Arcadia wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 1:59 pm
What a childish carry on this is.
Bottom line is, BLOA was a business from day 1, it was a sub-company of Concessionaires, created specifically to help sell more units. The name was later changed to LCGB, the whole thing was then shut down. It later reopened as a club which was independent of its former business founders. Nobody at Concessionaires ever gave a fcuk about a bunch of anoraks 50+ years later, they just wanted to sell more machines.
LCGB may have occasionally harked back to the BLOA roots by pasting the logo on a bunch of mugs, badges, and banners now and then...but they never officially operated under the BLOA banner at any point. The current LCGB may have links/roots in history, but the current club never had ANY legal title or ownership of the name BLOA. Gav has revived that name and is using it. Fair play to him.
The LCGB committee are spewing because they got caught with their pants down. If the old name BLOA meant so much to them, why didn't they protect or use it officially? Slack! So what are they doing about it? Throwing other peoples money at this, to ease their bruised egos. It very easy to get all bold and nostalgic, and to start an emotional crusade to 'reclaim their history' when they are spending other peoples money. But I dare so they wouldn't give a s**t if they had to get their hands in their own pockets, instead of other peoples!
And what is the financial cap on this 'reclaiming process? £10 grand? £20 grand? £30 grand? To achieve what? Putting the name back in the LCGB bottom drawer where it's been parked for the past 50 years until they wanted to rattle off a shitty old mug?
The LCGB have NEVER maintained a dignified silence as someone here previously posted, they always come out 'mob handed'...the only reason they haven't this time, is because they cant comment on a legal case which is ongoing. It must be killing them! Whereas Gav tries to answer people, but the reality is...the majority of people asking difficult questions are the LCGB supporters, and they have no desire to hear an honest answer...they are baying for blood, or looking for reasons to smear Gavs name. But I say take a look at your own committee, some of them are not exactly whiter than white.
Gav started a new club, with an old name, fair play to him. Get on with it son, that's what I say. LCGB are bruised over this, but they have ZERO legal ground to stand on. Thier ONLY tactic here is to hire the most expensive barrister they can, and hope to batter Gav into submission...and to rally a 'gang mentality' against him, and hope he crumbles from the venom and abuse he receives. Well, i don't support that, and I don't think the majority of the 5500 membership do either. At the AGM there we only a few hundred members, and I don't care what anyone says, getting 5500 people into vote s a logistical impossibility. A postal vote could have been sent with an explanatory statement to the members with JetSet, but that wouldn't give the committee the 'clear' mandate they wanted. So the committee got what they wanted instead, a room full of 'passionates' so that a few ardent supporters in a weighted room could dictate the decisions. And was it unanimous as some people stated? NO. It was a majority decision, which is not the same. Thoe who voted 'for' voted first, and that was a majority. Those who wanted to vote 'against' saw the vote was won, so simply abstained. They didn't want to be labeled as 'not supporting the club' or have their card marked. The statement and question of support were heavily loaded, and the smearing of Gavs name in that room was unfair.
People may not agree with the 'moral' value in terms of Gav using the name, but wasting tens of thousands of pounds, smearing a man's name, going at him mob-handed, chasing him with abusive posts (see Facebook) and setting barristers on him is pathetic. What an absolute f@@king nonsense. It's a f@@king scooter club, get over it.