Minhosa Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 I'm not sure I fully follow the narrative they're inferring about 'losing the battle but not the war' in that piece. Are they suggesting they've 'lost' NUFC but may 'win' another club down the line? Genuinely unsure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Consortium of one Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Just signed it. Hope a Yanks signature counts. Over 80K. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
triggs Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Haven't been following that much the last few days. Is it accepted that Golfmag's info was wrong when he said the hold up was with Ashley now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hakka Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 I like how we’re still spamming everyPremier league tweet It's really good. Much better than hitting Ashley's brands, as this has people from all over the word asking about the corruption and why etc. in those threads. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menace Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 I'm not sure I fully follow the narrative they're inferring about 'losing the battle but not the war' in that piece. Are they suggesting they've 'lost' NUFC but may 'win' another club down the line? Genuinely unsure. It's clickbait shite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Haven't been following that much the last few days. Is it accepted that Golfmag's info was wrong when he said the hold up was with Ashley now? Yes, though staveley did confirm he did ask for a new price which I think they were happy with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Haven't been following that much the last few days. Is it accepted that Golfmag's info was wrong when he said the hold up was with Ashley now? Yes, though staveley did confirm he did ask for a new price which I think they were happy with. It looks that way. To be fair to GM I’m guessing he was fed inaccurate information from his source. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 About the new price had assumed that it may just have related to being safe from relegation by that point Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Haven't been following that much the last few days. Is it accepted that Golfmag's info was wrong when he said the hold up was with Ashley now? Yes, though staveley did confirm he did ask for a new price which I think they were happy with. However, the 'withdrawal' could also have been partly a negotiation tactic aimed at Ashley, to expose the Mauriuss bid as having no substance and stop Ashley playing games with them without antagonising him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 The new price was probably to take into consideration the extra costs Ashley had incurred for having to run the club for 3 months longer than he expected to during the pandemic, as the whole reason he'd agreed to the sale at the price he did was because he wanted to avoid having to do that. And much though I think he's an absolute cunt of a man, he probably has a right to some redress there once the exclusivity agreement ran out and such a renegotiation was possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 The new price was probably to take into consideration the extra costs Ashley had incurred for having to run the club for 3 months longer than he expected to during the pandemic, as the whole reason he'd agreed to the sale at the price he did was because he wanted to avoid having to do that. And much though I think he's an absolute cunt of a man, he probably has a right to some redress there once the exclusivity agreement ran out and such a renegotiation was possible. And also because when the deal was originally done nobody knew whether the season would end/what would happen with Covid etc. There's much greater clarity around that now which mitigates the risk a little. He knows this is the best deal in town even if Mauriss is genuine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 The new price was probably to take into consideration the extra costs Ashley had incurred for having to run the club for 3 months longer than he expected to during the pandemic, as the whole reason he'd agreed to the sale at the price he did was because he wanted to avoid having to do that. And much though I think he's an absolute cunt of a man, he probably has a right to some redress there once the exclusivity agreement ran out and such a renegotiation was possible. True, but on the other hand buyers could easily say theirs big uncertainty around when capacity crowds will be back inside stadiums affecting their future revenue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 The new price was probably to take into consideration the extra costs Ashley had incurred for having to run the club for 3 months longer than he expected to during the pandemic, as the whole reason he'd agreed to the sale at the price he did was because he wanted to avoid having to do that. And much though I think he's an absolute cunt of a man, he probably has a right to some redress there once the exclusivity agreement ran out and such a renegotiation was possible. True, but on the other hand buyers could easily say theirs big uncertainty around when capacity crowds will be back inside stadiums affecting their future revenue. Of course. I'm not saying his new price was accurate or fair, simply that he had a right to discuss one and that in and of itself probably isn't wrong of him. Hence why PIF/Stavely were probably OK with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 The new price was probably to take into consideration the extra costs Ashley had incurred for having to run the club for 3 months longer than he expected to during the pandemic, as the whole reason he'd agreed to the sale at the price he did was because he wanted to avoid having to do that. And much though I think he's an absolute cunt of a man, he probably has a right to some redress there once the exclusivity agreement ran out and such a renegotiation was possible. True, but on the other hand buyers could easily say theirs big uncertainty around when capacity crowds will be back inside stadiums affecting their future revenue. Of course. I'm not saying his new price was accurate or fair, simply that he had a right to discuss one and that in and of itself probably isn't wrong of him. Hence why PIF/Stavely were probably OK with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cheesy Beans Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Haven't been following that much the last few days. Is it accepted that Golfmag's info was wrong when he said the hold up was with Ashley now? He was reiterating the info he was given from a source aligned to the PL side which was nothing more than PL propaganda as they were aware PIF had reached their limits and were about to blast them for it. All about covering their arse and passing blame. It’s no surprise his info came about shortly after multiple sources suggested PIF were not responding... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Haven't been following that much the last few days. Is it accepted that Golfmag's info was wrong when he said the hold up was with Ashley now? He was reiterating the info he was given from a source aligned to the PL side which was nothing more than PL propaganda as they were aware PIF had reached their limits and were about to blast them for it. All about covering their arse and passing blame. It’s no surprise his info came about shortly after multiple sources suggested PIF were not responding... For once Mike Ashley isn’t the one to blame here. He genuinely wants/needs to sell now. He risks losing it all anyway with no signs of this Covid madness ending any time in the next year or so. SD are probably only worth a third of what they were, if even. If you had a little nufc shaped nest egg worth 300m, and you could add that to your stash (or what’s left of it) would you not be thinking right now.. “fuck this.. I’m done” ? I think the club will be sold within a year regardless of what happens with PIF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Haven't been following that much the last few days. Is it accepted that Golfmag's info was wrong when he said the hold up was with Ashley now? He was reiterating the info he was given from a source aligned to the PL side which was nothing more than PL propaganda as they were aware PIF had reached their limits and were about to blast them for it. All about covering their arse and passing blame. It’s no surprise his info came about shortly after multiple sources suggested PIF were not responding... For once Mike Ashley isn’t the one to blame here. He genuinely wants/needs to sell now. He risks losing it all anyway with no signs of this Covid madness ending any time in the next year or so. SD are probably only worth a third of what they were, if even. If you had a little nufc shaped nest egg worth 300m, and you could add that to your stash (or what’s left of it) would you not be thinking right now.. “fuck this.. I’m done” ? I think the club will be sold within a year regardless of what happens with PIF I'd say that's quite optimistic considering the uncertainty of when audiences will be allowed back into grounds safely over the next 12 months. I said when PIF came in, they were probably the only investors who would spend that sort of money on a football club in this climate. I mean I don't really take the Mauriss/Qatar ghost bid of £350m bid seriously for obvious reasons, and haven't heard about any serious players other than PIF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 That's unnecessary Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 What a cunt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulie Walnuts Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Totally unnecessary snide comments. Out of order. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Professional troll. Fuck him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Im not a Guardian reader but would it be possible to find how many times he has called Man Citys owners Human rights abusers ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Im not a Guardian reader but would it be possible to find how many times he has called Man Citys owners Human rights abusers ? He’s a massive, and extremely bitter about anyone but, Man Utd fan so probably high. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattoon Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Professional troll. Fuck him. Exactly, he knows we bite and he's going for the interaction boost criticising NUFC gives you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts