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

[Stifler]

37 minutes ago, ToonArmy1892 said:

Something else is getting released later today, is that right?

Nah, they just said that the letter may be released in full, which it was.

[Ben]

 

Consider our bonfire pissed on 

[FloydianMag]

2 minutes ago, andyc35i said:

This is positive news in my opinion as it seems to suggests she still has the backing to buy the club. But I don’t get how this will change anything for us regarding a sale. The Premier League will just say they followed their own rules that NUFC signed up to as a member club. If we are aiming to prove that the rules are rigged and not fit for purpose then that’s all well and good, but PL will just deny everything even if it is in public 

I suppose it depends on what evidence the club has to show they haven’t followed their own rules and there was outside influences at play.

[ToonArmy1892]

17 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

Consider our bonfire pissed on 

Eh, that is quite positive from him isn't it?

[Ben]

Just now, ToonArmy1892 said:

Eh, that is quite positive from him isn't it?

Not if you read the full thread he says it's a desperate move by them and something they shouldn't do because even if the takeover goes through they need to deal with the EPL.

[et tu brute]

9 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

Consider our bonfire pissed on 

 

 

He clearly doesn't know what the fuck is happening. I'm always suprised how much credit is given to a person who is banned by the BBC, has strong BEIN connections and has been shown (during the previous takeover bid) by the Chronicle of telling lies during a podcast, which then had to be pulled within 24 hours as a direct result. 

[Joey Linton]

11 minutes ago, Ben said:

Not if you read the full thread he says it's a desperate move by them and something they shouldn't do because even if the takeover goes through they need to deal with the EPL.

He doesn't say that. He says it could either be seen as confident, confrontational or a little desperate. 

[Wandy]

I need someone to explain to me how having arbitration played out in the public eye improves our chances of winning. Are Staveley and co implying that the three people doing the arbitrating are capable of being influenced by public opinion?

[Scoot]

19 minutes ago, Ben said:

Not if you read the full thread he says it's a desperate move by them and something they shouldn't do because even if the takeover goes through they need to deal with the EPL.

Id imagine if the takeover does go through and the PL are shown to have not acted correctly, heads may roll and the consortium would be working with completely different people to the twats who've been in charge the last 18 months 

[Manxst]

3 minutes ago, Scoot said:

Id imagine if the takeover does go through and the PL are shown to have not acted correctly, heads may roll and the consortium would be working with completely different people to the twats who've been in charge the last 18 months 

Different persons, as well as more open, honest, transparent and fair working practices. No more secret meetings with the ‘Big 6’ to discuss matters before the other clubs.

[TheHoob]

16 minutes ago, Wandy said:

I need someone to explain to me how having arbitration played out in the public eye improves our chances of winning. Are Staveley and co implying that the three people doing the arbitrating are capable of being influenced by public opinion?

 

The logic is that the PL has some skeletons in the closet with regards to how they've handled this, outside influence etc. If it is forced to be in public then the PL are more likely to settle before it gets to that point. Or at the very least they get shown up to be a bunch of mugs. 

 

 

Edited July 4, 2021 by TheHoob

[Jackie Broon]

16 minutes ago, Wandy said:

I need someone to explain to me how having arbitration played out in the public eye improves our chances of winning. Are Staveley and co implying that the three people doing the arbitrating are capable of being influenced by public opinion?

 

Well the theory is that having hearings in public increases transparency and accountability, that's why the human rights act protects the right to public criminal trials.

 

Also, they may have stuff from the disclosure that would be embarrassing for the PL and, if so, it puts extra pressure for the PL to settle before it goes ahead.

 

The only private information should be commercially sensitive information for the club and PIF, there shouldn't really be anything that the PL should be worried about being made public; unless they have done something wrong.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 4, 2021 by Jackie Broon

[RS]

It’s great PR and gets the general public on the clubs side. Painting the EPL in a bad light even if they have nothing to hide. 

[Slim]

I dont even fully understand how top 6 have so much power when tje rest of the clubs can outvote them if they team up.

 

 

Edited July 4, 2021 by Slim

[Jackie Broon]

1 minute ago, Slim said:

I dont even fully understand how top 6 have so much power when tje rest of the clubs can outvote them if they team up.

 

 

 

 

I suppose because the brand is so tied to them and a lot of the other clubs are transitory, being relegated and promoted.

 

Ironically, I think the WhatsApp group the other 14 have is potentially illegal under competition law.

[Ashley17]

The Whatsapp groups only raise more questions for me. Has someone had to remove Tony Khan and add Delia Smith?

[Robster]

37 minutes ago, Ben said:

Not if you read the full thread he says it's a desperate move by them and something they shouldn't do because even if the takeover goes through they need to deal with the EPL.

Should be the other way around in my opinion. The PL should be telling themselves that if they don't play things straight with NUFC in future, they'll come for them, all guns blazing.

Fuck playing nice with the PL. That ship has sailed.

[Thumbheed]

6 minutes ago, Robster said:

Should be the other way around in my opinion. The PL should be telling themselves that if they don't play things straight with NUFC in future, they'll come for them, all guns blazing.

Fuck playing nice with the PL. That ship has sailed.

 

Aye, at this point I'm just as invested in dragging the PL through the mud as I am getting this takeover done. 

[Wandy]

15 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

Well the theory is that having hearings in public increases transparency and accountability, that's why the human rights act protects the right to public criminal trials.

 

Also, they may have stuff from the disclosure that would be embarrassing for the PL and, if so, it puts extra pressure for the PL to settle before it goes ahead.

 

The only private information should be commercially sensitive information for the club and PIF, there shouldn't really be anything that the PL should be worried about being made public; unless they have done something wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why have they left it so late in the game to do this though? They should have been on Tracey Crouch's case about this months ago. It makes no sense to leave it this late to get them to fold before arbitration starts.

 

It seems fairly obvious too that the club think Michael Beloff is going to side with the PL.

[Jackie Broon]

4 minutes ago, Wandy said:

 

Why have they left it so late in the game to do this though? They should have been on Tracey Crouch's case about this months ago. It makes no sense to leave it this late to get them to fold before arbitration starts.

 

It seems fairly obvious too that the club think Michael Beloff is going to side with the PL.

 

Good point. Possibly because of stuff that has come out in disclosure. It might also be related to the CAT jurisdiction challenge, supporting their case of there being a material difference between the CAT and arbitration.

 

 

Edited July 4, 2021 by Jackie Broon

[Scotty66]

It either suggests she is just confident and wants not just a takeover but to exposure a lack of integrity or she is only making bold claims because she feels she has nothing to lose. for me would be less positive for the takeover happening. We wait and see!

 

Groundbreaking journalism from Jacobs there. Either Staveley wins or loses. Either she's confident or she isn't. Either there is corruption or there isn't. 

Hit us with those cold hard facts my man and don't you sit on the fence as you do. 

[Yelevats]

Just now, Scotty66 said:

It either suggests she is just confident and wants not just a takeover but to exposure a lack of integrity or she is only making bold claims because she feels she has nothing to lose. for me would be less positive for the takeover happening. We wait and see!

 

Groundbreaking journalism from Jacobs there. Either Staveley wins or loses. Either she's confident or she isn't. Either there is corruption or there isn't. 

Hit us with those cold hard facts my man and don't you sit on the fence as you do. 

He's like the Riddler from a Batman Film.

[Thumbheed]

 

This latest move seems quite incisive, imo. I'm actually quite buoyed by the latest developments. 

 

I just don't see how it's possible for the PL to demonstrate they're looking after the interests of the fans whilst rejecting their calls for a public hearing, which as @Jackie Broon has said plays right into the hands of the people who are looking to establish independent regulation. 

[Fantail Breeze]

1 hour ago, Joey Linton said:

He doesn't say that. He says it could either be seen as confident, confrontational or a little desperate. 

 

Mad how people don’t actually read what he says properly and just criticise him incorrectly  Yet the same people bend over backwards for Keith to ram his random (and often illogical thoughts) down their throat.

 

Anyway, my thoughts which I know you’re all desperate to hear… 

 

It’s positive in one sense, because it seems to indicate PIF are still there (otherwise Staveley wouldn’t be). It also shows the continued fight from the consortium to get this through.

 

However, the reported best outcome for the takeover was an agreement outside of, or through, arbitration. All of this very public slagging off doesn’t suggest that possibility is on the table.

 

Although it could be seen as a positive. Maybe NUFC have seen the PL’s case and/or disclosure and it contains something very detrimental for the PL (but not quite enough to win CAT or arbitration). By trying to force the PL into a corner, they may reluctantly fold and make a deal.

 

It now seems the only way we’ll get this takeover is to back the PL into a corner they don’t want to be in. It’s a risky game, because the PL don’t have any obligation whatsoever to make arbitration public. This absolutely needs government involvement to force the PL, or a public CAT case (although that’ll probably take too long to ever happen).

 

Do I feel slightly more optimistic it may happen? Yes. Would I bet on it happening? No.

[Scoot]

3 minutes ago, Thumbheed said:

 

This latest move seems quite incisive, imo. I'm actually quite buoyed by the latest developments. 

 

I just don't see how it's possible for the PL to demonstrate they're looking after the interests of the fans whilst rejecting their calls for a public hearing, which as @Jackie Broon has said plays right into the hands of the people who are looking to establish independent regulation. 

 

Could this not be to indirectly put pressure on the judge in the CAT case to not agree to the PL''s request to have the CAT case heard privately?