?s=21
More evidence for De Marco and co to show our takeover was subjected to far stricter scrutiny than any previous.
I would have thought the government would have pushed for them to accept the bid. Premier league went to them....
I think they would, but the point is why did they feel they had to go to them. It’s meant to be a confidential process and if scrutiny of our takeover has been shown to be different to others, it all plays into the narrative that we have been treat differently.
I expect to tell them that they are going to reject the bid and wanted to explain why (Piracy) or get more info on the buyers. Also we probably have been treated differently but I can't think of any club being bought while at the same time running an illegal sports stations that steals games.
I'm still confused by this. Is it PIF that are illegally streaming games? Is this still going on?
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2020/6/16/explainer-the-piracy-case-against-saudis-beoutq-channel
Think we all know if the Saudis wanted to shut it down they could.
Probably could have but its still got nothing to do with PIF. Separate legal entity which is what do marco is trying to prove.
I suppose its a bit like having a limited company over here.
I am the sole director and shareholder of my company, i earn its money, i spend it, i have complete control over the business, its direction and its finances.
But legally, its separate to me.
That's where a problem arises though surely. As the owners and directors test has to find the parties who are have control over said company. With PIF describing themselves as the sovereign wealth fund of the state then the state surely has control over PIF. So it doesn't really matter if it's a separate legal entity in itself in that respect.
And there he is! Laugh a minute this lad.
Why is he wrong here though?
Because, as far as I understand it, the legal position can only be a matter of the law of the country where they are based. It has been reported that the highest legal authority in Saudi Arabia has determined that PIF are legally autonomous and therefore they are legally autonomous from the state.
Whilst it may seem like common sense that the state has control over its sovereign wealth fund, it's the law that matters.
If the PL are so sure of their position, why have they refused to make a formal decision on that basis?
Ultimately though, I think the PL have probably won with their tactic of delaying until it goes away. Even when we win the arbitration case, I doubt it will go ahead unless and until our survival is secured, and that seems very distant and precarious.