But what was the rule at the relevant time?
We binned the image rights arrangement pdq after the revenue said it was illegal.
But what was the rule at the relevant time?
I don't, and I would never buy their shite to find out.Yeah for illegal payments and stuff, this seems like one of the ways where you can actually prove things...Do you know source on the athletic for this mate?
It can be in UK courts, the US is different.If all they have are the de spiegel articles as evidence, they’re fucked in a UK court as I’m pretty certain hacked evidence can’t be used
My knowledge and understanding of the Enron scandal have become even vaguer over the years but from memory Enron was a very big American corporation which began to make sizeable losses and whose executives began to unload shares while the price was still high. Someone from within the company (Sharon someone?) exposed what was going on and it ended in bankruptcy and prison sentences. This certainly suggests a failure on the part of the regulatory authorities but the regulatory authorities are not involved and the difference in scale with City is massive, so that I cannot see why our owners would need to fiddle the books of what is a minor commercial enterprise. And our books have been inspected under a microscope not by one set of auditors but by umpteen. It seems that the rewards are paltry compared to the risks run. These are men who sign off a $60 billion deal to redevelop Dubai waterfront but are prepared to risk gaol for a few million for a football club?There are plenty of companies who had their accounts signed off by one of the big 4 accountancy firms but were 'at it'. Enron springs to mind.
They would still have to have firm evidence , heresay surely doesn't count in cases of fraud which is effectively what we have been accused of?If that's true were fucked
Nah, heard an interview with him recently & he has a lot of love for the clubChrist on a bike this could go bigger than Wagatha Christie :) my money is still on Gary Cook
Yaya