Tiger and 'comparisons'?

[myles]

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.

 

[Deleted member 142]

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.

 

[myles]

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.

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]

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.

 

[Deleted member 142]

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.

 

[MarkG]

But I’ll take Myles has raised significant questions about the people Tiger associated with. Which no one else has pointed out.

 

[MarkG]

So some of the lefties on here will read of tax havens and assume it must mean something dodgy. Whereas those who know how global business works will understand this is part and parcel of business

 

[myles]

Your constant stream of implied knowledge.

Implied knowledge? Yes, because that lengthy post in October didn't reveal anything at all....

 

[Deleted member 142]

Implied knowledge? Yes, because that lengthy post in October didn't reveal anything at all....

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.

 

[myles]

But I’ll take Myles has raised significant questions about the people Tiger associated with. Which no one else has pointed out.

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]

So some of the lefties on here will read of tax havens and assume it must mean something dodgy. Whereas those who know how global business works will understand this is part and parcel of business

Not all 'lefties' are ignorant of the workings of business, Mark.

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,

 

[myles]

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.

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]

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.

Ohhhhh I can feel ur pain from all the arm twisting that took [emoji23]

 

[myles]

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?

 

[myles]

And yet there was nothing, nothing at all worthy of posting about sartori ? No associates, no past companies, no risk of becoming a feeder club ?

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]

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...

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.

 

[myles]

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.

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....

 

[Sarge]

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]

As I've raised a couple of new, specific questions on this very thread, clearly English comprehension isn't your strong point...

That’s probably true!

So many questions. So few answers.

 

[MarkG]

But I’ll take Myles has raised significant questions about the people Tiger associated with. Which no one else has pointed out.

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...

I’ll have to dig in again will report
Back