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

[Scotty66]

 

Came in to post this. Very interesting points and if true, it's really clever from NDM etc.

[Jackie Broon]

If it was that straightforward why wouldn’t the consortium just set up an investment vehicle through a Delaware company?

 

Something tells me things have changed since 2015, or the PL do know exactly who owns Palace.

 

Because PIF's sports investments are probably about branding and promotion, so they won't want to hide their involvement.

 

The issue that is highlights legally is that the PL seem to be applying their rules and UK law to the relationship between PIF and the Saudi state when it can probably only be a matter of Saudi law.

[manorpark]

If he wasn’t biased before this, surely he will be a bit cheesed off now we’ve taken to the High Court to try and remove him from the panel?

 

Exactly the opposite of this.

 

His possible bias (and I do not think he would have ever been so) has been totally exposed into the public domain by De-Marco . . so (if anything) he will have to show to the maximum externt that he has bent over backwards to NOT be biased.

 

Great move by De-Marco, probably everything he wanted . . ie, far better than having another 'unknown quantity' as a replacement Chairman.

 

Brilliant.

 

Confirmation of this . . .

 

[Stifler]

If he wasn’t biased before this, surely he will be a bit cheesed off now we’ve taken to the High Court to try and remove him from the panel?

 

Exactly the opposite of this.

 

His possible bias (and I do not think he would have ever been so) has been totally exposed into the public domain by De-Marco . . so (if anything) he will have to show to the maximum externt that he has bent over backwards to NOT be biased.

 

Great move by De-Marco, probably everything he wanted . . ie, far better than having another 'unknown quantity' as a replacement Chairman.

 

Brilliant.

 

Confirmation of this . . .

 

That is just a theory that people are coming out with.

The reason they went through this legal process to have him taken off the board is because they believe he would either be biased, or most likely would know the rules too well (because he wrote them) in order to create a good argument against him and that he is probably the 1 individual they don’t want on the board for that reason.

 

There would have been no ‘If we fail to get him kicked off then at least it puts pressure on him to appear unbiased’ conversation.

It may very well be that it helps our cause, but losing this ruling would not have been part of the plan.

[Fantail Breeze]

Yeah Trying to claim it as a victory is weird. They didn’t pursue a High Court judgement intending to lose it.

[manorpark]

Yeah Trying to claim it as a victory is weird. They didn’t pursue a High Court judgement intending to lose it.

 

Strangely, obviously they did.

 

These legal cases are 'complex' and very often the "easy assumption" (the obvious assumption) seen from the outside . . . is the opposite of the truth.

 

As in this case!

[Dokko]

Yeah Trying to claim it as a victory is weird. They didn’t pursue a High Court judgement intending to lose it.

 

Na. Thinking about it then it’s very possible they knew they wouldn’t win this battle but sets them up nicely to go to war. Sacrificed a pawn as this guys biased is now in focus and he can’t exert it over proceedings or they’ll be all over it making the judgement to not replace him look the wrong one.

[Fantail Breeze]

Yeah Trying to claim it as a victory is weird. They didn’t pursue a High Court judgement intending to lose it.

 

Na. Thinking about it then it’s very possible they knew they wouldn’t win this battle but sets them up nicely to go to war. Sacrificed a pawn as this guys biased is now in focus and he can’t exert it over proceedings or they’ll be all over it making the judgement to not replace him look the wrong one.

 

It may be a decent secondary outcome, but the overall aim was to remove him. That didn’t happen.

 

His bias may be in focus, but on the flip side you could say it makes him/PL very aware of it so if there is any dodgy dealings, they’ll be very carefully covered up rather than an accidental mishap caused by complacency.

 

This wasn’t a win. It was a loss. It’s good to see the club are intent on progressing it and it’s clear the club are willing to push this all of the way. All of which is good news. But we don’t need to try and twist/seek out positive news from every development

[Tiresias]

There may be benefits but people are trying to spin every set back through this lockdown saga as positive news. The hint that a lot of the news has been bad is that we are still owned by Ashley. Equally, this arbitration is to decide if the chairman of the investment fund trying to buy us would have any control over his own investment and so would have to pass a fit and proper person test. If he was going to pass it he would have been submitted for the test already. This all feels very tenuous. I know we all hope it happens but i wish people would stop stringing everyone along with 'actually this failure is yet another win'

[Paully]

Cracking artwork especially the milk carton

 

[manorpark]

If he wasn’t biased before this, surely he will be a bit cheesed off now we’ve taken to the High Court to try and remove him from the panel?

 

Exactly the opposite of this.

 

His possible bias (and I do not think he would have ever been so) has been totally exposed into the public domain by De-Marco . . so (if anything) he will have to show to the maximum externt that he has bent over backwards to NOT be biased.

 

Great move by De-Marco, probably everything he wanted . . ie, far better than having another 'unknown quantity' as a replacement Chairman.

 

Brilliant.

 

Yeah Trying to claim it as a victory is weird. They didn’t pursue a High Court judgement intending to lose it.

 

Strangely, obviously they did.

 

These legal cases are 'complex' and very often the "easy assumption" (the obvious assumption) seen from the outside . . . is the opposite of the truth.

 

As in this case!

 

Yeah Trying to claim it as a victory is weird. They didn’t pursue a High Court judgement intending to lose it.

 

Na. Thinking about it then it’s very possible they knew they wouldn’t win this battle but sets them up nicely to go to war. Sacrificed a pawn as this guys biased is now in focus and he can’t exert it over proceedings or they’ll be all over it making the judgement to not replace him look the wrong one.

 

It may be a decent secondary outcome, but the overall aim was to remove him. That didn’t happen.

 

His bias may be in focus, but on the flip side you could say it makes him/PL very aware of it so if there is any dodgy dealings, they’ll be very carefully covered up rather than an accidental mishap caused by complacency.

 

This wasn’t a win. It was a loss. It’s good to see the club are intent on progressing it and it’s clear the club are willing to push this all of the way. All of which is good news. But we don’t need to try and twist/seek out positive news from every development

 

It was most obviously a WIN for us.

[Joey Linton]

So can anyone explain to me, as if I was a six year old, what's going on?

Is the takeover any closer or more far away than it was yesterday?

 

I'm back for one statement and then Im off again

 

A bit of pre-amble - bare with me:

 

Crystal Palace

 

On 18 December 2015, it was announced that a new deal had been signed with American investors Josh Harris and David Blitzer.[103] The club stated that Steve Parish would continue as chairman alongside Harris and Blitzer as general partners in a new structure, and that Browett, Long and Hosking would also retain a substantial investment.[104]

 

The company accounts later showed that the ownership figures were: Steve Parish 18%, Steve Browett 5%, Jeremy Hosking 5% and Martin Long 2.5% with the remainder being owned by Palace Holdco LP (a limited partnership registered in Delaware) 67.5% and Palace Parallel LLC (a company also registered in Delaware) 1.5%. Both Palace Holdco and Palace Parallel have 180 preference shares each. As the Delaware companies do not have to reveal their owners the exact ownership of the club is therefore unknown but Steve Parish confirmed that each of Harris and Blitzer had an 18% share to match his own.

 

So the Premier League doesn't know who owns 67.5% of Crystal Palace as Delaware companies don't have to reveal their owners.  The Premier League accepted this as they can't argue against the rule of Law in the USA.  Remember this as its important.

 

Now onto NUFC and PIF.

 

Premier League are arguing that they can't separate PIF from KSA and as such the KSA is a potential director of NUFC.  This, as has been said previously could then allow them to link MBS to owning NUFC and the state piracy of Bein, Beout.    PIF apparently sent details stating that PIF is separate to KSA in Saudi Law but PL didn't accept this. 

 

So the PL approved  a Delaware Company which doesn't disclose its owners/Directors because in US law where the company is based,that is its right but on the NUFC takeover, wont accept that PIF is separate under Saudi Law and choses to ignore/reject.

 

This is the crux of the matter and why Shaheed Fatima is on the case with Nick. 

 

How can PL accept US Law and not even know who owns Crsytal Palace (For all they know, it could be MBS) but reject Saudi Law stating PIF is separate to the state?  In essence, they shouldn't be able to and hopefully this will come out in Court.

 

Im off again, enjoy your baiting of each other, you sad f***s!

 

That’s the most positive post for months. Much better than the Keith s*** being touted.

 

You do realise Mitch, Steve Hastie and Keith have been talking about Delaware companies and the Palace ownership for weeks ?

 

Why would he? They are just three fans on twitter or whatever and no more or less important than anyone posting on here who gets bits and pieces.

[Doctor Zaius]

Its funny the way some people are unwavering in their positivity. The club lose a high court case and it absolutely, must be part of a grand strategy, and losing a high court case is exactly what they wanted.

 

That might be the case, or De Marco et al. may have genuinely wanted to remove him as a chair.

[gdm]

Its funny the way some people are unwavering in their positivity. The club lose a high court case and it absolutely, must be part of a grand strategy, and losing a high court case is exactly what they wanted.

 

That might be the case, or De Marco et al. may have genuinely wanted to remove him as a chair.

 

It’s ridiculous. I’m 50-50 as that’s what it’ll literally be 50-50. No one knows how the arbitration case will be. I’m

Hopeful but that as much as I can be. The ultra positive types just want to be able to say see I told you all along while the rest of us will be too busy celebrating

[Jinky Jim]

Its funny the way some people are unwavering in their positivity. The club lose a high court case and it absolutely, must be part of a grand strategy, and losing a high court case is exactly what they wanted.

 

That might be the case, or De Marco et al. may have genuinely wanted to remove him as a chair.

 

It’s ridiculous. I’m 50-50 as that’s what it’ll literally be 50-50. No one knows how the arbitration case will be. I’m

Hopeful but that as much as I can be. The ultra positive types just want to be able to say see I told you all along while the rest of us will be too busy celebrating

 

At the same time the ultra negative types will be able to say, I told you so, if it all goes arse over tip....best to keep optimistic, whilst prepared for the worst.

[Fantail Breeze]

Its funny the way some people are unwavering in their positivity. The club lose a high court case and it absolutely, must be part of a grand strategy, and losing a high court case is exactly what they wanted.

 

That might be the case, or De Marco et al. may have genuinely wanted to remove him as a chair.

 

It’s no surprise really. We had some people claiming PIF’s statement pulling out was a good thing and another of these ‘tactical moves’

 

Sounds like it’s unlikely there will be any movement or news on this until relegation status is confirmed, we may as well forget about it until at least May.

[Candi_Hills]

The PL are so determined to stop it that I just can't see us getting our way.

 

 

Doesn’t matter what they want it’s what is legally correct. We will just have to wait and see as none of us know, however I will say if they were so sure on their legal stand why didn’t they just reject it initially.

 

The thing is, legally or not, if there's enough corruption at the top it won't matter, who's going to stop them from doing whatever they want? Grease the palm of the right person and the PL can do whatever they want.

 

I agree with this, although the buyers will be doing a fair bit palm-greasing of their own too. The world is corrupt beyond what most people can imagine. When you're talking about people with this much power and influence - CEOs, lawmakers, kings, billion dollar industries - there'll be dirty money flying about in all directions.

[gdm]

Its funny the way some people are unwavering in their positivity. The club lose a high court case and it absolutely, must be part of a grand strategy, and losing a high court case is exactly what they wanted.

 

That might be the case, or De Marco et al. may have genuinely wanted to remove him as a chair.

 

It’s ridiculous. I’m 50-50 as that’s what it’ll literally be 50-50. No one knows how the arbitration case will be. I’m

Hopeful but that as much as I can be. The ultra positive types just want to be able to say see I told you all along while the rest of us will be too busy celebrating

 

At the same time the ultra negative types will be able to say, I told you so, if it all goes arse over tip....best to keep optimistic, whilst prepared for the worst.

 

You are right. I don’t see the point in being either. I 100% hopeful but don’t know what’s going to happen. One day I’ll log on here and either be deliriously happy or absolutely gutted

[Whitley mag]

From a Palace forum, now I’m not sure what date the PL rules changed, however I believe they should be reapplied every season regardless.

 

"Ownership of details of the Palace Holdco now up at companies house. Figures being rounded roughly show

 

Steve P - 18%

Steve B - 5%

Martin L - 2.5%

Jeremy H - 5%

Palace Holdco LP (a limited partnership registered in Delaware) 67.5%

Palace Parallel LLC (a company also registered in Delaware) - 1.5%

In addition both Palace Holdco and Palace Parallel have 180 preference shares each.

 

The relevance of Delaware is that that is where the trail ends as Delaware allows companies not to have to provide the names of any of their owners - something which makes it very popular for registering companies. Therefore there are no details as to who owns shares in either of the 2 Delaware companies. The only thing of note is that Parallel was formed only in June this year and some shares were transferred to it from Holdco - so presumably a reorganisation of the US owners. I think it is fair to call the US names the owners from now on."

[alexf]

Yeah mentioned it the other day. But claiming every negative is a secret "we lost on purpose" is very similar to the Trump fans with his election bullshit.

 

Not that anyone really cares but does open us up to ridicule from outsiders. It may not be the end of the world but a loss is a loss. If the legal team can turn it into a positive as well then that's great

[Wilson]

Its funny the way some people are unwavering in their positivity. The club lose a high court case and it absolutely, must be part of a grand strategy, and losing a high court case is exactly what they wanted.

 

That might be the case, or De Marco et al. may have genuinely wanted to remove him as a chair.

 

It’s ridiculous. I’m 50-50 as that’s what it’ll literally be 50-50. No one knows how the arbitration case will be. I’m

Hopeful but that as much as I can be. The ultra positive types just want to be able to say see I told you all along while the rest of us will be too busy celebrating

 

At the same time the ultra negative types will be able to say, I told you so, if it all goes arse over tip....best to keep optimistic, whilst prepared for the worst.

 

How many 'ultra negative types' are there on here? And how many would seriously say 'told you so'?

 

Most of what I see is people just being realistic. Yeah there's the penns etc, but most people are just grounded.

[Jinky Jim]

Its funny the way some people are unwavering in their positivity. The club lose a high court case and it absolutely, must be part of a grand strategy, and losing a high court case is exactly what they wanted.

 

That might be the case, or De Marco et al. may have genuinely wanted to remove him as a chair.

 

It’s ridiculous. I’m 50-50 as that’s what it’ll literally be 50-50. No one knows how the arbitration case will be. I’m

Hopeful but that as much as I can be. The ultra positive types just want to be able to say see I told you all along while the rest of us will be too busy celebrating

 

At the same time the ultra negative types will be able to say, I told you so, if it all goes arse over tip....best to keep optimistic, whilst prepared for the worst.

 

How many 'ultra negative types' are there on here? And how many would seriously say 'told you so'?

 

Most of what I see is people just being realistic. Yeah there's the penns etc, but most people are just grounded.

 

You’ve obviously not been reading this thread much then?

[manorpark]

Yeah mentioned it the other day. But claiming every negative is a secret "we lost on purpose" is very similar to the Trump fans with his election bullshit.

 

 

Couldn't possibly be more different.

 

Trump fans are (by definition) idiots.

 

People who support NUFC and are also able to distinguish a 'win' from a 'loss' - are uniquely talanted!

[Fantail Breeze]

Part of me thinks manorpark is so over the top, that he could possibly be someone on the wind up.

 

You have to go back to the 19th Feb for his last post that wasn’t in either takeover thread. It was in the Project Big Picture thread, talking about Newcastle as a European giant after the takeover.

 

Clearly not interested in engaging properly about Newcastle, other than to post unrealistic s*** about the takeover which sounds more and more like the stereotypical nonsense that comes out of pundits.

[manorpark]

Part of me thinks manorpark is so over the top, that he could possibly be someone on the wind up.

 

You have to go back to the 19th Feb for his last post that wasn’t in either takeover thread. It was in the Project Big Picture thread, talking about Newcastle as a European giant after the takeover.

 

Clearly not interested in engaging properly about Newcastle, other than to post unrealistic s*** about the takeover which sounds more and more like the stereotypical nonsense that comes out of pundits.

 

To use a good old English expression . . "Crikey".

 

I have never posted anything unrealistic in my life, if you think something I have posted is . . then you know where the problem lies.

 

Until I gave it up, I have had a Season Ticket at St James' since Season 1969/1970 (I was the original 'glory hunter' after we won the Fairs Cup . . hmm!!) so I am more knowledgeable and 'interested in' NUFC than most people I know.

 

However, the only thing that really matters to NUFC in 2020 and 2021 is the Takeover, which is why that is absolutely the only thing worth posting about until it happens.

 

To the word 'Crikey', I would add (about your comments) the word 'Dispiriting'.