Various: N-O has lost the plot over potential end of Mike Ashley's tenure

[madras]

nufc.com don't have a clue what is happening, ignore it.

They may have but its nothing new. The question over beautq and bein was going to arise and they'll have to have more proof than when the French courts knocked it back.

[Wandy]

Nobody commenting on NUFC.com’s latest update? Apparently the leaked document that has put this thing back highlighted a possible breach of the rule that says a club should not provide false, misleading or inaccurate information....

 

 

A club as opposed to prospective owner or director?

 

Yeah sorry, that should have said buyer...not the club.

 

I guess this is the only thing that can stop it now.

[gasman]

It's just a vague stab in the dark

[Stifler]

I don’t believe they know anything.

They have never really been ITK, although they have never really claimed to have been.

Also the article is a lot conjuncture of already reported information.

As said, this will have been a case where there are plenty of high profile lawyers putting together the deal. They won’t be including documents that are false or misleading in this, it’s not what they do. They are very expensive and highly rated for a reason, this isn’t Saul Goodman.

 

Is Biffa or Nial one of the lads from The Backpage? If so that guy is negative as fuck, even seeing him makes me want to neck a bottle of Prozac.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

That's a pretty specifc thing for them to refer to if they 'know nothing.' In all likelihood they will know 'something' but it's hard to put much weight on anything anybody claims at the moment.

[Stifler]

That's a pretty specifc thing for them to refer to if they 'know nothing.' In all likelihood they will know 'something' but it's hard to put much weight on anything anybody claims at the moment.

It was a rumoured report from a not so reliable source earlier in the week.

[LV]

If I worried as much as some on here, I'd never fart, in fear of shitting myself.

 

Tbf this has been a real fear since I sharted just before going into the first showing of Rise of Skywalker. A real morning of disappointment and reflection.

 

:lol:

[bealios]

I don’t believe they know anything.

They have never really been ITK, although they have never really claimed to have been.

Also the article is a lot conjuncture of already reported information.

As said, this will have been a case where there are plenty of high profile lawyers putting together the deal. They won’t be including documents that are false or misleading in this, it’s not what they do. They are very expensive and highly rated for a reason, this isn’t Saul Goodman.

 

Is Biffa or Nial one of the lads from The Backpage? If so that guy is negative as fuck, even seeing him makes me want to neck a bottle of Prozac.

 

I've acted on the purchase of a football club before, and trust me, it is perfectly possible for false or misleading documents or statements to be submitted without the knowledge of the lawyers involved. A lot of the information which is requested is factual in nature, so as a lawyer you're relying on your client giving you the answer. A firm in the City will have absolutely no idea of the historic relationship between PIF/MBS and BeinOut, and they will be relying entirely on what the client told them. So if (just an example, no inside knowledge) someone on the buy side withheld an email which showed some kind of link, and denied any link, but then that email comes to light further down the line, nothing any lawyer could do about that. That's how a lot of these sorts of things come out. 

[manorpark]

Nobody commenting on NUFC.com’s latest update? Apparently the leaked document that has put this thing back highlighted a possible breach of the rule that says a club should not provide false, misleading or inaccurate information....

 

 

To me, this part of NUFC.coms latest note is the most relevant part . . .

 

Optimism last weekend that the Premier League checks were set to be passed was quickly dampened when documentation was received by the PL and simultaneously circulated to media outlets, that detailed an apparent breach of the PL checks by Staveley & Co. in regard to the BeoutQ streaming service. The PL was obligated to investigate this claimed breach of their rule that "prospective club owners must not provide false, misleading or inaccurate information."

 

If, as they say, this documentation was "simultaneously circulated to media outlets", then surely the media would have used it, and we would all know EXACTLY what this documentation said and probably who had sent it.

 

Have I missed the publication of that documentation??

[LV]

I think they mean news of the submission of documents detailing a breach was submitted to media outlets. I.e whoever sent the docs to the Premier League also briefed the media about it. Someone clearly wants this stopped.

[My Silent Face]

https://www.shieldsgazette.com/sport/football/newcastle-united/revealed-reason-premier-league-are-reportedly-dragging-their-heels-newcastle-uniteds-saudi-takeover-2854991

[David Edgar]

That story is just a regurgitation of tweets that were posted in here earlier in the day.

[Ameritoon]

I say we have this Paul guy fight the .com lads

[Guest Butcher]

Even if it takes another week, two weeks, a month - there’s nothing to suggest it’s not going through. It’s a question of when, not if.

 

Can’t wait.

[Hhtoon]

nufc.com don't have a clue what is happening, ignore it.

They may have but its nothing new. The question over beautq and bein was going to arise and they'll have to have more proof than when the French courts knocked it back.

 

Will they need more proof though? They aren't a court but if they do operate on a burden of proof scale (no idea if they do) I daresay it would be more in line with the civil side which is on the balance of probability.

 

If they do refuse, would any appeal end up at CAS? If another body did force them to approve the ownership, at least the Premier League could just go "hey, we tried everyone" and then change the tests if they wanted.

 

Of course that could all be bollocks. I don't have a clue but it's fun making up scenarios

 

[prefabtoon]

Deal is dead in the water, roma have turned the Saudis heads now.

Thanks to the fa for dragging there heels on this one.

obviously dont want the power to move from south to the north.

back to mike and bruce.

[bealios]

It's probably the most plausible of all the theories circling at the moment.

[Jinky Jim]

Nobody commenting on NUFC.com’s latest update? Apparently the leaked document that has put this thing back highlighted a possible breach of the rule that says a club should not provide false, misleading or inaccurate information....

 

 

To me, this part of NUFC.coms latest note is the most relevant part . . .

 

Optimism last weekend that the Premier League checks were set to be passed was quickly dampened when documentation was received by the PL and simultaneously circulated to media outlets, that detailed an apparent breach of the PL checks by Staveley & Co. in regard to the BeoutQ streaming service. The PL was obligated to investigate this claimed breach of their rule that "prospective club owners must not provide false, misleading or inaccurate information."

 

If, as they say, this documentation was "simultaneously circulated to media outlets", then surely the media would have used it, and we would all know EXACTLY what this documentation said and probably who had sent it.

 

Have I missed the publication of that documentation??

 

If they say that” documentation was received by the PL and simultaneously circulated to media outlets[/b], that detailed an apparent breach of the PL checks by Staveley & Co.”....then someone in the PL is passing information given by Staveley and Co in their application to outside agencies, otherwise how would anyone know whether they have/have not handed misleading information to the PL.....in other words someone at the PL doesn’t want this bid to succeed and is actively passing on sensitive information......I’ve got to say I’m a bit dubious with this, as the PL would be open to a huge legal battle over distribution of sensitive material....I’m guessing that all members of the PL are also subject to strict confidence.

 

I’m in the “this is bullshit” brigade......Always trying to be positive...at least for the moment.

 

[madras]

nufc.com don't have a clue what is happening, ignore it.

They may have but its nothing new. The question over beautq and bein was going to arise and they'll have to have more proof than when the French courts knocked it back.

 

Will they need more proof though? They aren't a court but if they do operate on a burden of proof scale (no idea if they do) I daresay it would be more in line with the civil side which is on the balance of probability.

 

If they do refuse, would any appeal end up at CAS? If another body did force them to approve the ownership, at least the Premier League could just go "hey, we tried everyone" and then change the tests if they wanted.

 

Of course that could all be bollocks. I don't have a clue but it's fun making up scenarios

 

But with it being purchase of a business it also has to act within business law I'd guess which could open them up to a huge , costly court case if its not watertight.

[wormy]

 

Would you buy a second hand car off this man?

 

Don't think cars are his expertise tbf. I'd get an exotic bird off him, though. For sure.

[Stifler]

Deal is dead in the water, roma have turned the Saudis heads now.

Thanks to the fa for dragging there heels on this one.

obviously dont want the power to move from south to the north.

back to mike and bruce.

The Roma article is a laugh.

 

1. It has already been dismissed.

 

2. They are already the subject of a bid by an American and are in the exclusivity stage.

 

3. It makes no sense for them to drop out of a deal for us considering how close we are to it being completed and how along they are.

 

4. If for whatever reason they couldn’t buy us, they aren’t going to buy an Italian team. The money in Serie A isn’t coming in as much as you can get from a Premier League team. If they failed in our bid they would go for West Ham, Leeds etc instead.

 

5. Even if they did have an interest in a foreign team, they would likely invest in them alongside us, in fact recent reports even suggest that they are interested in buying other clubs in other leagues alongside us.

[Guest chopey]

If this deal gets cancelled for moral reasons which in turn re-sets the Premier League as a beacon for fair play, honesty and integrity then I will accept it, however my intuition tells me the 6 owners at the top of the league will be sitting somewhere laughing over a Scotch.

[Guest Butcher]

They can’t reject it on moral grounds.

[gasman]

Deal is dead in the water, roma have turned the Saudis heads now.

Thanks to the fa for dragging there heels on this one.

obviously dont want the power to move from south to the north.

back to mike and bruce.

The aroma article is a laugh.

 

1. It has already been dismissed.

 

2. They are already the subject of a bid by an American and are in the exclusivity stage.

 

3. It makes no sense for them to drop out of a deal for us considering how close we are to it being completed and how along they are.

 

4. If for whatever reason they couldn’t buy us, they aren’t going to buy an Italian team. The money in Serie A isn’t coming in as much as you can get from a Premier League team. If they failed in our bid they would go for West Ham, Leeds etc instead.

 

5. Even if they did have an interest in a foreign team, they would likely invest in them alongside us, in fact recent reports even suggest that they are interested in buying other clubs in other leagues alongside us.

[bealios]

If you accept that there is definitely a "sportwashing" angle to all of this, then buying an Italian team has nowhere near the same affect as buying a Premier League club. Then again, I would have thought that about PSG, but at least they are the best team in France. Roma are nowhere near.