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

[Guest]

I blame Greg. He's too busy playing with his sea cucumbers.

[Sean]

The two people involved in this might have a lot of time on their hands and expertise in this area where the NUST haven’t and it’s not their sole purpose.

 

Well we’ll agree to disagree as I think it it is relevant that you are criticising volunteers for something you aren’t prepared to volunteer to do yourself. Easy to just sit back and criticise.

 

So no criticism from outside NUST is welcomed or to be listened to? Great attitude 

 

If it’s justified for sure. I still don’t think people understand what the role of NUST is and how it allows people like yourself to get involved in it.

 

This is fair enough like.

[Shearergol]

The two people involved in this might have a lot of time on their hands and expertise in this area where the NUST haven’t and it’s not their sole purpose.

 

Well we’ll agree to disagree as I think it it is relevant that you are criticising volunteers for something you aren’t prepared to volunteer to do yourself. Easy to just sit back and criticise.

 

So no criticism from outside NUST is welcomed or to be listened to? Great attitude 

 

If it’s justified for sure. I still don’t think people understand what the role of NUST is and how it allows people like yourself to get involved in it.

 

That's a failing itself though, surely?

[Strawberry]

The two people involved in this might have a lot of time on their hands and expertise in this area where the NUST haven’t and it’s not their sole purpose.

 

Well we’ll agree to disagree as I think it it is relevant that you are criticising volunteers for something you aren’t prepared to volunteer to do yourself. Easy to just sit back and criticise.

 

So no criticism from outside NUST is welcomed or to be listened to? Great attitude 

 

If it’s justified for sure. I still don’t think people understand what the role of NUST is and how it allows people like yourself to get involved in it.

 

Whats the point of you defending them. Once they slept in with masters their reputation is dead. I would have giving them the benefit of doubt but the previous members ( like Thomas got re-elected ) so it is hopeless.

[54]

Think NUST have come out of this whole thing really well tbh.

[LFEE]

The two people involved in this might have a lot of time on their hands and expertise in this area where the NUST haven’t and it’s not their sole purpose.

 

Well we’ll agree to disagree as I think it it is relevant that you are criticising volunteers for something you aren’t prepared to volunteer to do yourself. Easy to just sit back and criticise.

 

So no criticism from outside NUST is welcomed or to be listened to? Great attitude 

 

If it’s justified for sure. I still don’t think people understand what the role of NUST is and how it allows people like yourself to get involved in it.

 

Whats the point of you defending them. Once they slept in with masters their reputation is dead. I would have giving them the benefit of doubt but the previous members ( like Thomas got re-elected ) so it is hopeless.

 

I try to defend them because the couple of people I know who are involved in it give up a hell of a lot of their free time unpaid for the long term good of the club. It’s a hard gig at any club I’d imagine but with our owners almost thankless. Seems to be the case with some of the fan base too.

[Judge Holden]

The two people involved in this might have a lot of time on their hands and expertise in this area where the NUST haven’t and it’s not their sole purpose.

 

Well we’ll agree to disagree as I think it it is relevant that you are criticising volunteers for something you aren’t prepared to volunteer to do yourself. Easy to just sit back and criticise.

 

So no criticism from outside NUST is welcomed or to be listened to? Great attitude 

 

If it’s justified for sure. I still don’t think people understand what the role of NUST is and how it allows people like yourself to get involved in it.

 

Whats the point of you defending them. Once they slept in with masters their reputation is dead. I would have giving them the benefit of doubt but the previous members ( like Thomas got re-elected ) so it is hopeless.

 

I try to defend them because the couple of people I know who are involved in it give up a hell of a lot of their free time unpaid for the long term good of the club. It’s a hard gig at any club I’d imagine but with our owners almost thankless. Seems to be the case with some of the fan base too.

 

I reckon Strawberry posts on the internet wearing a life vest.

[Greg]

My personal view is that backing a spurious and futile legal attempt would be of little benefit to the Trust or anyone else for that matter. Read the letter, it's badly written noise. I'm still struggling to establish the standing required to bring such a claim. Serious legal action isn't played out on Twitter and through a local newspaper at letter before action stage.

[Robster]

So is MMA part of the seemingly coordinated strategy to put pressure on the PL or are they really just some random Twitter user, trying in their own small way to help ?

[Judge Holden]

So is MMA part of the seemingly coordinated strategy to put pressure on the PL or are they really just some random Twitter user, trying in their own small way to help ?

 

He's a random user with a funny twitter account & an inside scoop on the takeover.

[Sean]

My personal view is that backing a spurious and futile legal attempt would be of little benefit to the Trust or anyone else for that matter. Read the letter, it's badly written noise. I'm still struggling to establish the standing required to bring such a claim. Serious legal action isn't played out on Twitter and through a local newspaper at letter before action stage.

 

I got dogs abuse yesterday for pointing out it's badly written noise. It is though. The fact that the guy from Wor Fund is behind it has to be worrying also surely. And like you said, if it was serious there was no need to release it through Twitter. It's just strange.

 

Hopefully Ashley/the consortium/someone else has a better case waiting in the wings.

[Strawberry]

The two people involved in this might have a lot of time on their hands and expertise in this area where the NUST haven’t and it’s not their sole purpose.

 

Well we’ll agree to disagree as I think it it is relevant that you are criticising volunteers for something you aren’t prepared to volunteer to do yourself. Easy to just sit back and criticise.

 

 

So no criticism from outside NUST is welcomed or to be listened to? Great attitude 

 

If it’s justified for sure. I still don’t think people understand what the role of NUST is and how it allows people like yourself to get involved in it.

 

Whats the point of you defending them. Once they slept in with masters their reputation is dead. I would have giving them the benefit of doubt but the previous members ( like Thomas got re-elected ) so it is hopeless.

 

I try to defend them because the couple of people I know who are involved in it give up a hell of a lot of their free time unpaid for the long term good of the club. It’s a hard gig at any club I’d imagine but with our owners almost thankless. Seems to be the case with some of the fan base too.

 

 

It is a volunteer thing if they dont fee like doing it they can leave. What they manage not to do when they meet Masters is crazy. If they feel they did a lot then there is no point having them.

[gdm]

My personal view is that backing a spurious and futile legal attempt would be of little benefit to the Trust or anyone else for that matter. Read the letter, it's badly written noise. I'm still struggling to establish the standing required to bring such a claim. Serious legal action isn't played out on Twitter and through a local newspaper at letter before action stage.

 

I got dogs abuse yesterday for pointing out it's badly written noise. It is though. The fact that the guy from Wor Fund is behind it has to be worrying also surely. And like you said, if it was serious there was no need to release it through Twitter. It's just strange.

 

Hopefully Ashley/the consortium/someone else has a better case waiting in the wings.

 

The problem you have rightly or wrongly is that your constantly negative and slagging off staveley every chance you get so many don’t really care what you have to say anymore and just think your being negative for negatives sake or a wind up

[TRon]

Getting back on track got to take my hat off to mimms. He’s clearly got the inside track on this, let’s hope his prediction of good news over next few weeks and space in the fridge is also spot on.

 

This seems like a calculated move by all parties, let’s hope the PL haven’t got the cash or stomach for the fight.

 

 

@LiamJKennedy23

Replying to

@NUFC360

As I keep saying to people, play it out - what will result from this - and join the dots. This is not just a fan effort.

 

It's so far back I don't want to check but did he predict good news in a couple of weeks. I know he predicted a statement, now, and something about a few weeks. But there is no way anybody can know that the outcome in a few weeks will be good.

 

A selection of mimms recent posts.

 

Progress I mentioned is due to a different direction that the lawyers have explored/exploited.

 

Last thing I’m saying on here. Been told there will be another statement this week. 

 

It maybe a few weeks before the champagne gets opened, but there will be positive news coming out more and more in the next few days then in the next few weeks.

 

Not completed yet but everything is going into the final stages.

 

If everything is going through the final stages, then what was the need for a threatening letter to the PL? Unless it really was unconnected with anyone at PIF and is genuinely fan led.

[Robster]

For me, a question mark currently sits over where the PL are in all of this. It'd be good to know if the buyers and their legal team are full of confidence because of direct communication from the PL or if that confidence is simply borne from them feeling they have a very strong case. Maybe the letters are extra pressure because they aren't getting the responses that they want from the PL.

[SUPERTOON]

Surely the papers served today goes against any ITK on here saying it was close because if it was then this wouldn’t be needed or have received the backing it has

 

There are only two people that appear to be ITK on here and neither have said it is close. Mimms has said that it may be a few weeks today but before that has always said that it would be months.

 

Mimms did say make sure you have cans or something along those lines but yesterday’s news shows is the takeover isn’t anywhere close to being back on.

[Strawberry]

Surely the papers served today goes against any ITK on here saying it was close because if it was then this wouldn’t be needed or have received the backing it has

 

There are only two people that appear to be ITK on here and neither have said it is close. Mimms has said that it may be a few weeks today but before that has always said that it would be months.

 

Mimms did say make sure you have cans or something along those lines but yesterday’s news shows is the takeover isn’t anywhere close to being back on.

 

Please don't say what he didn't say. He said you might want to make room for can's. However it will be few weeks later not now. Jesus

[Judge Holden]

Surely the papers served today goes against any ITK on here saying it was close because if it was then this wouldn’t be needed or have received the backing it has

 

There are only two people that appear to be ITK on here and neither have said it is close. Mimms has said that it may be a few weeks today but before that has always said that it would be months.

 

Mimms did say make sure you have cans or something along those lines but yesterday’s news shows is the takeover isn’t anywhere close to being back on.

 

Please don't say what he didn't say. He said you might want to make room for can's. However it will be few weeks later not now. Jesus

 

[Slim]

Surely the papers served today goes against any ITK on here saying it was close because if it was then this wouldn’t be needed or have received the backing it has

 

There are only two people that appear to be ITK on here and neither have said it is close. Mimms has said that it may be a few weeks today but before that has always said that it would be months.

 

Mimms did say make sure you have cans or something along those lines but yesterday’s news shows is the takeover isn’t anywhere close to being back on.

 

Please don't say what he didn't say. He said you might want to make room for can's. However it will be few weeks later not now. Jesus

 

Pretty sure he said the takeover is still a long way off.  Talking like next year

[Happinesstan]

Here we go round the Caulkin bush.

[ED209]

Here we go round the Caulkin bush.

 

 

?????

[Jackie Broon]

My personal view is that backing a spurious and futile legal attempt would be of little benefit to the Trust or anyone else for that matter. Read the letter, it's badly written noise. I'm still struggling to establish the standing required to bring such a claim. Serious legal action isn't played out on Twitter and through a local newspaper at letter before action stage.

 

Although Gordon Stein’s first letter to the PL certainly was terribly written, and I said as much here at the time, I don’t feel that the pre-action letter is badly written. There seems to be an over-reliance on reference to media reports, rather than actual evidence, and the deadline for response doesn’t seem to be realistic or in accordance with procedural guidance, but I wouldn't say that it’s badly written. In terms of the legal merits, I’d imagine that this is a highly specialist area of law that no one on this forum is likely to be in a position to take a view on. However, the fact that Nick De Marco retweeted it is telling, I very much doubt he would be willing to associate himself in any way with something that is spurious badly written noise. Whilst it might not be in our experience for such matters to be conducted so publicly, the fact that a highly regarded Silk is involved in doing so at least suggests that this is potentially serious.

[Nattfare]

Nothing against mimms, but I remain septic.

 

 

SCEPTIC I mean! That's just my default state about anything regarding Mike Ashley's Newcastle United.

[Wilson]

My personal view is that backing a spurious and futile legal attempt would be of little benefit to the Trust or anyone else for that matter. Read the letter, it's badly written noise. I'm still struggling to establish the standing required to bring such a claim. Serious legal action isn't played out on Twitter and through a local newspaper at letter before action stage.

 

Although Gordon Stein’s first letter to the PL certainly was terribly written, and I said as much here at the time, I don’t feel that the pre-action letter is badly written. There seems to be an over-reliance on reference to media reports, rather than actual evidence, and the deadline for response doesn’t seem to be realistic or in accordance with procedural guidance, but I wouldn't say that it’s badly written. In terms of the legal merits, I’d imagine that this is a highly specialist area of law that no one on this forum is likely to be in a position to take a view on. However, the fact that Nick De Marco retweeted it is telling, I very much doubt he would be willing to associate himself in any way with something that is spurious badly written noise. Whilst it might not be in our experience for such matters to be conducted so publicly, the fact that a highly regarded Silk is involved in doing so at least suggests that this is potentially serious.

 

 

The retweets are the thing that make me think twice about it being bollocks.

[Awaymag]

Anything that distracts us from the bore-fest that is brucie-ball, is welcomed in my eyes.