the gunslinger 3,366 Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 interesting to note he feels a cva was possible if whyte wasn't involved. this was very much tbk and Brian Kennedy's feeling. makes you wonder why green didn't get a cva. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 I was of the view that King was on record as saying he would hand back anything he could successfully recover from the initial £20m. I was not of the view that this was to be in return for having a controlling interest. He never said a controlling interest in the article above. He said a place on the board. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lenzEK 0 Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 He never said a controlling interest in the article above. He said a place on the board. Which would not seem like an unreasonable request if he was in a position to hand over a significant proportion of his original investment. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchorman 0 Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 interesting to note he feels a cva was possible if whyte wasn't involved. this was very much tbk and Brian Kennedy's feeling. makes you wonder why green didn't get a cva. It doesn't make me wonder. Dave King "thought a CVA was possible". Charles Green also "thought a CVA was possible". HMRC were not to be trusted to agree to anything as CG found out and by the time CG tried to negotiate with them Whyte had done so much damage the rest is history. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 interesting to note he feels a cva was possible if whyte wasn't involved. this was very much tbk and Brian Kennedy's feeling. makes you wonder why green didn't get a cva. Because Mr King is wrong. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovanAllan 0 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Which would not seem like an unreasonable request if he was in a position to hand over a significant proportion of his original investment. You think King would be happy with just a place on the board this time, long term he's looking to gain control and that should be fought tooth and nail. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 It doesn't make me wonder. Dave King "thought a CVA was possible". Charles Green also "thought a CVA was possible". HMRC were not to be trusted to agree to anything as CG found out and by the time CG tried to negotiate with them Whyte had done so much damage the rest is history. no king though one was possible without whyte. we didn't get one. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovanAllan 0 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 no king though one was possible without whyte. we didn't get one. Your trolling again, it has become clear HMRC had no intention of accepting a CVA from anyone. King is wrong to claim otherwise. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EDGE 0 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Allan is correct here. HMRC will only accept CVA's in certain circumstances, Tax avoidance then Tax evasion is not the criteria that endear you to HMRC's sympathetic side. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Because Mr King is wrong. or he is right and hmrc didnt believe whyte was gone. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.