Jump to content

PIF and RB Sports & Media


Yorkie

Recommended Posts

Amnesty International have asked the Premier League to re-examine assurances made by Newcastle United’s ownership that the Saudi Arabian state will not be in control of the club.

 

The request follows the publication of court documents in the United States this week, which suggests a closer relationship between the Saudi state and the Public Investment Fund (PIF), who own 80 per cent of Newcastle, than had previously been stated.

 

The Premier League approved the takeover in October 2021 only after receiving “legally-binding assurances” that PIF was a separate entity to the state. They claimed the deal had been delayed by 18 months due to the separation issue.

 

However, that level of separation has been questioned due to a brief filed in a court case between the PGA Tour and PIF-owned LIV Golf.

In that, PIF describe themselves as “a sovereign instrumentality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” and Al Rumayyan as “a sitting minister of the Saudi government”.

“It was always stretching credulity to breaking point to imagine that the Saudi state wasn’t directing the buyout of Newcastle with the ultimate aim of using the club as a component in its wider sportswashing efforts,” Peter Frankental, Amnesty UK’s economic affairs director, said.

 

“There’s an unmistakable irony in the sovereign wealth fund declaration emerging in a dispute about another arm of Saudi Arabia’s growing sports empire, but the simple fact is that Saudi sportswashing is affecting numerous sports and governing bodies need to respond to it far more effectively.

 

“The Premier League will surely need to re-examine the assurances made about the non-involvement of the Saudi authorities in the Newcastle deal, not least as there’s still a Qatari bid for Manchester United currently on the table.”

 

Premier League chief executive Richard Masters told the BBC after the takeover that if evidence of state involvement was discovered, “we can remove the consortium as owners of the club”.

The Premier League declined to comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To add to that, it's a case of semantics.

 

YAR was a minister and the chairman of PIF when the takeover was approved by the PL. In short, they'll have wanted assurance that he'll only be acting in his capacity as the chairman of PIF and not as a KSA minister, in the day-to-day running of NUFC. 

 

The whole reason that is nonsense is because PIF is quite blatantly an instrument of KSA, but this has changed nothing regarding the relationship between PIF and NUFC. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

It's just noise. 

 

PIF always has been an instrument of KSA, this isn't news. The Premier League know this, unfortunately they just don't care.

Fortunately don’t you mean?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the statement made about separation when this went through was always bullshit and wouldn't stand up to any scrutiny. 

 

However it seems the Saudi's and premier League are on the same page now and would be shocked if the PL had the gumption to go back on their decision. It's not really in their interest to.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, bowlingcrofty said:

Do Amnesty genuinely think PIF are stupid enough to tell the PL that they’re separate and then stroll to America a year later and say they’re not separate, without being totally watertight on both arguments. :lol: 

 

Otherwise known as the Schrödinger's CAT argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, bowlingcrofty said:

Do Amnesty genuinely think PIF are stupid enough to tell the PL that they’re separate and then stroll to America a year later and say they’re not separate, without being totally watertight on both arguments. :lol: 

Meanwhile Amnesty seem to be silent on on other issues!

 

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/saudi-uk-ministers-agree-study-combat-air-co-operation-saudi-agency-2023-03-01/

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Mattoon said:

I'm pretty sure they signed legally binding documentation in the wording of the state would not be involved in running NUFC, not that they were a separate entity.

I think that's probably it.

 

As long as the decisions are being made by YAR, Staveley etc. not by a third party (someone not listed as a Director) I don't think there'll be an issue.

 

Plus, as The Prophet says, the PL never objected to the takeover on moral grounds, it was purely piracy. The "separation" issue being settled just meant neither side had to admit it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mattoon said:

I'm pretty sure they signed legally binding documentation in the wording of the state would not be involved in running NUFC, not that they were a separate entity.

 

Aye, sick of banging this drum now [emoji38]

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, The Prophet said:

It doesn't really change anything. The PL knew he was a minister of KSA when PIF bought the club.

 

As long as he's acting in his capacity as PIF Chairman in the day to day running of the club, it proves nothing.


Correct. Basically the entire board of PIF is government ministers, and the government appoints directors when there’s a vacancy. That’s all long-known public information. 

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
×
×
  • Create New...