Bushey Boy
 Offline
Posts: 8351
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:23:46 » |
|
yeah but devlin said that while he worked for his company? how long has Mike D been a managing DIRECTOR at dunwoody? Was it a Mike D interview that devlin had to say was his?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TalkTalk
|
|
« Reply #31 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:24:00 » |
|
Bushey Boy .. according to Mark D .. he was never a Director No, not for STFC perhaps. But managing a company while disqualified is a very serious offence. Once again: http://www.thetownend.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=309064#309064 And he is now a company director again, albeit of several with their registered addresses based in Reading. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bushey Boy
Offline
Posts: 8351
|
|
« Reply #32 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:25:33 » |
|
Fuck it, one email to a client of mine will dig up all the stuff I want to know, I will post all findings on here.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TalkTalk
|
|
« Reply #33 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:29:07 » |
|
Fuck it, one email to a client of mine will dig up all the stuff I want to know, I will post all findings on here.  Good man. Incidentally his wife is a director of a couple. Director Details - SARAH DIAMANDIS
Date of Birth: 12-01-1968
Postcode / Address: RG20 0LS
Directorships Trading: 2
Directorships Insolvent: 0
Directorships Dissolved: 0
Directorships Resigned: 4
Proprietorships: 0 Perhaps you can find out what she is involved with while you are at it? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RobertT
Offline
Posts: 12316
|
|
« Reply #34 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:36:47 » |
|
Rob - I would also be very interested to see any official document that says he is currently banned or being investigated by the DTI (another frequent allegation)..... if he is then I will happily acknowledge the point, until then it seems like another convenient thing to hurl. There is a world of difference (as I know from my own dealings as a Councillor), between allegations or tip offs, and matters actually being taken up and formally investigated. Try the DTI Mav, they happily confirmed it to the last person that checked (although clearly gave no details). I have no wish to be sued for libel, so I keep anything which has no place in court under wraps. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Maverick
Offline
Posts: 444
|
|
« Reply #35 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:38:43 » |
|
Well well well ... the true colours show through .... this seems to be all about "getting Mike D" really doesn't it?
Now you guys decide to go for his wife as well.
If that is the kind of levels supporters of the Consortium will stoop to, then I for one hope that the Consortium either publicly disowns people who are prepared to make it that personal ....... or else it just demonstrates that we have it all to fear with the way they choose to do business.
Let's hope that the other potential investor has a better approach and wins the day.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bushey Boy
Offline
Posts: 8351
|
|
« Reply #36 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:40:42 » |
|
thanks talk talk although its more his dealings I am concerned about.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 33875
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #37 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:41:57 » |
|
Well well well ... the true colours show through .... this seems to be all about "getting Mike D" really doesn't it?
Now you guys decide to go for his wife as well.
If that is the kind of levels supporters of the Consortium will stoop to, then I for one hope that the Consortium either publicly disowns people who are prepared to make it that personal ....... or else it just demonstrates that we have it all to fear with the way they choose to do business.
Let's hope that the other potential investor has a better approach and wins the day. what other potential investors? We've had no proof & we've had no names..... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bushey Boy
Offline
Posts: 8351
|
|
« Reply #38 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:42:28 » |
|
maverick im nowt to do with consortium just wanna know about this man a bit more, todays interview make me suspicious
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Maverick
Offline
Posts: 444
|
|
« Reply #39 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:42:50 » |
|
Rob, I think you will find that the DTI will confirm verbally that they have been made aware of something (ie a tip off or allegation) but never that they are currently investigating. It would be kind of self-defeating ... it would mean that I could ring up posing as someone else to find out if I needed to worry that my activities were being investigated.
Many many things will get left on their "hotline" as it is anonymous .... it does not mean that an investigation is under way... or will ever be necessarily.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Maverick
Offline
Posts: 444
|
|
« Reply #40 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:44:33 » |
|
DV85 ... what proof do you have of exactly who the other people are in the Consortium bid .. or why we were told that a bid had been submitted .. and then suddenly it hadn't been until now??
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bennett
No Comment
Offline
Posts: 9735
|
|
« Reply #41 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:44:53 » |
|
Well well well ... the true colours show through .... this seems to be all about "getting Mike D" really doesn't it?
Now you guys decide to go for his wife as well.
If that is the kind of levels supporters of the Consortium will stoop to, then I for one hope that the Consortium either publicly disowns people who are prepared to make it that personal ....... or else it just demonstrates that we have it all to fear with the way they choose to do business.
Let's hope that the other potential investor has a better approach and wins the day. yawn |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
This is the water.
And this is the well.
Drink full and descend.
The horse is the white of the eyes and dark within.
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #42 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:47:43 » |
|
Well well well ... the true colours show through .... this seems to be all about "getting Mike D" really doesn't it?
Now you guys decide to go for his wife as well.
If that is the kind of levels supporters of the Consortium will stoop to, then I for one hope that the Consortium either publicly disowns people who are prepared to make it that personal ....... or else it just demonstrates that we have it all to fear with the way they choose to do business.
Let's hope that the other potential investor has a better approach and wins the day. Is she your sister or something.....if you think this is stooping then you aint seen nothing yet. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RobertT
Offline
Posts: 12316
|
|
« Reply #43 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:48:22 » |
|
and a letter that's found it's way into the "wrong hands" Mav, although yes I'm going on someone else's say so ( but I know them to be fan of longstanding). Mav, you really need to check out some of the non club related posts on here to realise half the shit is just that, shit. I'm not part of the Consortium, neither is Talk Talk for example. But yes, on a personal level, Diamandis is the problem for me. Met him, know his tactics, know his decisions, know enough to not want him around. It's his involvement that causes me most problems, but that would never see me make anything up about the man. I only post stuff about people like that if it has grounds. For example, he is Greek and his is a bit on the portly side.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TalkTalk
|
|
« Reply #44 on: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 21:48:50 » |
|
Now you guys decide to go for his wife as well. Hey sonny, it is well known that people in business sometimes use their spouses for deflecting business interest attention away from themselves. Bushey Boy asked the question and it's fair to supply information. What the fuck has it got to do with you anyway, stirrer? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
