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

3 hours ago, Whitley mag said:

Where not at the point whereby they’d give in yet. If the CAT case is given the go ahead, that’s when it gets interesting. 

Really now? Now the W.A.I.T is for the stage where they say 'ah ok, we give in'? Didn't hear this scenario 2 3 weeks back. All the bollocks I was rrading from Keith and all the supposed ITKs were the PL will give in.

 

Quoting you on this one. Funny that you're not confident saying they'll give in, instead, just saying it'll get interesting.

 

 

Edited by nufcjb

Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, nufcjb said:

Really now? Now the W.A.I.T is for the stage where they say 'ah ok, we give in'? Didn't hear this scenario 2 3 weeks back. All the bollocks I was rrading from Keith and all the supposed ITKs were the PL will give in.

 

Quoting you on this one. Funny that you're not confident saying they'll give in, instead, just saying it'll get interesting.

 

 

 

Keith has always said they’d fight to get case thrown out it’s what bird and bird do. What he said was that when disclosure comes they’ll fold like a pack of cards. 

Think you’ve jumped the gun a bit based on Ryder’s article. 
 

Quote me away. Yeah I believe it’ll get interesting if case is given go ahead. Do I know they’ll fold for certain course I don’t, but i would hazard a guess it’ll greatly increase the chances  of a settlement during arbitration if it gets go ahead.

 

 

Edited by Whitley mag

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

Keith has always said they’d fight to get case thrown out it’s what bird and bird do. What he said was that when disclosure comes they’ll fold like a pack of cards. 

Think you’ve jumped the gun a bit based on Ryder’s article. 
 

Quote me away. Yeah I believe it’ll get interesting if case is given go ahead. Do I know they’ll fold for certain course I don’t, but i would hazard a guess it’ll greatly increase the chances  of a settlement during arbitration if it gets go ahead.

 

 

 

 

You found your missing 1% yet mate?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How can the CAT case be solely damages when one of the seeking points was "An injunction requiring the Defendant to withdraw the Director Decision and/or to reconsider the same" (the director decision provisionally being PIF = KSA) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for PL arbitration that applies section A's definitions of control and person on PIF and the KSA to determine whether the PL were right to provisionally conclude what they did. In my head the idea is to overturn that which facilitates an easier pathway to takeover from Staveley's group. If it all fails fine we'll have alternatives. But none have managed to get anywhere near in the 4 years (more like 3.5) the club has been for sale 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest reefatoon
10 minutes ago, nbthree3 said:

How can the CAT case be solely damages when one of the seeking points was "An injunction requiring the Defendant to withdraw the Director Decision and/or to reconsider the same" (the director decision provisionally being PIF = KSA) 


Staveley even said not long ago that she can’t speak about Newcastle due to NDA’s. She isn’t going to be tied into anything like that just so Mike can get a bit extra cash.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When fans don't hear an update in a while the pessimism comes in, obviously because uncertainties arise and confidence falls as we're more privy to those worries. But materially little changes unless something is made public about it, at some unknown point in the future 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that people (Keith and his following of minions) keep talking about the delay tactics of the PL, when NUFC delayed arbitration by 3-6 months by failing to remove the chair of the independent panel.

 

NUFC could also have lodged the CAT case much sooner then they did.

 

We could’ve had a decision/closure by now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did that cause a significant delay or was it part of the process? Genuine question. Don't remember seeing it reported that way but could be wrong.  

 

Bit of a strange equivocation either way mind. 

 

 

Edited by TheHoob

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheHoob said:

Did that cause a significant delay or was it part of the process? Genuine question. Don't remember seeing it reported that way but could be wrong.  

 

Bit of a strange equivocation either way mind. 

 

 

 

 

It was only part of the process because we wanted it to be. It was reported at the time to have taken 3-6 months to resolve. If we didn’t challenge it and just proceeded, we’d have gone through arbitration by now.

 

NUFC’s right to challenge that is no different to the PL’s right to challenge CAT’s jurisdiction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it caused a delay (if you’re talking about challenging the chair of the arbitration panel) but it was a risk they had to take.

 

The fella pretty much designed the Owners and Directors test. They couldn’t just not try to have him removed. What it also does though, even though it wasn’t successful, is to put the spotlight on him a lot more and he’s going to have to be squeaky clean throughout the whole process and not be obviously biased towards the PL.


I think it was a ridiculous decision not to remove him. Talk about a clear conflict of interest. 

 

 

 

Edited by LV

Link to post
Share on other sites

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