Penn Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 It's always been down to whether PIF are seen as a separate legal entity and whether they can be directly linked to the piracy or not. Absolute minefield and I still think the PL are waiting for the final version of the report to go public to use as ammunition. The importance of this distinction exists largely in the minds of Newcastle-Online.org members, and stems from a wild extrapolation of one of the Premier League’s early statements that referenced a “Saudi Arabian company”. No one involved in the deal on any side would have bothered discussing the distinction between the sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia, chaired by Mohammed bin Salman, and the state of Saudi Arabia, governed by Mohammed bin Salman. Because there isn’t a meaningful distinction. The idea that the Premier League is going to secure meaningful legal reform in Saudi Arabia is also fanciful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 athletic thing a good read but hasn't changed anything imo, have always thought the PL are trying to find a way to get the deal through and i'm still of that opinion Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 At least that provides a little bit of credible insight into the reason for the delay. But does suggest this could roll on for a long while yet. That buzz from the last two weeks of April has well and truly fizzled out, like. Hopefully it'll be resolved before preparations for the new season are under way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 So much pessimism from that ok article Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest godzilla Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 It's always been down to whether PIF are seen as a separate legal entity and whether they can be directly linked to the piracy or not. Absolute minefield and I still think the PL are waiting for the final version of the report to go public to use as ammunition. The importance of this distinction exists largely in the minds of Newcastle-Online.org members, and stems from a wild extrapolation of one of the Premier League’s early statements that referenced a “Saudi Arabian company”. No one involved in the deal on any side would have bothered discussing the distinction between the sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia, chaired by Mohammed bin Salman, and the state of Saudi Arabia, governed by Mohammed bin Salman. Because there isn’t a meaningful distinction. The idea that the Premier League is going to secure meaningful legal reform in Saudi Arabia is also fanciful. So all the news outlets reporting it also got that from Newcastle Online have they Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE27 Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 It's always been down to whether PIF are seen as a separate legal entity and whether they can be directly linked to the piracy or not. Absolute minefield and I still think the PL are waiting for the final version of the report to go public to use as ammunition. The importance of this distinction exists largely in the minds of Newcastle-Online.org members, and stems from a wild extrapolation of one of the Premier League’s early statements that referenced a “Saudi Arabian company”. No one involved in the deal on any side would have bothered discussing the distinction between the sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia, chaired by Mohammed bin Salman, and the state of Saudi Arabia, governed by Mohammed bin Salman. Because there isn’t a meaningful distinction. The idea that the Premier League is going to secure meaningful legal reform in Saudi Arabia is also fanciful. I actually agree with this. Too many people looking for hidden messages out of desperation and somewhere later down the line this being treated as fact. I'm probably guilty of it myself. And the premier league somehow being peace brokers in the middle East just sounds rediculous, nowhere in the PL's OD test does it state the prem can push for reform in another country in exchange for a club haha. I know the second point is a bit hyperbolic but it's loosely how I interpreted that athletic point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 If the Pl are now suddenly treating PIF as KSA and want open courts, fair playing fields and a deal with BeIN then its over. Expect next season to be completely fucked by an owner who will go on holiday mode until its sold. It'll be along the lines of the mackems and Short unless another buyer comes in quickly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Butcher Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 If the Pl are now suddenly treating PIF as KSA and want open courts, fair playing fields and a deal with BeIN then its over. Expect next season to be completely f***ed by an owner who will go on holiday mode until its sold. It'll be along the lines of the mackems and Short unless another buyer comes in quickly. Nah. Our finances are fine. We live within our means. The mackems spent more than they could afford and were completely fucked as a result. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 Somewhere in the sale documents there'll be a long-stop date beyond which the deal will only proceed if both sides agree to waive or extend it. Normally that date contains a fair bit of leeway but you don't want it to be too long in order to protect both parties to material unforeseen events. We must be edging closer to it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest godzilla Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 Somewhere in the sale documents there'll be a long-stop date beyond which the deal will only proceed if both sides agree to waive or extend it. Normally that date contains a fair bit of leeway but you don't want it to be too long in order to protect both parties to material unforeseen events. We must be edging closer to it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 Somewhere in the sale documents there'll be a long-stop date beyond which the deal will only proceed if both sides agree to waive or extend it. Normally that date contains a fair bit of leeway but you don't want it to be too long in order to protect both parties to material unforeseen events. We must be edging closer to it. Worrying, especially if other bidders waiting are true. Would be typical NUFC to come so close to glory but so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 If there is such a date I'm guessing the PL will be aware of it and will have to provide a decision within that time frame to allow the deal to be completed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 If there is such a date I'm guessing the PL will be aware of it and will have to provide a decision within that time frame to allow the deal to be completed. Unlikely. How could the private members club be bound by such a date? They will see it as the consortiums problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 That renders the checks pointless then because if they didn't want to allow the deal but couldn't stop it under current guidelines, then they could just wait it out until the deadline. Or alternatively they could approve it but not leave both parties enough time to transfer funds and sign it all off, which would be a cluster fuck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejeck Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 Somewhere in the sale documents there'll be a long-stop date beyond which the deal will only proceed if both sides agree to waive or extend it. Normally that date contains a fair bit of leeway but you don't want it to be too long in order to protect both parties to material unforeseen events. We must be edging closer to it. Worrying, especially if other bidders waiting are true. Would be typical NUFC to come so close to glory but so far. Suppose it all depends on how close this is to a positive conclusion, and how desperate Ashley is for his money. It might be better for him to just extend, rather than go through the whole process again with a different buyer. I was convinced that after the suggestion of more questions being answered last week that we might be close to a conclusion one way or another, but that line about heavy dialogue still taking place would suggest that the finish line is still some way off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCormick Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 There's no way the Saudis are this bothered about pushing through the deal. This will rumble on for a couple more months before it dissipates into thin air. They're not. It's hardly news over here; I get the distinct impression that this means more to Qatar than it does to KSA. With all the financial restrictions and belt-tightening measures taken by the government due to a covid-related economic downturn, this is fast becoming a headache that KSA do not need. Additionally, with salaries going down by 40%, vat increasing from 5 to 15%, the timing for a 'vanity project' like this is ill-judged here at present. I have many friends - leading directors- in the housing project at PIF that echo these sentiments. Broken record and I hope I'm wrong but I heavily doubt this will go through. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest godzilla Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 Somewhere in the sale documents there'll be a long-stop date beyond which the deal will only proceed if both sides agree to waive or extend it. Normally that date contains a fair bit of leeway but you don't want it to be too long in order to protect both parties to material unforeseen events. We must be edging closer to it. Worrying, especially if other bidders waiting are true. Would be typical NUFC to come so close to glory but so far. Suppose it all depends on how close this is to a positive conclusion, and how desperate Ashley is for his money. It might be better for him to just extend, rather than go through the whole process again with a different buyer. I was convinced that after the suggestion of more questions being answered last week that we might be close to a conclusion one way or another, but that line about heavy dialogue still taking place would suggest that the finish line is still some way off. Staveley's case starting this week won't help either although I would imagine it will be the lawyers answering the questions anyway so it might not have that big of an effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964 Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 This visit by Masters to Qutar, what do we make of that. If true it seems to go against the legalities of the NDA unless, and this may be overly optimistic it has been agreed and the buyers have agreed to this as an emollient gesture If it ever happened of course Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
junkhead Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 https://theathletic.co.uk/1854065/2020/06/08/saudi-arabia-piracy-tv-rights-premier-league-newcastle-united This confirms my fears (and posts which I've been ridiculed on). From everything that I have read about Qatar-SA relations, there's no way MBS or Al-Khelaifi will back down an inch. Even leaving aside, the latter's tendency to corrupt as many football officials as possible and the fact that the PL is already taking billions of Qatari money. This can all be avoided easily if we were brought by just some nameless Saudi royal family member, that's not what SA wants from nufc though. Most likely it's either PIF or no Saudi involvement. Well, it was fun dreaming of football domination for a while, now we can all enjoy the mother of all comedowns. :'( :'( :'( :'( Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest godzilla Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 There's no way the Saudis are this bothered about pushing through the deal. This will rumble on for a couple more months before it dissipates into thin air. They're not. It's hardly news over here; I get the distinct impression that this means more to Qatar than it does to KSA. With all the financial restrictions and belt-tightening measures taken by the government due to a covid-related economic downturn, this is fast becoming a headache that KSA do not need. Additionally, with salaries going down by 40%, vat increasing from 5 to 15%, the timing for a 'vanity project' like this is ill-judged here at present. I have many friends - leading directors- in the housing project at PIF that echo these sentiments. Broken record and I hope I'm wrong but I heavily doubt this will go through. So why are they investing all over the place then, including sums far exceeding what they will be paying for the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCormick Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 There's no way the Saudis are this bothered about pushing through the deal. This will rumble on for a couple more months before it dissipates into thin air. They're not. It's hardly news over here; I get the distinct impression that this means more to Qatar than it does to KSA. With all the financial restrictions and belt-tightening measures taken by the government due to a covid-related economic downturn, this is fast becoming a headache that KSA do not need. Additionally, with salaries going down by 40%, vat increasing from 5 to 15%, the timing for a 'vanity project' like this is ill-judged here at present. I have many friends - leading directors- in the housing project at PIF that echo these sentiments. Broken record and I hope I'm wrong but I heavily doubt this will go through. So why are they investing all over the place then, including sums far exceeding what they will be paying for the club. Crisis investment and diversification. How many of these bigger investments were met with the same criticisms? I don't see the ROI's on this deal being worth the hassle and associated bad press. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 That renders the checks pointless then because if they didn't want to allow the deal but couldn't stop it under current guidelines, then they could just wait it out until the deadline. Maybe that's what's happening? Of course PCP/MA can agree to extend that date but if the PL believes (or has come to understand) that an extension would not be mutually agreeable then procrastination would be a very useful way of avoiding an uncomfortable decision. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest godzilla Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 There's no way the Saudis are this bothered about pushing through the deal. This will rumble on for a couple more months before it dissipates into thin air. They're not. It's hardly news over here; I get the distinct impression that this means more to Qatar than it does to KSA. With all the financial restrictions and belt-tightening measures taken by the government due to a covid-related economic downturn, this is fast becoming a headache that KSA do not need. Additionally, with salaries going down by 40%, vat increasing from 5 to 15%, the timing for a 'vanity project' like this is ill-judged here at present. I have many friends - leading directors- in the housing project at PIF that echo these sentiments. Broken record and I hope I'm wrong but I heavily doubt this will go through. So why are they investing all over the place then, including sums far exceeding what they will be paying for the club. Crisis investment and diversification. How many of these bigger investments were met with the same criticisms? I don't see the ROI's on this deal being worth the hassle and associated bad press. Don't agree, but time will tell anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 That renders the checks pointless then because if they didn't want to allow the deal but couldn't stop it under current guidelines, then they could just wait it out until the deadline. Maybe that's what's happening? Of course PCP/MA can agree to extend that date but if the PL believes (or has come to understand) that an extension would not be mutually agreeable then procrastination would be a very useful way of avoiding an uncomfortable decision. This is my view too, they have a get out which will save them from a law suit too. This deal lapsing would be the perfect solution for them imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCormick Posted June 8, 2020 Share Posted June 8, 2020 Also, I explicitly talked about this being a vanity (or I suppose a sportswashing) project and the country not needing it now. I could be wrong but I don't see this as the same type of venture as those other investments. Like I said, prominent PIF directors- albeit in a vastly different sector- think the same thing, but we'll see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts