they walk among us - Wallopers in the WildView attachment 1548568
there is no reason to have your shirt unbuttoned that much
actual bleeping idiots who for some reason have over inflated egos
they walk among us - Wallopers in the WildView attachment 1548568
there is no reason to have your shirt unbuttoned that much
She looks bloody awfulView attachment 1549737
they look like that dodgy swinger couple at the party that everyone tries to avoid as they make everyone uncomfortable
They’re at someone’s wedding I believe!Where are they? I don’t follow any of that lot anymore. That is a really unflattering outfit.
Nooooo she did not wear a fuckin mirrored bralet to a weddin?!?!They’re at someone’s wedding I believe!
They had their reception in a skating rink/bowling alley. It wasn't a "normal" weddingNooooo she did not wear a fuckin mirrored bralet to a weddin?!?!
The owners licenced the creative from him, he doesn’t own the AS bar at allInteresting to find out his role in the Glasgow bar is only creative and not operational. If that’s true, then he has grossly misled his customers. Up until the grievance hit the press, I think most were under the illusion that he had opened it and was running it himself.
Comments are still restricted and number of likes are hidden from his new posts. I think he’s posted about it now because he’s not selling any t shirts as a result. My mate sent me a snap of his old ASA wheel tee with the caption ‘is this the new swastika?’. I think a lot of people will not be wearing the brand now because of the negative associations.
Exactly, at director level there’s no way he didn’t knowTotally unsurprised by his statement. He has mislead folk for a long time over his involvement in the bars, making out like he had a far greater role to come across like a Billy Big Balls until tit hits the fan then he admits he was barely involved.
However, he was a minority partner and creative director, and these rumours have been circulating for months, so I completely refuse to believe that he didn’t know of the allegations. This then leads me to ask why he stayed silent and chose not to look into it all, especially since his name and reputation would also be on the line, as they currently are now.
And the bits about always being transparent and about his track record as an employer? Don’t make me laugh.
his social media was full of ‘I have opened a bar’ ‘my bar…’ ‘I’m running a bar’ which has all been deleted now if course when the tit hit the fan and he wanted to distance himself. He’s was very much the face of that bar and it was no accident that he positioned himself as the owner before it all went sideways. The first time we started hearing that he was only the creative director was when the union got involved. If you look at his name on Companies House he was one of three directors who owned a third of that bar.The owners licenced the creative from him, he doesn’t own the AS bar at all
Pretty sure this thread is full of screengrabs of all this toohis social media was full of ‘I have opened a bar’ ‘my bar…’ ‘I’m running a bar’ which has all been deleted now if course when the tit hit the fan and he wanted to distance himself. He’s was very much the face of that bar and it was no accident that he positioned himself as the owner before it all went sideways. The first time we started hearing that he was only the creative director was when the union got involved. If you look at his name on Companies House he was one of three directors who owned a third of that bar.
That’s interesting, he frames it that he was a director, not an owner. You can be creative director without ownership. Maybe he did have shareshis social media was full of ‘I have opened a bar’ ‘my bar…’ ‘I’m running a bar’ which has all been deleted now if course when the tit hit the fan and he wanted to distance himself. He’s was very much the face of that bar and it was no accident that he positioned himself as the owner before it all went sideways. The first time we started hearing that he was only the creative director was when the union got involved. If you look at his name on Companies House he was one of three directors who owned a third of that bar.
He frames it NOW that he was only ever a director. But for months he was calling it ‘his’ bar, and making out he’d opened it himself. I’m sure this was done on purpose to get all the emo ASA fans in. If everyone knew the reality, that two suits owned it, then it wouldn’t have had that same appeal. I heard on the Glasgow grapevine from a pretty credible source that he was bought out which would imply that he owned part of it originally.That’s interesting, he frames it that he was a director, not an owner. You can be creative director without ownership. Maybe he did have shares
I’m actually surprised they would have the capital to own a bar with all their failed businesses. Must be up to their eyes in debt?He frames it NOW that he was only ever a director. But for months he was calling it ‘his’ bar, and making out he’d opened it himself. I’m sure this was done on purpose to get all the emo ASA fans in. If everyone knew the reality, that two suits owned it, then it wouldn’t have had that same appeal. I heard on the Glasgow grapevine from a pretty credible source that he was bought out which would imply that he owned part of it originally.
You don’t need a lot of capital up front. Everything will be on tick. They’ll have a line of credit for coffee suppliers, food, booze. If you can get a license, it’s easy to get credit for all these things. The issue is if they don’t make enough money to pay it back, plus wages, plus future stock.I’m actually surprised they would have the capital to own a bar with all their failed businesses. Must be up to their eyes in debt?
Where did you see that the accounts were £100k in the red? Is that just for the clothing brand or for the bars? I think they were separate. Edit: I just looked at their accounts on companies house. £134k debt and that’s just the clothing business.So Abandon Ship Apparel website is no more. The accounts were over 100k in the red, so could this business be liquidated shortly owing people thousands and thousands again???
So Abandon Ship Apparel website is no more. The accounts were over 100k in the red, so could this business be liquidated shortly owing people thousands and thousands again???
The bar was transferred to Bromley and Bolton limited around the time he resigned from all the other abandon ship bars directorship. Anyone know anything more about this ?
Just gets dodgier and dodgier… why aren’t these grifters being investigated?Where did you see that the accounts were £100k in the red? Is that just for the clothing brand or for the bars? I think they were separate. Edit: I just looked at their accounts on companies house. £134k debt and that’s just the clothing business.
also, do you mean Belford Ltd? The bars were transferred to Belford just before Rich did a runner. It’s interesting that if you look up Belford Ltd, Rich and Phil were both directors but resigned just before the company took over the bars. The only director left is AJ McMenemy who used to run McMerry with Phil.
it’s all so shady.
Sorry I got that wrong, McMerry’s directors were Phil Donaldson, Martin Cannon and Nicola Cannon. Belford LTD’s (previously called Abandon Ship Bar LTD) directors were AJ McMenemy, Martin Cannon, Richard Davies and Phil Donaldson.
so much crossover
This is strange, if you Google ‘AJ McMenemy’ who is the remaining director of Belford who took over all the MacMerry bars, it says he was co-director of MacMerry 300 with Phil, but there’s no mention of him being director of MacMerry on Companies House. I knew I was right about that! The plot thickens…
Just found Bromley & Bolton on companies house and it’s…Phil Donaldson! How many companies run by the same people are going to own or have significant control of these bars! Why do they need all these different companies if they were not trying to hide something?