De Marco is gloating. Nick 1-0 Premier League. The arbitration judgement will be published in the public interest. The PL has also effectively just lost the right to have the CAT case heard privately due to the public interest test.The PL will be just a little sheepish now. The judgement will specifically highlight any wrongdoing or interference. I now expect some form of agreement. He is coming after them.
You're as bad a Roy. The PL simply couldn't give a ****. It's the equivalent of Matt Hancock. Utterly ****ing useless bloke, loses data, tests, regurgitates old speeches, abuses power - only lost his job on a technicality about social effing distancing! The PL is in the gutter, but it remains untouchable. No amount of public outrage is going to change their behaviour, ombudsman, governments, nothing works. One club, with its possibly made-up grievances, isn't going to make a jot of difference. The PL could stand there and say "we're not allowing Saudi investment because we hate dirty arabs", wouldn't make a lick of difference, wouldn't make a takeover happen. We've all got to get to grips with reality here. Ashley is still the worst salesman the world has ever known, with a desirable asset, a desperation to sell yet still nothing happens. No transfer budget, where the **** did Villa get £30m from? Watford have spent the same. But, similarly, nothing we do, say, makes any difference to Mike Ashley. I cannot let this club get to me anymore and so I'm done with it.
Roly forgets he spent months telling us this crap when we claimed arbitration was for change of ownership, but he was wrong.
No, I'm often wrong and freely admit it. I have no legal experience and often leap to wrong conclusions. Could be wrong again on this, but greater minds than mine are saying similar things.
Indeed we're both entitled to theorise mate and it's still in the balance. That's really the crux of this
See above. The findings and judgement of arbitration must be made public. In full. The publi interest test.
In the balance? That's where we disagree, with my reasons being as follows: - The PIF announcement of withdrawal from a year ago - Staveley's history of lining up deals without having buyers - Ashley being a pathological liar and serial **** - Good things simply never happening to Newcastle - Arbitration delay - Zero communication - Other buyers being available but not being able to strike a deal - PIF not setting up a separate entity to buy the club, something that's so incredibly easy it's laughable - Ashley not doing a deal with RB or AS for the 20% stake they're allegedly after - Ashley not doing some kind of deal for up to 49% and additional investment with PIF directly - The length of any given CAT case - The fact CAT is usually about compo and couldn't influence the PL O&D test regardless of result - The fact the buyers aren't the ones bringing the CAT case which then calls into question what, exactly, Ashley is arguing for
Public interest? Nobody ****ing cares, mate, aside from the 59 geordies who hopped on a bus to the PL offices. Sky report on footballers haircuts ahead of NUFC's situation, because most fans are ignorant thickos who can't see past their own club - and even then rarely have a ****ing clue what's going on with their own. They just want to get drunk, punch a horse and boo a football team then go home to get a new Pogba tattoo. Six clubs tried to leave the English league. They were fined about £3m each. To add some context, QPR were fined £40m for breaching financial rules by the EFL in 2014. The fine was halved, but what the actual **** are we doing here?! Football simply doesn't matter enough.
1. PIF - If they had disappeared then arbitration would be pointless. Legal separation of PIF-KSA is the SOLE issue to decide so that Rule A can be satisfied. Confirmed by the High Court. Rule A is the dispute - Is KSA a person with significant control that they should be a director? PL say yes. If PIF had withdrawn then arbitration is irrelevant. This is so fundamentally basic. No PIF - no arbitration. So why is it still due to happen? Shaheed Fatima would not be acting. She is an expert on Saudi law. 2. PZ Newco. The High Court judgement. Arbitration. PIF are still around. 3. Court documents prove that he is telling the truth this time. 4. Irrelevant. 5. Delays are part and parcel of legal action. 6. Communication is prohibited due to NDA. PIF, Staveley and RB cannot comment on proceedings of which they are not parties. If you need statements from them to provide evidence of ongoing takeover then you are barking up the wrong tree. Staveley is the broker/ public face. She has confirmed quite vocally that all remain committed. You don't need statements from PIF / RB to provide reassurance. Her Barclays case proved beyond a shadow of a doubt thst she is neither a chancer nor all talk.Ongoing legal action is proof enough that all parties remain. If you choose to ignore that evidence then that is your choice. 7. No evidence of this. 8. It would still be subject to the same argument - person with significant control. PIF control Sports Fund X and PIF controlled by KSA, so KSA control Sports Fund X argument would be raised. Not quite that easy. 9. RB Sports and Media. Holding company in place. Deal agreed hence the charge against assets of PCP/ Cabntervale. That charge is evidence of agreement with St James Holdings and the Reuben Brothers. All are linked to Rb Sports and Media, PZ Newco and NCUK limited. The link proves agreement of all. The High Court in Newcastle v PL confirmed that PZ Newco is owned by PIF and is the company created to facilitate the transfer of shares. 10. Subject to ODT. This applies to all directors irrespective of size of holding, and includes shadow directors. PIF could have a 1% share and would still be vetted. 11. Court delays - irrelevant. Blame the legal system at large. 12. CAT can influence ODT. They assess competition law, against which the ODT must comply. A legal fact. CAT has the power to order that Rule A is satisfied and order assessment under Rule F. Injunction for specific performance of obligation A is a remedy under s.47A Competition Act. 13. The buyers have no standing to bring a CAT case as they are not the party involved in arbitration. Only Mike Ashley can bring a claim.
Public interest test is one applied by Courts. It is irrelevant what Sky, BEin or the snakey six think. If a Court believes that it is in the public interest to have transparency and accountability to promote confidence in football governance then they will. It is a legal test.
I think the whole point of this acquisition is that they want it a part of their PIF Vision 2030 scheme so shrouding it in an investment vehicle would be pointless. As best I understand it, the 2030 thing is about rehabilitating their public image and also branching out from oil. But the fact this transaction has caused them so much headache and negative press makes me wonder why/if they're even still interested.
Yeah in the balance ie an arbitration panel will eventually decide unless an agreement is made or the buyers and/or Ashley give up. It's not long... A year is nothing when it comes to business. Just accept it's still possible... You or anyone else can say it's off, but you don't know its off.
If they are still interested, which the evidence leads me to believe, then they are the type of owners we want.
Ultimately Staveley is a fan that's exactly what you want on the board.. The fans turning on her are taking the bait from the worried journalists that dislike her simply because they see he responsibile for trying to make a club they don't like ruin their weekends.
