Guest The Little Waster Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Saudis just need to execute a few pirates and good to go ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheInfiniteOdyssey Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 I think we'll get a decision by the end of the week Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Isn’t that just a Saudi press release spouting their interpretation they want to spread? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Are you a saudi bot? That's just Saudi Arabia propaganda. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookie1892 Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Im so confused NUFC.COM saying this... WTO report released: Sticking point / bargaining tool? Tuesday saw publication of the World Trade Organisation report into TV piracy, seen as pivotal to the mooted takeover of Newcastle United by a consortium including Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF). As expected, the WTO found evidence of Saudi Arabian state involvement in the beoutQ TV service, with crown prince Mohammad bin Salman a key player in both PIF and the Saudi government. That undermines undertakings made by the PIF/PCP/Reubens consortium to the Premier League, but puts pressure on the Saudis to make concessions in order for the takeover to proceed, rather than for the PL to simply reject their application. PS: Separate to the WTO / PIF situation are claims that the eligibility of Amanda Staveley to be a PL owner could be called into question, something related to her current High Court action. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty66 Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Wtf is that from NUFC.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Are you a saudi bot? That's just Saudi Arabia propaganda. I choose to read it as a public slap down of Richard Keys and his paymasters in Qatar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxst Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 There’s about ten differing news outlets (Guardian, Mail, BBC, Gazette etc) saying the report is bad news for the takeover and it’ll be off, then you get another ten saying the report is great and the takeover should fly through. How can words on a page be interpreted so incredibly diversely? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 They didn't find evidence of state involvement but the bit about Stavely is intriguing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xLiaaamx Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 So .com think Staveley might fail the director's test? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Holden Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 There’s about ten differing news outlets (Guardian, Mail, BBC, Gazette etc) saying the report is bad news for the takeover and it’ll be off, then you get another ten saying the report is great and the takeover should fly through. How can words on a page be interpreted so incredibly diversely? Havent seen one report saying it'll be off and haven't seen one report saying it'll fly through Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Ha, imagine the Saudi's passing and Amanda failing. Still, sure the Reuben's could cover her share Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Im so confused NUFC.COM saying this... WTO report released: Sticking point / bargaining tool? Tuesday saw publication of the World Trade Organisation report into TV piracy, seen as pivotal to the mooted takeover of Newcastle United by a consortium including Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF). As expected, the WTO found evidence of Saudi Arabian state involvement in the beoutQ TV service, with crown prince Mohammad bin Salman a key player in both PIF and the Saudi government. That undermines undertakings made by the PIF/PCP/Reubens consortium to the Premier League, but puts pressure on the Saudis to make concessions in order for the takeover to proceed, rather than for the PL to simply reject their application. PS: Separate to the WTO / PIF situation are claims that the eligibility of Amanda Staveley to be a PL owner could be called into question, something related to her current High Court action. I don’t know where to start but are we moving on to Staveley now, what a crock of shit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Might be worth someone more eloquent than myself to let .Com know their error. They’ll change it if pointed out it’s incorrect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Im so confused NUFC.COM saying this... WTO report released: Sticking point / bargaining tool? Tuesday saw publication of the World Trade Organisation report into TV piracy, seen as pivotal to the mooted takeover of Newcastle United by a consortium including Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF). As expected, the WTO found evidence of Saudi Arabian state involvement in the beoutQ TV service, with crown prince Mohammad bin Salman a key player in both PIF and the Saudi government. That undermines undertakings made by the PIF/PCP/Reubens consortium to the Premier League, but puts pressure on the Saudis to make concessions in order for the takeover to proceed, rather than for the PL to simply reject their application. PS: Separate to the WTO / PIF situation are claims that the eligibility of Amanda Staveley to be a PL owner could be called into question, something related to her current High Court action. I don’t know where to start but are we moving on to Staveley now, what a crock of shit. Barclay's are busy scribbling letters together as we speak. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LV Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Why would Staveley fail just because she’s taking Barclays to court. Absolute dog dirt. The only way she’d fail is if she’s committed a crime or hasn’t got enough cash. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ameritoon Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Im so confused NUFC.COM saying this... WTO report released: Sticking point / bargaining tool? Tuesday saw publication of the World Trade Organisation report into TV piracy, seen as pivotal to the mooted takeover of Newcastle United by a consortium including Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF). As expected, the WTO found evidence of Saudi Arabian state involvement in the beoutQ TV service, with crown prince Mohammad bin Salman a key player in both PIF and the Saudi government. That undermines undertakings made by the PIF/PCP/Reubens consortium to the Premier League, but puts pressure on the Saudis to make concessions in order for the takeover to proceed, rather than for the PL to simply reject their application. PS: Separate to the WTO / PIF situation are claims that the eligibility of Amanda Staveley to be a PL owner could be called into question, something related to her current High Court action. There's definitely someone/people out there who don't like her. You can tell several of the national journalists have negative perceptions of her and I'm not sure how that would be unless they've been told something. Wonder who's feeding that to them and if they're right or just don't like her. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouldy_uk Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 The takeover at the moment Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964 Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Has this even made sky sports news? It doesn't seem to be getting mention Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LV Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 The takeover at the moment Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 It’s about how the Barclays lawyer insinuated during his questioning that Staveley was not eligible to conduct the type of deal she described. She stated in her response that PCP as a company are, and she herself has certificates that she gained at a previous company which made her entitled to conduct those types of transactions. Further to this, the FCA have not taken action against her or PCP after clarifying with them at the time about what they doing. It is yet more clickbait. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Im so confused NUFC.COM saying this... WTO report released: Sticking point / bargaining tool? Tuesday saw publication of the World Trade Organisation report into TV piracy, seen as pivotal to the mooted takeover of Newcastle United by a consortium including Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF). As expected, the WTO found evidence of Saudi Arabian state involvement in the beoutQ TV service, with crown prince Mohammad bin Salman a key player in both PIF and the Saudi government. That undermines undertakings made by the PIF/PCP/Reubens consortium to the Premier League, but puts pressure on the Saudis to make concessions in order for the takeover to proceed, rather than for the PL to simply reject their application. PS: Separate to the WTO / PIF situation are claims that the eligibility of Amanda Staveley to be a PL owner could be called into question, something related to her current High Court action. She’s suing Barclays, it’s a civil action not criminal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Im so confused NUFC.COM saying this... WTO report released: Sticking point / bargaining tool? Tuesday saw publication of the World Trade Organisation report into TV piracy, seen as pivotal to the mooted takeover of Newcastle United by a consortium including Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF). As expected, the WTO found evidence of Saudi Arabian state involvement in the beoutQ TV service, with crown prince Mohammad bin Salman a key player in both PIF and the Saudi government. That undermines undertakings made by the PIF/PCP/Reubens consortium to the Premier League, but puts pressure on the Saudis to make concessions in order for the takeover to proceed, rather than for the PL to simply reject their application. PS: Separate to the WTO / PIF situation are claims that the eligibility of Amanda Staveley to be a PL owner could be called into question, something related to her current High Court action. She’s suing Barclays, it’s a civil action not criminal. Read my post, it is due to speculation by the Barclays lawyer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penn Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Can you doylems bother to at least read the conclusion. It's about 500 words and the histrionics about whether this tweet or that tweet is an accurate summary of the actual fucking summary is embarrassing. 8.1. For the reasons set forth in this Report, the Panel concludes as follows: a. The Panel has no discretion to decline to make any findings or recommendation in the case that has been brought before it; b. With respect to Qatar's claims under Parts I, II and III of the TRIPS Agreement: i. Qatar has established that Saudi Arabia has taken measures that, directly or indirectly, have had the result of preventing beIN from obtaining Saudi legal counsel to enforce its IP rights through civil enforcement procedures before Saudi courts and tribunals, and thus Saudi Arabia has acted in a manner inconsistent with Article 42 and Article 41.1 of the TRIPS Agreement; ii. Qatar has established that Saudi Arabia has not provided for criminal procedures and penalties to be applied to beoutQ despite the evidence establishing prima facie that beoutQ is operated by individuals or entities under the jurisdiction of Saudi Arabia, and thus Saudi Arabia has acted inconsistently with Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement; iii. in the light of these findings, it is unnecessary to make findings on Qatar's additional claims under Parts I and II of the TRIPS Agreement. c. With respect to Saudi Arabia's invocation of the security exception in Article 73(b)(iii) of the TRIPS Agreement: i. the requirements for invoking Article 73(b)(iii) are met in relation to the inconsistency with Article 42 and Article 41.1 of the TRIPS Agreement arising from the measures that, directly or indirectly, have had the result of preventing beIN from obtaining Saudi legal counsel to enforce its IP rights through civil enforcement procedures before Saudi courts and tribunals; and ii. the requirements for invoking Article 73(b)(iii) are not met in relation to the inconsistency with Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement arising from Saudi Arabia's non-application of criminal procedures and penalties to beoutQ. 8.2. Under Article 3.8 of the DSU, in cases where there is an infringement of the obligations assumed under a covered agreement, the action is considered prima facie to constitute a case of nullification or impairment. The Panel concludes that, to the extent that the measures at issue are inconsistent with the TRIPS Agreement, they have nullified or impaired benefits accruing to Qatar under that Agreement. 8.3. Pursuant to Article 19.1 of the DSU, the Panel recommends that Saudi Arabia bring its measures into conformity with its obligations under the TRIPS Agreement. The Saudi state broke international law, as ruled by the governing body of that piece of international law. Not that this was ever in serious dispute. Given the violation centred on the IP rights of a Premier League broadcaster, it would obviously be wildly inappropriate to allow that state to then purchase a Premier League football club. That's why the takeover will be rejected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts