KSA are making amends in respect of piracy. They have closed beoutq and introduced legislation to comply with TRIPS. They are allowing BEin to broadcast again and ties between KSA and Qatar are restored. It makes commercial sense to have three of the wealthiest nations on earth onside, rather than off. especially KSA, who eclipse the others. If it is money then KSA have an unlimited supply.
Seperate point, but I really miss Donald Trump... The news has been dull without him. It's just not the same.. Comedy gold he was.
I still can’t get it around my head that KSA can be classified as a director. KSA cannot in itself do anything because it doesn’t have a voice, literally. By KSA that would ultimately mean MBS. And that’s completely different. Has he personally been implicit in illegal streaming and IP. Nope. As for separation that imho is clear as day. PIF and KSA are separate legally. PIF and MBA are separate legally.
It’s basically a case from the PL argument “making the shoe fit”. Working backwards from the desired outcome you want and reverse jumping hoops to the point of ah this is where it gets sticky. I think it’s all engineered to fit a bigger purpose. If it was Man Utd. It would have gone through no questions.
KSA cannot be a director. States cannot be directors. The PL knows that. It would be an automatic fail. KSA linked with piracy and so by relationship, PIF and their named directors. MBS would be included and the circle is complete. That is why separation is key. PIF legally separate then MBS and KSA including piracy are irrelevant. The PL are trying to create symbiosis so that they can fail PIF. Why? Because of pressure from commercial partners and six clubs. That is abreach of competition law. Arbitration is set to decide. Michael Beloff QC has already gave his opinion to Bird and Bird that KSA can be classed as a director due to their level of control. Lords Dyson and Neuberger are interestingly both pro Saudi.
He is the expert so I cannot really question him. But the argument is that they cannot be because of the legal separation. If that is proven in arbitration then yes, he is wrong
I also cannot fathom how he can give that opinion to Bird and Bird when he is meant to be chairing the arbitration! Surely he’s giving an opinion on something to one side of the case and then ruling on his own advice? That’s just bonkers?
He gave the opinion before appointed. He also failed to disclose to Denton's (NUFC's lawyers) that he had contacted Bird and Bird and gave opinions on the case. NUFC tried to get him removed and failed. That being said though, Beloff has only seen one side of the evidence and when presented with NUFC's case, he may change his opinion. If he sticks to his opinion then I would surmise that gives NUFC grounds to challenge the decision based on judicial bias. It won't matter though. It is as clear as mud and the panel will rule in NUFC's favour.
I like your confidence. I totally hope it does fall that way. The PL need putting in their place for the good of the football pyramid. On a side note they are still yet to punish the big six for ESL.
When NUFC wins it will have massive implications. Regulation of the game will become even more real. The PL and the 6 clubs have too much influence. They satisfy the definition of a cartel and should be punished accordingly. Should the anti competition case go ahead and NUFC wins then expect the Competition and Mergers Authority ( CMA) to get involved. If they do and find wrongdoing, Richard Masters, Gary Hoffman and executives within the big six could be in very serious trouble. THAT is why the PL are trying to get the CAT case thrown out.
They are courting with potential disaster. CMA sanctions can equate to prison and disqualification from holding director positions as well as fines of 10% of net profit. If CAT refuse to throw the case out I can guarantee that a settlement will be reached
Let the takeover happen and Newcastle guaranteed CL for 5 years regardless of league position,seems fair to me.
