Jump to content

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


Will the takeover be complete by this summer?  

312 members have voted

  1. 1. Will the takeover be complete by this summer?

    • Yes
      87
    • No
      183


Recommended Posts

You don’t like her do you?

 

Not one to toot my own horn but I did call the sham nature of PCP a while back:

 

I think (could be wrong) it was just her and PCP

If thats the case she should be able to afford us now with the Reubens on board too if she still has PCP backing

 

PCP doesn't actually exist as a business. It's part of the lie that is her public persona.

 

PCP is basically just Staveley. It's not really worth anything in and of itself and owns basically nothing.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don’t like her do you?

 

Not one to toot my own horn but I did call the sham nature of PCP a while back:

 

I think (could be wrong) it was just her and PCP

If thats the case she should be able to afford us now with the Reubens on board too if she still has PCP backing

 

PCP doesn't actually exist as a business. It's part of the lie that is her public persona.

 

PCP is basically just Staveley. It's not really worth anything in and of itself and owns basically nothing.

 

 

 

 

Go fuck yourself Luke.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/PCP-v-Barclays-Summary.pdf

 

Interesting that the judge largely confirms the truth of Staveley's allegations re the conduct of Barclays, but denies any compensation whatsoever on the grounds that PCP is basically a non-existent enterprise that had no real-world ability to raise any finance.

 

That’s not true though is it, who brought Mansour to the table for the first Barclays bail out. Did she earn 300 million for fuck all ?

 

https://www.euromoney.com/article/b12kjth9h0p0xf/revealed-the-truth-about-barclays-and-the-abu-dhabi-investment

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did mention a while back I’d heard there was a version of the consortium that didn’t involve her going ahead.

 

We spend too much time worrying about the Saudis and Staveley, it’s the Reubens we should have been keeping an eye on this whole time, if anything is to happen it’ll be them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like PCP can appeal and "just" have to prove damages.  God knows how long that will take.

 

My feeling right now is that if there are any other interested parties and they haven't bid because of PCP's involvement then they should.  If the American wants to set up a network of clubs following the Red Bull model let him do so.  If he'd like to partner with Stavely and the Reubens, even better.  Something has to be done.  Ashley has to be out and this ghost ship we watch needs some life breathed into it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who’s Chris Lucas again? Someone linked to the PL?

 

Someone at Barclays.

 

I can say very little about this :lol:

 

Let's just say the company I work for ended up with a lot of former Barclay's senior management (until they made a fucking fortune selling us). People talk.

 

Chris Lucas was 100% going down for what went on until he developed health issues and stepped down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who’s Chris Lucas again? Someone linked to the PL?

 

Someone at Barclays.

 

I can say very little about this :lol:

 

Let's just say the company I work for ended up with a lot of former Barclay's senior management (until they made a fucking fortune selling us). People talk.

 

Chris Lucas was 100% going down for what went on until he developed health issues and stepped down.

 

‘Kin ell

 

Shady bastards

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/PCP-v-Barclays-Summary.pdf

 

Interesting that the judge largely confirms the truth of Staveley's allegations re the conduct of Barclays, but denies any compensation whatsoever on the grounds that PCP is basically a non-existent enterprise that had no real-world ability to raise any finance.

 

I haven't posted in this thread since last summer, when I threw in my cards and gave up on the whole shebang.

 

But I've made an exception today to say you, by the way, are an absolute weapons-grade c*nt. You're welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who’s Chris Lucas again? Someone linked to the PL?

 

Someone at Barclays.

 

I can say very little about this :lol:

 

Let's just say the company I work for ended up with a lot of former Barclay's senior management (until they made a fucking fortune selling us). People talk.

 

Chris Lucas was 100% going down for what went on until he developed health issues and stepped down.

Public knowledge.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKBN1WO2CX

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who’s Chris Lucas again? Someone linked to the PL?

 

Someone at Barclays.

 

I can say very little about this :lol:

 

Let's just say the company I work for ended up with a lot of former Barclay's senior management (until they made a fucking fortune selling us). People talk.

 

Chris Lucas was 100% going down for what went on until he developed health issues and stepped down.

Public knowledge.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKBN1WO2CX

 

Yep. Which is why I could say the parts I did. I'm saying nothing else on the matter though :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

A high-flying city financier now faces paying millions in legal costs after losing her £600million High Court bid against Barclays  over the behaviour of the bank's bosses when negotiating investment deals during the 2008 financial crisis.

 

Oops.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Marca reporting today that the Saudis had eyed Mateo Alemany (former managing director of Real Mallorca and Valencia) as Charnley's replacement. He's rumored to become Barça's managing director after March's election, if Laporta wins (which he's likely to).

 

You're probably more clued in than I do about whether Marca is bullshitting or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not surprised she lost, the bits I saw she was getting a right arse whipping off the QC and seemed totally unsure of herself on her facts. Mind I’m not saying it’s easy by a long-way facing these legal top level experts. Think we can shut down any thoughts of her going alone now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not surprised she lost, the bits I saw she was getting a right arse whipping off the QC and seemed totally unsure of herself on her facts. Mind I’m not saying it’s easy by a long-way facing these legal top level experts. Think we can shut down any thoughts of her going alone now.

Judge said her claims were valid, Barclays lied and what she said was true.

They don’t have to pay her on a technicality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not surprised she lost, the bits I saw she was getting a right arse whipping off the QC and seemed totally unsure of herself on her facts. Mind I’m not saying it’s easy by a long-way facing these legal top level experts. Think we can shut down any thoughts of her going alone now.

Judge said her claims were valid, Barclays lied and what she said was true.

They don’t have to pay her on a technicality.

 

 

She lost so her case wasn’t sound and she still has to pay the massive costs also. I didn’t say Barclays were anything less than dodgy either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/PCP-v-Barclays-Summary.pdf

 

Interesting that the judge largely confirms the truth of Staveley's allegations re the conduct of Barclays, but denies any compensation whatsoever on the grounds that PCP is basically a non-existent enterprise that had no real-world ability to raise any finance.

 

Given you are well respected and highly connected sports journalist attached to major UK paper, can you please find out the sources or comps the judge used in #19, #20, #21 to come up with the probability %'s?

 

I read that entire document and I'm not sure how you come up with the second part of your sentence without being incredibly lacking in ability to understand debt financing and legal judgements. Perhaps stick to what you know best? Perhaps try not to be such a misogynist? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...