Takeover Thread - July 1st statement, Staveley letter to Tracey Crouch (and response) in OP

[Ashley17]

I guess all that’s left to do is sit back and watch journalists fight over why the Trust (or the PL?) gave the Chronicle early access to the minutes

[Whitley mag]

"RM outlined the Owners’ & Directors’ Test process, explaining that it was an objective test and not one that was open to subjective opinion. He explained the need to establish if there were links to other legal entities that would own or control the Club. When an impasse was reached in this matter, the consortium was offered a number of routes to progress the matter:

 

– the entity in question accepts they would have Control by completing relevant forms and processes

 

– an independent arbitration on the issue of Control which en"

 

 

It is an objective test, it's very clearly set out and the process in the rules is this:

 

Rule F.4. requires the submission of a declaration if any Person proposes to become a director of a club (including anyone acquiring control of the club):

 

That is then assessed against Rule F.1. which sets out a number of 'disqualifying events'.

 

Those 'disqualifying events' include rule F.1.1.1. that the person subject to the test has failed to provide all relevant information (including information relating to any other individual who would qualify as a Director but has not been disclosed).

 

Rule F.6. states that: Upon the Board becoming aware by virtue of the submission of a Declaration or by any other means that a Person is liable to be disqualified as a Director under the provisions of Rule F.1, the Board will: F.6.1. give written notice to the Person that he is disqualified, giving reasons.

 

Rule F.13. states that Any Person or Club who receives notice under Rule F.6 has a right to appeal the disqualification notice(s)

 

 

The PL have abundantly clearly not followed that process. They established in June that an 'entity' that they believed should be included as a director had not been disclosed (a disqualifying event under rule F.1.1.1.). Rule F.6. requires them to have issued a notice of disqualification to the proposed directors "upon becoming aware" that they were liable to be disqualified.

 

The rules give them absolutely no other option, they should have issued a formal decision at that point, which could then have been appealed.

 

 

Everything you say makes sense, but of course the PL also left themselves with enough wiggle room that they could just keep on dragging the process out with enough faith in their position that it wouldn't come back to burn them. Might have been a bit of a gamble on their part, but they knew they would have the backing of the rest of the league, and that was the main thing. They correctly guessed that by putting in the arbitration clause with no guarantees of success if that went in favour of PIF, the Saudis would just decide to walk away rather than wait another 12 months of being messed about. It must have been what they were banking on ultimately.

 

Hence why Ashley has apparently been asking Saudis to give the PL a name. I just wish they would and then we’ll see how confident the PL are of rejecting it.

[Robster]

This feels like such a pathetic and pitiful end to all those weeks of hope.

What a total waste of all that emotional energy.

 

EDIT: New Page Demoralised Wanker.

[Consortium of one]

Who knows?  Maybe there is a NDA in place as PCP/RB/PIF restructure the deal to suit the PL.  PCP/RB/PIF have a better chance of closing a deal than BNG, IMO

 

You are kidding yourself. What will restructuring it do? The PL will still want the same answers

 

I'm not sure.  I saw some different articles that referenced 60% and 70% ownership levels.  I don't know why any level should matter but > or < 50%.

[TheInfiniteOdyssey]

I wonder if we're finally going to see an attempt from Ashley to sell everyone and walk away with the profits? (I mean transparently for a change)

 

I'll be surprised if we make any permanent signings that cost an actual fee for the next 18 months

 

[gdm]

I wonder if we're finally going to see an attempt from Ashley to sell everyone and walk away with the profits? (I mean transparently for a change)

 

I'll be surprised if we make any permanent signings that cost an actual fee for the next 18 months

 

 

Aye if we thought the last 13 years were bad. It’s gonna get a lot worse.

 

Ahh what could have been

[Shearergol]

I wonder if we're finally going to see an attempt from Ashley to sell everyone and walk away with the profits? (I mean transparently for a change)

 

I'll be surprised if we make any permanent signings that cost an actual fee for the next 18 months

 

 

Aye if we thought the last 13 years were bad. It’s gonna get a lot worse.

 

Ahh what could have been

 

Rio - "And who can blame him? Why would he buy a player for 5, 6, 7 million when they could get injured? He wants to sell the club, why would he spend his own money on it?"

 

[Scoot]

All we can do now is hope something happens bit deep down we all know that this is dead. Stuck with Ashley after all the hype  is the final straw for me. I'll be watching from afar from now on.

[Slim]

Maybe if Bruce loves Newcastle so much he should buy some players himself.

[joeyt]

Finally got a response from my local MP Harriet Harman bit of  meh response:

 

Dear *****,

Thank you for contacting me about the proposed takeover of Newcastle United Football Club. I appreciate the concerns you raise.

As you may know, the CEO of the Premier League, Richard Masters, has written to my colleague Chi Onwurah, MP for Newcastle Central, setting out the Premier League’s response to questions asked about its approach to the planned takeover. Mr Masters said the Premier League had not been able to assess the suitability of the potential owners of the club because the consortium had not provided the required information. He said this was because the consortium disagreed with the Premier League’s determination of who the actual owners of the club would be after the takeover.

Mr Masters further stated that the Premier League would be reviewing the owners’ and directors’ test in the coming months to ensure it remains robust and fair to everyone involved.

I appreciate that many Newcastle United fans will feel disappointed at the withdrawal of the consortium’s bid for the club. I can assure you that I will continue to monitor any further developments on this issue.

Last year the Government promised to set up a fan-led review of football governance, which will include the owners’ and directors’ test. I believe the Government needs to get started on this review as soon as possible, so we can deliver a governance structure for football that is modern, accountable and above all, puts fans at the heart of their clubs.

As part of this review, I believe it will be important to consider who should be able to own a football club, as well as what information needs to be in the public domain regarding ownership, finance and structure.

Above all, I believe the review must be genuinely driven by what fans want and need. It is therefore vital that the Government makes clear what “fan-led” will mean in practice and, crucially, when we can expect change. It is almost ten years since the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee published recommendations on football governance – including for “a strong fit and proper persons test consistently applied” – and these issues are becoming urgent.

Thank you once again for contacting me.

Best wishes

Harriet Harman

 

Harsh of her to address you as a swear word

[TRon]

"RM outlined the Owners’ & Directors’ Test process, explaining that it was an objective test and not one that was open to subjective opinion. He explained the need to establish if there were links to other legal entities that would own or control the Club. When an impasse was reached in this matter, the consortium was offered a number of routes to progress the matter:

 

– the entity in question accepts they would have Control by completing relevant forms and processes

 

– an independent arbitration on the issue of Control which en"

 

 

It is an objective test, it's very clearly set out and the process in the rules is this:

 

Rule F.4. requires the submission of a declaration if any Person proposes to become a director of a club (including anyone acquiring control of the club):

 

That is then assessed against Rule F.1. which sets out a number of 'disqualifying events'.

 

Those 'disqualifying events' include rule F.1.1.1. that the person subject to the test has failed to provide all relevant information (including information relating to any other individual who would qualify as a Director but has not been disclosed).

 

Rule F.6. states that: Upon the Board becoming aware by virtue of the submission of a Declaration or by any other means that a Person is liable to be disqualified as a Director under the provisions of Rule F.1, the Board will: F.6.1. give written notice to the Person that he is disqualified, giving reasons.

 

Rule F.13. states that Any Person or Club who receives notice under Rule F.6 has a right to appeal the disqualification notice(s)

 

 

The PL have abundantly clearly not followed that process. They established in June that an 'entity' that they believed should be included as a director had not been disclosed (a disqualifying event under rule F.1.1.1.). Rule F.6. requires them to have issued a notice of disqualification to the proposed directors "upon becoming aware" that they were liable to be disqualified.

 

The rules give them absolutely no other option, they should have issued a formal decision at that point, which could then have been appealed.

 

 

Everything you say makes sense, but of course the PL also left themselves with enough wiggle room that they could just keep on dragging the process out with enough faith in their position that it wouldn't come back to burn them. Might have been a bit of a gamble on their part, but they knew they would have the backing of the rest of the league, and that was the main thing. They correctly guessed that by putting in the arbitration clause with no guarantees of success if that went in favour of PIF, the Saudis would just decide to walk away rather than wait another 12 months of being messed about. It must have been what they were banking on ultimately.

 

Hence why Ashley has apparently been asking Saudis to give the PL a name. I just wish they would and then we’ll see how confident the PL are of rejecting it.

 

They already had a name, but as far as I'm aware they wanted SA govt to be named officially as owners rather than an individual who couldn't be linked directly.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

It doesn't seem the PL's place to have a view on who should or shouldn't be director. The buyers name their team, the PL say whether they pass or fail the test.

[TorchyTBB]

So nothing we didn't know already including further confirmation that the deal is dead. 

 

I think what is pi**ing me off more than anything right now, is how Amanda Staveley asked the fans to rally and to put pressure on, then she promptly disappears without trace.  I think we more than deserve some sort of explanation from her.

[Jackie Broon]

It doesn't seem the PL's place to have a view on who should or shouldn't be director. The buyers name their team, the PL say whether they pass or fail the test.

 

It is their place to assess that because it's part of the test, but having concluded that another 'entity' should be named a director in June the rules required that a formal decision be made disqualifying the other directors on that basis. They didn't do that.

 

The PL have absolutely no wiggle room on that from what I can see, they've come out and said they've come to a conclusion on it and reached an impasse. Their rules unequivocally require that formal notice of disqualification be issued "upon the Board becoming aware" of a disqualifying event.

[Awaymag]

Oh is everyone excited for the new season?  What fun we shall have in our quest for 17th place!!!!!

[duo]

Oh is everyone excited for the new season?  What fun we shall have in our quest for 17th place!!!!!

I have lost all interest - feels like we've been robbed.

[Kanj]

as if the PL are going to say that off the record they had a million and a half objection letters and phone calls from other clubs or BeIn sports etc.

[Joe_F]

Sky Sports going with..... Door still open for Saudi-Newcastle takeover.

 

http://www.skysports.com/share/12052546

[relámpago blanco]

Downie must be in the whatsapp group.

[Guest reefatoon]

So nothing we didn't know already including further confirmation that the deal is dead. 

 

I think what is pi**ing me off more than anything right now, is how Amanda Staveley asked the fans to rally and to put pressure on, then she promptly disappears without trace.  I think we more than deserve some sort of explanation from her.

 

Could she have been trying to rally the fans as a back handed message to PIF, to show them how committed/passionate they were towards it, to try and tempt them back into the fold?

[Judge Holden]

So nothing we didn't know already including further confirmation that the deal is dead. 

 

I think what is pi**ing me off more than anything right now, is how Amanda Staveley asked the fans to rally and to put pressure on, then she promptly disappears without trace.  I think we more than deserve some sort of explanation from her.

 

Could she have been trying to rally the fans as a back handed message to PIF, to show them how committed/passionate they were towards it, to try and tempt them back into the fold?

 

Or she was using us to buy her some time before she works out what to do next.

[Kanj]

Yeah, what a terrible person for trying to purchase this club from the toughest and tightest bastard owner there is in the PL for the past 2-3 years. Shame on her.

[Wolfcastle]

Actually really annoying me the way the chronicle and others have ran with the ‘door still open’ headlines. That was never in question from the PL side of it coz they didn’t give a decision one way or another. It creates false hope amongst the fanbase. I’ll be amazed if PIF come back to the table, fact is they don’t need to buy Newcastle half as much as we need them to.

Ben Jacobs today saying PIF are now looking to France and are linked to buying Marseille

 

They’ll get Marseille right up in the faces of PSG. Hope they dominate them for decades to come.

 

BeIn(g c**ts) have the rights to the MENA region for Ligue Une.

All the same problems should apply as applied here.

Then you've Qatar/Bein owning PSG. So the heat from that end ought to be even more than we got.

The only difference will be whether the people at the French equivalent of the PL are pre-disposed to passing it or not.

Maybe they'll be more interested in improving and growing their league and making it competitive than the QPL was.

[duo]

Sky Sports going with..... Door still open for Saudi-Newcastle takeover.

 

http://www.skysports.com/share/12052546

What does that even mean?  We're no further forward - RM has still kept his silence and has yet to answer any of the questions.

[mouldy_uk]

Sky Sports going with..... Door still open for Saudi-Newcastle takeover.

 

http://www.skysports.com/share/12052546

 

Allows them to milk the story that little bit more even though it’s pretty dead