Scooterotica

Nic wrote: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.

Who approached who?

Perhaps Kev didn’t relish in the prospect of the club spending £thousands and washing its dirty linen in public...and tried to persuade Gavin to part with the name for a fee which would be a lot less than the prospective legal fees, but a sufficient amount to allow Gavin to recover his costs/expenditure to date??

Now IF that was the case...your accusations don’t really seem fair do they.

Nic wrote: ↑Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:58 pm

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?

Not at all. Except you were suggesting he was a crook. And you really don't know that for sure.

Doom Patrol wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2018 4:07 pm

Nic wrote: ↑Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:58 pm

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?

Not at all. Except you were suggesting he was a crook. And you really don't know that for sure.

I haven't insinuated he was a crook. I do think his actions mark him out as morally bankrupt.

drunkmunkey6969 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2018 1:51 pm

Nic wrote: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.

Who approached who?

Perhaps Kev didn’t relish in the prospect of the club spending £thousands and washing its dirty linen in public...and tried to persuade Gavin to part with the name for a fee which would be a lot less than the prospective legal fees, but a sufficient amount to allow Gavin to recover his costs/expenditure to date??

Now IF that was the case...your accusations don’t really seem fair do they.

1) What dirty linen? I don't understand the point you are making here.

2) No-one relishes the cost of the club paying thousands of pounds to lawyers. I'd rather it was spent, as the LCGB generally does, to promote active on-the-road scootering. I'm also in favour of holding conversations with Gavin Frankland - subject to this being with the prior knowledge and approval of the LCGB itself.

3) What costs has Gavin Frankland incurred? I refer you here: https://www.gov.uk/how-to-register-a-trade-mark/apply. We are talking a few hundred pounds. If that's all he wants to hand back what is not morally his, he should say so publicly.

But I also have to ask: separate from a few quid, which is neither here or there, should he be rewarded for taking something that he should have known was not his to take?

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.

YI’m an early member of BLOA since Gavin Franklin promoted the club.

I think there's too much speculation of what was said and what are facts and what are rumours. Comments might be better made after the court has heard the facts and made a ruling.

I'm an LCGB member and have an interest in the outcome......

When is the court date?

Man comes home from the pub with a duck under his arm and says this is the pig I’ve been shagging. His wife says that’s not a pig it’s a duck.
Man says I’m not talking to you.

Nic wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2018 5:11 pm

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.

YI’m an early member of BLOA since Gavin Franklin promoted the club.

Not sure what you find funny, perhaps you will explain....