FloydianMag Posted May 16 Share Posted May 16 2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: Except the Tories don’t have public floggings on the statute books for doing those things - no matter how much some of them might want to. You can use it with a VPN https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1BV10M/ Face Time WhatsApp etc are no longer banned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McDog Posted May 16 Share Posted May 16 (edited) Now I can sleep at night, glad they reversed that ban. Edited May 16 by McDog Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted May 16 Share Posted May 16 Should ban face time here tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 FaceTime is banned in the UAE but it’s more to push you to use their services than anything else. WhatsApp isn’t banned. Google and Zoom all fine too as they have good relationships with the country. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 Apologies folks, didn’t realised that FaceTime was unbanned in KSA. Just the death penalty for being homosexual or renouncing the Islamic faith it is, then. But I guess you have to start somewhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 17 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said: Saudi Arabia prohibits encrypted phone calls - which is why FaceTime etc is banned. It’s a completely normal place … The U.K. has just passed a law to prohibit encryption for messaging, mean iMessage, Whattsapp, and other all face being banned unless they lose their encryption. All the tech giants are fighting against it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groundhog63 Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 4 minutes ago, Stifler said: The U.K. has just passed a law to prohibit encryption for messaging, mean iMessage, Whattsapp, and other all face being banned unless they lose their encryption. All the tech giants are fighting against it. Tbf if any country needs to spy on its punters they just need to buy into Israeli Pegasus software. Encryption no problemo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 43 minutes ago, Groundhog63 said: Tbf if any country needs to spy on its punters they just need to buy into Israeli Pegasus software. Encryption no problemo. Yeah but its use to gather evidence to use in a court of law would be illegal. The new rules just tries to take away encryption instead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Prontonise Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 Giving a government hands on private keys on encryption is seriously one of the most stupid things ever suggested. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 On 16/05/2024 at 12:51, TheBrownBottle said: That was my understanding- that every decision needs sign-off in Riyadh and takes some time to do so. It’s magnificently inefficient way of running a football club - you’d think that a permanent delegate at the club would make more sense. But it’s clear that Staveley and Reuben aren’t running the show. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-421 Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 (edited) Whilst that shows the situation at the time with the AG signing, and deals 'have to be agreed by the chairman', I doubt every deal, or even big deal will mean Staveley, et al have to fly to Riyadh to have it signed off/agreed by YAR. Edited May 17 by TK-421 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack27 Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 7 minutes ago, TK-421 said: Whilst that shows the situation at the time with the AG signing, and deals 'have to be agreed by the chairman', I doubt every deal, or even big deal will mean Staveley, et al have to fly to Riyadh to have it signed off/agreed by YAR. Because apparently fuck the environment if it does Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armchair Pundit Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 I see news in Italy is pushing that PIF are allegedly interested in Inter Milan and our 'takeover' could be under threat again. Link Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 4 minutes ago, Armchair Pundit said: I see news in Italy is pushing that PIF are allegedly interested in Inter Milan and our 'takeover' could be under threat again. Link Is this the 4th or 5th time this has been reported in Italy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 7 minutes ago, Armchair Pundit said: I see news in Italy is pushing that PIF are allegedly interested in Inter Milan and our 'takeover' could be under threat again. Link But we’re already taken over Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miggys First Goal Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 5 minutes ago, PauloGeordio said: But we’re already taken over Maybe they’ve been in a probation period and they haven’t passed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack27 Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 14 minutes ago, Armchair Pundit said: I see news in Italy is pushing that PIF are allegedly interested in Inter Milan and our 'takeover' could be under threat again. Link Charlie Bennett is worse than Burnsie/Sean Casey/NUFCWill in my eyes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groundhog63 Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 2 minutes ago, Miggys First Goal said: Maybe they’ve been in a probation period and they haven’t passed. Double secret probation Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegans Export Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 Always interested to hear what the Italian Press have got to say, will give that article my full attention. Perhaps it will update me on how Botman is getting on at Milan too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
huss9 Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 surely PIF can do some clever money laundering through a few companies and finally come to a third party sponsorship deal with someone. eg renaming the east stand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 9 minutes ago, huss9 said: surely PIF can do some clever money laundering through a few companies and finally come to a third party sponsorship deal with someone. eg renaming the east stand. Aramco East. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
huss9 Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 yeah, but they arent third party are they? dont have to rename the stadium, just £10m for a 3 year east stand sponshorship. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAK Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 7 minutes ago, huss9 said: surely PIF can do some clever money laundering through a few companies and finally come to a third party sponsorship deal with someone. eg renaming the east stand. I don’t know why they don’t get third parties who they have business relations with but don’t own to sponsor us. They must let out billions in contracts to unaffiliated companies. Bump up the contract to cover the sponsorship. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
huss9 Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 Just now, SAK said: I don’t know why they don’t get third parties who they have business relations with but don’t own to sponsor us. They must let out billions in contracts to unaffiliated companies. Bump up the contract to cover the sponsorship. exactly. what would fair market value be for a 3 year sponshorsip of a stand? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAK Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 1 minute ago, huss9 said: exactly. what would fair market value be for a 3 year sponshorsip of a stand? Fair market only comes in to it I think if it is a related party which I would take to mean an organisation that is significantly controlled by the same people. If it’s a third party who just has business dealings I don’t think it applies. Will let others more knowledge correct if wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now