Page 20 of 49

Re: LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:20 pm
by Muttley McLadd
bsso78 wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 10:37 am I went to school with Frank Martinland, a very studious youth who moved to Iceland to study swallow migration.
African or European swallows?

Re: LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:35 pm
by Doom Patrol
I don't know that.

Re: LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 10:15 pm
by Scooterdude
Personally I think that Gav fella will back down before it gets to heated otherwise my feelings are if it goes to court he will get crucified once the
LCGB flex their financial muscle. At the end of the day their paid barrister/barristers must have reviewed the case otherwise they wouldn’t be as confident as they are.
If Gav looses I wonder what will become of the paid members subscription money? I’m not biased either way just an observation.

Re: LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 10:24 pm
by Rally220
I completely support the LCGB in their actions. Well said Nic couldn’t have put it better myself. If you want to start a club fine, don’t go pinching historic club names to suit your own ends. From what I can see the venture by this Frankland bloke is s financial one layered with gloss to draw in members. Got my popcorn ready for when it folds and kicks off.

Re: LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:24 pm
by Doom Patrol
Yes, and this is how it goes. LCGB men through and through insinuating that someone elses motives are illegal and purely financial. The party line.

Re: LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:58 pm
by Nic
Doom Patrol wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:24 pm Yes, and this is how it goes. LCGB men through and through insinuating that someone elses motives are illegal and purely financial. The party line.
Does that mean unless I agree with you I'm not allowed to voice my opinion?

Re: LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 12:07 am
by Nic
As for financial gain, if Kev Walsh's admission to hundreds of people at the AGM that he has had private discussions with Gavin Frankland about Gavin "selling" us back the BLOA name are true, then there's your proof. Anyone who was mug enough to believe that this was somehow a disinterested gesture on Gavin's part, aimed at resurrecting a historic name, well, you've been taken for a ride. If the price is right - for Gavin Frankland - he'll happily ditch you just as easily as he roped you in.

Re: LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 12:17 am
by Rally220
Unfortunately or fortunately whichever way you look at it integrity is like your virginity once it’s gone it’s gone forever.

Re: LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:08 am
by Timbo
Nic wrote: Sun Feb 04, 2018 12:07 am As for financial gain, if Kev Walsh's admission to hundreds of people at the AGM that he has had private discussions with Gavin Frankland about Gavin "selling" us back the BLOA name are true, then there's your proof. Anyone who was mug enough to believe that this was somehow a disinterested gesture on Gavin's part, aimed at resurrecting a historic name, well, you've been taken for a ride. If the price is right - for Gavin Frankland - he'll happily ditch you just as easily as he roped you in.
Your entitled to your opinion as much as I am. I’m an early member of BLOA since Gavin Franklin promoted the club. I’ve never met him or spoken with him but through my business like to think i’m a good judge of character. Everything I have seen him do so far is from a guy with integrity and not someone trying to make a quick buck. I’ve never been involved in organising a rally so I don’t know if ones lucky to break even or make a killing. Perhaps someone can enlighten me. If there was a NOT very private conversation with Kev Walsh the reason might be, faced with the might of the LCGB £200k coffers against an individual in court, a good enough reason to ask the question. It doesn't prove anything as you suggested. To refer to all members as mugs is simply quite disrespectful. If i’m proved to be wrong I will happily apologise and hope you will do the same.

Re: LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:41 am
by GTFOMWSC
Timbo wrote: Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:08 am
Nic wrote: Sun Feb 04, 2018 12:07 am As for financial gain, if Kev Walsh's admission to hundreds of people at the AGM that he has had private discussions with Gavin Frankland about Gavin "selling" us back the BLOA name are true, then there's your proof. Anyone who was mug enough to believe that this was somehow a disinterested gesture on Gavin's part, aimed at resurrecting a historic name, well, you've been taken for a ride. If the price is right - for Gavin Frankland - he'll happily ditch you just as easily as he roped you in.
Your entitled to your opinion as much as I am. I’m an early member of BLOA since Gavin Franklin promoted the cub. I’ve never met him or spoken with him but through my business like to think i’m a good judge of character. Everything I have seen him do so far is from a guy with integrity and not someone trying to make a quick buck. I’ve never been involved in organising a rally so I don’t know if ones lucky to break even or make a killing. Perhaps someone can enlighten me. If there was a NOT very private conversation with Kev Walsh the reason might be, faced with the might of the LCGB £200k coffers against an individual in court, a good enough reason to ask the question. It doesn't prove anything as you suggested. To refer to all members as mugs is simply quite disrespectful. If i’m proved to be wrong I will happily apologise and hope you will do the same.
i agree with you Tim it appears there has been a discussion between Kev and Gav but only those 2 know exactly what was discussed between them.If Gav has been offered a sum by Kev albeit without the LCGB approval it appears by what Gav is still doing and going ahead with he would of declined it.So as someone has clearly stated here that Gav would sell out in making such a statement he should really back this up with clear evidence that Gav would accept it if not that statement should be withdrawn tbh.

Just because a lawyer etc says you'll win doesn't mean you will they're only in it to get paid they'll swear blind that black is white if you want to pay them to do so,so backing from them means absolutely nothing until it's in front of a judge he is the one who decides nobody else.