Jump to content

 

 

SPL share agreement - Rumor!


Recommended Posts

Do you know who the head honcho at BT is?

 

The Chief Executive of BT Vision is Marc Watson. Ian Livingston (a non exec at Celtic) is CEO of BT.

 

i think to suggest that a subsidiary of BT can be co-erced into wasting shareholders money because of their CEOs non exec role at the piggery is a bit paranoid. If he does then he could easily end up in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chief Executive of BT Vision is Marc Watson. Ian Livingston (a non exec at Celtic) is CEO of BT.

 

i think to suggest that a subsidiary of BT can be co-erced into wasting shareholders money because of their CEOs non exec role at the piggery is a bit paranoid. If he does then he could easily end up in court.

 

Going by the other tentacles Scum FC has spread in within the authorities and media, you do get an idea how they might influence upcoming TV deals for the "SPL" and them nonetheless.

 

Have a look

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chief Executive of BT Vision is Marc Watson. Ian Livingston (a non exec at Celtic) is CEO of BT.

 

i think to suggest that a subsidiary of BT can be co-erced into wasting shareholders money because of their CEOs non exec role at the piggery is a bit paranoid. If he does then he could easily end up in court.

 

I find that thinking rather naive so say the least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So just so I get this right, people think that the CEO of BT Plc is going to influence the CEO (Daniel Marks) and CE (Marc Watson)of BT Vision (UK) Ltd into paying an inflated price for the SPL contract because of his role as a non-Exec on Celtic's board? And you think that the shareholders and board members of BT Vision (UK) Ltd are going to allow that?

 

As far as I can see Ian Livingston has no role in BT VIsion (UK) Ltd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a word yes, it wouldn't surprise me in the least from them.

 

Personally I highly doubt it. If challenged it could cost him his job. He has a fiduciary duty to operate in the best interests of his company's shareholders - paying an inflated price to put money into Celtic's hands would be contrary to that and could see him in court. It also could personally impact upon his own bonus, which I doubt he would put in danger either.

 

Much as though it COULD happen, it is more than unlikely to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.