Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Because arbitration isn't a public process, they're also likely to be discussing commercially sensitive stuff, but even if they weren't it's not something that would usually, or ever, be open to the public.

Basically this, aye. No matter how interested we are, it's fuck all to do with us of course
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have I misread that or does it say that she doesn’t have to pay Barclays legal costs even though they won?

 

Not gonna read a dm article, but wasnt the ruling the equivalent of a draw? Barclays were shady but she didnt warrant compensation was how I read it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After hearing that PCP had racked up around £20million in legal costs and Barclays had run up £30million of their own, the judge decided both parties should cover their own costs.

 

Normally losers pick up winners' legal bills and Barclays bosses had argued that the judge should have followed the normal rule.

 

But Ms Staveley said the normal rule should not be followed because the judge found in her favour on a number of issues.

 

Yeah, sounds like she’s actually done quite well here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After hearing that PCP had racked up around £20million in legal costs and Barclays had run up £30million of their own, the judge decided both parties should cover their own costs.

 

Normally losers pick up winners' legal bills and Barclays bosses had argued that the judge should have followed the normal rule.

 

But Ms Staveley said the normal rule should not be followed because the judge found in her favour on a number of issues.

 

Yeah, sounds like she’s actually done quite well here.

 

I don’t think having to pay 20m for her own legal costs is what I would class as doing well mind. Could have been worse, but, her aim was to win the case and have her legal costs covered in that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After hearing that PCP had racked up around £20million in legal costs and Barclays had run up £30million of their own, the judge decided both parties should cover their own costs.

 

Normally losers pick up winners' legal bills and Barclays bosses had argued that the judge should have followed the normal rule.

 

But Ms Staveley said the normal rule should not be followed because the judge found in her favour on a number of issues.

 

Yeah, sounds like she’s actually done quite well here.

 

I don’t think having to pay 20m for her own legal costs is what I would class as doing well mind. Could have been worse, but, her aim was to win the case and have her legal costs covered in that.

 

I’ve absolutely no idea how the process works, but I assume you enter these legal situations with the knowledge you may have to pony up for the bill and that bill may be quite substantial. Losing and only having to pay your half seems quite unusual.

 

I genuinely don’t give that much of a fuck, I just read the article assuming it would say one thing and instead it said another.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Glazer is putting 5m of his shares worth £70m up for sale. Would be surprised if PIF were interested in getting their feet in the door at Man Utd

 

Less than 3%, I can't see how that is value for money, by the sound of it they would rather build than maintain

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have I misread that or does it say that she doesn’t have to pay Barclays legal costs even though they won?

 

Not gonna read a dm article, but wasnt the ruling the equivalent of a draw? Barclays were shady but she didnt warrant compensation was how I read it.

 

Aye the judge decided that she was correct in her claim of Barclays wrong doing.  But then concluded that in his opinion she wouldn't have been able to leverage that into a major profit if Barclays had acted properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So the Judge ruled that Barclays were RIGHT to doubt her abilities - but that they were Cunts in the way they went about it.

 

From the admittedly quick read I gave it the case was about Barclays misleading practices taking a investment opportunity away from her.  The judge agreed they had done that, so they were in the wrong.  But he also thought that even if she had that opportunity there was no way she could have funded it.  So no damages were awarded.  Not sure any of that necessarily has any baring on ability outside of a certain level of finance.  Might be wrong, that's just from memory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a dream about this last night. In some garden with Masters, giving him a piece of my mind about how he blocked salvation for my club and caused its terminal decline (more a premonition than a dream perhaps). Fell apart there after when I was trying to get out of the doors of a small grounded plane before Bodhi and his mates from Point Break commandeered it and took me on a sky-diving jaunt against my will.

 

Think Freud would say that dream meant I didn't want to go along with an inevitable free-falling, pointlessly risky, plane-crash. If only I could think of a way that could apply to something happening in my life now or figure out why Masters would be involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a dream about this last night. In some garden with Masters, giving him a piece of my mind about how he blocked salvation for my club and caused its terminal decline (more a premonition than a dream perhaps). Fell apart there after when I was trying to get out of the doors of a small grounded plane before Bodhi and his mates from Point Break commandeered it and took me on a sky-diving jaunt against my will.

 

Think Freud would say that dream meant I didn't want to go along with an inevitable free-falling, pointlessly risky, plane-crash. If only I could think of a way that could apply to something happening in my life now or figure out why Masters would be involved.

 

 

Once we're relegated that's all it will be a bad dream

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this been our worst year in recent history? Ashley as owner, Bruce as manager, Shelvey playing every week, takeover so close then off, relegation pretty certain. Just feels like things can’t get worse.

 

It's the worst one I think. Easily.

 

So far  :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

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