Takeover (Covid-19/20)

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Bit behind on all this due to work lately. So what’s the main reason for why folk seem to think this is going through then?
 
Geordieginola said:
Nope. Your wrong again.
Click to expand...


Unfortunately I don't understand all this companies house nonsense, but we've got to get on with it. Look if there's one thing I've always said its that we've got to show a certain resilience and unfortunately you haven't done that
 
Geordieginola said:
Nope. Your wrong again.
Click to expand...

Not at all. The vendor purchase loan, the purpose of the charge, includes financial penalties obtained from the assets of PCP, in the event that they withdraw/ fail to complete.

Given that St James Holdings are in law, the owners of NUFC and that is the only property it owns, then a failure to complete the sale due to withdrawal, is a trigger event to obtain assets of circa £17 million from PCP Capital Holdings.
 
captain wrong said:
Unfortunately I don't understand all this companies house nonsense, but we've got to get on with it. Look if there's one thing I've always said its that we've got to show a certain resilience and unfortunately you haven't done that
Click to expand...
I have. This started in March. We are nearly 1 year down the road and it’s not happened. There’s resilience and there’s blind faith!
 
Sheikh_of_Araby said:
Not at all. The vendor purchase loan, the purpose of the charge, includes financial penalties obtained from the assets of PCP, in the event that they withdraw/ fail to complete.

Given that St James Holdings are in law, the owners of NUFC and that is the only property it owns, then a failure to complete the sale due to withdrawal, is a trigger event to obtain assets of circa £17 million from PCP Capital Holdings.
Click to expand...
Jesus Christ..... The legal charge was drafted WHEN they thought it was going to sail through and they thought at the time it was a formality from the PL angle. That all changed but the charge remained.

PIF pulled out because they couldn’t get it passed and thus the charge comes into force. Or if we are led to believe PIF have NOT pulled out but have said to MA you theoretically have 17m to get this deal done. Knock yourself out pal.

Either way PIF have either lost out on 17m (chicken feed to them) or they get the club.
 
Geordieginola said:
Jesus Christ..... The legal charge was drafted WHEN they thought it was going to sail through and they thought at the time it was a formality from the PL angle. That all changed but the charge remained.

PIF pulled out because they couldn’t get it passed and thus the charge comes into force. Or if we are led to believe PIF have NOT pulled out but have said to MA you theoretically have 17m to get this deal done. Knock yourself out pal.

Either way PIF have either lost out on 17m (chicken feed to them) or they get the club.
Click to expand...

The charge was drafted in April last year when they reportedly received assurances that all was well. Staveley's words.

Now, we have no idea who put up the £17 million. What is clear is that the charge is against Staveley's assets. Not PIF's. Not the Reubens. If Staveley had received assurances from the PL that everything would go through and agreed to that charge against her own assets, and she has now had to pay that, because of PL conduct, you could argue misrepresentation giving her a case to sue the PL for financial loss.

That appears to be the purpose of that charge. To ensure thst the deal was completed. The only legal case is NUFC's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flash
Sheikh_of_Araby said:
The charge was drafted in April last year when they reportedly received assurances that all was well. Staveley's words.

Now, we have no idea who put up the £17 million. What is clear is that the charge is against Staveley's assets. Not PIF's. Not the Reubens. If Staveley had received assurances from the PL that everything would go through and agreed to that charge against her own assets, and she has now had to pay that, because of PL conduct, you could argue misrepresentation giving her a case to sue the PL for financial loss.

That appears to be the purpose of that charge. To ensure thst the deal was completed. The only legal case is NUFC's.
Click to expand...
Your last paragraph is right and probably was at the request of Ashley. To ensure he wasn’t being pissed about.

Fact is and still remains is that the charge or the recent filings have no impact on the takeover. It just proves a company exists. Nothing more and nothing less.

The released statements from the government and the timing of them is quite intriguing mind. That they cannot release information because of sensitive information and relations with saudi.

Ive actually got a feeling that the arbitration will fall
In favour for the O and D test to be passed.

Simple question! PIF pulled out but the PL did not actually block the deal. So if arbitration wins then the takeover resumes at the point where it was left off?

Meaning as soon as Arbitration result comes through it won’t take long at all, possibly days for things to be concluded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sheikh_of_Araby
Geordieginola said:
Your last paragraph is right and probably was at the request of Ashley. To ensure he wasn’t being pissed about.

Fact is and still remains is that the charge or the recent filings have no impact on the takeover. It just proves a company exists. Nothing more and nothing less.

The released statements from the government and the timing of them is quite intriguing mind. That they cannot release information because of sensitive information and relations with saudi.

Ive actually got a feeling that the arbitration will fall
In favour for the O and D test to be passed.

Simple question! PIF pulled out but the PL did not actually block the deal. So if arbitration wins then the takeover resumes at the point where it was left off?

Meaning as soon as Arbitration result comes through it won’t take long at all, possibly days for things to be concluded.
Click to expand...

Are we 100% convinced PIF pulled out or do you think it was a bluff? I suspect they may have stepped into the background knowing Ashley would take the PL to court.

Everything points to a positive outcome. I personally think the PL are ****ed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cronemeister
Sheikh_of_Araby said:
Are we 100% convinced PIF pulled out or do you think it was a bluff? I suspect they may have stepped into the background knowing Ashley would take the PL to court.

Everything points to a positive outcome. I personally think the PL are ****ed.
Click to expand...
They did release a statement to the effect that they pulled out because of economic reasons which you can take with a pinch of salt because we all know why they pulled out and we also know what happened afterwards. So it was just a polite way of stepping back.

I have to say them do seem extremely professional mind.

I would just love to know how long the Arbitration takes. All cards are now on the table and every man and his dog knows it should fall in favour of MA so how long do the PL drag it out or can they do that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: magpie290761 and Sheikh_of_Araby
captain wrong said:
You must log in or register to see images


You must log in or register to see media
Click to expand...
Can’t see anything on who this is. So here’s my spin on it. SB is head coach. And from what people say he’s actually a good coach. But not a manager.

So leave him to do the coaching and get a manager in to do the rest?

Or could it be a director of football?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back