First of all, it's a rumour.
Second, even if it is true, the fact that they would veto a trade is not meddling. It is not 'tying Feaster's hands.'
It's their money. The whole idea of a veto is that there is someone (Feaster) responsible for making decisions. However the owners retain the right to veto a deal if there is something they don't like about it. That is completely normal and does not undermine the authority of the person responsible.
|