Positive Optimism - Saudi Takeover Edition

[Shearergol]

Just now, Jackie Broon said:

Fair enough, but you asked for evidence that the agreement might still be in place, there is evidence in the form a a £150m loan between PCP and Ashley which is extant on Companies House.

Al-Rumayyan personally delivered documents to the PL in the autumn, after PIF had publicly withdrawn, and it’s been reported that they expected the takeover to be approved following that and when it wasn't the arbitration was started. Why would PIF bother doing that unless they were still intending to purchase the club?

It has also been reported that Ashley has refused to even answer the phone other potential buyers since then. Why would he do that unless he has some sort of commitment from PIF?

I'm not saying that is the case, and I'm not in the blindly optimistic camp, but there are things that point towards the possibility that the agreement to buy the club might have been extended after the public withdrawal of PIF in July.

I didn't. I've never questioned that part. I questioned the line that the club was sold. And that's the problem here - I'm negative about the takeover happening, not because the buyers and sellers don't want it, but because I think it just won't get approved. However, because I question the use of phrases like "the club was sold" I'm immediately "being negative". 

I'm desperate for the takeover to happen, and quickly. I'm sure both AS and MA are desperate for it to happen too. 

[Anderson]

2 hours ago, Jackie Broon said:

Fair enough, but you asked for evidence that the agreement might still be in place, there is evidence in the form a a £150m loan between PCP and Ashley which is extant on Companies House.

Fairly certain this isn’t true, although equally cannot be arsed pulling out the relevant submission to confirm.

[Jackie Broon]

43 minutes ago, Anderson said:

Fairly certain this isn’t true, although equally cannot be arsed pulling out the relevant submission to confirm.

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/OC311146/charges/NajlYnFJqeQExM8atpduvlV3AwQ

[Anderson]

14 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/OC311146/charges/NajlYnFJqeQExM8atpduvlV3AwQ

Aye - that’s not a £150m loan agreement.

[Rosenrot]

8 minutes ago, Anderson said:

Aye - that’s not a £150m loan agreement.

It's security for a £150m loan.

[Jackie Broon]

What is it then?

Here's a solicitor off of twitter's take:

The ‘New Loan’: the position with the new loan is unclear. The Daily Express already reported this. It’s titled a “vendor loan” but the reality may be different. Our view is Ashley is putting the facility in place via St James’ Holdings to represent his existing £150m loan.

The wording of the charge suggests that Ashley, via St James Holdings, will retain security over a specific bank account.

It would seem that Ashley will finance the purchase initially (as otherwise it becomes complex to redeem his investment) and then Cantervale / JV1 will deposit £150m in the relevant bank account and the facility is immediately at an end.

This approach would also explain why the deal was initially reported as being comprised of a £150m deposit and £200 of debt.

There is a clause in the ‘new loan’ that the account doesn’t drop below 13m. This likely represents the 5% deposit that has been reported and would support our view that

 

Whatever it is, it's still there and unsatisfied nine months after the sale supposedly collapsed. 

 

 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Jackie Broon

[Anderson]

It’s security against a vendor loan.

There is currently no outstanding loan balance between the two parties as far as I’m aware. The vendor loan would only come into force if the sale has completed, it hasn’t. Is the £150m figure even mentioned anywhere (again, cba reading through the doc) or is that pure speculation? 

[Rosenrot]

12 minutes ago, Anderson said:

It’s security against a vendor loan.

There is currently no outstanding loan balance between the two parties as far as I’m aware. The vendor loan would only come into force if the sale has completed, it hasn’t. Is the £150m figure even mentioned anywhere (again, cba reading through the doc) or is that pure speculation? 

Yes.

[Jackie Broon]

The £150m amount is at para 4.14.5

How would anyone outside of the deal know there is any outstanding loan balance? It requires a deposit of £13m to be paid (para 5.11), which it's suggested above is the much talked about deposit that was paid by the consortium to Ashley. If it is unsatisfied doesn't that mean that the deposit will still be sitting in the controlled account?

I'm not saying you're wrong, it's clearly something you know more about than me, just asking out of interest 

 

 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Jackie Broon

[Joey Linton]

27 minutes ago, Anderson said:

It’s security against a vendor loan.

There is currently no outstanding loan balance between the two parties as far as I’m aware. The vendor loan would only come into force if the sale has completed, it hasn’t. Is the £150m figure even mentioned anywhere (again, cba reading through the doc) or is that pure speculation? 

This a setback? 

[Anderson]

13 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

The £150m amount is at para 4.14.5

How would anyone outside of the deal know there is any outstanding loan balance? It requires a deposit of £13m to be paid (para 5.11), which it's suggested above is the much talked about deposit that was paid by the consortium to Ashley. If it is unsatisfied doesn't that mean that the deposit will still be sitting in the controlled account?

I'm not saying you're wrong, it's clearly something you know more about than me, just asking out of interest 

Whey the easiest way to confirm would be to check the accounts, but think I read we’re down to the last 2 of the 92 clubs still left to file them.  

That said though, the finance agreement in place is a vendor loan. It’s impossible to gleam too much, as that document doesn’t get filed alongside the registration of charge. The vendor loan would be dependent on the sale being signed off though, as would form part of the wider sales agreement. No sale = no outstanding loan balance.

[Awaymag]

14 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

The £150m amount is at para 4.14.5

How would anyone outside of the deal know there is any outstanding loan balance? It requires a deposit of £13m to be paid (para 5.11), which it's suggested above is the much talked about deposit that was paid by the consortium to Ashley. If it is unsatisfied doesn't that mean that the deposit will still be sitting in the controlled account?

I'm not saying you're wrong, it's clearly something you know more about than me, just asking out of interest 

they aren't interested in your rationale statements.  you can tell that by the way they challenge  what you say and then say 'but I can't be arsed to look it up'.   Basically they are in a topic titled 'Positive Optimision- Takeover' but they can't help themselves coming on and trying to tell everyone they are right and others are wrong.

They are trolls and this forum has gone to the dogs.   Talk about actual football and NUFC has slowed to a trickle because NUFC is a shell, yet those hoping for a takeover to reset the club are hounded.  Even when a thread is set up to try and keep the positivity, the trolls follow!

 

 

 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Awaymag

[Anderson]

3 minutes ago, Joey Linton said:

This a setback? 

No, nothing’s changed since it was filed way back when.

[Anderson]

1 minute ago, Awaymag said:

they aren't interested in your rationale statements.  you can tell that by the way they challenge  what you say and then say 'but I can't be arsed to look it up'.   Basically they are in a topic titled 'Positive Optimision- Takeover' but they can't help themselves coming on and trying to tell everyone they are right and others are wrong.

Personally they are trolls and this forum has gone to the dogs.   Talk about actual football and NUFC has slowed to a trickle because NUFC is a shell, yet those hoping for a takeover to reset the club are hounded.  Even when a thread is set up to try and keep the positivity, the trolls follow!

 

This isn’t very positive.

[Jackie Broon]

4 minutes ago, Anderson said:

Whey the easiest way to confirm would be to check the accounts, but think I read we’re down to the last 2 of the 92 clubs still left to file them.  

That said though, the finance agreement in place is a vendor loan. It’s impossible to gleam too much, as that document doesn’t get filed alongside the registration of charge. The vendor loan would be dependent on the sale being signed off though, as would form part of the wider sales agreement. No sale = no outstanding loan balance.

But what about the £13m deposit?

[Anderson]

Should still be sat in the account. IIRC it was widely reported to be non-refundable anyway. Again though, impossible to say with 100% certainty with the information we have right now.

[Jinky Jim]

Think I’ll set up a thread…”Positive Optimism- The Wind up Merchants Edition”

[Jackie Broon]

10 minutes ago, Anderson said:

Should still be sat in the account. IIRC it was widely reported to be non-refundable anyway. Again though, impossible to say with 100% certainty with the information we have right now.

Well, that £13m seems to still be sitting in a controlled account (albeit not 100% certain), when Ashley could have just walked away with it nine months ago, indicates to me that there may be some kind of deal still in place.

[Joey Linton]

45 minutes ago, Anderson said:

No, nothing’s changed since it was filed way back when.

So the continued existence of it whilst the club continue to chase the premier league isn't really an indication of anything at this stage? 

[duo]

Positive Optimism?....let me think.....erm.......

[Hhtoon]

@Yorkie for the love of God, please put this thread out of its misery 

[Manxst]

9 hours ago, Joey Linton said:

This a setback? 

Not as such. You can put away your party poppers for the time being. 

[Shearergol]

8 hours ago, Jinky Jim said:

Think I’ll set up a thread…”Positive Optimism- The Wind up Merchants Edition”

FFS, nobody is trying to wind anyone up. It's a debate. The only wind up comment on the last two pages is the one that claims "the club was sold last summer".

[Ben]

20 minutes ago, Hhtoon said:

@Yorkie for the love of God, please put this thread out of its misery 

Stop reading it, are you some sort of masochist ?

[gdm]

Honestly the ridiculousness of this thread because you dare to challenge a point (the whole point of a forum) or offer up a slightly less positive opinion it suddenly makes you a wum. 
 

Merge the two threads or this one is forum equivalent of someone saying something then putting their fingers in the ears and shouting I can’t hear you, I’m not listening 

if not, I don’t mind leaving it to the few that aren’t willing to listen to counter arguments but I’m not being called a wum coz I disagree on certain points 

 

 

Edited May 6, 2021 by gdm