Guest The Little Waster Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months. New information (WHO report) has come to light though which may need to be taken in to account. That was also informal so they may have to wait for the published version (mid-June)? Maybe.... WHO ? World Health Organisation this time ?? ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Little Waster Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 I maintain this; What did they expect man? And why should the club in all truth, they have overheads and bills to pay. Support your club you fucking numpties. Selfish bastards. Fuck them! They should have been asking for refunds/cancelling DD’s a long time ago. It’s his money, not yours, maybe try and write to the PL and piss and moan... Cunts! ???? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months. New information (WHO report) has come to light though which may need to be taken in to account. That was also informal so they may have to wait for the published version (mid-June)? Maybe.... Why would they await the published version when they have already had the draft version for over 3 weeks? And what in your opinion would that suggest as to the reason into waiting for the published version? If there waiting for the published version, that would suggest it maybe is the smoking gun they’ve been waiting for. That will be there excuse to block it, and say to everyone look we had no choice. However, i really don’t think that’s the case. They will have trouble linking this directly to pif or nominated directors. Also I think at worst this report will only say they could have done more to stop piracy, but then couldn’t all governments be accused of that. Bottom line is if they want to pass it they can, and if they don’t I think it’s to do with more than piracy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months. New information (WHO report) has come to light though which may need to be taken in to account. That was also informal so they may have to wait for the published version (mid-June)? Maybe.... Did them pesky Arabs poison Keith Moon? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hhtoon Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months. New information (WHO report) has come to light though which may need to be taken in to account. That was also informal so they may have to wait for the published version (mid-June)? Maybe.... Why would they await the published version when they have already had the draft version for over 3 weeks? And what in your opinion would that suggest as to the reason into waiting for the published version? There was a maybe for a reason. I don't have a fucking clue Have any of your multi-million projects started on a draft business case? They're clearly waiting for something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hhtoon Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months. New information (WHO report) has come to light though which may need to be taken in to account. That was also informal so they may have to wait for the published version (mid-June)? Maybe.... WHO ? World Health Organisation this time ?? ? Oooops, you'd think they'd be busy elsewhere Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest godzilla Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months. New information (WHO report) has come to light though which may need to be taken in to account. That was also informal so they may have to wait for the published version (mid-June)? Maybe.... Why would they await the published version when they have already had the draft version for over 3 weeks? And what in your opinion would that suggest as to the reason into waiting for the published version? If there waiting for the published version, that would suggest it maybe is the smoking gun they’ve been waiting for. That will be there excuse to block it, and say to everyone look we had no choice. However, i really don’t think that’s the case. They will have trouble linking this directly to pif or nominated directors. Also I think at worst this report will only say they could have done more to stop piracy, but then couldn’t all governments be accused of that. Bottom line is if they want to pass it they can, and if they don’t I think it’s to do with more than piracy. Agree if they're awaiting the published report, then it's to use the report as a reason to knock it back. The football lawyer article from earlier today indicated the links could not be directed to PIF. If this is the case and it's knocked back either due to the piracy (or any other reason) then I can see this being a legal minefield (even with the piracy), which could take a extreme length of time to sort, whilst leaving the club in total limbo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest godzilla Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months. New information (WHO report) has come to light though which may need to be taken in to account. That was also informal so they may have to wait for the published version (mid-June)? Maybe.... Why would they await the published version when they have already had the draft version for over 3 weeks? And what in your opinion would that suggest as to the reason into waiting for the published version? There was a maybe for a reason. I don't have a f***ing clue Have any of your multi-million projects started on a draft business case? They're clearly waiting for something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest awaymag Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months. New information (WHO report) has come to light though which may need to be taken in to account. That was also informal so they may have to wait for the published version (mid-June)? Maybe.... Why would they await the published version when they have already had the draft version for over 3 weeks? And what in your opinion would that suggest as to the reason into waiting for the published version? If there waiting for the published version, that would suggest it maybe is the smoking gun they’ve been waiting for. That will be there excuse to block it, and say to everyone look we had no choice. However, i really don’t think that’s the case. They will have trouble linking this directly to pif or nominated directors. Also I think at worst this report will only say they could have done more to stop piracy, but then couldn’t all governments be accused of that. Bottom line is if they want to pass it they can, and if they don’t I think it’s to do with more than piracy. Agree if they're waiting the published report, then it's to use the report as a reason to knock it back. The football lawyer article from earlier today indicated the links could not be directed to PIF. If this is the case and it's knocked back either due to the piracy (or any other reason) then I can see this being a legal minefield (even with the piracy), which could take a extreme length of time to sort, whilst leaving the club in total limbo. It pretty much takeover or bust for me. I can't bear the thought of going back to 30% possession football and no shots on target after being close to a different future. Ashley was awful before the takeover, can you imagine what he will be like if the takeover falls through? I'll miss match day for the occasion but I can't say I've enjoyed the football on show as most of the time it has been turgid! Walking up the hill just knowing its pretty futile as the toon don't really want to compete, total drains you after a while. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 Are we rich then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months. New information (WHO report) has come to light though which may need to be taken in to account. That was also informal so they may have to wait for the published version (mid-June)? Maybe.... Why would they await the published version when they have already had the draft version for over 3 weeks? And what in your opinion would that suggest as to the reason into waiting for the published version? If there waiting for the published version, that would suggest it maybe is the smoking gun they’ve been waiting for. That will be there excuse to block it, and say to everyone look we had no choice. However, i really don’t think that’s the case. They will have trouble linking this directly to pif or nominated directors. Also I think at worst this report will only say they could have done more to stop piracy, but then couldn’t all governments be accused of that. Bottom line is if they want to pass it they can, and if they don’t I think it’s to do with more than piracy. Agree if they're waiting the published report, then it's to use the report as a reason to knock it back. The football lawyer article from earlier today indicated the links could not be directed to PIF. If this is the case and it's knocked back either due to the piracy (or any other reason) then I can see this being a legal minefield (even with the piracy), which could take a extreme length of time to sort, whilst leaving the club in total limbo. It pretty much takeover or bust for me. I can't bear the thought of going back to 30% possession football and no shots on target after being close to a different future. Ashley was awful before the takeover, can you imagine what he will be like if the takeover falls through? I'll miss match day for the occasion but I can't say I've enjoyed the football on show as most of the time it has been turgid! Walking up the hill just knowing its pretty futile as the toon don't really want to compete, total drains you after a while. I console myself by thinking of the money I’ll save if it falls through. Was looking forward to returning after an 11 year exile. It’s not only that though it’s what this could do for the city and whole area, it’ll be heartbreaking for a lot of people if it falls through. To me this directors test should be purely about who is better for this football club. Forget all the other shit going on around this, that’s all it should boil down to. How can the premier league look themselves in the mirror, and say Mike Ashley is better for this football club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pons Alias Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 @TheProphet No, the League are giving the Glazers time to gazump us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bealios Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 Honestly think if this doesn't go through (and I still think it will), there will be a sale in a fairly short time frame. Once someone in properly in the selling mentality, it will happen. Ashley has form for this as well, dropping the price to £80m back in 2009 to get a deal done when the £100m deal fell through. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tsah Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 Worst Poster of Year. Every year Who are you? Serious question Greg - why do you ask this? Not the first time I’ve seen you do this? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miggys First Goal Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 If this falls through we'll have that non-rich American "media mogul" as owner eventually and Ashley will still have his grubby mitts in the pie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 Club will be doomed if this doesn’t go thru. More fans won’t go and there would be less and less money spent due to Covid19. Yet 4 weeks ago we were all talking about knocking St James down and building a new 80,000 stadium, yet there more prospect of us not being able to fill the ground when this is knocked back. The prospect of that and Lee Charnley’s bald head still in the director’s box is unbearable. Nice bit of negative pressure, very cunning Amanda. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Little Waster Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 If this fails the club is fucked . Any other buyers would probably buy us Glazer style and load us up with debt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Holden Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 Worst Poster of Year. Every year Who are you? Serious question Greg - why do you ask this? Not the first time I’ve seen you do this? He must want to know who he is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 It’s not gonna fail, they will/will have made a tentative look into any links to piracy and challenged them on it, if they can guarantee assurances there won’t be any practices of piracy or future accusations, that will satisfy them. If they were to try and delve deeper which they have no real right to or the power to, they’d find nothing anyway. I think the piracy issues is more about appeasing other clubs/current tv rights holders rather than any actual desire to truly investigate things further independently. And legally, again, they have no authority. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 Caulkins podcast is out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 It’s not gonna fail, they will/will have made a tentative look into any links to piracy and challenged them on it, if they can guarantee assurances there won’t be any practices of piracy or future accusations, that will satisfy them. If they were to try and delve deeper which they have no real right to or the power to, they’d find nothing anyway. I think the piracy issues is more about appeasing other clubs/current tv rights holders rather than any actual desire to truly investigate things further independently. And legally, again, they have no authority. If it was as simple as you make it sound, surely it would not still be an issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mag_in_NZ Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 And surely if it wasn’t a red flag it would have been sorted quite early on in the process since they have known about it for months. New information (WHO report) has come to light though which may need to be taken in to account. That was also informal so they may have to wait for the published version (mid-June)? Maybe.... Did them pesky Arabs poison Keith Moon? More like Doctor WHO, as I'm sure that something like this occurred at another time....BZG anyone anyway its raining again and 7:00 in the morning....beer o'clock again Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Holden Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 Caulkins podcast is out. This the one where they harp on about cats? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 In terms of legal action from outside influences should the takeover pass, can anyone actually sue the league if they let it through with the piracy issues, or is it simply a case of it’s the premier leagues and it’s up to them what happens with its matches. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted June 2, 2020 Share Posted June 2, 2020 Caulkins podcast is out. This the one where they harp on about cats? No. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts