Jump to content

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


Yorkie

Will the takeover be complete by this summer?  

312 members have voted

  1. 1. Will the takeover be complete by this summer?

    • Yes
      87
    • No
      183


Recommended Posts

So nothing we didn't know already including further confirmation that the deal is dead. 

 

I think what is pi**ing me off more than anything right now, is how Amanda Staveley asked the fans to rally and to put pressure on, then she promptly disappears without trace.  I think we more than deserve some sort of explanation from her.

 

I’m guessing it was the only card she had left. May as well play it and see what happens rather than just accept defeat

Link to post
Share on other sites

The club must have a record of questions asked and the timeline, also they would be aware of no red flag feedback from PL. Someone needs to blow the lid on these smarmy cnuts, the notion that our interest was foremost is f***ing laughable.

 

"No red flags" was Staveley's info given to Caulkin - not some fact.

 

Yes and the questions re piracy were quoted by numerous journalists, yet the PL implied that this hadn’t even been looked at yet, and would only have been considered once who owned club was decided.

 

You need to get over your absolute hated of Staveley makes you like a grade A cnut.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The club must have a record of questions asked and the timeline, also they would be aware of no red flag feedback from PL. Someone needs to blow the lid on these smarmy cnuts, the notion that our interest was foremost is f***ing laughable.

 

"No red flags" was Staveley's info given to Caulkin - not some fact.

 

Yes and the questions re piracy were quoted by numerous journalists, yet the PL implied that this hadn’t even been looked at yet, and would only have been considered once who owned club was decided.

 

You need to get over your absolute hated of Staveley makes you like a grade A cnut.

 

There's definitely a middle ground here. Don't think either of you are there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"RM outlined the Owners’ & Directors’ Test process, explaining that it was an objective test and not one that was open to subjective opinion. He explained the need to establish if there were links to other legal entities that would own or control the Club. When an impasse was reached in this matter, the consortium was offered a number of routes to progress the matter:

 

– the entity in question accepts they would have Control by completing relevant forms and processes

 

– an independent arbitration on the issue of Control which en"

 

 

It is an objective test, it's very clearly set out and the process in the rules is this:

 

Rule F.4. requires the submission of a declaration if any Person proposes to become a director of a club (including anyone acquiring control of the club):

 

That is then assessed against Rule F.1. which sets out a number of 'disqualifying events'.

 

Those 'disqualifying events' include rule F.1.1.1. that the person subject to the test has failed to provide all relevant information (including information relating to any other individual who would qualify as a Director but has not been disclosed).

 

Rule F.6. states that: Upon the Board becoming aware by virtue of the submission of a Declaration or by any other means that a Person is liable to be disqualified as a Director under the provisions of Rule F.1, the Board will: F.6.1. give written notice to the Person that he is disqualified, giving reasons.

 

Rule F.13. states that Any Person or Club who receives notice under Rule F.6 has a right to appeal the disqualification notice(s)

 

 

The PL have abundantly clearly not followed that process. They established in June that an 'entity' that they believed should be included as a director had not been disclosed (a disqualifying event under rule F.1.1.1.). Rule F.6. requires them to have issued a notice of disqualification to the proposed directors "upon becoming aware" that they were liable to be disqualified.

 

The rules give them absolutely no other option, they should have issued a formal decision at that point, which could then have been appealed.

 

 

Everything you say makes sense, but of course the PL also left themselves with enough wiggle room that they could just keep on dragging the process out with enough faith in their position that it wouldn't come back to burn them. Might have been a bit of a gamble on their part, but they knew they would have the backing of the rest of the league, and that was the main thing. They correctly guessed that by putting in the arbitration clause with no guarantees of success if that went in favour of PIF, the Saudis would just decide to walk away rather than wait another 12 months of being messed about. It must have been what they were banking on ultimately.

 

Hence why Ashley has apparently been asking Saudis to give the PL a name. I just wish they would and then we’ll see how confident the PL are of rejecting it.

 

They already had a name, but as far as I'm aware they wanted SA govt to be named officially as owners rather than an individual who couldn't be linked directly.

 

I would guess if they had MBS down as the owner, it would be very difficult to suggest there were any other shadow directors they could insist on being put forward.

 

Of course the Saudis would never go with that, but I bet the PL would get twitchy arses saying he wasn’t fit and proper. In fact it would be worth seeing the impact it would have on U.K. & Saudi relations.

 

How would it look for the leader of Saudi Arabia to be the owner of an EPL club? It would make it all look a bit Mickey Mouse, from a public image POV you would imagine people would think he had better things to do. Granted he'd just be a figurehead, but even so it damages SA credibility.

 

It's actually for this reason that I think there's no way back for PIF, they won't want to be seen to be begging to be part of the English Premier League.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The PL are/were doing everything to make this fail.

 

It's just staggering that they are allowed to dismiss the takeover because the owner is somebody at the top of the food chain.

 

Have PIF ever been refused ownership/investment before from any other company?

 

I wish PIF would just setup sports investment fund or something and buy the club with that. There must be a way around this and surely it doesn't have to be PIF on the paperwork. Just like AS has done.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Threat title change :'(

 

I'm not quite sure what to expect next, the consortium to return with a comment, Chopra and his photoshopped friends to emerge again, or a new player to enter the game?

 

:buck2:

 

None of those. Radio silence until just before the next transfer window.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The club must have a record of questions asked and the timeline, also they would be aware of no red flag feedback from PL. Someone needs to blow the lid on these smarmy cnuts, the notion that our interest was foremost is f***ing laughable.

 

"No red flags" was Staveley's info given to Caulkin - not some fact.

 

Yes and the questions re piracy were quoted by numerous journalists, yet the PL implied that this hadn’t even been looked at yet, and would only have been considered once who owned club was decided.

 

You need to get over your absolute hated of Staveley makes you like a grade A cnut.

 

Love the personal abuse from the usual suspects. For the hundredth time, doubting somebody does not equate to hatred. But you knew that anyway I'd hope.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The club must have a record of questions asked and the timeline, also they would be aware of no red flag feedback from PL. Someone needs to blow the lid on these smarmy cnuts, the notion that our interest was foremost is f***ing laughable.

 

"No red flags" was Staveley's info given to Caulkin - not some fact.

 

Yes and the questions re piracy were quoted by numerous journalists, yet the PL implied that this hadn’t even been looked at yet, and would only have been considered once who owned club was decided.

 

You need to get over your absolute hated of Staveley makes you like a grade A cnut.

 

There's definitely a middle ground here. Don't think either of you are there.

 

Thanks for the arbitration but fuck off  :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The club must have a record of questions asked and the timeline, also they would be aware of no red flag feedback from PL. Someone needs to blow the lid on these smarmy cnuts, the notion that our interest was foremost is f***ing laughable.

 

"No red flags" was Staveley's info given to Caulkin - not some fact.

 

Yes and the questions re piracy were quoted by numerous journalists, yet the PL implied that this hadn’t even been looked at yet, and would only have been considered once who owned club was decided.

 

You need to get over your absolute hated of Staveley makes you like a grade A cnut.

 

There's definitely a middle ground here. Don't think either of you are there.

 

Thanks for the arbitration but fuck off  :lol:

 

Such a romantic way with words you have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PL should’ve done everything to get KSA investment into UK due this debt situation. But they didn’t.

 

They only care about the Premier League, and tbf, their paymasters are the Big 6.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PL should’ve done everything to get KSA investment into UK due this debt situation. But they didn’t.

 

Ksa aren't going to pay off or national debt because they own a football club  :lol:

They were going to invest in an area in need of investment at a time when a lot if investment is being pulled apparently.
Link to post
Share on other sites

PL should’ve done everything to get KSA investment into UK due this debt situation. But they didn’t.

 

Ksa aren't going to pay off or national debt because they own a football club  :lol:

They were going to invest in an area in need of investment at a time when a lot if investment is being pulled apparently.

 

Again, that's not the PL's problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PL should’ve done everything to get KSA investment into UK due this debt situation. But they didn’t.

 

Ksa aren't going to pay off or national debt because they own a football club  :lol:

They were going to invest in an area in need of investment at a time when a lot if investment is being pulled apparently.

 

Again, that's not the PL's problem.

 

No it's not their problem, but it's very short sighted considering the ultimate increase in cash they could have got from a Newcastle team providing a challenge and a team people would actually want to watch

Link to post
Share on other sites

PL should’ve done everything to get KSA investment into UK due this debt situation. But they didn’t.

 

Ksa aren't going to pay off or national debt because they own a football club  :lol:

They were going to invest in an area in need of investment at a time when a lot if investment is being pulled apparently.

 

Again, that's not the PL's problem.

 

No it's not their problem, but it's very short sighted considering the ultimate increase in cash they could have got from a Newcastle team providing a challenge and a team people would actually want to watch

 

Clearly they didn't see it that way, and I kind of suspected they wouldn't when so many were saying they would never turn down potential investment on that scale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PL should’ve done everything to get KSA investment into UK due this debt situation. But they didn’t.

 

Ksa aren't going to pay off or national debt because they own a football club  :lol:

They were going to invest in an area in need of investment at a time when a lot if investment is being pulled apparently.

 

Again, that's not the PL's problem.

 

No it's not their problem, but it's very short sighted considering the ultimate increase in cash they could have got from a Newcastle team providing a challenge and a team people would actually want to watch

 

Clearly they didn't see it that way, and I kind of suspected they wouldn't when so many were saying they would never turn down potential investment on that scale.

 

Agreed. They clearly couldn't look beyond their immediate revenue streams. They'll start worrying if Wolves and Leicester continue to hang around in the top 6 positions for a couple more seasons

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leicester built a lot of good will by winning the title and the helicopter tragedy. Reckon their owners would have been re-scruitinised if they were just hanging around the top 4 taking away from Arsenal/Chelsea/Tottenham

Link to post
Share on other sites

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