Positive Optimism - Saudi Takeover Edition

[Wandy]

5 minutes ago, Pokerprince2004 said:

Just watched this episode and I would highly recommend anyone interested in takeover proceedings to put this on (skip the first 32 minutes as this is when it gets interesting).

Keith produced 2 bits of evidence that have been in the public domain so arent breaking any NDAs. Firstly a letter by Masters to someone in June where he calls PIF 'a company based in Saudi Arabia' and secondly a letter by BeIn Sports where they say they would strongly oppose a takeover. 

Also a bit of talk about Hoffmans role throughout this and Keith says evidence will come out eventually showing Masters and Hoffman knew about ESL and were possibly even involved. 

Cant help but feel extremely positive and confident after hearing him speak. He must have some pretty good sources and definitely seems to know the laws. Good stuff 

I liked the bit when he said they have a copy of every tweet that hairy hands Keys posted and then subsequently deleted, and have a timeline of what he posted and when.

[Whitley mag]

1 hour ago, Pokerprince2004 said:

Just watched this episode and I would highly recommend anyone interested in takeover proceedings to put this on (skip the first 32 minutes as this is when it gets interesting).

Keith produced 2 bits of evidence that have been in the public domain so arent breaking any NDAs. Firstly a letter by Masters to someone in June where he calls PIF 'a company based in Saudi Arabia' and secondly a letter by BeIn Sports where they say they would strongly oppose a takeover. 

Also a bit of talk about Hoffmans role throughout this and Keith says evidence will come out eventually showing Masters and Hoffman knew about ESL and were possibly even involved. 

Cant help but feel extremely positive and confident after hearing him speak. He must have some pretty good sources and definitely seems to know the laws. Good stuff 

Yeah the reference to a company in Saudi by Masters is telling. Some might say it’s semantics but terminology could be everything in this. They found the only technicality they could use to delay this takeover, but didn’t have the conviction or confidence to reject it.

Unbelievable work from a fan, this without knowing what evidence club also have and what disclosure brings.

[Jinky Jim]

Fucking hell…it’s depressing in the other thread?

[LV]

I’ve got to be honest, that’s pretty lame ‘evidence’. Both are already in the public domain 

[LV]

Anyway, really hope it does get done 

[Wilson]

6 minutes ago, LV said:

I’ve got to be honest, that’s pretty lame ‘evidence’. Both are already in the public domain 

 Nowt we didn't know a long time ago.

[BergenMagpie]

13 minutes ago, Wilson said:

 Nowt we didn't know a long time ago.

Wasnt it just two examples of evidence? Wouldnt expect them to present their main pieces of evidence on a podcast. Bet they have asked the legal team what they could reveal today

[LV]

Let’s hope so because that is pretty darn underwhelming 

[Whitley mag]

54 minutes ago, Jinky Jim said:

Fucking hell…it’s depressing in the other thread?

C’mon Jinky these folk know how to interpret evidence better than a leading QC and someone with vast experience in competition cases ?. He stated in advance of show he would be highlighting how evidence already in public domain could be used. 
 

[manorpark]

34 minutes ago, LV said:

I’ve got to be honest, that’s pretty lame ‘evidence’. Both are already in the public domain 

That is the point, he was using those well known examples of information that is already in the public domain to demonstrate the "type" of evidence that will be used.

It is logical that those examples are "as nothing" in comparison to the actual evidence that will be used (of course I have not seen the evidence myself) but the quality of that evidence is why the legal action and arbitration are both going forward - right now.

 

[LV]

Well that makes more sense 

[Fantail Breeze]

9 hours ago, Whitley mag said:

C’mon Jinky these folk know how to interpret evidence better than a leading QC and someone with vast experience in competition cases ?. He stated in advance of show he would be highlighting how evidence already in public domain could be used. 
 

Is it not really weird talking about yourself in third person?

[Whitley mag]

7 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

Is it not really weird talking about yourself in third person?

Oh dear, one of the forums experts in competition law decides to drop into the positivity thread.

 

[Fantail Breeze]

1 minute ago, Whitley mag said:

Oh dear, one of the forums experts in competition law decides to drop into the positivity thread.

 

Can’t say I’ve ever described myself as an expert in competition law - quite the contrary in the real takeover thread.

Just wondered why you keep pretending to be someone else.

[Whitley mag]

10 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

Can’t say I’ve ever described myself as an expert in competition law - quite the contrary in the real takeover thread.

Just wondered why you keep pretending to be someone else.

You seemed confident interpreting the evidence that Keith presented last night as underwhelming. I just figured you must have a level of knowledge to come to that conclusion ?
 

[Joey Linton]

5 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

You seemed confident interpreting the evidence that Keith presented last night as underwhelming. I just figured you must have a level of knowledge to come to that conclusion ?
 

There was no evidence of anything really. Just some stuff that was out there already. It certainly doesn't point towards anything. 

[Fantail Breeze]

16 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

You seemed confident interpreting the evidence that Keith presented last night as underwhelming. I just figured you must have a level of knowledge to come to that conclusion ?
 

Weird that you keep avoiding the question

There’s a difference between having an opinion (which is the whole point of forums) and claiming to be an expert. I was fairly clear in the fact I have no idea, but like everyone else, I have an opinion.

You’re detracting from my initial point and I won’t get drawn into a discussion re: the evidence otherwise everyone will get upset it’s not a positive opinion in this thread.

It’s just a bit odd for a grown man to be pretending to be someone else on the internet and praising himself in third person.

[Candi_Hills]

Amanda's press conference: "And we'd also like to say a massive thankyou to Keith Patterson and Gordon Stein..."

On here...

"It was another Keith Patterson and Gordon Stein."

"She meant to say beef flappers and soaring swine."

"It's all a conspiracy to help Mike do a tax fiddle."

[Whitley mag]

2 minutes ago, Joey Linton said:

There was no evidence of anything really. Just some stuff that was out there already. It certainly doesn't point towards anything. 

All about building a picture and last nights evidence is a part of that.

No way are they going to let the PL see all their cards on a podcast, and he clearly stated last night it was going to be evidence already in public domain.

Look I’m not going to persuade you and Fantail any differently, respect your opinions but let’s not waste each other’s time.

A judge will look at this evidence in next couple of weeks and if your right he will throw the case out. 

But trust me he won’t and it’s going to get very interesting.

[Hhtoon]

Whitley and Keith have different writing styles and personalities if you ask me.

[Whitley mag]

3 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

Weird that you keep avoiding the question

There’s a difference between having an opinion (which is the whole point of forums) and claiming to be an expert. I was fairly clear in the fact I have no idea, but like everyone else, I have an opinion.

You’re detracting from my initial point and I won’t get drawn into a discussion re: the evidence otherwise everyone will get upset it’s not a positive opinion in this thread.

It’s just a bit odd for a grown man to be pretending to be someone else on the internet and praising himself in third person.

Why would I answer a daft question like that ? I had to go to arbitration to get reinstated on the forum after playing along with that nonsense last time.

Enjoy your day fantail ?

[Joey Linton]

4 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

All about building a picture and last nights evidence is a part of that.

No way are they going to let the PL see all their cards on a podcast, and he clearly stated last night it was going to be evidence already in public domain.

Look I’m not going to persuade you and Fantail any differently, respect your opinions but let’s not waste each other’s time.

A judge will look at this evidence in next couple of weeks and if your right he will throw the case out. 

But trust me he won’t and it’s going to get very interesting.

Again with "last night's evidence", there was no evidence.  If you think this statement is incorrect can you let us all know what this evidence was actually evidence of? 

[Whitley mag]

1 minute ago, Joey Linton said:

Again with "last night's evidence", there was no evidence.  If you think this statement is incorrect can you let us all know what this evidence was actually evidence of? 

You think it’s non evidence, however 2 leading QC’s, the club and a bloke experienced in winning competition cases think it is.

With all respect I’ll take there opinion over yours on this matter.

[Thumbheed]

7 minutes ago, Joey Linton said:

Again with "last night's evidence", there was no evidence.  If you think this statement is incorrect can you let us all know what this evidence was actually evidence of? 

Do you know what evidence is? 

[Menace]

Fair enough you don't believe its happening (I don't either tbf), but why are the same posters always in here spouting the same stuff? If you're convinced its not happening why are you still posting here? There's other threads...