buster. 4,808 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) The other question I'd like to know the answer to is: by what mechanism has MA garnered support from the share holders who have sided with him so far? Stating the obvious I know, but if we could somehow uncover these dodgy connections it would spell the end for all involved. Going back to the beginning of what we know, why would greedy low life sp.ivs handover half the retail rights with control over finance and the stadium renaming rights for a pound ? Why would Llambias be sent up to help Green sell a 'potential deal' that would bring in 'lots of money' when the deal had already been done for a pound coin between Ashley and the Green 'consortium' ? Why would Stockbridge sign off on KBA invoices (Llambias involved in Keith Bishop PR) for services unknown back in December 2012 ? Edited January 28, 2015 by buster. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 The other question I'd like to know the answer to is: by what mechanism has MA garnered support from the share holders who have sided with him so far? Does he stealth-own them through some subsidiary? (In which case the SFA would be after him) Do they benefit from onerous contracts of their own that MA's placemen will maintain for them? (Which would be a dereliction of fiduciary responsibility) Basically, IMO, there is no way MA is working with the best interests of RIFC in mind, and any shareholder that votes to maintain the status quo at an EGM must be dodgy in some way. Stating the obvious I know, but if we could somehow uncover these dodgy connections it would spell the end for all involved. It would be nice - but nigh on impossible, I'd wager. Let's take a purely theoretical scenario. Company A, let's call it FCB Ltd for the sake of argument, gives a juicy contract to company B, let's call it FCB Pals Ltd for the sake of argument. FCB Pals Ltd in turn gives nice little earners to Companies C and D, let's call them FCB Lapdogs Ltd and FCB Puppets Ltd for the sake of argument, who in turn each give a Big Brucey Bonus to Mr Stephen Pivs - Mr S.Pivs being the director of a, oh I don't know, a sports club for the sake of argument. Good luck proving that one in court. 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.