Because Ben Jacobs says so? Strange how J P Morgan are also claiming that they were going to fund it. https://www.nationalworld.com/sport...at-is-it-worth-and-who-is-ed-woodward-3206073
Of course it is, but to suggest there's no link at all and it's completely seperate is fanciful. Proving its seperate is different to saying it
Just be prepared that this doesn't happen and hope that it does. This notion than Jacobs and the other journalists are just making thing up because they're anti takeover is just weird. They just have information that's positive and negative and are reporting it.
It's not fanciful. It's a legal fact with a wealth of evidence and opinion to corroborate. People look at MBS and say - wealth fund of KSA. He is defacto ruler, chairman of PIF so he must control it. That's like saying the Queen controls the economy for her own ends. MBS is a figurehead. It is the Governor and Vice President who make the day to day investment and management decisions. The PIF is a sovereign wealth fund created by Royal decree that over the years has been given autonomy to remove state interference. There is an argument, put forward by some less than impartial academics suggesting that MBS has tried to increase control for his own ends. The research of those academics was funded by the state of Qatar. Now, the reason for separation is due to IP theft. But for the PL to correctly link that, there needs to be a conviction in a UK or foreign court for offences or conduct that are criminal acts in UK law. No criminal conviction exists so it is a moot point. KSA and PIF are ultimately separate. The PL know they are. They know they have no valid grounds to block the deal and chickens are about to come home to roost hence their continued requests to delay. Now in relation to the CAT case - There's an opinion written by a well respected competition law journalist. He has pretty much hinted that it is likely an open and shut case. The BEin letter is enough to incriminate the PL. Ben Jacobs (i like him but) he used to work for BEin is portraying a line that is simply incorrect.
MBS is the crown Prince of Saudi Arabia and the money is from a fund provided by the state. Mbs Is the chairman of PIF. There's some good grounds to argue there's a connection. Just because the Saudis say its seperate along with one of the mps of our country doesn't mean they can prove it. I'm not saying it's not more complicated, but to suggest there's no link and that it's an open and shut case is quite clearly fanciful. We're over a 1 year in and weeks away from an arbitration case. I'm informed by NUFC's own QC that arbitration is a last resort because you never know which way that will go.. Why is that? Because BOTH sides have a strong case.
Nufc fans have ignored every ref flag and twisted every single negative into an argument to suit their preferred belief. They even argued that nufc lost the last case in purpose when they wanted beloff removed.... They lost! They also lost in the sttempt to get the details in the public.
There is nothing fanciful about it. NUFC's QC's for the arbitration are Shaheed Fatima - an expert on Middle Eastern constitutional law and Nick De Marco an expert on PL regulatory law. Given their standing, they don't take cases on based on a punt. Shaheed Fatima in particular is interesting. She is regarded as somewhat of a world leading expert on legal matters in the middle east. If there was no case she would decline to act. It really is that simple.
Because the PL have decided that their commercial partners take precedent. There is no valid legal basis for stopping the takeover. The PL knows it hence their repeated delaying tactics. If CAT allows the competition case to go ahead the PL will settle out of court.
