Jump to content
Newcastle-Online

PIF and RB Sports & Media - Darren Eales to step down from CEO after being diagnosed with blood cancer.

Yorkie

by Yorkie
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Jack27

Jack27

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

Can’t access at work, anything particularly interesting or important in there ?

We’re fine, budget of around 60-80m in the summer, still looking for site for new training ground

Link to post
Share on other sites
SUPERTOON

SUPERTOON

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

We’re fine, budget of around 60-80m in the summer, still looking for site for new training ground

Would assume that would increase depending on sponsors and where we finish in the table.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Manxst

Manxst

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

Can’t access at work, anything particularly interesting or important in there ?

“Steve Bruce, who left his position as head coach in October 2021, received a pay-off of around £8m”

Link to post
Share on other sites
Scoot

Scoot

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

We’re fine, budget of around 60-80m in the summer, still looking for site for new training ground

 

Plus, possible Champions league football...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Joey47

Joey47

Posted
Posted
On 30/03/2023 at 21:56, RodneyCisse said:

He’s like a proper bairn 

 

 

 

Anyone else wonder if this whole thing is just a part of the sportswashing process? As soon as the fans (who are desperate for new ownership) are pitted against the PL or other powers that be, that's when the fans start arguing the case for why Qatar or whoever should be allowed to own a football club. Same happened when it was NUFC fans vs the PL. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
r0cafella

r0cafella

Posted
Posted

Well, the funny thing about the whole saga is the grounds people were pleading for them to block this on (PIF Being apart of the state) wasn’t against any rules. It was the piracy issue as everyone knows but unfortunately the PL thrust itself into the midst of a geopolitical issue directly against the interests of the British state. 
 

It’s probably a factor as to why the Govt want to regulate the premier league now (the UK Govt couldn’t care less about the super league). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
r0cafella

r0cafella

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

Saudis banning BeIN again just seems like a totally unnecessary and risky thing to do mind 

 

 

 

Fortunately for us what happens there doesn’t matter at premier league level (it might do at Uefa level though). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Whitley mag

Whitley mag

Posted
Posted (edited)

Nothing we didn’t already know, Crafton must be even more upset after we beat the Mancs at weekend.

 

I wonder if any of these journalists will invest as much time investigating the cloak and dagger interference from other clubs to prevent a legitimate takeover in the first place.

 

Course they won’t they’re fucking obsessed with hating the Saudis and NUFC.

 

 

Edited by Whitley mag

Link to post
Share on other sites
Keegans Export

Keegans Export

Posted
Posted (edited)
Quote

They claim the Premier League received advice that the continuing legal disputes over who would really control Newcastle — the PIF or the state — could require another 18 months of battle even from October 2021, at a cost of further millions to the league, and by now, there was less confidence at the Premier League, given all the circumstances, that it would actually win the case.

Quote

Additionally, it was felt by the league board that the matter of piracy — which would have been a disqualifying factor in the event the state was found to be the ultimate controlling party — would have felt historical by the point at which the legal battle over control was complete.

 

These are, ultimately, the most relevant parts of the article. 

 

Everything else we already knew - that PIF/KSA are intertwined but in a complex fashion (legally speaking), that the UK Government didn't want KSA to turn off the tap and stop that steady flow of cash, that the PL were only really bothered about piracy and didn't ultimately have the heart (or possibly the cash) for a protracted legal fight and that the other clubs arguing against the deal were doing so purely from self-interest.

 

I don't know exactly how it would work but I imagine stopping a takeover taking place would be considerably more straightforward than removing a sitting ownership from a club, especially when the links between the "official" ownership and the alleged "shadow" ownership are so murky. The Abramovic thing was inevitable (and easier for the PL) because he was sanctioned by the Government and the PL were just towing the line, rather than leading the charge as they would be in a case against PIF/KSA/MBS.

 

 

Edited by Keegans Export

Link to post
Share on other sites
r0cafella

r0cafella

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

 

These are, ultimately, the most relevant parts of the article. 

 

Everything else we already knew - that PIF/KSA are intertwined but in a complex fashion (legally speaking), that the UK Government didn't want KSA to turn off the tap and stop that steady flow of cash, that the PL were only really bothered about piracy and didn't ultimately have the heart (or possibly the cash) for a protracted legal fight and that the other clubs arguing against the deal were doing so purely from self-interest.

 

I don't know exactly how it would work but I imagine stopping a takeover taking place would be considerably more straightforward than removing a sitting ownership from a club, especially when the links between the "official" ownership and the alleged "shadow" ownership are so murky. The Abramovic thing was inevitable (and easier for the PL) because he was sanctioned by the Government and the PL were just towing the line, rather than leading the charge as they would be in a case against PIF/KSA/MBS.

 

 

 

Precisely, the premier league have no power whatsoever to change ownership of a private business. The remedy would be to eject us from the league. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stifler

Stifler

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

 

These are, ultimately, the most relevant parts of the article. 

 

Everything else we already knew - that PIF/KSA are intertwined but in a complex fashion (legally speaking), that the UK Government didn't want KSA to turn off the tap and stop that steady flow of cash, that the PL were only really bothered about piracy and didn't ultimately have the heart (or possibly the cash) for a protracted legal fight and that the other clubs arguing against the deal were doing so purely from self-interest.

 

I don't know exactly how it would work but I imagine stopping a takeover taking place would be considerably more straightforward than removing a sitting ownership from a club, especially when the links between the "official" ownership and the alleged "shadow" ownership are so murky. The Abramovic thing was inevitable (and easier for the PL) because he was sanctioned by the Government and the PL were just towing the line, rather than leading the charge as they would be in a case against PIF/KSA/MBS.

 

 

 

Aye the Abramovic thing only happened because legally any company of his had to cease running. Chelsea themselves were given an expedition to some extent so that they could be sold. Other businesses of his in the U.K. folded.

The Premier League were not arsed until the sanctions took place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...