caseyjones 0 Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 So Grier does not know about any Ticketus agreements on the 19th of April 2011 but he knows on the 19th of April 2011 that the Ticketus agreements will become unconditional once certain factors fall into place?...... If Spiers and his ilk put that to him, his answers would be interesting. One other thing puzzles me. How can he do all these interviews, but his legal advisers say that he can't be interviewed by the BBC because of the court case against CB/RFCG? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 The point is - as has been said - that while Grier knew about a deal with Ticketus and may even have worked on it, it is far from certain that he knew a) all details about the deal, and b) how Whyte wanted to use the Ticketus money. That, again, is the bone of contention. Ah so he knows about "A" deal but not "The" deal, the email clearly states "Ticketus agreements" plural, meaning there was more than one Ticketus deal Grier was aware of. Do you seriously expect us to believe that Grier thought the £24.4m deal for three years season tickets was for working capital? Grier did the cashflow projections do you not think the advance sale of 3 years seasons tickets just might have a wee bit of effect on the cashflow? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 I do not expect you or others "to believe" anything. If you think Grier knew all about the Ticketus deal, so be it. I'm not here to make you think differently, nor am I willing to believe your assumptions on this topic, no matter how often you repeat them. For in the end, they are just that, assumptions. The API will, if they go on with their inquiry, find out who told the truth here, or rather, who knew what at the time. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 I do not expect you or others "to believe" anything. If you think Grier knew all about the Ticketus deal, so be it. I'm not here to make you think differently, nor am I willing to believe your assumptions on this topic, no matter how often you repeat them. For in the end, they are just that, assumptions.The API will, if they go on with their inquiry, find out who told the truth here, or rather, who knew what at the time. The IPA could just sweep it under the rug if they wanted. Not that I'm saying they would do that, but I don't know of any reason why they couldn't. If the IPA were as strict as say the FSA, they'd have been investigating the MCR/D&P involvement in the Rangers takeover long before now. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 I do not expect you or others "to believe" anything. If you think Grier knew all about the Ticketus deal, so be it. I'm not here to make you think differently, nor am I willing to believe your assumptions on this topic, no matter how often you repeat them. For in the end, they are just that, assumptions.The API will, if they go on with their inquiry, find out who told the truth here, or rather, who knew what at the time. The email dated 19th April 2011 and its' contents are facts not assumptions (even Grier has not challenged its' veracity), surely you're not going to fall back on ye olde "fake documents" claim like you did with the MG05's exposing the sale off of the catering rights? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 0 Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 The IPA could just sweep it under the rug if they wanted. Not that I'm saying they would do that, but I don't know of any reason why they couldn't. If the IPA were as strict as say the FSA, they'd have been investigating the MCR/D&P involvement in the Rangers takeover long before now. There are half a dozen of these organisations covering IP's, so it's not going to be as in-depth as an FSA investigation. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 The IPA could just sweep it under the rug if they wanted. Not that I'm saying they would do that, but I don't know of any reason why they couldn't. If the IPA were as strict as say the FSA, they'd have been investigating the MCR/D&P involvement in the Rangers takeover long before now. The IPA is a self-regulatory body not a statutory body ergo highly unlikely to action against it's own, iirc at least 2 members of MCR/Duff & Phelps sit on it's various boards/committees. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
foggy dewhurst 0 Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 as the case stands mr grier is an out and out liar the documents show us that . 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 The email dated 19th April 2011 and its' contents are facts not assumptions (even Grier has not challenged its' veracity), surely you're not going to fall back on ye olde "fake documents" claim like you did with the MG05's exposing the sale off of the catering rights? You've either got long memory or a file of some posters about comments they made. Either thing's strange. I'v nothing to add to my previous post though. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 The IPA is a self-regulatory body not a statutory body ergo highly unlikely to action against it's own. I don't think you know what you are talking about. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.