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

[LFEE]

[LV]

TBF I would blame Newcastle United for this

 

Yeah that’s foul.

 

And as you say, completely on us. Chelsea can be as cheeky as they want to secure new talent but we absolutely should have secured all the local junior clubs on these sort of deals. Horrendous.

 

Hence why a takeover is crucial, the current ownership couldn’t give a shit about this.

 

Preaching to the converted mate

[Shearergol]

Could it be because the buyers are American.

 

maybe. could also be that they weren't pirating the league's intellectual property from one of its major partners.

 

Essentially it's this, which people are happy to ignore for some reason. No no no , it's because we're Newcastle and the world hates us.

[Sima]

Could it be because the buyers are American.

 

maybe. could also be that they weren't pirating the league's intellectual property from one of its major partners.

 

Yeah, this elephant in the room needs to be addressed.

[Manxst]

Wasn’t the BeOutQ, or whatever it was, stopped prior to the takeover going to the PL? And measures taken by the Saudis to prosecute those involved? Might be wrong though- it’s a while ago now.

[gdm]

Could it be because the buyers are American.

 

maybe. could also be that they weren't pirating the league's intellectual property from one of its major partners.

 

Yeah, this elephant in the room needs to be addressed.

 

I said a couple of days ago it’s pretty obvious the piracy issue is the main reason it didn’t go thru.

[Scoot]

If the piracy issue is as big a issue as everyone is saying (it probably is to be honest), then surely the fact Saudi Arabia and Qatar have ended their diplomatic feud which includes Bein sports being switched back on in Saudi in the near future and Bein being compensated by Saudi Arabia for the piracy, surely that's a big thing for this takeover?

[Lazarus]

If the piracy issue is as big a issue as everyone is saying (it probably is to be honest), then surely the fact Saudi Arabia and Qatar have ended their diplomatic feud which includes Bein sports being switched back on in Saudi in the near future and Bein being compensated by Saudi Arabia for the piracy, surely that's a big thing for this takeover?

 

Maybe not a big thing - but it appears to be one of the obstacles.

[Sho Time]

The BeoutQ stuff was only ever alledged and strongly insinuated, never proved. The PL could not block the takeover on these grounds and never did.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

The BeoutQ stuff was only ever alledged and strongly insinuated, never proved. The PL could not block the takeover on these grounds and never did.

 

Well no, that's why they delayed it until the buyer gave up.

[Hhtoon]

Sure that was a key reason, though didn't they also request information on persons they feel should be part of the OD test that was refused?

They'll have to rectify that as well, which I assume is where the legal  challenge lies

[Shearergol]

Sure that was a key reason, though didn't they also request information on persons they feel should be part of the OD test that was refused?

They'll have to rectify that as well, which I assume is where the legal  challenge lies

 

I don't think any of us actually know what happened at all.

[Whitley mag]

Sure that was a key reason, though didn't they also request information on persons they feel should be part of the OD test that was refused?

They'll have to rectify that as well, which I assume is where the legal  challenge lies

 

They we’re trying to link Saudi Govt to the piracy so they could fail test. If piracy is not a consideration anymore, i’m quite sure all this lines of power/shadow director stuff will be conveniently worked around.

 

[Teasy]

The BeoutQ stuff was only ever alledged and strongly insinuated, never proved. The PL could not block the takeover on these grounds and never did.

 

The letter that BeIN sent to the PL and other clubs basically saying the takeover should be blocked (with their £500m PL license negotiation about to be up for renewal) was pretty real like.  The PL might have used other excuses but this was a massive reason behind it, if not the only reason then by far the biggest IMO.

[Candi_Hills]

Couple of interesting bits in this if you can get past Starforth’s drab voice.

 

From 13 minutes onwards.

 

Seller positive about this weeks developments in Middle East.

 

Arbitration panel still not chosen, sounds like games at play and big concern FA chooses 3rd member.

 

Possibly most interesting, Kennedy has seen documents that show after PIF walked the o&d test has been changed.

 

 

Can any of you judicial types tell me, is it actually the case the each party's chosen judge will back them with unwavering loyalty during the arbiration process? If so, doesn't that undermine the whole point of it all?

 

All three judges are there to arbitrate, are they not?

[Jackie Broon]

Sure that was a key reason, though didn't they also request information on persons they feel should be part of the OD test that was refused?

They'll have to rectify that as well, which I assume is where the legal  challenge lies

 

I don't think any of us actually know what happened at all.

 

I think we do know what happened, both sides have said that it was down to the PL deciding that the Saudi state should be included as a director (represented by a natural person, e.g. MbS). PIF refused to do that but the PL then refused to actually make that decision official by disqualifying the other proposed directors on that basis. PIF provided additional information demonstrating that they are legally separate from the state, the PL wouldn't budge and suggested arbitration. PIF requested that a formal decision be made, the PL refused and then PIF publicly withdrew.

[Hhtoon]

Sure that was a key reason, though didn't they also request information on persons they feel should be part of the OD test that was refused?

They'll have to rectify that as well, which I assume is where the legal  challenge lies

 

I don't think any of us actually know what happened at all.

 

I think we do know what happened, both sides have said that it was down to the PL deciding that the Saudi state should be included as a director (represented by a natural person, e.g. MbS). PIF refused to do that but the PL then refused to actually make that decision official by disqualifying the other proposed directors on that basis. PIF provided additional information demonstrating that they are legally separate from the state, the PL wouldn't budge and suggested arbitration. PIF requested that a formal decision be made, the PL refused and then PIF publicly withdrew.

 

Thanks - saved me a job checking my facts 

[Shearergol]

Sure that was a key reason, though didn't they also request information on persons they feel should be part of the OD test that was refused?

They'll have to rectify that as well, which I assume is where the legal  challenge lies

 

I don't think any of us actually know what happened at all.

 

I think we do know what happened, both sides have said that it was down to the PL deciding that the Saudi state should be included as a director (represented by a natural person, e.g. MbS). PIF refused to do that but the PL then refused to actually make that decision official by disqualifying the other proposed directors on that basis. PIF provided additional information demonstrating that they are legally separate from the state, the PL wouldn't budge and suggested arbitration. PIF requested that a formal decision be made, the PL refused and then PIF publicly withdrew.

 

Link?

[Jackie Broon]

Sure that was a key reason, though didn't they also request information on persons they feel should be part of the OD test that was refused?

They'll have to rectify that as well, which I assume is where the legal  challenge lies

 

I don't think any of us actually know what happened at all.

 

I think we do know what happened, both sides have said that it was down to the PL deciding that the Saudi state should be included as a director (represented by a natural person, e.g. MbS). PIF refused to do that but the PL then refused to actually make that decision official by disqualifying the other proposed directors on that basis. PIF provided additional information demonstrating that they are legally separate from the state, the PL wouldn't budge and suggested arbitration. PIF requested that a formal decision be made, the PL refused and then PIF publicly withdrew.

 

Link?

 

All set out in Staveley's interview following the withdrawal announcement, the PL's letter to MPs and the PL's responce to the Club's statement that they had refused the takeover.

[Shearergol]

Sure that was a key reason, though didn't they also request information on persons they feel should be part of the OD test that was refused?

They'll have to rectify that as well, which I assume is where the legal  challenge lies

 

I don't think any of us actually know what happened at all.

 

I think we do know what happened, both sides have said that it was down to the PL deciding that the Saudi state should be included as a director (represented by a natural person, e.g. MbS). PIF refused to do that but the PL then refused to actually make that decision official by disqualifying the other proposed directors on that basis. PIF provided additional information demonstrating that they are legally separate from the state, the PL wouldn't budge and suggested arbitration. PIF requested that a formal decision be made, the PL refused and then PIF publicly withdrew.

 

Link?

 

All set out in Staveley's interview following the withdrawal announcement, the PL's letter to MPs and the PL's responce to the Club's statement that they had refused the takeover.

 

Ahh, I thought you meant it had been stated specifically that it was MBS who they wished to test. I guess it's obvious enough though.

[Dr Jinx]

So the big hold up is to see who can best lobby the FA over whom they choose to put forward as a judge? Like let’s just assume corruption is still in full swing, it was naive for any of us to think this wouldn’t or couldn’t be the case.

 

It’s far from an impartial process going on. Our side including the buyers probably didn’t realise how corrupt the whole thing is but they do now. Play the game or get left behind.

 

The other question is how far behind Qatar are they at this sort of thing? If they try and make ground on them will the attempts come across as crude, clumsy and too obvious?

 

Officially being friends again doesn’t necessarily mean they will roll over and let Saudi get what they want when it comes to investing in an area of sport that they have put so much into in recent years.

 

What a headache ?

 

[Jackie Broon]

Sure that was a key reason, though didn't they also request information on persons they feel should be part of the OD test that was refused?

They'll have to rectify that as well, which I assume is where the legal  challenge lies

 

I don't think any of us actually know what happened at all.

 

I think we do know what happened, both sides have said that it was down to the PL deciding that the Saudi state should be included as a director (represented by a natural person, e.g. MbS). PIF refused to do that but the PL then refused to actually make that decision official by disqualifying the other proposed directors on that basis. PIF provided additional information demonstrating that they are legally separate from the state, the PL wouldn't budge and suggested arbitration. PIF requested that a formal decision be made, the PL refused and then PIF publicly withdrew.

 

Link?

 

All set out in Staveley's interview following the withdrawal announcement, the PL's letter to MPs and the PL's responce to the Club's statement that they had refused the takeover.

 

Ahh, I thought you meant it had been stated specifically that it was MBS who they wished to test. I guess it's obvious enough though.

 

Yeah, that has not been explicitly stated. The PL referred to an 'entity' and Staveley said they required the Saudi state to be disclosed as director, but I'm assuming that the state would need to be represented by a natural person, as would be the case with a company directorship.

[Whitley mag]

Sure that was a key reason, though didn't they also request information on persons they feel should be part of the OD test that was refused?

They'll have to rectify that as well, which I assume is where the legal  challenge lies

 

I don't think any of us actually know what happened at all.

 

I think we do know what happened, both sides have said that it was down to the PL deciding that the Saudi state should be included as a director (represented by a natural person, e.g. MbS). PIF refused to do that but the PL then refused to actually make that decision official by disqualifying the other proposed directors on that basis. PIF provided additional information demonstrating that they are legally separate from the state, the PL wouldn't budge and suggested arbitration. PIF requested that a formal decision be made, the PL refused and then PIF publicly withdrew.

 

Link?

 

All set out in Staveley's interview following the withdrawal announcement, the PL's letter to MPs and the PL's responce to the Club's statement that they had refused the takeover.

 

Ahh, I thought you meant it had been stated specifically that it was MBS who they wished to test. I guess it's obvious enough though.

 

Yeah, that has not been explicitly stated. The PL referred to an 'entity' and Staveley said they required the Saudi state to be disclosed as director, but I'm assuming that the state would need to be represented by a natural person, as would be the case with a company directorship.

 

Did Staveley not indicate that they had offered to allow the whole of PIF board to be subjected, if so there are govt ministers with positions on PIF board.

 

The key here really surely has to be proving that MBS is only a figurehead and has no active involvement day to day. Remove the piracy factor and I’m not convinced PL really give a s*** who is in charge though.

 

 

[St1pe]

[gjohnson]

Masters and the PL will want as much money as they can get...if they can get more by allowing PIF to take us over than they would be pandering to 'Top' 6 they won't just allow but will encourage.

 

Reputations fade very quickly when there's no success or drama attached . Arsenal are rapidly becoming just another team in the league, Chelsea are becoming a playboy hobby that isn't working out so much now.

 

Man Utd remain interesting at the moment because of their fairly recent successes, but a few more years without a title and Asia will forget them

City will remain relevant as long as Guardiola is there, but where do they go from there? There's not a better management name around and available at present.

 

Painfully...Leicester are the way forward...can see them dumping Arsenal or Chelsea out of the 'Top 6', Got a brilliant mix of planning and ambition beyond just raking in the pounds