Jump to content

PIF, PCP, and RB Sports & Media


Yorkie

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, SAK said:

I didn’t read anywhere that having the same chairman was blocked, lots of senior managers have directorships across different companies?

 

 

 The Guardian has it down as the clubs voting to "temporarily ban commercial arrangements that involve pre-existing business relationships". 

 

As for the point about senior managers having directorship over a number of companies, well I assume the ban would include them too, but not preexisting commercial arrangements, conveniently enough.

 

Suppose the bottom line is though that this won't stand up to any sort of scrutiny anyway.  

 

 

Edited by Thumbheed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate that inference that it must be sound because we're the only ones that voted against it from that sky prick

How many clubs would have voted against Abramovich and Man City given the chance? 19 probably.

"Treason doth ne'er prosper, what's the reason, for if all prosper, none dare call it treason"

 

Its an absolute disgrace, makes a mockery of sport and business but because it suits them, that's fine. Maybe 18 clubs can go after Chelsea and Man City next, I mean why not? if we all agree on a way to stuff them up its sound right. "That bloke that qualified for the 100m final with record times can begrudingly participate in the final but isn't allowed to run as fast as the medal posistions"

 

 

 

Edited by Wolfcastle

Link to post
Share on other sites

What’s the point of football now if new owners can’t invest in their business to make that business more successful. In order to sign these bigger commercial deals in the future, you have to spend money to get better players and become successful on the pitch. You can’t get better without spending shit loads of money and no matter how morally corrupt football is now, you can’t just draw a line in the sand and be done with it - that only benefits the richest and top teams and closes off any competition 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheer fear tinged with wide eyed jealousy ensures irrational decisions come to the fore. Clubs outside the ‘Big 6’ aren’t thinking straight at all with regards to their own futures. The ‘Big 6’ aren’t thinking straight to ensure they act legally. It’s a shambles and will come crashing down if we decide to pursue yet more legal action. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Wolfcastle said:

 

They've categorically stated it "isn't a knee jerk reaction to the Newcastle takeover",  I'm happy to take their vested interest word for it and put this all down as the biggest coincidence of all time.


So then they exclude us from a meeting. I hope they push for this as they will be taking to the cleaners in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pokerprince2004 said:

 

Any existing deals in place are fine and its only new sponsors from today that arent allowed. Its absolute bollocks and obviously just a way to stop us getting money. It was alright for City to be sponsored by Etihad, Arsenal to be sponsored by Emirates, Leicester with King Power, Palace etc etc but when NUFC might get cash an emergency meeting is called and new law put in place to block it :lol:  

 

 

 

4 minute video on Sky this morning explaining it all

 

 

 

Any club who has already benefited from owner sponsorship should have been banned from voting.  They've already got the cash - increased their income to spend on players.  I hate the PL - it's just become like a club run by a select few, who bend and shape the rules to suit them.  Of course it's a knee jerk reaction - they had an emergency meeting so it's ridiculous to say otherwise.  I hope Newcastle contest this - has to be anti-competitive. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we not just call a mearing voting for the liquidation of Man Utd or something? Like if we get 19 votes can we just fold the club?

 

Honestly though, football is fucked, it's just not the sport it was 2 decades ago. It's all about excessive money and every team essentially has to be a gelactico to compete. The rest of the league need to hope the same thing happens to them, not try and hinder this, as it's the only way they'll ever win anything outside of dumb luck. 14 teams playing borderline aids football while the top 6 run away with everything got boring a long time ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, toontownman said:

They will find a work around. They all always do. Loop hole city.

Probably won’t be, but I’d love to see a strip with Aramco on it. My god what a fucking statement. We are Newcastle, we are the new “old” oil 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be funny if the separation issue that caused so much shit over the past 18 months allows the Saudi state to sponsor us "eh !! what !! not me gov, you proved we aren't linked"   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not going to post it all but love this:

 



“I’d never seen or heard anything like it in my life… it was incredible,” mused a person present. You get the idea: this wasn’t a standard shareholders’ meeting.

The reason for their incredulity was because they had listened to a verbal statement from Lee Charnley, Newcastle’s managing director and a man very much associated with the old Mike Ashley regime. He threatened legal action against not only the Premier League but also the executives in attendance if a vote was passed to block the club from making lucrative sponsorship deals. It also transpired Newcastle had sent a letter outlining their stance to the Premier League before the meeting but Charnley’s statement was the first other club executives had heard of it.

“Newcastle only sent the letter to the Premier League,” said a source. “Everyone has now seen the letter but nobody knew it existed before the meeting started. We found out from Lee’s statement.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

“They just didn’t turn up, except for Lee who sat there and read a statement like he was at a German wedding,” a source said.

“Poor old Lee, put in an impossible position like a puppet,” said another. “Absolutely unbelievable.”

 

That's a real "wish I'd been there" moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They more or less said "Newcastle can't just waltz in here and do what we've all been doing" without any hint of self reflection.

 

This is one aspect of the whole thing where it's pure hypocrisy, jealousy, and the chickens coming home to roost. This was wrong in 2003, not 18 years later when there's a bigger fish.

 

 

Edited by kisearch

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

The cheek of the other PL clubs whinging saying the new owners should have been there and voted it in too. :lol:

Also they like Lee, of course they do, because he is Ashley's puppet and they loved it when we were a club that didn't try 

 

I hope the PL legal team tell all the clubs they need to back down 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Kasper said:

 

That's a real "wish I'd been there" moment.

 

"He's only been doing that for several years already, daft cunts" would have been my response.

 

The utter lack of self-awareness they all hold judging by that article is bewildering. I particulary like the suggestion of putting a senior-ranking Man Utd officer in charge of a 'working group'. 

 

Let's forget that Man Utd wanted to leave this league in the mud just over six months ago...

 

 

Edited by Sima

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...