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

If true that the O&D test has changed,then I'm sorry but that's really really bad news for us.  :sad:

 

I always thought it would change but as our takeover started under the old test, then that would be applied.

 

Not necessarily. I'm only speculating here but the reportings of PIF leaving the table were only ever reportings. The conversations have clearly still be ongoing related to this deal rather than another one in the offing.

 

If the PL were to introduce changes to the test, they could not be enforced within the deal from last year, they could (surely) only be for any future dealings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If true that the O&D test has changed,then I'm sorry but that's really really bad news for us.  :sad:

 

I always thought it would change but as our takeover started under the old test, then that would be applied.

 

Not necessarily. I'm only speculating here but the reportings of PIF leaving the table were only ever reportings. The conversations have clearly still be ongoing related to this deal rather than another one in the offing.

 

If the PL were to introduce changes to the test, they could not be enforced within the deal from last year, they could (surely) only be for any future dealings.

It was a formal statement of withdrawal. Perhaps if they hadn’t withdrew they couldn’t change the test. Also though if they did meet the terms of the original test and the PL stalled. It would suggest the club is in a decent position to undertake legal proceedings for whatever reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If true that the O&D test has changed,then I'm sorry but that's really really bad news for us.  :sad:

 

I always thought it would change but as our takeover started under the old test, then that would be applied.

 

Not necessarily. I'm only speculating here but the reportings of PIF leaving the table were only ever reportings. The conversations have clearly still be ongoing related to this deal rather than another one in the offing.

 

If the PL were to introduce changes to the test, they could not be enforced within the deal from last year, they could (surely) only be for any future dealings.

It was a formal statement of withdrawal. Perhaps if they hadn’t withdrew they couldn’t change the test. Also though if they did meet the terms of the original test and the PL stalled. It would suggest the club is in a decent position to undertake legal proceedings for whatever reason.

 

It was not a formal withdrawal, it was a public statement, there is nothing formal about that. They can say whatever they want in a public statement, it doesn't have to be true and it doesn't formally change anything.

 

The process of formally withdrawing their offer would have been done behind closed doors, if it was. The only elements of withdrawing from the deal that would be public would be discharging charges and dissolving the holding companies on Companies House, and none of that has been done.

 

Also, the O&D test is set out in the PL Handbook, which is published before the start of each season. I doubt they would / could change the test without publishing the changes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If true that the O&D test has changed,then I'm sorry but that's really really bad news for us.  :sad:

 

I always thought it would change but as our takeover started under the old test, then that would be applied.

 

Not necessarily. I'm only speculating here but the reportings of PIF leaving the table were only ever reportings.

It was a formal statement of withdrawal. Perhaps if they hadn’t withdrew they couldn’t change the test. Also though if they did meet the terms of the original test and the PL stalled. It would suggest the club is in a decent position to undertake legal proceedings

 

It was not a formal withdrawal, it was a public statement, there is nothing formal about that. They can say whatever they want in a public statement, it doesn't have to be true and it doesn't formally change anything.

 

The process of formally withdrawing their offer would have been done behind closed doors, if it was. The only elements of withdrawing from the deal that would be public would be discharging charges and dissolving the holding companies on Companies House, and none of that has been done.

 

Also, the O&D test is set out in the PL Handbook, which is published before the start of each season. I doubt they would / could change the test without publishing the changes

They issued a formal statement, as I stated. In the post above. Formal as in officially sanctioned.  If they haven’t withdrawn the offer surely there would have been progress by now without all the legal manoeuvring?  Also, if the offer has been withdrawn (obviously it has) and  the PL then change the O&D test PIF will need to comply with the changes

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any changes would have no barring on arbitration or any legal case that is focused on something that happened before those changes.

 

Exactly, any legal proceedings would review the conduct of all parties in relation to the rules/regulations at that time, no moving the goalposts after. If we for some reason have to submit a new O&D request then that's a different matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If true that the O&D test has changed,then I'm sorry but that's really really bad news for us.  :sad:

 

I always thought it would change but as our takeover started under the old test, then that would be applied.

 

Not necessarily. I'm only speculating here but the reportings of PIF leaving the table were only ever reportings.

It was a formal statement of withdrawal. Perhaps if they hadn’t withdrew they couldn’t change the test. Also though if they did meet the terms of the original test and the PL stalled. It would suggest the club is in a decent position to undertake legal proceedings

 

It was not a formal withdrawal, it was a public statement, there is nothing formal about that. They can say whatever they want in a public statement, it doesn't have to be true and it doesn't formally change anything.

 

The process of formally withdrawing their offer would have been done behind closed doors, if it was. The only elements of withdrawing from the deal that would be public would be discharging charges and dissolving the holding companies on Companies House, and none of that has been done.

 

Also, the O&D test is set out in the PL Handbook, which is published before the start of each season. I doubt they would / could change the test without publishing the changes

They issued a formal statement, as I stated. In the post above. Formal as in officially sanctioned.  If they haven’t withdrawn the offer surely there would have been progress by now without all the legal manoeuvring?  Also, if the offer has been withdrawn (obviously it has) and  the PL then change the O&D test PIF will need to comply with the changes

 

It was widely reported at the time it was the clubs role to withdraw from the test, and again it was widely reported they did not.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is fine tho

 

 

:lol: The money borrowed was from Michael Dell's investment firm.

 

I know the mackems have seemingly found a buyer now, but it's just further proof SunDELLand was never a thing!

 

More likely it was a thing but got wind they could get involved with a PL club for similar outlays and commitments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TBF I would blame Newcastle United for this

 

Yeah that’s foul.

 

And as you say, completely on us. Chelsea can be as cheeky as they want to secure new talent but we absolutely should have secured all the local junior clubs on these sort of deals. Horrendous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TBF I would blame Newcastle United for this

 

Yeah that’s foul.

 

And as you say, completely on us. Chelsea can be as cheeky as they want to secure new talent but we absolutely should have secured all the local junior clubs on these sort of deals. Horrendous.

 

Hence why a takeover is crucial, the current ownership couldn’t give a shit about this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing isn't it how fast the Burnley sale was passed through by the EPL.  Could it be because the buyers are American.  Seems to me the Yanks either are or on the verge of controlling the EPL.  I think that's at least 5 clubs owned by American consortiums!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest chicken little

Could it be because the buyers are American.

 

maybe. could also be that they weren't pirating the league's intellectual property from one of its major partners.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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