Sanctum Zone

Keyword
A+ A A-
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: The People's Voice

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:20 #2701

  • Arthur
  • Arthur's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Rank1
  • Posts: 45
  • Thank you received: 76
  • Karma: 0
Gilly wrote:
diforumreject wrote:
looks like they are saying on the toxic mole thread that the Police/authorities are involved??? This should be good
AgJIP

sueperb
Senior Member
I'm sure someone from TPV said on Facebook or Twitter that the authorities had been informed, if so then why has no
statement from TPV been issued, " an employee/volunteer was today interviewed by Police on suspicion of...."
instead of all these cryptic messages ?
__________________
i_am
Technical Advisor
Maybe legal reasons?


www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=266467&page=3

I'm reading that as speculation (it's re the toxic mole *stifles giggle*)- Superb's wondering why there wasn't proper info in Icke's announcement, such as for eg. the police investigation thng.

I_Am_Silly is just trying to think up an acceptable explanation to cover for Icke's typical BS.

The thing is, IF he couldn't say anything for legal reasons, because of a legal investigation being underway, then how come he can accurately predict what and when the outcome can be?

He can't. It's as simple as that.

It's all jiggery-pokery, and they needed the 2 weeks to cook up a case against some poor unsuspecting party there.

My cynical mind originally read the situation as TPV would close in 2 weeks time and that anyone who worked there who subsequently spoke against the goings on would be labelled the 'toxic mole' and had to be the infiltraitor - and if it was more than one person, they would have been in it together, a conspiracy!!

Just my 2 cents worth (see what I did there)
You must register to post here.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Gilly, angelchemuel

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:24 #2702

  • Focus
  • Focus's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Rank1
  • Posts: 56
  • Thank you received: 127
  • Karma: 0
Arthur wrote:
Hello, first time poster and only found this board about a week ago after noticing the mass suspensions, bannings post deletions and editing going on over a DIF which when I first saw it in relation to TPV really blew me away that such underhand behaviour was going on, on a site purportedly under the auspices of a 'truth' seeker......Icke (blimey had an attack of the long words there)

What has just occurred to me, although not sure if it's been covered in this thread as I haven't gone all the way through it, is that we were told that Icke and Sean had the idea to do a broadcast platform only in May last year. So I guess at that early stage they would have discussed ways of funding and came up with the original idea of crowd funding - so far so good.

If this was something I was going to do and decided that I needed £100k to do it, I would not have run out to my friendly local accountants to start a company (TPV broadcasting Ltd or somesuch) as soon as I had the idea cos how the hell would I know if I would have got the £100K which as it happens turned into £300K

Perhaps the answers is as simple as the fact that every crowd funding campaign needs to have the business set up with specific bank accounts (Barclays...!!) for it to go ahead, but couldn't it have gone just as well into an existing business account and then have the new limited company set up when the target was reached as I'm sure the original campaign had to reach it's target before getting a cent (why does he always say cent, when we have always had pennies in the UK)

Like I say to me it was very presumptuous that they knew they would raise the money for it otherwise why start new companies way before
the initial campaign started...........

Apologies if this has already been questioned :conf:

Welcome to the board Arthur. :)

I think you make a very good point. Why start a company before the funding is in place, and also why a Pvt Ltd company?
The indigogo campaign didn't start until after the company was setup.
Perhaps the whole thing was a deliberate setup? :think:
You must register to post here.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Arthur

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:31 #2703

  • angelchemuel
  • angelchemuel's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Gold Boarder
  • Rank5
  • Posts: 2901
  • Thank you received: 1356
  • Karma: 11
Focus wrote:
Arthur wrote:
Hello, first time poster and only found this board about a week ago after noticing the mass suspensions, bannings post deletions and editing going on over a DIF which when I first saw it in relation to TPV really blew me away that such underhand behaviour was going on, on a site purportedly under the auspices of a 'truth' seeker......Icke (blimey had an attack of the long words there)

What has just occurred to me, although not sure if it's been covered in this thread as I haven't gone all the way through it, is that we were told that Icke and Sean had the idea to do a broadcast platform only in May last year. So I guess at that early stage they would have discussed ways of funding and came up with the original idea of crowd funding - so far so good.

If this was something I was going to do and decided that I needed £100k to do it, I would not have run out to my friendly local accountants to start a company (TPV broadcasting Ltd or somesuch) as soon as I had the idea cos how the hell would I know if I would have got the £100K which as it happens turned into £300K

Perhaps the answers is as simple as the fact that every crowd funding campaign needs to have the business set up with specific bank accounts (Barclays...!!) for it to go ahead, but couldn't it have gone just as well into an existing business account and then have the new limited company set up when the target was reached as I'm sure the original campaign had to reach it's target before getting a cent (why does he always say cent, when we have always had pennies in the UK)

Like I say to me it was very presumptuous that they knew they would raise the money for it otherwise why start new companies way before
the initial campaign started...........

Apologies if this has already been questioned :conf:

Welcome to the board Arthur. :)

I think you make a very good point. Why start a company before the funding is in place, and also why a Pvt Ltd company?
The indigogo campaign didn't start until after the company was setup.
Perhaps the whole thing was a deliberate setup? :think:
Please see this post #2693 previous page....
It's simple really...they already had the £100,000 to enable them to set up the various bits and pieces. Not necessarily in hard cash, but in assets. The requirement by the bank would have been to match that with hard cash.
This explains the PRIVATE Limited Company. £100,000 as your house as an asset is acceptable...once you've covered your 'asset' with hard cash...you can remove the 'asset'...which would also suggest that Icke say...put up his house as a 'guarantee/asset', they got their £300.000 in hard cash...asset was then removed as was Icke as a director...neither no longer required.
:jane:

PS....I am not a 100% certain...but land registry laws and regulations went under huge changes a few years back. I think I am correct in saying that a search of a property will give you the value or certainly the previous selling price of the property.....anyone fancy looking up Ickes pad in IoW? :D
"love it better"
the more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war
Last Edit: 22 Jan 2014 12:36 by angelchemuel.
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:37 #2704

  • Gilly
  • Gilly's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Rank6
  • Psychic Assassin
  • Posts: 11225
  • Thank you received: 6506
  • Karma: 99
I don't know where you're getting that info from, Angel.

It costs approx. £4.99 to actually set up a Ltd co through Companies house. You don't need any cash or collateral.

There are hundreds of companies set up each year that never start trading, and eventually just close down.
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]
Last Edit: 22 Jan 2014 12:38 by Gilly.
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:42 #2705

  • angelchemuel
  • angelchemuel's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Gold Boarder
  • Rank5
  • Posts: 2901
  • Thank you received: 1356
  • Karma: 11
Not talking about the setting up of a limited company Gilly....I'm thinking along the lines of the bank side of things, and the difference between a private and public limited company, either of which are easy to do with company house....what the banks want is a whole different ball game.
:jane:
"love it better"
the more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:46 #2706

  • SilvaRizla
  • SilvaRizla's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Expert Boarder
  • Rank4
  • Erm, hiya :)
  • Posts: 1015
  • Thank you received: 867
  • Karma: 0
angelchemuel wrote:
Not talking about the setting up of a limited company Gilly....I'm thinking along the lines of the bank side of things, and the difference between a private and public limited company, either of which are easy to do with company house....what the banks want is a whole different ball game.
:jane:

Banks would only be interested if they wanted a lone though, why take out a loan when they've been given somewhere in the region of half a million quid?
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:46 #2707

  • 3point5
  • 3point5's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Junior Boarder
  • Rank2
  • Posts: 154
  • Thank you received: 261
  • Karma: 0
angelchemuel wrote:
Focus wrote:
Arthur wrote:
Hello, first time poster and only found this board about a week ago after noticing the mass suspensions, bannings post deletions and editing going on over a DIF which when I first saw it in relation to TPV really blew me away that such underhand behaviour was going on, on a site purportedly under the auspices of a 'truth' seeker......Icke (blimey had an attack of the long words there)

What has just occurred to me, although not sure if it's been covered in this thread as I haven't gone all the way through it, is that we were told that Icke and Sean had the idea to do a broadcast platform only in May last year. So I guess at that early stage they would have discussed ways of funding and came up with the original idea of crowd funding - so far so good.

If this was something I was going to do and decided that I needed £100k to do it, I would not have run out to my friendly local accountants to start a company (TPV broadcasting Ltd or somesuch) as soon as I had the idea cos how the hell would I know if I would have got the £100K which as it happens turned into £300K

Perhaps the answers is as simple as the fact that every crowd funding campaign needs to have the business set up with specific bank accounts (Barclays...!!) for it to go ahead, but couldn't it have gone just as well into an existing business account and then have the new limited company set up when the target was reached as I'm sure the original campaign had to reach it's target before getting a cent (why does he always say cent, when we have always had pennies in the UK)

Like I say to me it was very presumptuous that they knew they would raise the money for it otherwise why start new companies way before
the initial campaign started...........

Apologies if this has already been questioned :conf:

Welcome to the board Arthur. :)

I think you make a very good point. Why start a company before the funding is in place, and also why a Pvt Ltd company?
The indigogo campaign didn't start until after the company was setup.
Perhaps the whole thing was a deliberate setup? :think:
Please see this post #2693 previous page....
It's simple really...they already had the £100,000 to enable them to set up the various bits and pieces. Not necessarily in hard cash, but in assets. The requirement by the bank would have been to match that with hard cash.
This explains the PRIVATE Limited Company. £100,000 as your house as an asset is acceptable...once you've covered your 'asset' with hard cash...you can remove the 'asset'...which would also suggest that Icke say...put up his house as a 'guarantee/asset', they got their £300.000 in hard cash...asset was then removed as was Icke as a director...neither no longer required.
:jane:

PS....I am not a 100% certain...but land registry laws and regulations went under huge changes a few years back. I think I am correct in saying that a search of a property will give you the value or certainly the previous selling price of the property.....anyone fancy looking up Ickes pad in IoW? :D

There is £2 in share capital issued from TPV which most likely means each director put in £1 each. There would have been no houses being put on the line etc... That's the joy of LTD companies, you have limited liability. If the company goes tits up, you can't have your house taken from you to pay the debts back etc...

His neighbours flats sell for around £200k as far as I can see. I'm not sure which floor he lives on. I guess the higher the more expensive?
Warning!!! User may offer a differing opinion. If in doubt, accuse of shilling.
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:50 #2708

  • angelchemuel
  • angelchemuel's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Gold Boarder
  • Rank5
  • Posts: 2901
  • Thank you received: 1356
  • Karma: 11
The difference here being between Private and Public. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole thing was set up as a Private PLC not PUBLIC PLC.....and I think if my chronology is right, and hence the confusion...TPV was set up as a Private PLC, and when assets were 'realised' THEN it was changed to a PUBLIC PLC hence the issue of the shares and Ickes revocation of his directorship.
:jane:
"love it better"
the more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:51 #2709

  • wake_up_bomb
  • wake_up_bomb's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Gold Boarder
  • Rank5
  • Posts: 5063
  • Thank you received: 4418
  • Karma: 56
As I've said previously, I think the funding of this station has not been handled well to say the least. But I'm not convinced that it's a money embezzling campaign, simply because it is an extremely elaborate and poorly conceived embezzlement campaign if that were the purpose. I really think that around £350,000 is not that much in order to attempt what they're attempting. Whether or not they should they should be attempting it is another matter.

I do agree with some of the comments, and transparency from ball one would obviously have helped. But I would be highly surprised if it's possible to siphon significant amounts of money out of TPV, just purely because there isn't enough to start off with. You know they had, for example, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on recently, one of the Independent's top columnists; these people are not going to appear for free.

Also, to put things into perspective, the Kickstarter campaign for Elite: Dangerous, which is to raise money for the production of one video game, made over £1.5 million.

www.kickstarter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous

No-one is accusing them of embezzling money, which they easily could. I realise this won't be a popular opinion, but there you go, I just say things as I see them.
The true measure of a man is not his intelligence or how high he rises in this freak establishment. The true measure of a man is this: how quickly he can respond to the needs of others and how much of himself he can give - Philip K. Dick.
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:51 #2710

  • Gilly
  • Gilly's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Rank6
  • Psychic Assassin
  • Posts: 11225
  • Thank you received: 6506
  • Karma: 99
My husband set one up just over a year ago - and I worked for an accountant, so I know that you don't need to have funds on the scale you're describing there to open a business bank account. I'm not even sure if th'usband had got his 1st payment in from a client before the account was set up, and he started with nowt. Certainly there was no requirement to stump up collateral, as i'm a joint mortgagee, so my signature would have been needed for an agreement to go ahead with the house - which it wasn't (and we've nothing else of worth).

Different banks have different terms, and those offering the best deals (free cheque facilities & such) dictate more up front from their clients, but Barclays is one of the easiest & quickest business-account set-ups.

I think it's more 'inappropriate' squandering of donations than outright embezzlement that's been the cause of concern, WUBs.
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]
Last Edit: 22 Jan 2014 12:54 by Gilly.
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 12:57 #2711

  • SilvaRizla
  • SilvaRizla's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Expert Boarder
  • Rank4
  • Erm, hiya :)
  • Posts: 1015
  • Thank you received: 867
  • Karma: 0
angelchemuel wrote:
The difference here being between Private and Public. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole thing was set up as a Private PLC not PUBLIC PLC.....and I think if my chronology is right, and hence the confusion...TPV was set up as a Private PLC, and when assets were 'realised' THEN it was changed to a PUBLIC PLC hence the issue of the shares and Ickes revocation of his directorship.
:jane:

This is not correct Jane, TPV are a Ltd company. Just a standard business entity in its own right. Shares are created, but do not have to be traded. It is at seans discresion whether to allow private shareholders or not.

A PLC is a public version of a LTD company. Being public, the director has no say over buying or selling shares, if you buy the majority of shares you control the company.

TPV has always been a Ltd company, but started as a partnership between Icke and Sean, Icke jumped ship when Ofcom got involved.
You must register to post here.
The following user(s) said Thank You: 3point5

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 13:02 #2712

  • SilvaRizla
  • SilvaRizla's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Expert Boarder
  • Rank4
  • Erm, hiya :)
  • Posts: 1015
  • Thank you received: 867
  • Karma: 0
wake_up_bomb wrote:
As I've said previously, I think the funding of this station has not been handled well to say the least. But I'm not convinced that it's a money embezzling campaign, simply because it is an extremely elaborate and poorly conceived embezzlement campaign if that were the purpose. I really think that around £350,000 is not that much in order to attempt what they're attempting. Whether or not they should they should be attempting it is another matter.

I do agree with some of the comments, and transparency from ball one would obviously have helped. But I would be highly surprised if it's possible to siphon significant amounts of money out of TPV, just purely because there isn't enough to start off with. You know they had, for example, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on recently, one of the Independent's top columnists; these people are not going to appear for free.

Also, to put things into perspective, the Kickstarter campaign for Elite: Dangerous, which is to raise money for the production of one video game, made over £1.5 million.

www.kickstarter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous

No-one is accusing them of embezzling money, which they easily could. I realise this won't be a popular opinion, but there you go, I just say things as I see them.

The crucial difference there wub is that the company you mentioned have never claimed to be not-for-profit from the start. They have not claimed complete transparency yet seem to be set up in favour of the opposite and they haven't submitted beer mat account figures that doesn't explain half their income as an attempt to disprove allegations of poor financial control.

TPV seems to be pointing in a certain direction and it is TPV themselves that are giving us these dots to connect.
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 13:02 #2713

  • 3point5
  • 3point5's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Junior Boarder
  • Rank2
  • Posts: 154
  • Thank you received: 261
  • Karma: 0
wake_up_bomb wrote:
As I've said previously, I think the funding of this station has not been handled well to say the least. But I'm not convinced that it's a money embezzling campaign, simply because it is an extremely elaborate and poorly conceived embezzlement campaign if that were the purpose. I really think that around £350,000 is not that much in order to attempt what they're attempting. Whether or not they should they should be attempting it is another matter.

I do agree with some of the comments, and transparency from ball one would obviously have helped. But I would be highly surprised if it's possible to siphon significant amounts of money out of TPV, just purely because there isn't enough to start off with. You know they had, for example, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on recently, one of the Independent's top columnists; these people are not going to appear for free.

Also, to put things into perspective, the Kickstarter campaign for Elite: Dangerous, which is to raise money for the production of one video game, made over £1.5 million.

www.kickstarter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous

No-one is accusing them of embezzling money, which they easily could. I realise this won't be a popular opinion, but there you go, I just say things as I see them.

I'm in two minds here. On one hand I think they're doing this for money. On the other, I think it is David's way of saying to the BBC "Screw you guys, you said I'd never be on TV again and now look at me".

It's extremely easy to syphen (sp?) money out of this type of business. Get Magus Media (Sean's company) to bill TPV for 'outside consulting' or something like that and you can easily scrape £100k off TPV each year. Each documentary, get Magus Media to be the production team and they can charge TPV what they like.
Warning!!! User may offer a differing opinion. If in doubt, accuse of shilling.
You must register to post here.
The following user(s) said Thank You: SilvaRizla

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 13:05 #2714

  • Gilly
  • Gilly's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Rank6
  • Psychic Assassin
  • Posts: 11225
  • Thank you received: 6506
  • Karma: 99
I believe there's a move to strike Magus Media btw.
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 13:06 #2715

  • SilvaRizla
  • SilvaRizla's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Expert Boarder
  • Rank4
  • Erm, hiya :)
  • Posts: 1015
  • Thank you received: 867
  • Karma: 0
Greencard wrote:
wake_up_bomb wrote:
As I've said previously, I think the funding of this station has not been handled well to say the least. But I'm not convinced that it's a money embezzling campaign, simply because it is an extremely elaborate and poorly conceived embezzlement campaign if that were the purpose. I really think that around £350,000 is not that much in order to attempt what they're attempting. Whether or not they should they should be attempting it is another matter.

I do agree with some of the comments, and transparency from ball one would obviously have helped. But I would be highly surprised if it's possible to siphon significant amounts of money out of TPV, just purely because there isn't enough to start off with. You know they had, for example, Yasmin Alibhai Brown on recently, one of the Independent's top columnists; these people are not going to appear for free.

Also, to put things into perspective, the Kickstarter campaign for Elite: Dangerous, which is to raise money for the production of one video game, made over £1.5 million.

www.kickstarter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous

No-one is accusing them of embezzling money, which they easily could. I realise this won't be a popular opinion, but there you go, I just say things as I see them.

I'm in two minds here. On one hand I think they're doing this for money. On the other, I think it is David's way of saying to the BBC "Screw you guys, you said I'd never be on TV again and now look at me".

It's extremely easy to syphen (sp?) money out of this type of business. Get Magus Media (Sean's company) to bill TPV for 'outside consulting' or something like that and you can easily scrape £100k off TPV each year. Each documentary, get Magus Media to be the production team and they can charge TPV what they like.

+1 GC, I've said this numerous times now. Not only that but David has a few sock companies as well. What maks it worse, is that because of the way they're set up and their "small turnover" detailed accounts do not need to be submitted to the taxman. The potential for abuse is enormous.
You must register to post here.
The following user(s) said Thank You: dubmeup

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 13:11 #2716

  • 3point5
  • 3point5's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Junior Boarder
  • Rank2
  • Posts: 154
  • Thank you received: 261
  • Karma: 0
SilvaRizla wrote:
Greencard wrote:
+1 GC, I've said this numerous times now. Not only that but David has a few sock companies as well. What maks it worse, is that because of the way they're set up and their "small turnover" detailed accounts do not need to be submitted to the taxman. The potential for abuse is enormous.

You know what I find weirdest? Icke isn't actually a director of anything. David Icke Books is ran by his ex wife and Gareth. TPV is ran by Sean. It's just weird.

David has however lived in the same house as a lot of business owners. When I'm back on my home PC I'll get some of the names and company names uploaded.
Warning!!! User may offer a differing opinion. If in doubt, accuse of shilling.
You must register to post here.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Gilly, SilvaRizla

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 13:16 #2717

  • Evie
  • Evie's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Zoner
  • Rank6
  • Posts: 463
  • Thank you received: 393
  • Karma: 0
I've tried to view TPV threads twice today. Both times it's frozen my laptop and I've had to restart it.
You must register to post here.

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 13:16 #2718

  • SilvaRizla
  • SilvaRizla's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Expert Boarder
  • Rank4
  • Erm, hiya :)
  • Posts: 1015
  • Thank you received: 867
  • Karma: 0
Greencard wrote:
SilvaRizla wrote:
+1 GC, I've said this numerous times now. Not only that but David has a few sock companies as well. What maks it worse, is that because of the way they're set up and their "small turnover" detailed accounts do not need to be submitted to the taxman. The potential for abuse is enormous.

You know what I find weirdest? Icke isn't actually a director of anything. David Icke Books is ran by his ex wife and Gareth. TPV is ran by Sean. It's just weird.

David has however lived in the same house as a lot of business owners. When I'm back on my home PC I'll get some of the names and company names uploaded.

I'd noted the same, its like he's distancing himself from any legal comeback. Very suspicious.
Last Edit: 22 Jan 2014 13:18 by SilvaRizla.
You must register to post here.
The following user(s) said Thank You: 3point5, Mother Damnable

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 13:22 #2719

  • Wise Haven
  • Wise Haven's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Senior Boarder
  • Rank3
  • Posts: 962
  • Thank you received: 779
  • Karma: 0
I wouldn't worry too much about the address used for the business. All companies have to have a registered address and most used their accountants address rather than their own home private address.

One thing that REALLY surprises me is that this was set up as a Private Limited Company rather than a Company Limited by Guarantee which is the normal form for social enterprise or non profit companies. Very dodgy considering the whole venture was sold as a non-profit and they chose THE for profit format.

BTW - Hi folks, I'm an ex DIFer and stopped posting waaaaaay back... maybe 3 years now.
My Rights End Where Yours Begin so give me space FFS
You must register to post here.
The following user(s) said Thank You: thoreau, Boots, Grenadene, Blue_Tackler, SilvaRizla, Focus, electricdreams

The People's Voice 22 Jan 2014 13:29 #2720

  • SilvaRizla
  • SilvaRizla's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Expert Boarder
  • Rank4
  • Erm, hiya :)
  • Posts: 1015
  • Thank you received: 867
  • Karma: 0
Wise Haven wrote:
I wouldn't worry too much about the address used for the business. All companies have to have a registered address and most used their accountants address rather than their own home private address.

One thing that REALLY surprises me is that this was set up as a Private Limited Company rather than a Company Limited by Guarantee which is the normal form for social enterprise or non profit companies. Very dodgy considering the whole venture was sold as a non-profit and they chose THE for profit format.

BTW - Hi folks, I'm an ex DIFer and stopped posting waaaaaay back... maybe 3 years now.

Hi Wise Haven, welcome to the boards. :)

This would have been the ideal situation but it would have meant the loss of control to Icke. ;)

They function much like PLC's except they can have charitable status, which get a reduced Ofcom license fee as well.

Top and bottom of it is that TPV is a FOR PROFIT company.
You must register to post here.
Moderators: psketti, oioioi, batou
Time to create page: 0.904 seconds

Latest Members Blogs

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Prev Next

What is going on when it comes to 9-11 I…

The EPA (environmental protection agency) and OSHA took air samples in the days following September 11th, they reported that they found no excessive levels of asbestos contrary to other findings....

Read more

9-11 Eleven Years Later

9-11 Eleven Years Later

With the anniversary of September 11th literally just around the corner, unanswered questions still remain for families who lost loved ones during the tragic event, as well as from families...

Read more

Strange Noises, Possible Link to Mass An…

Strange Noises, Possible Link to Mass Animal Deaths

In 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review a series of lower court rulings that restrict the United States Navy's use of sonar in submarine detection training exercises off...

Read more

Annual Server Target

Whether its 50 cents or five dollars, your donations are appreciated and help keep this community site running so we can all continue to enjoy using it.
This target is to meet our server cost for one year, June 2020 - May 2021, in USD.
$ 340 - Target
( £ 250 GBP )
donation thermometer
donation thermometer
$ 192 - Raised
( £ 140 GBP )
donation thermometer
56%
Most Recent Donation:
$122 USD on 4th Jan 2021
Bitcoin Address: bc1q0kazqya0nurfxtunxv807vm0m8852nnrrk8mj8
 
Ethereum Address: 0xe69915c80dd75df19f438d556267e04f932f057d
 
More Info: Donation options for TZ

No one is obliged to donate, please only donate what you can afford. Even the smallest amount helps. Being an active member is a positive contribution. Thank You.

TradeZone Latest

Visitors

Today1457
Yesterday1176
Week9031
Month35334
Total1238334

Your IP Address: 216.73.217.15 Your Browser and OS: Unknown - Unknown Friday, 16 October 2026 23:32

Who Is Online

Guests : 679 guests online Members : No members online
© 2012 – 2021 Sanctum Zone | All rights reserved. This website is a place for people to express and discuss their views on the news and world events. DISCLAIMER: Please Note: Views expressed and submitted by contributors are their own personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions and beliefs of the Sanctum Zone website and its founder(s) , administrators , moderators , and any other website maintenance technicians, personnel and volunteers. Articles and messages posted on this website and forum are solely the opinion of their authors.

Login or Register

LOG IN

Register

User Registration
or Cancel