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

[B-more Mag]

52 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

Whilst I understand the point you are making, I can see how broad the definition of 'control' is in the PL handbook, and that makes me nervous about the arbitration. The legal opinion from Football Law, Thomas Horton, a barrister whose practice covers sports law and commercial disputes, is clearly implicitly stating that his opinion is the KSA would not meet the definition of 'control' over PIF when he refers to the "degree of separation" being "sufficient for PIF to avoid disqualification as a director".

He's apparently taken that article, or maybe his whole site, down, but as I recall it (which could obviously be wrong) most of his analysis was about the piracy issue and how any KSA issues there shouldn't be imputed to the PIF, and I don't remember him doing any actual control analysis. Maybe he did. But if he did, and if he came to the conclusion that the KSA doesn't control the PIF, I'd be interested to know the basis for that, including whether the KSA has the power to remove directors or restructure the PIF board or determine the division of the government to which the PIF is answerable.

I mean, maybe the club has evidence the PIF is entirely autonomous and not subject to KSA control. As et tu brute wrote above, none of us have access to the evidence, so I express basically no confidence in my opinion. Having said that, based on what I do know, I'd still prefer to have the PL's case over the club's in the arbitration (but fuck the PL).

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by B-more Mag

[Jackie Broon]

43 minutes ago, B-more Mag said:

He's apparently taken that article, or maybe his whole site, down, but as I recall it (which could obviously be wrong) most of his analysis was about the piracy issue and how any KSA issues there shouldn't be imputed to the PIF, and I don't remember him doing any actual control analysis. Maybe he did. But if he did, and if he came to the conclusion that the KSA doesn't control the PIF, I'd be interested to know the basis for that, including whether the KSA has the power to remove directors or restructure the PIF board or determine the division of the government to which the PIF is answerable.

I mean, maybe the club has evidence the PIF is entirely autonomous and not subject to KSA control. As et tu brute wrote above, none of us have access to the evidence, so I express basically no confidence in my opinion. Having said that, based on what I do know, I'd still prefer to have the PL's case over the club's in the arbitration (but fuck the PL).

I think the article was based on the letter he wrote to the PL under the instruction of NUST which can be found here:

https://nufctrust.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/NUST-Letters-with-PL.pdf

The definition of control is referenced and it's implicitly clear that point 1 on page 4 is stating that the KSA would not meet that definition of control of PIF in relation to the PL's rules. 

This seems to indicate that PIF was made autonomous in 2014:

https://aawsat.com/home/article/143736

I've also seen a breakdown of government scrutiny of various SWFs in an IMF report (I think, but I'm struggling to find again) where, unlike other SWFs, they had zero requirement to report to government.

Btw, I'm as much trying to convince myself as anyone else that the PL don't have a watertight case.

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Jackie Broon

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

This fucking takeover best get sorted one way or another fast just so we can bin this fucking thread.

[cubaricho]

Thank you @B-more Mag. Stoked to have your insight around. 

[Whitley mag]

I’ll certainly bow to Jackie Broon and B-More Mag and their legal expertise in relation to PIF governance and how ‘control’ can be defined according to PL rule book.

The following from PIF website certainly suggests PIF board have to defer to CEDA on some key areas as referred to under article 7.

However, in terms of what is deemed control in terms of the day to day running of a football club, I’m not sure if the below requirements of PIF board suggest they wouldn’t have full control of club matters by which is deemed reasonable.

Reg 6.6 would suggest PIF board have full autonomy in appointing members to NUFC board for example without referring to CEDA.

Article 6
The Board shall supervise the Fund, including its management and affairs, and shall ensure its objectives are achieved and its powers—as stipulated in this Law—are exercised. To this end, the Board shall have all necessary authorities and powers. It shall also approve and issue the Fund's Bylaws and Policies, including the following:
1. Setting investment strategies, policies, and procedures, including targeted returns; and the mechanism for deciding on an investment, monitoring its performance, and exiting therefrom.
2. Setting a policy for distribution of Fund profits.
3. Setting risk management procedures and systems.
4. Determining the accounting standards and policies for drafting and auditing the
Fund’s financial statements, and determining the beginning and end of the fiscal year.
5. ApprovingtheFund'sloansandotherformsofdebt,includingissuingsukukand
bonds, in accordance with relevant rules.
6. SettingrulesfornominatingandappointingtheFund’srepresentativestotheboards
of directors of companies and other entities that the Fund owns or holds shares
therein, and determining their remuneration, as well as their rights and duties.
7. Setting policies and procedures for tax liability.
8. Designating the persons authorized to sign on behalf of the Fund.
9. Approving the procedures regulating the Fund's communication with the media.
10. Approving the Fund’s financial and administrative regulations.
3

     11. Approving the Fund's organizational structure and the manner of regulating and distributing its functions and duties.
12. Approving the Fund’s annual budget and annual report.
The Board may, when necessary, form committees to carry out any of its duties and responsibilities. It may also delegate certain powers to the Governor or any of the Fund’s officers, in accordance with the Fund's Bylaws and Policies.

Article 7
The Board shall submit to the Council of Economic and Development Affairs the Bylaws and Policies that regulate matters referred to in Article 6 (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of this Law, as well as the rules and procedures regulating its activities referred to in Article (8) of this Law, or any amendments thereto, within a period not less than 15 days or more than 30 days from the date set for their entry into force. The Council of Economic and Development Affairs may, within such period, direct the Board to make any amendments to the Bylaws and Policies, as it deems appropriate.

My own conclusion is that there is enough complexity in all of this, for an expert like Shaheed Fatima to fully exploit and we have every chance in arbitration.

 

 

Edited May 30, 2021 by Whitley mag

[RS]

Nah, you’re fucked Keith. 

[Whitley mag]

Just now, RS said:

Nah, you’re fucked Keith. 

Cheers ?

[Jackie Broon]

33 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

I’ll certainly bow to Jackie Broon and B-More Mag and their legal expertise in relation to PIF governance and how ‘control’ can be defined according to PL rule book.

 

I have no legal expertise 

But that does seem to back up that PIF have complete autonomy in terms of their investments and the appointment of directors of companies they own.

 

[Ben]

 

[Candi_Hills]

6 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

George Gallowgate

[mrmojorisin75]

6 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

If that fucking idiot is in, I'm probably out

Amazed to see this is all still going on in here, been out of it for ages.  I'd tend to side with the idea we're fucked like but hold onto the hope that if Ashley is burning money on legal teams to fight this then presumably he's been told they've a decent chance of winning.  Granted he got £17m for fuck all but still, not like him to chuck money away.

[Hhtoon]

8 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

 

1 minute ago, Candi_Hills said:

George Gallowgate

George Gallohaway the lads

[Joey Linton]

28 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

He'll be on the podcast this Friday

[Jackie Broon]

38 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

"I'll be the CAT"

[Fantail Breeze]

1 hour ago, Jackie Broon said:

"I'll be the CAT"

 Fantastic 

[Fantail Breeze]

“Hey lads; I know the takeover is really close - but in 16 months time do you realise you’ll be listening to George Galloway’s thoughts on whether the takeover should go through?”

Wish someone pre-warned us. What next? Jimmy Carr?

[loki679]

'We need a thread where the numpties can spout all their shite in peace'

Result - two threads full of numpty shite.

[TRon]

2 hours ago, mrmojorisin75 said:

If that fucking idiot is in, I'm probably out

Amazed to see this is all still going on in here, been out of it for ages.  I'd tend to side with the idea we're fucked like but hold onto the hope that if Ashley is burning money on legal teams to fight this then presumably he's been told they've a decent chance of winning.  Granted he got £17m for fuck all but still, not like him to chuck money away.

This is what I'm holding onto. Otherwise if there is any room for wiggle room in a legal case, I would always feel that a judge would side with the PL against the Saudis. 

[Guest reefatoon]

Go into the positive thread. See Fanny going on about people talking shite. Come into this thread. See Fanny talking just as much shite. 

[Whitley mag]

Far be it from me to question the balanced, informative and eloquent views of Benjamin Jacobs again, but I hope he isn’t providing misleading information again ?

hmmmm

F.1.
A Person shall be disqualified from acting as a Director and no Club shall be permitted to have any Person acting as a Director of that Club if:
F.1.1. in relation to the assessment of his compliance with Rule F.1 (and/or any similar or equivalent rules of The Football League or The Football Association) at any time, he has:
F.1.1.1.
F.1.1.2.
failed to provide all relevant information (including, without limitation, information relating to any other individual who would qualify as a Director but has not been disclosed, including where he or they are acting as a proxy, agent or nominee for another Person); or

 

 

[Whitley mag]

What a load of fucking rubbish. The consortium as Caulkin confirmed wanted them to reject it, then we could have gone down the route of the appeal court. They wanted to kick the can down the road and not make a decision, they also know arbitration is very difficult to appeal. 

 

[Doc]

8 hours ago, Candi_Hills said:

George Gallowgate

George Will you just fuck off.

[Whitley mag]

Still waffling does he really think the PL we’re doing us a favour by offering arbitration. The reason we had to start arbitration is because they wouldn’t make a fucking decision. 

 

[Joey Linton]

Jacobs certainly seems to have rattled the twitter mob by getting the better of Keith in Friday night's discussions. 

[mouldy_uk]

9 hours ago, Ben said:

 

When you agree with George Galloway