IPL mess : Why so surprised? - Gideon Haigh

[thevortex]

How is that even comparable? Chellaram joined a group of people who then bid for a franchise legally, like all the other owners. The bidding was done by a reputed third party company, all independent of Modi or his opinion. If anyone else had bid more than Chellaram's group, then they would have won it. The relationship had nothing to do with the process. In the other case, a random beautician got paid 20~50 million $ for no reason. How was she related to the team? Why would anyone pay someone, who for all purposes has not shown any previous experience for what she is supposedly hired for, such exorbitant fees? The obvious answer here is that she provides some other service. Seeing as Tharoor, played a huge hand in first removing a clause and canceling the 1st bid because Rendezvous couldn't bid and that his gf got paid 20~50 million $, its pretty obvious what happened here.

Zap - a corporate entity is entitled to give equity to any person it feels the need to do so. It is not Modi's call or BCCI's call. That entire controversy was in bad taste and motivated by seemingly personal interests. Are you by any chance saying that Modi is above cheap tactics? If an alleged girl friend holding stake can be a big talking point, then a brother in law holding the same stake has to be a bigger talking point, na? Begs the question, more like.

[thevortex]

Oh man, Modi comes across as a complete slimeball relying on the reprehensible tactics of the legal giants that our country has produced. If he gets through this unscathed then every belief in fairness as far as the BCCI is concerned will have to be summarily trashed.

[Zap_Brannigan]

Zap - a corporate entity is entitled to give equity to any person it feels the need to do so. It is not Modi's call or BCCI's call. That entire controversy was in bad taste and motivated by seemingly personal interests. Are you by any chance saying that Modi is above cheap tactics? If an alleged girl friend holding stake can be a big talking point, then a brother in law holding the same stake has to be a bigger talking point, na? Begs the question, more like.

Anyone can gift anything to anyone, but this was a bribe for Tharoor. I explained the scenario elaborately in the previous post. This has nothing to do with Modi or his tactics. You compared brother in law holding a stake in a team with this so i explained further, Again taking a bribe Vs doing everything legally. 2 different scenarios. I am asking simple questions 1. Why did the girl get that gift and does she deserve it as per her job profile? 2. Do you think that it is not a bribe? 3. How could Modi help his brother in law with the bid when it was done by an independent reputed 3rd party firm?

[CSK Fan]

What does Gideon Haigh say about the fixing reports concerning County cricket? Was he surprised or not?

[thevortex]

Anyone can gift anything to anyone, but this was a bribe for Tharoor. I explained the scenario elaborately in the previous post. This has nothing to do with Modi or his tactics. You compared brother in law holding a stake in a team with this so i explained further, Again taking a bribe Vs doing everything legally. 2 different scenarios. I am asking simple questions 1. Why did the girl get that gift and does she deserve it as per her job profile? 2. Do you think that it is not a bribe? 3. How could Modi help his brother in law with the bid when it was done by an independent reputed 3rd party firm?

OK Zap - first things first. You have got zero - I must repeat zero - control over who a company chooses to award equity to. Modi had no business raising the matter leave alone all the other controversy arising out of it. However the brother-in-law holding a stake in one of the teams is far more of a concern than the one that Modi raised. Which independent 3rd party firm bid for the team, Zap? That organization which bid for Rajasthan Royals was a hastily patched up entity. It only took shape properly after the Chellarams stepped in.

[Feed]

IPL mess : 'Team ownership details still missing' Not one of the eight Indian Premier League teams have furnished all the details relating to their ownership and funding to the Registrar of Companies, as they are required to by law, Corporate Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid told HT on Sunday. More... 'Team ownership details missing' Mahua Venkatesh, Hindustan Times New Delhi, May 31, 2010 Not one of the eight Indian Premier League (IPL) teams have furnished all the details relating to their ownership and funding to the Registrar of Companies (RoC), as they are required to by law, Corporate Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid told HT on Sunday. "There have been shortcomings in the reports of all the teams," said Khurshid. "The levels, however, vary. We’ve asked all of them to provide us more information," he added. The National Law Company Tribunal (NLCT) — a fast track adjudication body to be set up shortly — will take up the matter on a priority basis, Khurshid said. "Once the NLCT comes up we’ll look at the enforcement issue," Khurshid said. The Central Board of Direct Taxes, the Enforcement Directorate and the RoC are all separately examining the funding and ownership details of IPL teams amid allegations of financial irregularities and murky deals. The RoC is also examining whether the sweat equity shares given out by the teams comply with the guidelines of the Companies Act. Under Section 79(A) of the act, unlisted companies can issue sweat equity but need to clearly spell whom it has been awarded to, and why.

[Tapioca]

Not one of the eight Indian Premier League (IPL) teams have furnished all the details relating to their ownership and funding to the Registrar of Companies (RoC), as they are required to by law, Corporate Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid told HT on Sunday.

It is all available in the public domain. Why don't they just pick it up from there.

[Gunner_Mania]

It is all available in the public domain. Why don't they just pick it up from there.

if you start a company you need to furnish it to the Registrar of Companies. You can't just say pick my details up from the public domain. I am sure some body like SJS who has more experience in corporates may be better able to explain why it can't be picked from public domain

[Tapioca]

>> if you start a company you need to furnish it to the Registrar of Companies. You can't just say pick my details up from the public domain. That was not a serious comment. I was just quoting Modi.

[Feed]

'BCCI harassing Modi by issuing showcause notices' Suspended IPL Commissioner Lalit Modi on Monday accused the BCCI of harassing him through showcause notices which he termed as a 'ridiculous affair'. More...

[meloveindia]

on a separate topic, sack Kalmadi and make Modi the commonwealth games organizing committee chief just heard the commonwealth marketing committee is struggling http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Sports/Events-Tournaments/Commonwealth-Games/Sponsors-shy-away-from-Commonwealth-Games/articleshow/6000630.cms

[SachDan]

Chirayu Amin admits IPL bid! Amin agreed to invest 10% in Pune bid. He claims to have "total transparency" at every step and he would have taken a clearance letter from BCCI "had the bid was successful" No wonder Modi finds himself on a strong wicket in this IPLgate! :hysterical::hysterical:

[flamy]

:O)

[achilles]

:cheer: Modi. What must be noted that our "Totally Transparent" Rambo needed to be exposed by Modi for him to admit in public that he had a stake in the IPL Pune team bid. I said it back in April. Lalit Modi is not alone. And slowly but surely, he's taking everyone down. Maybe his Exposé was a shrewd hint to the big babu's.

[punjabi_khota]

who is he ? anyone fill me up on this ?

[asterix]

who is he ? anyone fill me up on this ?

Present IPL Commissioner..President of Gujarat Cricket Association (?)..

[kabira]

^No Narendra Modi is president of Gujarat Cricket Association

[yoda]

Don't see why there is a big deal with ownership and IPL committee/chairmanship. Yes, there can be conflicts of interest, but as long as it is disclosed in advance and approved by the governing bodies, who cares? MLB commissioner Bud Selig was/is a minority owner of a team. It is not as outrageous as it seems. Also, this guy Amin wasn't even involved with the IPL when the bid was made. So Modi lovers will have to find something else to celebrate :hehe:

[mastana]

Don't see why there is a big deal with ownership and IPL committee/chairmanship. Yes, there can be conflicts of interest, but as long as it is disclosed in advance and approved by the governing bodies, who cares? MLB commissioner Bud Selig was/is a minority owner of a team. It is not as outrageous as it seems. Also, this guy Amin wasn't even involved with the IPL when the bid was made. So Modi lovers will have to find something else to celebrate :hehe:

++1

[asterix]

In IPL everybody is involved and helping themselves. No need to make Modi the only fall guy. Other are not saints themselves.