The saddest thing about it was that it was the Supporters Trust who sold the club to the bloke in the first place.
No blame or bad reflection on them, as if everything in the programme is true then he has clearly fooled a lot of people and institutions - and not sure it was his greatest masterstroke to doing anything that could upset the North Koreans.
Not sure anybody came out of this with any credit,
The need for robust transparent ownership is surely a fundemental priciple , as the league, banks and other 'font men' dissolve like ice cream in the Sahara when the heat is on.
Baron Mawhinney, Tim Yeo, and the former Chairman seemed almost speechless, except pious remarks about ' I am not surprissed', and that is 'hindsight', which of course it would not have been if the original programme had been allowed to investigate the people concerned.
[cite]Posted By: ken from bexley[/cite]Not sure anybody came out of this with any credit,
The need for robust transparent ownership is surely a fundemental priciple , as the league, banks and other 'font men' dissolve like ice cream in the Sahara when the heat is on.
Baron Mawhinney, Tim Yeo, and the former Chairman seemed almost speechless, except pious remarks about ' I am not surprissed', and that is 'hindsight', which of course it would not have been if the original programme had been allowed to investigate the people concerned.
Agreed. Be nice if our ownership was 'transparent', eh?
I remember something being said by the guy who spoke at our Supporters Trust meeting. When asked about Notts County, I remember saying something along the lines of, "there's something strange about that takeover and it will be interesting to see how that pans out"
Haven't watched the programme, but will do.
[cite]Posted By: T.C.E[/cite]I remember something being said by the guy who spoke at our Supporters Trust meeting. When asked about Notts County, I remember saying something along the lines of, "there's something strange about that takeover and it will be interesting to see how that pans out"
Haven't watched the programme, but will do.
i remember that he also said that the suporters trust didnt recomend the deal, but the chairman of the group elected onto the supporters trust from notts county thought it was a good idea
great programme, how the hell he isnt in prison or dead is beyond me. sven came across well really cared for county and upset at what happend there. jesus, not even worth thinking if that was etc.. brian milwhiny?? the ex football league head guy looked a bit of a tool for allowing the guy to pass the fit and proper persons test, just wonder how many more people out there are doing the same right now. bahrain national family and kim jong il 2 people you really wouldnt want to upset and he hope he gets whats comming.
If anyone has a spare 30 mins over the weekend, I recommend you take a look on I player. Just watched it, the relevance of course is :-
WHO OWNS CHARLTON ?
The alleged fraudster by the name of Russell King aka Lord Voltemort, hoodwinked a London Investment Bank, the ex head of MI6, The North Korean government , Notts C, Sven Goran Erikson, The Football League and obviously many more, all on the promise of Bahrain money, which there was none, although he did produce a fake prince.
Notts C were unwittingly contributing towards his millionaire lifestyle. Absolutely unbelieveable.
Its a bit scary , and does raise lots of questions , i just hope we haven't been sold down the river , i hope against hope we haven't because Peter Varney is involved , but seeing who has been hoodwinked in the past anythings possible , i wonder how long it took before everything unravelled at Notts County?
small clip of Sven here., plus link to the back up report.
So frustrating the restrictions on BBC abraod. I'd gladly pay the licence fee for access, especially if I could buy up the licence of the knobheads who are always complaining about paying it.
[cite]Posted By: Winters-Dawn[/cite]Anyone know where i can watch this Panorama? I cant watch BBC iplayer here in Ireland.
Not sure of your computer proficiency but there are numerous proxy servers you can use which allow you to watch iPlayer abroad. Just type "iplayer abroad" into google and you'll be presented with many options.
I run a Mac and there is a great bit of freeware called 'Hot Spot Shield' that allows me to watch iPlayer abroad. Also allows me to watch Hulu (an american version of iplayer) over here..
yea I've seen a few of those servers around, I was never sure if they were dodgy or what though. I'd love to get one for Hulu, but as I said dodgy or not?
I dont see why I cant watch iplayer here, i have a subscription to Sky and Chorus in both my places, I pay these providers for a service, who in turn pay BBC (i might be wrong on that) so I'm basically like a license payer in a sense. So give me the damn player!!!
[cite]Posted By: Winters-Dawn[/cite]I dont see why I cant watch iplayer here, i have a subscription to Sky and Chorus in both my places, I pay these providers for a service, who in turn pay BBC (i might be wrong on that) so I'm basically like a license payer in a sense. So give me the damn player!!!
IPlayer is funded by the licence. (Sky don't pay the BBC anything. The BBC used to pay Sky to encrypt their satellite signal, maybe you're thinking of that). But why can't we pay the BBC a susbscription? The European Union would favour it, they want broadcasting without borders. One excuse is rights. The BBC only pay to broadcast MOTD, Wimbledon etc in the UK. But that does not explain why they could not offer a service where such programmes are scrambled. They already do that on radio (you can hear 5 live on the net outside UK but not the live commentaries.
The reason, although its never admittted, is national goverments block it, and they are being pushed that way by Murdoch and others who fear the competition form the BBC. Free market? My ass.
As you can see, this winds me up. Partly thats because sitting in my garden is a humunguous 2 metre dish which looks ridiculous, and I'm paying Sky 20 quit a month - to watch mainly the BBC.How stupid is that?
I've heard that iPlayer will soon be made available internationally on a subscription basis - but I've no idea where the guy who told me got his info from.
[cite]Posted By: Winters-Dawn[/cite]I dont see why I cant watch iplayer here, i have a subscription to Sky and Chorus in both my places, I pay these providers for a service, who in turn pay BBC (i might be wrong on that) so I'm basically like a license payer in a sense. So give me the damn player!!!
IPlayer is funded by the licence. (Sky don't pay the BBC anything. The BBC used to pay Sky to encrypt their satellite signal, maybe you're thinking of that). But why can't we pay the BBC a susbscription? The European Union would favour it, they want broadcasting without borders. One excuse is rights. The BBC only pay to broadcast MOTD, Wimbledon etc in the UK. But that does not explain why they could not offer a service where such programmes are scrambled. They already do that on radio (you can hear 5 live on the net outside UK but not the live commentaries.
The reason, although its never admittted, is national goverments block it, and they are being pushed that way by Murdoch and others who fear the competition form the BBC. Free market? My ass.
As you can see, this winds me up. Partly thats because sitting in my garden is a humunguous 2 metre dish which looks ridiculous, and I'm paying Sky 20 quit a month - to watch mainly the BBC.How stupid is that?
Sensible, logical arguments have never had a place in BBC rights policy Prague!......
Trouble is I get the impression that the BBC do not want to encroach on European transmission policies, I really cannot see why an ex pat could not pay for an encrypted fee, as you could argue your rights are being restricted in what is suppossed to be a free market!. But the BBC has always had a troubled history in this. Ironically the Sky channels were full of ex BBC programmes when of course the BBC made programmes.
When i was at the BBC I tried to get a couple of programmes released to the rightful owners! OGWT, in concert stuff, frankly the BBC were not interested!
Hopefully the position will change in the future..... but do not hold your breath!
[cite]Posted By: Czech_Addick[/cite]I've heard that iPlayer will soon be made available internationally on a subscription basis - but I've no idea where the guy who told me got his info from.
The News Technology editor, Rory Something-Jones mentioned it in an interview the other day.
[cite]Posted By: Czech_Addick[/cite]I've heard that iPlayer will soon be made available internationally on a subscription basis - but I've no idea where the guy who told me got his info from.
The News Technology editor, Rory Something-Jones mentioned it in an interview the other day.
That would be Rory Cellan-Jones, who is married to a BBC trust board member so perhaps he has some insight.
Comments
Not saying we shouldn't ask though.
No blame or bad reflection on them, as if everything in the programme is true then he has clearly fooled a lot of people and institutions - and not sure it was his greatest masterstroke to doing anything that could upset the North Koreans.
The need for robust transparent ownership is surely a fundemental priciple , as the league, banks and other 'font men' dissolve like ice cream in the Sahara when the heat is on.
Baron Mawhinney, Tim Yeo, and the former Chairman seemed almost speechless, except pious remarks about ' I am not surprissed', and that is 'hindsight', which of course it would not have been if the original programme had been allowed to investigate the people concerned.
Haven't watched the programme, but will do.
i remember that he also said that the suporters trust didnt recomend the deal, but the chairman of the group elected onto the supporters trust from notts county thought it was a good idea
WHO OWNS CHARLTON ?
The alleged fraudster by the name of Russell King aka Lord Voltemort, hoodwinked a London Investment Bank, the ex head of MI6, The North Korean government , Notts C, Sven Goran Erikson, The Football League and obviously many more, all on the promise of Bahrain money, which there was none, although he did produce a fake prince.
Notts C were unwittingly contributing towards his millionaire lifestyle. Absolutely unbelieveable.
WHO OWNS CHARLTON ?
So frustrating the restrictions on BBC abraod. I'd gladly pay the licence fee for access, especially if I could buy up the licence of the knobheads who are always complaining about paying it.
Not sure of your computer proficiency but there are numerous proxy servers you can use which allow you to watch iPlayer abroad. Just type "iplayer abroad" into google and you'll be presented with many options.
I run a Mac and there is a great bit of freeware called 'Hot Spot Shield' that allows me to watch iPlayer abroad. Also allows me to watch Hulu (an american version of iplayer) over here..
I dont see why I cant watch iplayer here, i have a subscription to Sky and Chorus in both my places, I pay these providers for a service, who in turn pay BBC (i might be wrong on that) so I'm basically like a license payer in a sense. So give me the damn player!!!
IPlayer is funded by the licence. (Sky don't pay the BBC anything. The BBC used to pay Sky to encrypt their satellite signal, maybe you're thinking of that). But why can't we pay the BBC a susbscription? The European Union would favour it, they want broadcasting without borders. One excuse is rights. The BBC only pay to broadcast MOTD, Wimbledon etc in the UK. But that does not explain why they could not offer a service where such programmes are scrambled. They already do that on radio (you can hear 5 live on the net outside UK but not the live commentaries.
The reason, although its never admittted, is national goverments block it, and they are being pushed that way by Murdoch and others who fear the competition form the BBC. Free market? My ass.
As you can see, this winds me up. Partly thats because sitting in my garden is a humunguous 2 metre dish which looks ridiculous, and I'm paying Sky 20 quit a month - to watch mainly the BBC.How stupid is that?
Sensible, logical arguments have never had a place in BBC rights policy Prague!......
Trouble is I get the impression that the BBC do not want to encroach on European transmission policies, I really cannot see why an ex pat could not pay for an encrypted fee, as you could argue your rights are being restricted in what is suppossed to be a free market!. But the BBC has always had a troubled history in this. Ironically the Sky channels were full of ex BBC programmes when of course the BBC made programmes.
When i was at the BBC I tried to get a couple of programmes released to the rightful owners! OGWT, in concert stuff, frankly the BBC were not interested!
Hopefully the position will change in the future..... but do not hold your breath!
The News Technology editor, Rory Something-Jones mentioned it in an interview the other day.
That would be Rory Cellan-Jones, who is married to a BBC trust board member so perhaps he has some insight.