Quinn Insurance in Administration

muppet · February 26, 2013, 05:07:36 PM

Quote from: supersarsfields on February 26, 2013, 04:45:10 PM
If the Quinns win their cases they wouldn't be asking you to pay their debts. Because it won't be their debt. It'll be Anglo's debt. So that's why I said take it up with Cowen. You don't seem to be following that.

If Sean Quinn hadn't laid the bet, there would be no debt.

trileacman · February 26, 2013, 05:09:57 PM

Quote from: muppet on February 26, 2013, 05:07:36 PM
Quote from: supersarsfields on February 26, 2013, 04:45:10 PM
If the Quinns win their cases they wouldn't be asking you to pay their debts. Because it won't be their debt. It'll be Anglo's debt. So that's why I said take it up with Cowen. You don't seem to be following that.

If Sean Quinn hadn't laid the bet, there would be no debt.

So no business should borrow from a bank? Or just Sean Quinn? I notice we don't have a 50+ page thread on the bets of Michael O'Leary or Denis O'Brien.

supersarsfields · February 26, 2013, 05:11:53 PM

If Anglo hadn't lied about their share value there'd be no debt.
If anglo hadn't over exposed themselves to the property market there'd be no debt.
If anglo hadn't loaned the money there'd be no debt.(To the tax payers)

muppet · February 26, 2013, 05:14:50 PM

Quote from: trileacman on February 26, 2013, 05:09:57 PM
Quote from: muppet on February 26, 2013, 05:07:36 PM
Quote from: supersarsfields on February 26, 2013, 04:45:10 PM
If the Quinns win their cases they wouldn't be asking you to pay their debts. Because it won't be their debt. It'll be Anglo's debt. So that's why I said take it up with Cowen. You don't seem to be following that.

If Sean Quinn hadn't laid the bet, there would be no debt.

So no business should borrow from a bank? Or just Sean Quinn? I notice we don't have a 50+ page thread on the bets of Michael O'Leary or Denis O'Brien.

I don't think you understand what he did.

He borrowed from Anglo to cover the bet.

muppet · February 26, 2013, 05:16:18 PM

Quote from: supersarsfields on February 26, 2013, 05:11:53 PM
If Anglo hadn't lied about their share value there'd be no debt.
If anglo hadn't over exposed themselves to the property market there'd be no debt.
If anglo hadn't loaned the money there'd be no debt.(To the tax payers)

Poor Sean Quinn, laid a €3bn bet on a donkey. And you blame the donkey.

supersarsfields · February 26, 2013, 05:18:17 PM

No I blame the corupt bookies.

muppet · February 26, 2013, 05:19:47 PM

Quote from: supersarsfields on February 26, 2013, 05:18:17 PM
No I blame the corupt bookies.

That would be a bank in Switzerland.

supersarsfields · February 26, 2013, 05:22:12 PM

So you don't blame anglo for any of their involvement in the dealings?

muppet · February 26, 2013, 05:28:02 PM

Quote from: supersarsfields on February 26, 2013, 05:22:12 PM
So you don't blame anglo for any of their involvement in the dealings?

Of course I do. They should have done the sensible thing and let Sean Quinn be liquidated by the Swiss.

Instead they tried to bail him out, to save their own share price and landed the taxpayer in the mess thanks to the idiotic guarantee. All of them are to blame.

supersarsfields · February 26, 2013, 05:31:14 PM

And maybe they shouldn't have fiddled their accounts either.

trileacman · February 26, 2013, 05:33:34 PM

I would be the first to admit that Quinn made mistakes and those mistakes could have eventually led to his financial demise but I can't believe the neck on some people who continue to ignore the malpractice engaged by the government/IRBC.

The government/IBRC are being trawled through the courts and with every passing day look more likely to lose on any of the counts, you've acknowledged as much yourself Muppet and suggested a deal could be in the offing.

Now after all that and the increasing likelihood the courts will find in favour of Quinn on some of the challenges how can you continue to ignore the role of the government/IBRC in this affair. Time after time on here and in other threads you have continued to solely lay the blame for the loss of taxpayer funds at the door of Quinn and Anglo, ignoring or minimizing the governments involvement.

Now given that you seem to accept that a deal is forthcoming, do you honestly believe that the government/IBRC shoulder none of the blame here?

muppet · February 26, 2013, 05:40:02 PM

Quote from: trileacman on February 26, 2013, 05:33:34 PM
I would be the first to admit that Quinn made mistakes and those mistakes could have eventually led to his financial demise but I can't believe the neck on some people who continue to ignore the malpractice engaged by the government/IRBC.

The government/IBRC are being trawled through the courts and with every passing day look more likely to lose on any of the counts, you've acknowledged as much yourself Muppet and suggested a deal could be in the offing.

Now after all that and the increasing likelihood the courts will find in favour of Quinn on some of the challenges how can you continue to ignore the role of the government/IBRC in this affair. Time after time on here and in other threads you have continued to solely lay the blame for the loss of taxpayer funds at the door of Quinn and Anglo, ignoring or minimizing the governments involvement.

Now given that you seem to accept that a deal is forthcoming, do you honestly believe that the government/IBRC shoulder none of the blame here?

Woah. I never said that I thought the courts would find in favour of the Quinns.

The reason I think there may be a deal done is because of the liquidation of IBRC and the legal mess that will follow. I don't think the Quinns case is improving or likely to succeed. Their behaviour to the courts has been appalling and that is not really a good sign. I think the the Government might desperately want to avoid a legal holdup to the Promissory Note, which might happen if the Quinns get an injunction. Hence the Government might cut a deal.

The only way I see the Quinns winning is if they blame the Dad.

muppet · February 26, 2013, 05:45:18 PM

Quote from: supersarsfields on February 26, 2013, 05:31:14 PM
And maybe they shouldn't have fiddled their accounts either.

Why is it Quinn supporters can't understand this is not an either or situation?

Anglo is officially the worst business in Irish history and are possibly is worst bank in World history.

Now over to Sean Quinn. He, all on his own, by his own hand, of his own volition, without the knowledge of Anglo bet €3bn on them. Are we supposed to bail Quinn's idiotic bet out because Anglo was rotten?

Both Quinn and Anglo are disasters for the Irish economy. Despising one does not mean you have to support the other.

sammymaguire · February 26, 2013, 05:59:59 PM

Quote from: muppet on February 26, 2013, 02:04:39 PM
Quote from: sammymaguire on February 26, 2013, 01:59:54 PM
It's been a total mess from Day 1.

Yea but I am referring to the new legal mess.

I am referring to the political mess made by incompetent people in power

supersarsfields · February 26, 2013, 06:30:10 PM

Quote from: muppet on February 26, 2013, 05:45:18 PM
Quote from: supersarsfields on February 26, 2013, 05:31:14 PM
And maybe they shouldn't have fiddled their accounts either.

Why is it Quinn supporters can't understand this is not an either or situation?

Anglo is officially the worst business in Irish history and are possibly is worst bank in World history.

Now over to Sean Quinn. He, all on his own, by his own hand, of his own volition, without the knowledge of Anglo bet €3bn on them. Are we supposed to bail Quinn's idiotic bet out because Anglo was rotten?

Both Quinn and Anglo are disasters for the Irish economy. Despising one does not mean you have to support the other.

Funny I would say the same about others who lay the blame solely at SQ which your previous post about "had Sean Quinn not made the bet " seemed to imply.
Indeed its equally possible to think SQ messed up with his CFDs but still appreciate other aspects of his career.