Poll

Can the Saudi's get the deal 'over the line'?

Yes - and want it to.
No - but want it to.
Yes - and don't want them as NUFC Owners
No - and don't want the as NUFC Owners

Author Topic: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings  (Read 878852 times)

Stal, Cracked Ankles Bennet, ED209 and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Jackie Broon

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17100 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 06:42:43 PM »
It’s as unlinked as Man City’s ownership is to their government

They changed the rules after that

Doesn't matter, the test is ongoing, directors have to undergo it before the start of every season and can be disqualified at any time if the PL becomes aware of any disqualifying circumstances.

The immunity from disqualification from the old rules only applies to one very limited circumstance which is:

"the Disqualifying Event is a Conviction imposed between 19th August 2004 and 5 June 2009 for an offence which would not have led to disqualification as a Director under the Rules of the League as they applied during that period".

Offline Armchair Pundit

  • General Member
  • Energy Vampire
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17101 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 06:55:21 PM »
I know it's like most things in that they take as long as they take and a lot of the time that's fair enough, but I'd love to know what's actually causing the whole process that we find ourselves in to take so long. What does it take to get the main people involved around a table (albeit virtually) to get a resolution and the takeover sorted. What exactly are they waiting for? They've had months upon months and it just dribbles on while in the meantime the club goes further and further down the pan. With the people and amounts of money involved you'd think it could be prioritised to some degree, it's mental.
#PremierLeagueIsCorrupt

Online Shearergol

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17102 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 07:04:32 PM »
It’s as unlinked as Man City’s ownership is to their government

They changed the rules after that

Then citeh owners should be forced to sell. It states that the test is applied to every club every season.

They can't be forced to sell but they can be expelled from the league. Along with Chelsea.

Offline Dokko

  • TT
  • General Member
  • You can’t understand white without knowing black
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17103 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 07:04:36 PM »
Nearly a year.  :lol:

Burnley was what, 6 weeks.

Online Sean

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17104 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 07:10:47 PM »
?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.

Offline Rod

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17105 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 07:13:01 PM »
?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.

Online Shearergol

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17106 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 07:21:38 PM »
?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?

Offline InspectorCoarse

  • New Member
  • " What i don't understand is this " ...
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17107 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 07:25:35 PM »
?s=20

Offline Lazarus

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17108 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 07:27:50 PM »
?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.

The UK's legal framework that separates individual people from companies is very well established - in fact it goes back approx 150 years.

Im not familiar with Saudi Arabias version or whether its as 'robust' as ours but its possible that the difference between an individual and a company is not as clearly defined.

That being said, if it isnt, it hasnt stopped other investments in the UK.

Maybe Saudi Arabia will have to amend its company formation legislation to align with ours. Maybe not.

From a legal point of view, the whole deal is endlessly facinating for a million differnt reasons as im sure will be revealed in the years to come, regardless of the takeover happenning.

Offline Jackie Broon

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17109 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 07:38:02 PM »
?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.

Offline Whitley mag

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17110 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 08:34:35 PM »
 ?s=20

Offline Rod

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17111 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 09:37:15 PM »
?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?
You are obviously spoiling for a fight.  Was I wrong?

Online Shearergol

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17112 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 09:39:36 PM »
?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?
You are obviously spoiling for a fight.  Was I wrong?

I have no idea, that’s why I asked you?

Offline Slim

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17113 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 09:40:29 PM »

Offline LV

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17114 on: Wednesday 13 January 2021, 10:51:05 PM »
Glad we swerved that one then

Offline Rod

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17115 on: Thursday 14 January 2021, 12:44:07 AM »
?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?
You are obviously spoiling for a fight.  Was I wrong?

I have no idea, that’s why I asked you?
I am certainly "not in the know".  Sean knows nowt.  No one apart from the relevant parties know f all.  My point, and this is very important,  is that Sean only posts in the negative.  It gets on my nerves.  You're a canny poster, don't stoop to his standards.

Offline Ankles Bennett

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17116 on: Thursday 14 January 2021, 09:13:12 AM »
?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.
They probably went to the FCO to let them know that they were about to p*ss of the Saudi royal family by knocking back their bid to buy NUFC due to the KSA pirating EPL games in the MENA region.  They probably wanted to make sure it wasn't going to cause an international issue between the KSA and the UK government thyat might have a knock on effect on trade between the two countries.  All above board in my view and good practice by the EPL!!

Offline Ankles Bennett

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17117 on: Thursday 14 January 2021, 09:26:26 AM »
?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.

Exactly this.  The Saudi state could turn round after the takeover and dissolve PIF and take over control of all the enterprises PIF entered into including control of NUFC!

Online Manxst

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17118 on: Thursday 14 January 2021, 09:36:03 AM »
?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.

Exactly this.  The Saudi state could turn round after the takeover and dissolve PIF and take over control of all the enterprises PIF entered into including control of NUFC!

Lol. Righto. And you REALLY don’t think in that instance that the PL might have something to say, and invoke the yearly O&D Test again to throw the club out of the league?

Offline Broadsword

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17119 on: Thursday 14 January 2021, 10:22:19 AM »
?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.

Exactly this.  The Saudi state could turn round after the takeover and dissolve PIF and take over control of all the enterprises PIF entered into including control of NUFC!

Lol. Righto. And you REALLY don’t think in that instance that the PL might have something to say, and invoke the yearly O&D Test again to throw the club out of the league?

So Isn’t that why they are wanting to test the people who have the power to do that before the takeover happens, I.e MBS.

The real question is why won’t he take the test?

Offline LV

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17120 on: Thursday 14 January 2021, 10:24:45 AM »
Because he’s the de facto King of Saudi Arabia and honour and image are massively important out there. He’s not gonna take any test. No one can test a King or he looks weak. It’s an insult in fact.

Online Ben

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17121 on: Thursday 14 January 2021, 10:26:19 AM »
I'm pleased the Premier League has our best interests at heart

Offline Broadsword

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17122 on: Thursday 14 January 2021, 10:31:29 AM »
Because he’s the de facto King of Saudi Arabia and honour and image are massively important out there. He’s not gonna take any test. No one can test a King or he looks weak. It’s an insult in fact.

It’s not an exam, it’s a few boxes on a form. It would take an hour at best to do. The refusal to do so is the weird part.  If he were to buy it personally would he also refuse to take the test?

Offline AyeDubbleYoo

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17123 on: Thursday 14 January 2021, 10:35:12 AM »
Even admitting to needing to take the test would imply he's a controlling interest though, and that PIF are closer to the Saudi state than they want to admit. I think that's the main reason it's a non-starter.

Offline Broadsword

  • General Member
Re: Takeover Thread - NUFC confirm legal proceedings
« Reply #17124 on: Thursday 14 January 2021, 10:39:01 AM »
Even admitting to needing to take the test would imply he's a controlling interest though, and that PIF are closer to the Saudi state than they want to admit. I think that's the main reason it's a non-starter.

But if he takes the test and passes the problem goes away.  The independence thing then won’t matter.  Why won’t he do that?  Why is no one asking that question?  Why would he fail?