Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Guest reefatoon
34 minutes ago, Dr Jinx said:

It’s a weekly cycle. Some are more than happy to buy into the positivity and baseless rumours early in the week but then inevitably the weekend comes and all the things those oddballs on Twitter said didn’t come true leaving a lot of pissed off forum members with an equal amount of people who are happy to troll them.

 

This has been going on for well over a year so we should be used to it by now.


The thing is though, nobody is pissed off about it. Everyone knows that the tweets are pure guesswork and full of shite, nobody is holding them gospel, it’s just something to talk about light heartedly. This seems to completely go over the head of a selected few  “realists” as they like to call themselves who seem to not be able to grasp the fact that it’s just nothing serious. And for them to get so wound up about it is the weirdest thing ever. I don’t take any of the random tweets seriosusly, but it’s fine to still talk about it without the attention whores getting their knickers in a twist. 

 

 

Edited by reefatoon

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, reefatoon said:


The thing is though, nobody is pissed off about it. Everyone knows that the tweets are pure guesswork and full of shite, nobody is holding them gospel, it’s just something to talk about light heartedly. This seems to completely go over the head of a selected few  “realists” as they like to call themselves who seem to not be able to grasp the fact that it’s just nothing serious. And for them to get so wound up about it is the weirdest thing ever. I don’t take any of the random tweets seriosusly, but it’s fine to still talk about it without the attention whores getting their knickers in a twist. 

 

 

 

:clap:

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, reefatoon said:


The thing is though, nobody is pissed off about it. Everyone knows that the tweets are pure guesswork and full of shite, nobody is holding them gospel, it’s just something to talk about light heartedly. This seems to completely go over the head of a selected few  “realists” as they like to call themselves who seem to not be able to grasp the fact that it’s just nothing serious. And for them to get so wound up about it is the weirdest thing ever. I don’t take any of the random tweets seriosusly, but it’s fine to still talk about it without the attention whores getting their knickers in a twist. 

 

 

 

You might not but some absolutely do which I just find funny tbh :lol: 

 

I just let them get on with it now they are only disappointing themselves 

 

 

Edited by gdm

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Fantail Breeze said:

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure what page you were looking on, but took me two minutes to see the three posts he was talking about.


All in the fairly obvious context of generally being anti JL'a contributions moreso than someone genuinely believing burnsie. If they were to genuinely believe burnsie, that's a different can of worms to open.

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Kaizero said:


All in the fairly obvious context of generally being anti JL'a contributions moreso than someone genuinely believing burnsie. If they were to genuinely believe burnsie, that's a different can of worms to open.

 

That’s not what @Joey Lintonsaid. He said:

 

“When i said it was nonsense yesterday people instantly disagreed and said there was no way of knowing it was untrue? Hopefully one of them will reply.“

 

Which is exactly what those posts say.

 

 

Edited by Fantail Breeze

Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

:lol: Good old Keith. 

 

I see Ashley’s completely normal practice of delaying the publication of accounts has got everyone excited for no reason.

 

It MUST be takeover related (apart from the fact he does it every year).

He's not delaying them this year though, he's changing them. 

 

And they were always filed by April/May time until last year when they were early June. 

 

So slight difference in approach

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

He's not delaying them this year though, he's changing them. 

 

And they were always filed by April/May time until last year when they were early June. 

 

So slight difference in approach

Pretty sure I remember that being a Covid thing, that everyone could do? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 25/06/2021 at 20:51, Fantail Breeze said:

 

Do you know what that means? :lol: Because I don’t.

Point 6 just means that if the CAT decides it does not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal, or decides it does have jurisdiction but decides not to exercise that jurisdiction, for reasons best known to them, they can give directions as to the disposal of the case, i.e. throw it out, or stay (postpone) the proceedings, because they consider they may have jurisdiction to here the case if we win the arbitration case.

 

Point 7 simply says that if they decide point 6 has no application i.e. they decide they do have jurisdiction and decide to proceed to hear the case, they can issue directions to the parties advising when, and in what order, they will hear the arguments put by both parties to the appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Bishops Finger said:

How can they offer arbitration if they didn't reject it? I don't get this at all

 

The article is poorly written (Ryder, no surprise). But presumably the PL offered arbitration over the issue of whether KSA is a director. The PL presumably takes the position that saying KSA is a director is not tantamount to rejecting the takeover -- it just means KSA has to submit a declaration about the officers and directors test factors and otherwise pass the test. (Though we all know that in effect this is pretty much the same as blocking the takeover because it's highly unlikely a sovereign state would subject itself to that.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, manorpark said:

 

That is their only defence - but it will NOT work!

I’m sure it’s not like. But your right it won’t work for ever. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, B-more Mag said:

 

The article is poorly written (Ryder, no surprise). But presumably the PL offered arbitration over the issue of whether KSA is a director. The PL presumably takes the position that saying KSA is a director is not tantamount to rejecting the takeover -- it just means KSA has to submit a declaration about the officers and directors test factors and otherwise pass the test. (Though we all know that in effect this is pretty much the same as blocking the takeover because it's highly unlikely a sovereign state would subject itself to that.)

Problem is for them it took them 3 months to get to that decision, after stating it was ok and nothing to worry about. When you look at other takeovers such as Burnley, the lead time was a few weeks so they cannot argue that they didn’t deliberately delay this one and that their offer was to delay further. What will be the deciding factor is if an outside influence was at play in why we went from green to delay and if so then that’s anti competition. I believe our side have all the proof they need to show this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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