights and the other side ignored the blatant theft of these rights. I know which side I'd be paying more attention to were I in the premier leagues position They will take notice of the U.K. government given they spend billions each year here. That’s a much more likely scenario given there’s already been a leaked letter indicating support for the takeover.

It’s been deleted because it wasn’t true.

Already been discussed on here a few times If they where being viewed as separate, would this not have been passed long ago. Well it’s a recent legal opinion released in June, I’m sure that PL lawyers are looking at these issues especially any knock back could end up in Court.

Nowt from Delaney either

Can't wait for the storm of people on Twitter reading it within 5 minutes and spewing misinformed rubbish Yeah, they call them journo’s.

Is it a public release or to interested parties only?

Just don't forget that NUFC will be a tiny part of the total PIF investment portfolio, I'm sure that there is a point that it just isn't worth it and they will walk away to another league that will happily take their money. There’s no other league that can give them the exposure they want, the PL is shown globally, it’s the only league that can give them that. They won’t walk away.

What a fucking surprise.

I've literally quoted the test from the PL's website and highlighted the relevant bits. You have your head so far in the sand it's hilarious, though I understand why as I we all want this to go through but so many have lost the ability to think critically and objectively over this. I'm not willing to spend my day going in circular arguments so I'll just say as I've said to others when I've reached this point: Time will tell, and I hope for the sake of this club and my own enjoyment that I'm wrong. I'll be delighted to be wrong, genuinely, but I maintain my stance which I've had since this first all started. OK private Fraser.

Whose chairman owns the fucking country. Why are people so blind to this being an issue? Do people just have their heads in the sand? There's not a chance on earth this goes through. Zero. The directors' test says anyone who might have an influence over the club has to be squeaky clean, and not "reasonably" thought to have done anything like, I dunno, be involved in piracy. Can you think of anyone who has connections to PIF who this might apply to? I've been saying this for weeks. Doesn’t fucking matter it’s about PIF being a separate legal entity. lol thats not how it works Legally yes that’s how it works. Yeah, for the test on PIF, sure. But they also look at anyone involved in PIF who might have some significant say in the running of the club, and what they may have been involved with in other parts of their life. The fact that he did that outside of PIF is utterly irrelevant. It's this bit.... You can't tell me with a straight face that MBS doesn't fall into any of this bit. Especially the last, bolded bit, because he's the chairman of PIF. I get that PIF and Saudi Arabia are separate entities, but that's not the argument I'm having. They'll reject PIF on the grounds that MBS is the chairman and outside of PIF there's enough to say that... This gets rejected, for those reasons. It's about MBS and what he's done outside of PIF, and PIF cannot be separated from him as a person because he's the chairman. It's nothing to do with whether PIF and SA are separate, people need to stop banging that drum, it's a distraction and an irrelevance. It’s only about the ODT test on PIF, the rest of the stuff you mention is your opinion, whataboutery and ifs and buts.

Make sense. Where's that quote above from then? Apparently he’s with the New York Times.

Whose chairman owns the fucking country. Why are people so blind to this being an issue? Do people just have their heads in the sand? There's not a chance on earth this goes through. Zero. The directors' test says anyone who might have an influence over the club has to be squeaky clean, and not "reasonably" thought to have done anything like, I dunno, be involved in piracy. Can you think of anyone who has connections to PIF who this might apply to? I've been saying this for weeks. Doesn’t fucking matter it’s about PIF being a separate legal entity. lol thats not how it works Legally yes that’s how it works.

Whose chairman owns the fucking country. Why are people so blind to this being an issue? Do people just have their heads in the sand? There's not a chance on earth this goes through. Zero. The directors' test says anyone who might have an influence over the club has to be squeaky clean, and not "reasonably" thought to have done anything like, I dunno, be involved in piracy. Can you think of anyone who has connections to PIF who this might apply to? I've been saying this for weeks. Doesn’t fucking matter it’s about PIF being a separate legal entity.

He hasn’t got a pot to piss in apparently, bit like the conmen who took over the mackems.

I’m 80% confident it’ll go through.

Is it being released to the public tomorrow? It is not. Shouldn’t be anything new that the PL aren’t aware as they’ve had a copy for sometime now, of unless there’s been amend nets made that they aren’t aware of.

Is it being released to the public tomorrow?

That’s why it could end up in Court, the Saudis won’t just walk away I feel. They’ve invested a lot of time and effort to buy the club.

The PL lawyers will be important in the decision and for me it hinges on PIF being a separate legal entity. A few on here, however read the last couple of paragraphs in this legal opinion. Mind it’s only opinion and it there maybe counter opinions. So we are screwed then Why's that? Has anyone with legal knowledge claimed they aren't a separate entity legally? There could be, not seen any. This is worth a read especially the last couple of paragraphs. https://www.footballlaw.co.uk/articles/newcastle-united-fc-takeover-and-the-premier-leagues-owners-and-directors-test

If it’s a fail, there’ll be an appeal, if that fails I would think potential legal action. It could go on a bit longer. Do you think they would definitely appeal. My worry is they'd try elsewhere. Where, it’s the PL they want into, biggest league in the world, global coverage. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk