Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

[bighairyfaeleith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If he possibly intervened, say as an individual in his ' down time', why then splash it over the national press? And before we get the 'keep politics out of this debate', I would say that his involvement is very relevant to this thread. If and when we learn that his contribution to their cause was instrumental in it's success, I'm sure there will be no objections to heated debate about it.

His involvement is, the referendum is not.

[Sanger]

Hilarious how the national press are still reporting that Ukio meeting could take place this week. Even some saying Friday. Yesterday’s investigations here clearly showed that meeting needs ten day notice to the creditors and must be posted by the court in Lithuania. I assume this has to be made public by the court?

[Saorsa]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The First Minister's involvement is "on topic".

Maybe so but every mention of it drags other issues in tae it which are not because some people cannae help themselves, and quite frankly it has spoiled and is spoiling what has so far been a fun thread.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Hilarious how the national press are still reporting that Ukio meeting could take place this week. Even some saying Friday. Yesterday’s investigations here clearly showed that meeting needs ten day notice to the creditors and must be posted by the court in Lithuania. I assume this has to be made public by the court?

I'm not convinced we can put much faith in the notice periods as they seem to ignore them anyway.

[One Day Soon]

There's some pretty breathtaking hypocrisy on here of late.

In a democracy, the last time I checked, you are entitled to vote and to do so for whatever motivation propels you. If you want to vote Yes or No in a Referendum on account of anything at all you can and should do so. I don't like that particularly, but it is your right.

Anyone who thinks that politics should be kept out of this discussion, or has nothing to do with the subject matter, is being extremely naive. A judicial process is being pursued by the various parties and it is subject to political pressure on a number of sides. The fact that the man who is currently First Minister of Scotland has volunteered himself into the public eye on this one simply brings the politics into sharper focus. The politics of all this isn't just a legitimate subject for this debate and this thread, it is an essential part of it.

We have a range of posters on this thread asking that Referendum/Salmond related political points be posted elsewhere rather than this thread. That's pretty ironic given the number of posters who are posting all over the thread with 'Yes' avatars and/or adverts on all of their posts. Added to which if people are genuinely reconsidering their voting intentions on the Referendum/Salmond due to his intervention in this matter then that surely becomes a legitimate part of the discussion, regardless of whether you think it is sensible of them to base their vote on such an issue?

For my part I am voting No and was always going to do so. That's because of the many £billions deficit that independence would demonstrably cause us and which will certainly require massive cuts in public services like the NHS, education and benefits - way beyond anything coming from Westminster.

So on Salmond intervening with the Lithuanians I think that if he was going to do it he should have done it quietly without announcing it, if at all. That's not really his style though is it? I think it would have been more legitimate of him to have done this if we had also heard him using the office of First Minister to publicly call for an investigation into what has been going on at Hearts over the last few years or indeed calling for action by the appropriate authorities against Romanov. Perhaps he has done so and I missed it.

Anyway, my main interest here is for this CVA stuff and the Referendum to both just be over. They have both sucked too much time and energy from far more important things that really matter and given too much prominence to people and institutions who were already sufficiently self-obsessed.

[Winston Ingram]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There's some pretty breathtaking hypocrisy on here of late.

In a democracy, the last time I checked, you are entitled to vote and to do so for whatever motivation propels you. If you want to vote Yes or No in a Referendum on account of anything at all you can and should do so. I don't like that particularly, but it is your right.

Anyone who thinks that politics should be kept out of this discussion, or has nothing to do with the subject matter, is being extremely naive. A judicial process is being pursued by the various parties and it is subject to political pressure on a number of sides. The fact that the man who is currently First Minister of Scotland has volunteered himself into the public eye on this one simply brings the politics into sharper focus. The politics of all this isn't just a legitimate subject for this debate and this thread, it is an essential part of it.

We have a range of posters on this thread asking that Referendum/Salmond related political points be posted elsewhere rather than this thread. That's pretty ironic given the number of posters who are posting all over the thread with 'Yes' avatars and/or adverts on all of their posts. Added to which if people are genuinely reconsidering their voting intentions on the Referendum/Salmond due to his intervention in this matter then that surely becomes a legitimate part of the discussion, regardless of whether you think it is sensible of them to base their vote on such an issue?

For my part I am voting No and was always going to do so. That's because of the many £billions deficit that independence would demonstrably cause us and which will certainly require massive cuts in public services like the NHS, education and benefits - way beyond anything coming from Westminster.

So on Salmond intervening with the Lithuanians I think that if he was going to do it he should have done it quietly without announcing it, if at all. That's not really his style though is it? I think it would have been more legitimate of him to have done this if we had also heard him using the office of First Minister to publicly call for an investigation into what has been going on at Hearts over the last few years or indeed calling for action by the appropriate authorities against Romanov. Perhaps he has done so and I missed it.

Anyway, my main interest here is for this CVA stuff and the Referendum to both just be over. They have both sucked too much time and energy from far more important things that really matter and given too much prominence to people and institutions who were already sufficiently self-obsessed.

I thought we were keeping this political ***** off here?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If the ukio vote does pass, will that be BDOs involvement finished? Even if the courts wont unfreeze the shares?

If the UKIO vote passes the CVA, BDO's involvement lasts as long as the CVA takes to complete.

If it doesn't, and/or HMFC go into liquidation, BDO's involvement continues, as liquidator.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I'm voting for the Greens in the referendum election thingy.

[greenpaper55]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There's some pretty breathtaking hypocrisy on here of late.

In a democracy, the last time I checked, you are entitled to vote and to do so for whatever motivation propels you. If you want to vote Yes or No in a Referendum on account of anything at all you can and should do so. I don't like that particularly, but it is your right.

Anyone who thinks that politics should be kept out of this discussion, or has nothing to do with the subject matter, is being extremely naive. A judicial process is being pursued by the various parties and it is subject to political pressure on a number of sides. The fact that the man who is currently First Minister of Scotland has volunteered himself into the public eye on this one simply brings the politics into sharper focus. The politics of all this isn't just a legitimate subject for this debate and this thread, it is an essential part of it.

We have a range of posters on this thread asking that Referendum/Salmond related political points be posted elsewhere rather than this thread. That's pretty ironic given the number of posters who are posting all over the thread with 'Yes' avatars and/or adverts on all of their posts. Added to which if people are genuinely reconsidering their voting intentions on the Referendum/Salmond due to his intervention in this matter then that surely becomes a legitimate part of the discussion, regardless of whether you think it is sensible of them to base their vote on such an issue?

For my part I am voting No and was always going to do so. That's because of the many £billions deficit that independence would demonstrably cause us and which will certainly require massive cuts in public services like the NHS, education and benefits - way beyond anything coming from Westminster.

So on Salmond intervening with the Lithuanians I think that if he was going to do it he should have done it quietly without announcing it, if at all. That's not really his style though is it? I think it would have been more legitimate of him to have done this if we had also heard him using the office of First Minister to publicly call for an investigation into what has been going on at Hearts over the last few years or indeed calling for action by the appropriate authorities against Romanov. Perhaps he has done so and I missed it.

Anyway, my main interest here is for this CVA stuff and the Referendum to both just be over. They have both sucked too much time and energy from far more important things that really matter and given too much prominence to people and institutions who were already sufficiently self-obsessed.

My thoughts as well so where do we go from here, maybe the politics thing will die a death like the jambos ?.

[HappyAsHellas]

New thread started titled Alex Salmond. Please go away old chap with all that crap that has nothing to do with this thread

[greenpaper55]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

New thread started titled Alex Salmond. Please f&*k off there with all that crap that has nothing to do with this thread

Tut tut, language Timothy !.

[One Day Soon]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

New thread started titled Alex Salmond. Please f&*k off there with all that crap that has nothing to do with this thread

You're a sensitive soul and your other thread doesn't have any proposed context at all.

[marinello59]

Given that Salmond, Foulkes and that MP guy have all got involved in this individually it is hard to disentangle politics from this.
However if you are going to post anything that is only concerned with the referendum could you please do it on the thread in the Holy Ground. It's much more fun kicking the Yams than each other.

[GreenCastle]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

New thread started titled Alex Salmond. Please f&*k off there with all that crap that has nothing to do with this thread

There seems to be double standards by many as several people are bringing politics onto this message board on a daily basis with their profile pictures and signatures about the up coming referendum.

Surely a board wide ban of this would make a fair game?

Regarding the yams and Salmond people can say they don't want to read it or be involved in it but its ignoring the way which he is acting.

Yam or not I would be asking questions with his involvement as I am yet to see any clear evidence he supported other clubs in bad financial problems. Don't forget these clubs usually bring it upon themselves.

it makes it worse here as he clearly states who he supports and was even seen in pictures such as the cup final lapping it up and now he expects it all to be fixed as if no harm was done to local businesses.

if he actually did something worthwhile like helping the local businesses who lost money he would get much more credit - instead he's going to try to come out looking like a savior and again shows the yams class - sell their soul to get a result.

[Saorsa]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Given that Salmond, Foulkes and that MP guy have all got involved in this individually it is hard to disentangle politics from this.
However if you are going to post anything that is only concerned with the referendum could you please do it on the thread in the Holy Ground. It's much more fun kicking the Yams than each other.

[greenpaper55]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Given that Salmond, Foulkes and that MP guy have all got involved in this individually it is hard to disentangle politics from this.
However if you are going to post anything that is only concerned with the referendum could you please do it on the thread in the Holy Ground. It's much more fun kicking the Yams than each other.

Sound good, are they not dead yet. I wonder if Sergey has any updates on developments ?.

[CapitalGreen]

Share sale by UKIO approved by Creditors meeting

[Heisenberg]

@BBCBMcLauchlin: A meeting of the creditors committee of Ukio Bankas has now approved the sale of the shares held in Hearts.#bbcsportscot

[Waxy]

That was a tad unexpected.

[johnrebus]

So, If Hawrts are liquidated, do the authorities break all the rules - as with Sevo - and they are in League Two?

Or, is it a trawl around Gretna 2008, Rosewell and Stirling University?

[Waxy]

Has to be Salmonds involvement.

[Saorsa]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There seems to be double standards by many as several people are bringing politics onto this message board on a daily basis with their profile pictures and signatures about the up coming referendum.

Surely a board wide ban of this would make a fair game?

Quite happy tae remove mine, it was always my intention tae keep it off here but when I saw another user with better together in his sig then I thought what the ****, I'm having mine.

As I say quite happy tae remove any political reference from my avatar/signature if all are removed.


Edit: In fact I'll start lets, see if other follow? If they dinnae....

[bingo70]

Bugger.

Down to the freezer test im guessing now?

[grunt]

Now I guess we find out if they're still frozen...

[greenpaper55]

I suppose we can mention Salmond without getting bogged down in the referendum debate after all we have a go at Foulkes and Cardownie for being yams.

[Bostonhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There's some pretty breathtaking hypocrisy on here of late.

In a democracy, the last time I checked, you are entitled to vote and to do so for whatever motivation propels you. If you want to vote Yes or No in a Referendum on account of anything at all you can and should do so. I don't like that particularly, but it is your right.

Anyone who thinks that politics should be kept out of this discussion, or has nothing to do with the subject matter, is being extremely naive. A judicial process is being pursued by the various parties and it is subject to political pressure on a number of sides. The fact that the man who is currently First Minister of Scotland has volunteered himself into the public eye on this one simply brings the politics into sharper focus. The politics of all this isn't just a legitimate subject for this debate and this thread, it is an essential part of it.

We have a range of posters on this thread asking that Referendum/Salmond related political points be posted elsewhere rather than this thread. That's pretty ironic given the number of posters who are posting all over the thread with 'Yes' avatars and/or adverts on all of their posts. Added to which if people are genuinely reconsidering their voting intentions on the Referendum/Salmond due to his intervention in this matter then that surely becomes a legitimate part of the discussion, regardless of whether you think it is sensible of them to base their vote on such an issue?

For my part I am voting No and was always going to do so. That's because of the many £billions deficit that independence would demonstrably cause us and which will certainly require massive cuts in public services like the NHS, education and benefits - way beyond anything coming from Westminster.

So on Salmond intervening with the Lithuanians I think that if he was going to do it he should have done it quietly without announcing it, if at all. That's not really his style though is it? I think it would have been more legitimate of him to have done this if we had also heard him using the office of First Minister to publicly call for an investigation into what has been going on at Hearts over the last few years or indeed calling for action by the appropriate authorities against Romanov. Perhaps he has done so and I missed it.

Anyway, my main interest here is for this CVA stuff and the Referendum to both just be over. They have both sucked too much time and energy from far more important things that really matter and given too much prominence to people and institutions who were already sufficiently self-obsessed.

Good post mate, I won't be voting for obvious reasons but just as iamanmp murray has been fair game on here since he propelled himself into the limelight I do feel Salmond is the other cheek of the same erse so to speak.

The fact that he is one of them and at the same time is a political figure and the front man for the yes campaign makes it difficult to separate the three things out in my opinion.

For example would he have anything special to bring to the table with the Liths if he wasn't the political figure that he is? Arguably his profile is higher because he does court a lot of publicity so when the whiff of intervention on behalf of the yam is suggested it can only be linked to what he does for a living and how he does it. The role he was elected to fulfil has the added perk of perceived personal influence.

As to how much attention they will pay to him I am not convinced it will be much at all - they might be astute enough to wonder about his silence whilst it was all going on on his own doorstep and wonder why his government took no action, or at least used the same channels they might be using now to tip the Liths off bearing in mind who the real losers ultimately were?

I can see the point about the political use of this type of thread but irrespective of the points made here, the die was cast a while ago when the pro independence stuff you mention started appearing without attracting much attention. For what its worth I have no problem with this however on all yam matters once a politico has decided to reflect in the glory by getting involved they are fair game for those who don't agree with their judgement - Politicians usually know what they are doing even if they can't see too far ahead and usually end up trying to distance themselves from their original involvement.

[grunt]

BBCBMcLauchlin ‏@BBCBMcLauchlin 5m BDO will now finalise the deal and prepare for the handover over of Hearts to Ann Budge#bbcsportscot

[greenpaper55]

If it's true then it's been fun while it lasted, sales of new underwear will drop in Gorgie !.

[Saorsa]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I suppose we can mention Salmond without getting bogged down in the referendum debate after all we have a go at Foulkes and Cardownie for being yams.

some folk cannae though, they've got tae get their dig in. I've slagged pishy breeks, cardownie, salmond and the MP, nowt tae dae with politics though

[Brightside]

so either BBC are way off or our in the know guys knew nowt??