Shadow Puppets Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 If this had failed or was expected to we would have had strong leaks from Ashley’s side by now I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Little Waster Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 The amount of research and documentation involved will be insane: adverse media checks, politically-exposed persons reports, financial crime, reviewing the commercial structure and track record of each legal entity involved...we know much of this is highly relevant in this bid. Hence the PL will be asking for further info and detailed mitigation on a lot of this. They will be taking legal and government advice. Its a significant undertaking especially as most parties have probably got bigger fish to fry right now. Politically exposed persons and adverse media will be the PL's main concern, but ultimately money talks and if they get sufficient assurances they will give the green light, especially in the absence of any real government backing. With the heightened scrutiny and opposition, they will want to ensure the process is a rigorous and comprehensive as it can be within the rules , short of actually blocking it. My opinion. Something like this perhaps ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. She was Caulkins "source" throughout that whole affair, just as she is now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Puppets Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. She was Caulkins "source" throughout that whole affair, just as she is now. Ok. I’m not entirely sure of the point you’re attempting to make? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hhtoon Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. You're repeating this same point over and over. We were there, we know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hhtoon Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. She was Caulkins "source" throughout that whole affair, just as she is now. Ok. I’m not entirely sure of the point you’re attempting to make? He just wants to be able to say "I told you so" if it does go wrong. I bet if you look at his number of posts made when all looked positive vs now there are delays, I suspect the contrast will be telling. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. She was Caulkins "source" throughout that whole affair, just as she is now. Ok. I’m not entirely sure of the point you’re attempting to make? My point, or my worry, is that Staveley is saying Ashley has no way of scuppering this deal now. Ashley's side have planted something via Luke Edwards that by the end of this week "something could happen" if this isn't complete. Now we hear it won't be complete this week. I hope Staveley is correct in that it is a "done deal", but we've been here so many times in the past (including once with Staveley herself), only for it to unravel. I have some doubts that it's as simple as she is leading us to believe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hhtoon Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. She was Caulkins "source" throughout that whole affair, just as she is now. Ok. I’m not entirely sure of the point you’re attempting to make? My point, or my worry, is that Staveley is saying Ashley has no way of scuppering this deal now. Ashley's side have planted something via Luke Edwards that by the end of this week "something could happen" if this isn't complete. Now we hear it won't be complete this week. I hope Staveley is correct in that it is a "done deal", but we've been here so many times in the past (including once with Staveley herself), only for it to unravel. I have some doubts that it's as simple as she is leading us to believe. Ok, your point (based partially on Luke Edwards ) has been made. Feel free not to make it another 10 times. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Puppets Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. She was Caulkins "source" throughout that whole affair, just as she is now. Ok. I’m not entirely sure of the point you’re attempting to make? My point, or my worry, is that Staveley is saying Ashley has no way of scuppering this deal now. Ashley's side have planted something via Luke Edwards that by the end of this week "something could happen" if this isn't complete. Now we hear it won't be complete this week. I hope Staveley is correct in that it is a "done deal", but we've been here so many times in the past (including once with Staveley herself), only for it to unravel. I have some doubts that it's as simple as she is leading us to believe. Firstly, Luke Edwards is a tosser who loves to stir shit. Secondly, it’s not Stavely saying that Ashley can’t scupper the deal. The documents are signed. It’s done bar regulatory checks. Stop stressing yourself out with made up scenarios Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWN Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 Funny enough he’s just tweeted this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. She was Caulkins "source" throughout that whole affair, just as she is now. Ok. I’m not entirely sure of the point you’re attempting to make? My point, or my worry, is that Staveley is saying Ashley has no way of scuppering this deal now. Ashley's side have planted something via Luke Edwards that by the end of this week "something could happen" if this isn't complete. Now we hear it won't be complete this week. I hope Staveley is correct in that it is a "done deal", but we've been here so many times in the past (including once with Staveley herself), only for it to unravel. I have some doubts that it's as simple as she is leading us to believe. I've often felt that you've shared my level of cynicism Sean, but even I believe that now, there is literally nothing that Ashley can do (without huge expense, and possible litigation, to himself so I don't think that'll happen). It's 100% a PL thing now. It might all still fall apart of course but it won't have anything to do with Ashley. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 When people say the PL are busy sorting out the return of football as a priority ahead of the takeover, you can tell they're under the Ashley years doctrine of thinking every large organisation has a max of two senior officials running it and can therefore only deal with one thing at a time. Yeah Pretty sure they have different departments fully staffed and qualified in their respective roles. Exactly - Caulkin spoke about an "unexpected delay" - hardly lack of staff due to Covid. You's lot are living on a different planet. Do you think the PL has a whole department dedicated to just takeovers? 9 story building with 12,000 workers all gasping to complete take over bids. They'll probably use an outside solicitors firm to go over the documentation for them. I'd presume they can read material while in lock down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. She was Caulkins "source" throughout that whole affair, just as she is now. Ok. I’m not entirely sure of the point you’re attempting to make? My point, or my worry, is that Staveley is saying Ashley has no way of scuppering this deal now. Ashley's side have planted something via Luke Edwards that by the end of this week "something could happen" if this isn't complete. Now we hear it won't be complete this week. I hope Staveley is correct in that it is a "done deal", but we've been here so many times in the past (including once with Staveley herself), only for it to unravel. I have some doubts that it's as simple as she is leading us to believe. I've often felt that you've shared my level of cynicism Sean, but even I believe that now, there is literally nothing that Ashley can do (without huge expense, and possible litigation, to himself so I don't think that'll happen). It's 100% a PL thing now. It might all still fall apart of course but it won't have anything to do with Ashley. I'll admit it's probably nerves more than anything, but I can't be fully convinced unless Staveley had actually shown Caulkin the contract, which I don't believe she has. I'll be unbelieving till the end I think sadly Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. She was Caulkins "source" throughout that whole affair, just as she is now. Ok. I’m not entirely sure of the point you’re attempting to make? My point, or my worry, is that Staveley is saying Ashley has no way of scuppering this deal now. Ashley's side have planted something via Luke Edwards that by the end of this week "something could happen" if this isn't complete. Now we hear it won't be complete this week. I hope Staveley is correct in that it is a "done deal", but we've been here so many times in the past (including once with Staveley herself), only for it to unravel. I have some doubts that it's as simple as she is leading us to believe. I've often felt that you've shared my level of cynicism Sean, but even I believe that now, there is literally nothing that Ashley can do (without huge expense, and possible litigation, to himself so I don't think that'll happen). It's 100% a PL thing now. It might all still fall apart of course but it won't have anything to do with Ashley. I'll admit it's probably nerves more than anything, but I can't be fully convinced unless Staveley had actually shown Caulkin the contract, which I don't believe she has. I'll be unbelieving till the end I think sadly I have those same nerves. I think most of us have. Thinking about this whole thing is taking up so much of my waking day, it's bonkers It'd all do us good if the PL could just acknowledge that they have the test in progress. It's not going to happen unfortunately so we just have to try and hold our nerve. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sturla Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It's already done, they just haven't announced it. Just ask The Sun: Image appeared in a story related to lower league takeovers. https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/premierleague/11537823/dennis-bergkamp-dirk-kuyt-henrik-larsson-club-takeover/?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=sunfootballfacebook030520&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1588508424 Aren't Man City owned my a sovereign wealth fund in part. I'm sure I read somewhere that their resources were similar to PIF (300bn odd) are just just showing Mansours wealth for dramatic effect there? Man City is 78% owned by Abu Dhabi United Group for Development and Investment (ADUG). It looks like it is a investment fund specifically for Man City and is owned by Sheik Mansour, not by Abu Dhabi. It was news to me that the ownership of Man city is similarly constructed as PCP is planning for Newcastle. 78% by Abu Dhabi group, 12% China Media Capital group and 10% Silver Lake (American group). I've seen a lot of comments (many on other clubs forums) about how the construction of ownership of Newcastle being questioned as opposed to ManCity being owned 100% by Sheik Mansour, like it is a hint that PIF don't mean business with Newcastle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 It seems to all boil down to how reliable his sources are. It doesn't really bare thinking about about what happened 2 1/2 years ago. His source is almost certainly Stavely or someone very close to her, considering he’s the one journalist who interviewed her. Yep, it was last time also though. She led him to believe she was going to buy us, then the next thing was Ashley's "timewaster" statement. I hope its a happier ending this time. His interview with Stavely was after it had already fallen apart last time. She was Caulkins "source" throughout that whole affair, just as she is now. Ok. I’m not entirely sure of the point you’re attempting to make? My point, or my worry, is that Staveley is saying Ashley has no way of scuppering this deal now. Ashley's side have planted something via Luke Edwards that by the end of this week "something could happen" if this isn't complete. Now we hear it won't be complete this week. I hope Staveley is correct in that it is a "done deal", but we've been here so many times in the past (including once with Staveley herself), only for it to unravel. I have some doubts that it's as simple as she is leading us to believe. I've often felt that you've shared my level of cynicism Sean, but even I believe that now, there is literally nothing that Ashley can do (without huge expense, and possible litigation, to himself so I don't think that'll happen). It's 100% a PL thing now. It might all still fall apart of course but it won't have anything to do with Ashley. I'll admit it's probably nerves more than anything, but I can't be fully convinced unless Staveley had actually shown Caulkin the contract, which I don't believe she has. I'll be unbelieving till the end I think sadly Surely the PL have seen the contract hence them conducting their Fit and Proper Persons test? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 the contract is part of the package submitted to the pl, guys. cmon. it's been said like a million times over the last month. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 the contract is part of the package submitted to the pl, guys. cmon. it's been said like a million times over the last month. I think it's just because nothing has come from the PL directly. I know that we saw that letter to Amnesty International but we haven't heard them say "Contracts are in place, we are now starting our checks". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 the contract is part of the package submitted to the pl, guys. cmon. it's been said like a million times over the last month. I think it's just because nothing has come from the PL directly. I know that we saw that letter to Amnesty International but we haven't heard them say "Contracts are in place, we are now starting our checks". It’s clearly in process. There isn’t even a source out there saying “what tests?” Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 Seems the Telegraph were on the money when they reported the hold up is down to the Premier League legally covering itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 if you want to be concerned, have a valid concern that you're nervous that the PL block this and don't allow the Buyer the chance to fix it or the Buyer isn't in a position to fix it. my nerves are simple, somehow this isn't approved and we are stuck with MA. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manorpark Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 my nerves are simple, somehow this isn't approved and we are stuck with MA. Seems very unlikely. If I wasn't a Newcastle United supporter I would KNOW it will be approved, it would never occur to me that it wouldn't be approved. That includes if I was a Sunderland FC supporter, I would KNOW it would be approved . . though I would probably continually say the opposite !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED209 Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 So is this thing off or on then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted May 6, 2020 Share Posted May 6, 2020 So is this thing off or on then? Looks like the middle of May sign off is probably a decent shout now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts