Montey Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 I agree it's a last ditch move by Stavely, I just don't think it'll work. The PL have what they wanted, they don't have to make a decision. But now not making a decision is potentially going to cost the PL a minimum of £17m. How's that? Ashley gets the 17m deposit, not them The PL's actions, or lack of them, have caused the consortium to lose the £17m deposit. They would've got it back if they'd refused the test. So they will have a case to take the PL to court to recover that money as an absolute minimum. problem is I can't see a legal case having any legs on the basis of they weren't prompt enough when the PL made clear there is no time limit I don't know enough about UK law, but I know under Australian law (which is very strongly based on UK law) there would be a case against the Premier League on the basis of them not acting in a reasonable manner. Under Australian "Common Law", the buying or selling party (or both) could argue that the Premier League had set an expectation regarding the requirements and timelines that they failed to adhere to and that this constituted a breach of process that could be ruled on by a court - that either or both party could make claims for loss against the Premier League on the basis of their unreasonable behavior. But, one thing I did look up about UK law, early on in the process, was that it appears that UK contracts law does not have the concept of "unreasonable behavior", that under UK law it is up to the parties to anticipate all potential scenarios and address them in their agreement. I must admit, I think this is a silly way to do things because it is not reasonable to ever expect anyone to anticipate every possible scenario - for example, what if aliens invaded - do UK contracts all have a clause dealing with the Earth being invaded by aliens? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
St1pe Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Fuck off with that hope Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 However our current focus must now be on supporting Steve Bruce in the transfer market I feel much better now. Saved! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reefatoon Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Charnley and Bruce. The only two people to have smiles on their faces this morning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribesman Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Am I reading this wrong or is this Guardian writer being a bit unfair here. It just reads to me he acknowledges there are horrible people including Saudi Arabia already involved in English football and society, but is just picking and choosing when to draw the line in this case the Newcastle takeover. It seems to me the flood gates opened long ago to English football clubs and businesses being funded by dubious sources so its either all ok or not acceptable at all. But it’s not a binary choice, and never has been. Newcastle fans frequently point to Abu Dhabi investment in Manchester City, or existing Saudi ties to Manchester United or large swathes of the British economy, and argue their club is being held uniquely responsible for a problem they did not create. But just because someone is running around the neighbourhood with a grenade launcher doesn’t mean you arm everyone else with a grenade launcher. Just because Saudi investment is already deeply embedded in English football doesn’t mean you have to throw open the doors and let them help themselves. https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/jul/30/newcastle-united-narrow-escape-takeover-saudi-arabia Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Don't give Bruce any fucking transfer money man, what's the point? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montey Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 "Mike Ashley is 100% committed to this deal (sale)" is a very interesting statement. It appears that this, combined with yesterday's statement, is a clear message to the Premier League that the buying and selling parties still want this deal to happen, as already agreed, if only the Premier League would get out of the way. I don't think this is likely as I think the ego's involved (especially of Richard "Dick" Masters) would not permit it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Don't give Bruce any fucking transfer money man, what's the point? to keep the club in the premier league to maintain the price at an acceptable level to mike ashley? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejeck Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Nothing more than propaganda to try and prevent fans from jacking it in. Unless the government step in, there's not a chance that the PL move on this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Those that think this isn't a well concocted ploy by the consortium and MASH are very naïve. This does not end here, absolutely not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 I'll be honest, I'm pretty disappointed in the consortium if it's true the whole thing has fallen down because the PL wanted to apply the Director's test in effect to MBS/KSA and the Saudis are not happy being subject to that level of scrutiny (which is not a one-off test, it's an ongoing obligation). It's there in the rulebook and I think some of the quotes from Staveley are trying to make it sound as though the PL were asking something unreasonable. If I were entering into a transaction in my professional life, then I am expected to exercise diligence in understanding who I'm dealing with- not just directly- but those who will be the ultimate beneficiaries of that transaction. Under no circumstances would I consider stopping at PIF and not considering MBS and the Saudi state as controlling persons. PIF is not an independently-managed fund, MBS heads the board of PIF and is the absolute monarch of KSA. Even if we weren't personally involved, he has demonstrated in the Ritz Carlton incident that he can easily exercise control over other wealthy Saudis and members of the expansive royal family and that the legal system in KSA does nothing to protect individuals from the actions of the monarchy. If you can still be bothered to read it, this is straight from the PL's own rulebook: A.1.56. Subject to Rule A.1.57, “Director” means any Person occupying the position of director of a Club whose particulars are registered or registrable under the provisions of section 162 of the Act and includes a shadow director, that is to say, a Person in accordance with whose directions or instructions the directors of the Club are accustomed to act, or a Person having Control over the Club, or a Person exercising the powers that are usually associated with the powers of a director of a company; A.1.50. “Control” means the power of a Person to exercise, or to be able to exercise or acquire, direct or indirect control over the policies, affairs and/or management of a Club, whether that power is constituted by rights or contracts (either separately or in combination) and having regard to the considerations of fact or law involved, and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, Control shall be deemed to include: (a) the power (whether directly or indirectly and whether by the ownership of share capital, by the possession of voting power, by contract or otherwise including without limitation by way of membership of any Concert Party) to appoint and/or remove all or such of the members of the board of directors of the Club as are able to cast a majority of the votes capable of being cast by the members of that board; and/or (b) the holding and/or possession of the beneficial interest in, and/or the ability to exercise the voting rights applicable to, Shares in the Club (whether directly, indirectly (by means of holding such interests in one or more other persons) or by contract including without limitation by way of membership of any Concert Party) which confer in aggregate on the holder(s) thereof 30 per cent or more of the total voting rights exercisable at general meetings of the Club. For the purposes of the above, any rights or powers of a Nominee for any Person or of an Associate of any Person or of a Connected Person to any Person shall be attributed to that Person Absolutely this. It’s like the PIF lawyers read “control” to mean something other than what is written. I mentioned earlier that Staveley has said some questionable things in the last 24 hours, and the “reasonableness” line is one of them. I also hadn’t realised that Staveley approached PIF as investors (which I probably should have) - it makes their walking away more explicable. Staveley and the Reubens might be emotionally invested, but for PIF it’s just another investment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 "We acknowledge yesterday’s statement" seems to say a lot without saying much Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Those that think this isn't a well concocted ploy by the consortium and MASH are very naïve. This does not end here, absolutely not. well theres issue one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reefatoon Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 How fucking inept must you be to make Mike Ashley look like the good guy. Hats off to Masters and his bunch of corrupt useless bottling cunts for that unbelievable achievement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chapo Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Nice distraction for the club to ensure we don’t spent a penny in the off season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 There's absolute zero chance of PIF ever proving that people not listed as directors won't have any control over the club. PL should have rejected weeks ago based on this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montey Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Am I reading this wrong or is this Guardian writer being a bit unfair here. It just reads to me he acknowledges there are horrible people including Saudi Arabia already involved in English football and society, but is just picking and choosing when to draw the line in this case the Newcastle takeover. It seems to me the flood gates opened long ago to English football clubs and businesses being funded by dubious sources so its either all ok or not acceptable at all. But it’s not a binary choice, and never has been. Newcastle fans frequently point to Abu Dhabi investment in Manchester City, or existing Saudi ties to Manchester United or large swathes of the British economy, and argue their club is being held uniquely responsible for a problem they did not create. But just because someone is running around the neighbourhood with a grenade launcher doesn’t mean you arm everyone else with a grenade launcher. Just because Saudi investment is already deeply embedded in English football doesn’t mean you have to throw open the doors and let them help themselves. https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/jul/30/newcastle-united-narrow-escape-takeover-saudi-arabia The problem with his statement is not that someone is running around the neighbourhood with a grenade launcher, it's that everyone already has grenade launchers. It's only a question of how many and how big each grenade launcher is. Ashley is tainted enough to also be accused of being one of those running around the neighbourhood with a grenade launcher. My counsel to the Guardian writer would be, "you can console yourself that you were pure and did not have a grenade launcher as your life ebbs away having been killed by someone else with a grenade launcher." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 For once, and I hate saying this, I dont think Ashley is the guilty party here. Sounds like he is hoping a deal can be resurrected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Am I reading this wrong or is this Guardian writer being a bit unfair here. It just reads to me he acknowledges there are horrible people including Saudi Arabia already involved in English football and society, but is just picking and choosing when to draw the line in this case the Newcastle takeover. It seems to me the flood gates opened long ago to English football clubs and businesses being funded by dubious sources so its either all ok or not acceptable at all. But it’s not a binary choice, and never has been. Newcastle fans frequently point to Abu Dhabi investment in Manchester City, or existing Saudi ties to Manchester United or large swathes of the British economy, and argue their club is being held uniquely responsible for a problem they did not create. But just because someone is running around the neighbourhood with a grenade launcher doesn’t mean you arm everyone else with a grenade launcher. Just because Saudi investment is already deeply embedded in English football doesn’t mean you have to throw open the doors and let them help themselves. https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/jul/30/newcastle-united-narrow-escape-takeover-saudi-arabia The problem with his statement is not that someone is running around the neighbourhood with a grenade launcher, it's that everyone already has grenade launchers. It's only a question of how many and how big each grenade launcher is. Ashley is tainted enough to also be accused of being one of those running around the neighbourhood with a grenade launcher. My counsel to the Guardian writer would be, "you can console yourself that you were pure and did not have a grenade launcher as your life ebbs away having been killed by someone else with a grenade launcher." Nah, it’s just another shit analogy in a sea full of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Those that think this isn't a well concocted ploy by the consortium and MASH are very naïve. This does not end here, absolutely not. Aye, it’s just step one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Those that think this isn't a well concocted ploy by the consortium and MASH are very naïve. This does not end here, absolutely not. Aye, it’s just step one. If this is step one, how long does the whole plan take? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 For once, and I hate saying this, I dont think Ashley is the guilty party here. Sounds like he is hoping a deal can be resurrected. I agree, as much as I hate him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bada Bing Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 The deal is probably dead, but I have a feeling there are some twists to come. PL will not be satisfied despite all the intense lobbying: - Likely no further recourse on piracy - BeIN banned in KSA (a major market for MENA rights) - Questions from UK govt as they have effectively filibustered circa £600m investment in poorer region - Relations damaged with one of largest sovereign wealth funds. Ultimately the consortium have pulled out so you cannot 100% blame the PL. It does seem likely PIF were getting cold feet about it the longer it played out, understandably. Here's hoping this is the Hail Mary. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danh1 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Support Steve Bruce. Get fucked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chapo Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 I do get comfort hearing that he is distraught though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts