Barking up the wrong tree there Dave.
Tiger and 'comparisons'?
- Thread starter Jem
- Start date
Barking up the wrong tree there Dave.
Scotchegg
Level: James Constable
(280 Apps, 106 Gls)
How about directing that question to OxVox? After all, they have been keen to reassure us that they have been doing the investigative work on Tiger. And I know for a fact that OxVox had the information before I did which enabled the relevant enquiries to be made.
Maybe they could also comment on the proposed £2.4m debt for equity deal and the potential implications this has on the debt owed by the club? What would this move reduce the debt to? Who will this be owed to going forward? Has Darryl, as promised, written off any losses accrued on his watch?[/QUOTE]
You're very quick to accuse OxVox of not giving the answers to these questions, so why not put the information out there yourself and let the rest of us judge?
I am assuming that all the information you have is freely available, breeches no confidentialities and would not face legal challenges? If this is the case then simply provide that information.
You are clearly concerned about the future of the club but withhold information that we as fans need to know. That is a bizarre position and unfortunately could be seen as trying to put the point scoring between you and OxVox above the needs of the club.
So, why not put the information out in the public domain and allow others to judge you, OxVox, Tiger, DE and others accordingly.
Can you point us normal people to where such information is found?
And will you be making the same demand of OxVox to "show your workings"?
LondonRoader
Level: Andy Crosby
(122 Apps, 13 Gls)
How about directing that question to OxVox? After all, they have been keen to reassure us that they have been doing the investigative work on Tiger. And I know for a fact that OxVox had the information before I did which enabled the relevant enquiries to be made.
Maybe they could also comment on the proposed £2.4m debt for equity deal and the potential implications this has on the debt owed by the club? What would this move reduce the debt to? Who will this be owed to going forward? Has Darryl, as promised, written off any losses accrued on his watch?[/QUOTE]
Myles you must have your wires crossed, I was pointing another poster in your direction as he was asking where you got this info from.
Deleted member 222
Guest
Very odd that myles has all this information but isn’t so freely saying where he got it from. Surely you wouldn’t be breaking confidentiality info would you myles?
Scotchegg
Level: James Constable
(280 Apps, 106 Gls)
Firstly, it's not a demand. It is a request to share information that would help fans judge on our future. You are under no obligations to share anything, but it is bizarre that you are keeping something potentially so serious to yourself.
OxVox will of course face challenges but this forum also allows us to challenge the views of others, hence my post. Respond as you wish.
Nope. All public domain info. Which is all I've ever shared, despite what others will try and lead you to believe....
Colin B
Level: Dave Roberts
(176 Apps, 8 Gls)
Meaning what exactly?
arthurturner
Level: Callum O'Dowda
(106 Apps, 14 Gls)
Myles, if it's all in the public domain why are you seemingly unwilling to share it? At least give us some pointers as to where to look. Surely it's not a question of you saying to OxVox "you show me yours and I'll show you mine"? I don't know you, but from your posts over a period of time you come across as an intelligent and articulate man who I cannot believe would be so petty, particularly with information which may give clarity as to where the funding of the new owner is coming from; its nature and whether it allows him to fund the club as we would all wish.
OK. To satisfy those of you who think I may be withholding important information (and notwithstanding the massive irony there!):
Can OxVox explain the involvement of Supranee Piamphongsarn?
And I've already mentioned the debt-for-equity issue with some questions that immediately raises.
Can OxVox explain the involvement of Supranee Piamphongsarn?
And I've already mentioned the debt-for-equity issue with some questions that immediately raises.
Deleted member 142
Guest
How about you just say what you know, myles?
Anyone who didn’t know better would conclude that you’re more interested in seeing OxVox damaged than you are in helping Oxford United.
Anyone who didn’t know better would conclude that you’re more interested in seeing OxVox damaged than you are in helping Oxford United.
Wow. Just wow.
Back in October I posted a very lengthy piece highlighting many of the issues and concerns surrounding Tiger and his potential associates. Many people tried to shoot me down, variously saying I was scaremongering, there was no evidence the "associates" were involved, surely OxVox would be looking into these things, OxVox will be under an NDA etc etc.
Since then, it's emerged that OxVox WEREN"T under an NDA (and I will acknowledge here that I understand why they acted as they did, even if I don't fully agree), the some of those associates mentioned ARE involved to some degree or other, and were are still none the wiser as to what Tiger's plans actually are. And I'M the villain for not saying what I know?!!!
Forgive me for being brusque here, but all the way through this process I have been pretty much the only person putting the significant information into the public domain and OxVox, even now, have said next to nothing. So, how about OxVox saying what THEY know, or don't know? Anyone who didn't know better would conclude that you're more interested in protecting OxVox than you are in helping Oxford United....
MarkG
Level: Steve Basham
(189 Apps, 51 Gls)
Come on Myles. Some of this seems similar to a police investigation where they only disclose information helpful to the prosecution.
You’re scaremongering with talks of tax havens and shell companies and dodgy associates. Why wasn’t this raised with sartori and his Switzerland hedge fund back ground, and Monaco connections and the father in law ?
Put up a balanced view of what you’ve discovered or it will end up like a crap accountant mixing up cash flows and profits and double counting.
You’re scaremongering with talks of tax havens and shell companies and dodgy associates. Why wasn’t this raised with sartori and his Switzerland hedge fund back ground, and Monaco connections and the father in law ?
Put up a balanced view of what you’ve discovered or it will end up like a crap accountant mixing up cash flows and profits and double counting.
Deleted member 142
Guest
Ha ha ha.
Honestly, Myles, you do make me chortle. Your constant stream of implied knowledge is wasting a great opportunity, because, by the looks of it, you will have a chance to be elected to OxVox, to lead them into the gloried paradise. You could win a few votes by telling the masses how you’ve done the research, which you don’t believe OxVox has done. I can’t believe someone so critical won’t step up. Win those votes, myles. They’re there, just waiting for you to take them.
Come on, myles, stop the titilation, tell us. Please.
Honestly, Myles, you do make me chortle. Your constant stream of implied knowledge is wasting a great opportunity, because, by the looks of it, you will have a chance to be elected to OxVox, to lead them into the gloried paradise. You could win a few votes by telling the masses how you’ve done the research, which you don’t believe OxVox has done. I can’t believe someone so critical won’t step up. Win those votes, myles. They’re there, just waiting for you to take them.
Come on, myles, stop the titilation, tell us. Please.
Implied knowledge? Yes, because that lengthy post in October didn't reveal anything at all....
Deleted member 142
Guest
Ah, my mistake. I’d infered that you’d learnt more detail and new info from that the time of that post. I’m obviously mistaken.
Thanks for conceding that point at least Mark.
Picking up on your other point about my investigation being unbalanced (which is better than unhinged I guess!
), I made my first substantial post on Tiger and his associates back in October - knocking on for five months ago. During that time, OxVox have met and communicated with Tiger and his associates, and have had ample time to carry out their own investigations. If there was something which substantially demonstrated that my concerns were unfounded, surely that could have been published? I am but a private individual, not a supporters' trust. I would suggest it's notable that whilst OxVox have not published anything negative or critical about Tiger, they also haven't published anything substantially positive...
MarkG
Level: Steve Basham
(189 Apps, 51 Gls)
Didn’t say all, Pete.
My point was that some readers will assume they are supposed to read “educated” posts as fact whereas it’s very easy to spin the story,
As I've raised a couple of new, specific questions on this very thread, clearly English comprehension isn't your strong point...
Deleted member 462
Guest
Ohhhhh I can feel ur pain from all the arm twisting that took [emoji23]
At least I can't be accused of hiding behind a non-existent NDA, eh Dave?
Keep up, Dave. If there was anything negative to post about a potential investor, Oxvox would be letting us know quick sharp. That's how your argument went, isn't it?
Scotchegg
Level: James Constable
(280 Apps, 106 Gls)
Thanks for conceding that point at least Mark.
Picking up on your other point about my investigation being unbalanced (which is better than unhinged I guess!
Myles, you have been given every opportunity to substantiate your claims but choose not to. Your reasons for doing so are yours, but you lose credibility every time you avoid the issue or try to use it as a club to hit OxVox with.
Now, this is only an insignificant chatroom and you can post as you wish. But if you have serious concerns about the future of our club then a really don't understand why you wont share this.
So, in nearly five months, NOBODY has come up with any evidence to refute the claims I made in a very detailed post? Not a peep from OxVox even acknowledging those concerns? And yet, again, I'm the one who has not substantiated my claims? We truly are through the looking glass....
how about re-running your detailed post, after all this version of YF is only a short time 'old' .... so your post from back then is somewhere on the previous incarnation of YF...you were happy enough to share it then 5 months ago, how about now?
Deleted member 142
Guest
That’s probably true!As I've raised a couple of new, specific questions on this very thread, clearly English comprehension isn't your strong point...
So many questions. So few answers.
MarkG
Level: Steve Basham
(189 Apps, 51 Gls)
Thanks for conceding that point at least Mark.
Picking up on your other point about my investigation being unbalanced (which is better than unhinged I guess!
I’ll have to dig in again will report
Back
