duo Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. I don't see how that could affect it. Surely the privacy issue is the main reason for the hold up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cheesy Beans Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarralad Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. Can you put a link to where the premier league said this please? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happinesstan Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. I reckon you're both correct. The reason for the delay is the makeup of the consortium, but the reason that is a concern is definitely linked to the Tv rights issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Are we ruling out this being dead in the water and Big Mike dragging this out until the end of the summer to avoid any heat? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Are we ruling out this being dead in the water and Big Mike dragging this out until the end of the summer to avoid any heat? That's where I am with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menace Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 I have to salute how many articles journo's can churn up without having anything new in them whatsoever. It really is a talent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Holden Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Ah, the owld holding-pattern-of-pressure tactic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? This. Also, if it's so easily solved, why have the consortium pulled out and not solved the issue already? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Does it say anywhere that they can’t be on the board by the way? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cheesy Beans Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? This. Also, if it's so easily solved, why have the consortium pulled out and not solved the issue already? You’ve answered your own question - it has been solved, or is being solved, by the immense pressure the PL are now under due to the ‘withdrawal’. It’s made the PL move when they said they were not willing to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cheesy Beans Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. Can you put a link to where the premier league said this please? I’ve literally told you what happened in my post, the articles were all posted in this thread - go and read it yourself and join the dots up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. Can you put a link to where the premier league said this please? I’ve literally told you what happened in my post, the articles were all posted in this thread - go and read it yourself and join the dots up. Why whenever I ask posters like you (you know, the ones who "KNOW THIS IS ON") you always refuse to post the links to your facts? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cheesy Beans Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. Can you put a link to where the premier league said this please? I’ve literally told you what happened in my post, the articles were all posted in this thread - go and read it yourself and join the dots up. Why whenever I ask posters like you (you know, the ones who "KNOW THIS IS ON") you always refuse to post the links to your facts? Because I work a full time job and don’t have the time/can’t be arsed to pull up the 5 or 6 articles which were posted at the time. Here’s one, by example: www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/07/27/newcastle-united-takeover-gridlocked-saudi-led-consortium-struggles/amp/ Fwiw, I’ve never said ‘I know it’s on’ - I’ve just posted the information I have which may or may not be relevant or true. I’m confident it is on, but the only people who ‘know’ are sat in PL headquarters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cheesy Beans Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 As I’ve said before - PIF’s ‘withdrawal’ and tactic to ramp up the pressure/turn it dirty was in direct retaliation to the PL releasing the propaganda in the article above, written a mere 3 days before the ‘withdrawal’. Believe it or don’t believe it, I couldn’t care less - I’m only sharing what I have, know or believe (which is the entire point of a forum). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. Can you put a link to where the premier league said this please? I’ve literally told you what happened in my post, the articles were all posted in this thread - go and read it yourself and join the dots up. Why whenever I ask posters like you (you know, the ones who "KNOW THIS IS ON") you always refuse to post the links to your facts? Because I work a full time job and don’t have the time/can’t be arsed to pull up the 5 or 6 articles which were posted at the time. Here’s one, by example: www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/07/27/newcastle-united-takeover-gridlocked-saudi-led-consortium-struggles/amp/ Fwiw, I’ve never said ‘I know it’s on’ - I’ve just posted the information I have which may or may not be relevant or true. I’m confident it is on, but the only people who ‘know’ are sat in PL headquarters. Ahh, I misunderstood. I read your post as it being the PL who had said it, which is why you were so certain. But actually it's Luke Edwards. That makes things much clearer. So you're basing your facts (opinions) on a story from Luke Edwards and some information put out by Staveley. Cool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 As I’ve said before - PIF’s ‘withdrawal’ and tactic to ramp up the pressure/turn it dirty was in direct retaliation to the PL releasing the propaganda in the article above, written a mere 3 days before the ‘withdrawal’. Believe it or don’t believe it, I couldn’t care less - I’m only sharing what I have, know or believe (which is the entire point of a forum). Absolutely, debate makes the forum work. But if you're putting opinions out as facts you're gonna be called out on it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cheesy Beans Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. Can you put a link to where the premier league said this please? I’ve literally told you what happened in my post, the articles were all posted in this thread - go and read it yourself and join the dots up. Why whenever I ask posters like you (you know, the ones who "KNOW THIS IS ON") you always refuse to post the links to your facts? Because I work a full time job and don’t have the time/can’t be arsed to pull up the 5 or 6 articles which were posted at the time. Here’s one, by example: www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/07/27/newcastle-united-takeover-gridlocked-saudi-led-consortium-struggles/amp/ Fwiw, I’ve never said ‘I know it’s on’ - I’ve just posted the information I have which may or may not be relevant or true. I’m confident it is on, but the only people who ‘know’ are sat in PL headquarters. Ahh, I misunderstood. I read your post as it being the PL who had said it, which is why you were so certain. But actually it's Luke Edwards. That makes things much clearer. So you're basing your facts (opinions) on a story from Luke Edwards and some information put out by Staveley. Cool. And the 5 other articles all written at exactly the same time? Did Luke Edwards tell them? Or was the information from a source distributed to multiple journalists at the same time? Not sure why Staveley would be the source - she was furious by it. Not sure why Ashley would be the source - he nearly lost much needed investment. Who else is left?... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cheesy Beans Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 As I’ve said before - PIF’s ‘withdrawal’ and tactic to ramp up the pressure/turn it dirty was in direct retaliation to the PL releasing the propaganda in the article above, written a mere 3 days before the ‘withdrawal’. Believe it or don’t believe it, I couldn’t care less - I’m only sharing what I have, know or believe (which is the entire point of a forum). Absolutely, debate makes the forum work. But if you're putting opinions out as facts you're gonna be called out on it. The only fact I have stated is the piracy is not the hold up, which is a fact. Unless you can prove otherwise? It’s an issue which the PL want action on - but it isn’t the cause for the delay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 I believe it boiled down to in regards the MBS questions, that MBS wasnt on board of the consortium that would own NUFC but Premier League did not believe, or at least questioned, that he would not have influence and decision making power over the consortium. The onus is on the consortium to demonstrate a governance structure for owning the club, and as such it is quite difficult to prove this bloke, who is in charge of the investment fund as well as having enourmous power over anything Saudi related would not get his way should he say demand NUFC be renamed Saudi Arabia FC etc etc. Well yeah i thought it was a given that's what it was tbh. Which is why staveley said the PL 'wanted' him named as a director, which they couldn't do, which was the stalemate and probably still is. Despite our best efforts nothing's going to change that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. Can you put a link to where the premier league said this please? I’ve literally told you what happened in my post, the articles were all posted in this thread - go and read it yourself and join the dots up. Why whenever I ask posters like you (you know, the ones who "KNOW THIS IS ON") you always refuse to post the links to your facts? Because I work a full time job and don’t have the time/can’t be arsed to pull up the 5 or 6 articles which were posted at the time. Here’s one, by example: www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/07/27/newcastle-united-takeover-gridlocked-saudi-led-consortium-struggles/amp/ Fwiw, I’ve never said ‘I know it’s on’ - I’ve just posted the information I have which may or may not be relevant or true. I’m confident it is on, but the only people who ‘know’ are sat in PL headquarters. Ahh, I misunderstood. I read your post as it being the PL who had said it, which is why you were so certain. But actually it's Luke Edwards. That makes things much clearer. So you're basing your facts (opinions) on a story from Luke Edwards and some information put out by Staveley. Cool. And the 5 other articles all written at exactly the same time? Did Luke Edwards tell them? Or was the information from a source distributed to multiple journalists at the same time? Not sure why Staveley would be the source - she was furious by it. Not sure why Ashley would be the source - he nearly lost much needed investment. Who else is left?... Then ask yourself - why is it important for the PL to have MBS added as a director if it's nothing relating to piracy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
relámpago blanco Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 I wonder when the title will be Official: Saudi-backed consortium re-inserts bid to buy NUFC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. Can you put a link to where the premier league said this please? I’ve literally told you what happened in my post, the articles were all posted in this thread - go and read it yourself and join the dots up. Why whenever I ask posters like you (you know, the ones who "KNOW THIS IS ON") you always refuse to post the links to your facts? Because I work a full time job and don’t have the time/can’t be arsed to pull up the 5 or 6 articles which were posted at the time. Here’s one, by example: www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/07/27/newcastle-united-takeover-gridlocked-saudi-led-consortium-struggles/amp/ Fwiw, I’ve never said ‘I know it’s on’ - I’ve just posted the information I have which may or may not be relevant or true. I’m confident it is on, but the only people who ‘know’ are sat in PL headquarters. Ahh, I misunderstood. I read your post as it being the PL who had said it, which is why you were so certain. But actually it's Luke Edwards. That makes things much clearer. So you're basing your facts (opinions) on a story from Luke Edwards and some information put out by Staveley. Cool. And the 5 other articles all written at exactly the same time? Did Luke Edwards tell them? Or was the information from a source distributed to multiple journalists at the same time? Not sure why Staveley would be the source - she was furious by it. Not sure why Ashley would be the source - he nearly lost much needed investment. Who else is left?... Then ask yourself - why is it important for the PL to have MBS added as a director if it's nothing relating to piracy? Already been answered countless times - because the PL have concerns he will have control of (or major influence in) the club, which is against their rules as a state cannot own a club. Right, so they want it so they can reject it? So basically they have every right to be asking for this if it's going to be the case (you say it's easily solved) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cheesy Beans Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 The TV rights is nothing to do with the delay - it’s the make up of PIF and influence of MBS. Which is easily solved and will be solved. You're saying this as fact, rather than opinion. Depends who you believe of course. Which deleted account were you btw? Godzilla? Both the PL and buyer have said this - it’s about the only thing they both agree on. Staveley through her various interviews and the PL through their propaganda session just before PIF ‘withdrew’ claiming there was an impasse due to the make up of the organisations. Plus it’s also what I’ve heard, unofficially, and makes the most sense as legally the PL couldn’t reject the takeover based on the piracy. Can you put a link to where the premier league said this please? I’ve literally told you what happened in my post, the articles were all posted in this thread - go and read it yourself and join the dots up. Why whenever I ask posters like you (you know, the ones who "KNOW THIS IS ON") you always refuse to post the links to your facts? Because I work a full time job and don’t have the time/can’t be arsed to pull up the 5 or 6 articles which were posted at the time. Here’s one, by example: www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/07/27/newcastle-united-takeover-gridlocked-saudi-led-consortium-struggles/amp/ Fwiw, I’ve never said ‘I know it’s on’ - I’ve just posted the information I have which may or may not be relevant or true. I’m confident it is on, but the only people who ‘know’ are sat in PL headquarters. Ahh, I misunderstood. I read your post as it being the PL who had said it, which is why you were so certain. But actually it's Luke Edwards. That makes things much clearer. So you're basing your facts (opinions) on a story from Luke Edwards and some information put out by Staveley. Cool. And the 5 other articles all written at exactly the same time? Did Luke Edwards tell them? Or was the information from a source distributed to multiple journalists at the same time? Not sure why Staveley would be the source - she was furious by it. Not sure why Ashley would be the source - he nearly lost much needed investment. Who else is left?... Then ask yourself - why is it important for the PL to have MBS added as a director if it's nothing relating to piracy? Accidentally deleted my post when trying to amend it... Because the PL believe MBS will have a significant influence on the club. Nothing to do with piracy but PL do not want him to have control of a PL club. The test would fail if he was appointed a director (due to a state owning a club, nothing to do with piracy), which is why PIF/Staveley refuse to do so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts