Talk:Qadbak Investments

Qadbak Investments Ltd registered in British Virgin Islands

Please note that Qadbak Investments Ltd has been officially confirmed by British Virgin Islands Financial Services Commission to be a British Virgin Islands registered company. Swiss newspaper Sonntags Zeitung published on 27th September 2009 a copy of an extract of the company register of British Virgin Islands and an enclosed statement made by British Virgin Islands Financial Services Commission, Registry of Corporate Affairs, confirming that "Qadbak Investments Ltd." is a British Virgin Islands registered company incorporated on 10th of June 2008 with company number 1486102. (Here a shorted online-version of Sonntags Zeitungs' article [1]. The complete article including copy of extract of British Virgin Islands company register and statement made by British Virgin Islands Financial Services Commission is printed on page 57 of Sonntags Zeitungs' print-version)

No one knows why BMW in its first statements purported Qadbak to be a Swiss fundation, not even BMW officials, as it was from the beginning clear that Qadbak Investments Ltd can't be a Swiss based fundation or company as it is not registered in Swiss commercial registers. For the commercial registers in Switzerland provided by Federal Office of Justice see www.zefix.ch. --84.226.38.52 (talk) 20:27, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

While the company might not perhaps be registered in Switzerland, the fact is that both official and published, reliable sources state the company does have a significant base in Switzerland and many of its investors and representatives either have investments or are Swiss themselves, such as Lionel Fischer, who represented Qadbak during the BMW takeover. These are facts that cannot be argued against, and verifiability trumps all. Therefore, while it might be registered in the British Virgin Islands, this does not need to be highlighted or stressed further than a few lines, and certainly not in the introduction itself, as that would hint at an agenda of sorts. The primary objective of any article on Wikipedia is to present a notable, verifiable and most all, neutral stance on any object at hand. ···巌流^{? · talk to ganryuu} 17:24, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Furthermore, the Guardian's noted Digger column has also recently highlighted another instance of Qadbak's relations in Switzerland. This is not an uncommon occurrence in European business however, as numerous companies have had investments in Swiss companies. ···巌流^{? · talk to ganryuu} 17:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

What an unserious and redicolous Muppet Show is this here? It seems that someone has a very big interest in divulgating only informations which he personally finds suitable, while official informations provided by national authorities being completely ignored and deleted out of the article. How strange... but let's talk about some facts and answer some questions here:
1.) Qadbak Investments Ltd has officially been confirmed by British Virgin Islands Financial Services Commission to be registered in British Virgin Islands and incorporated on 10th June 2008.
2.) Where in Switzerland Qadbak Investments Ltd should be based? As it is confirmed by Ivan Kaufmann of board of Swiss Commodity Holding AG that Qadbak Investments Ltd has never had any offices in Switzerland. Qadbak Investments Ltd seems to be nothing else than an Shelf corporation. So please provide a serious and reliable references that Qadbak Investments Ltd is Swiss based.
3.) Talking about Swiss Commodity Holding AG... I'm sure you didn't know that Swiss Commodity Holding AG was founded just a few months ago, in march 2009, and has a Share capital of just 100.000 Swiss francs (approx. 60.000 British Pounds). Even more, Swiss Commodity Holding AG has no offices in Switzerland, using the address c/o Naiman Trust Solutions AG.
4.) So if you think to know it better than official informations provided by Swiss authorities, please provide serious and reliable references and not some worthless speculative press-talking. --84.226.40.211 (talk) 10:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Please refrain from rude, uncivil and personal attacks - you might also be well-advised to use a spell-checker. As I have repeatedly told you, neutrality and verifiability trumps all and whatever that's stated by both official and reliable sources such as the the Guardian will only be used in Wikipedia articles. Original research of any kind, as well as non-relevant, non-notable information are not permitted on Wikipedia. Thank you. ···巌流^{? · talk to ganryuu} 11:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Aha, sure... so why do you continue to delete relevant information from reliable sources? In fact it really looks like you are deliberately distorting the article by picking out only those things out of news articles published in newspapers you personally want to be mentioned and deleting all kind of relevant information you don’t like even if they are well-sourced. One-sided information by mentioning only one half of things is clear manipulation. You can’t write in the article Qadbak is a Swiss based company (even if there is no official prove for that and BMW has corrected this version) and not want to have mentioned that the company is officially registered in British Virgin Islands according to official information by British Virgin Islands Financial Services Commission published in Swiss newspaper Sonntags Zeitung. You can’t mention only a Zurich-registered company and at the same time not want to have mentioned other involved companies mentioned in British newspapers. Companies, for example Jersey-regsitered Belgravia, in which the same Russell King has been involved and failed some years ago to buy Newcastle United and the Jordan Formula 1 team. You can’t write in the article that Eriksson owns a "major" shareholding in Swiss Commodity Holding AG at the same time not mentioning that this company according your own source is completele unknown, was founded just a few months ago and is in reality jus a small company with a share capital of only 100.000 Swiss franc. All these informations are well sourced either by official and publicly available register-entries or by news-articles for example in the Guardian or in Swiss medias. ([2], [3], [4] etc etc.) By picking out of personally selected medias only those informations you find suitable you give a distorted picture of reality. Such a behaviour goes clearly against wikipedia prinicple of Neutral point of view. So you are kindly invited not to delete any kind of relevant and well sourced information as such a behaviour would be nothing else than purposeful disinformation, in Wikipedia terms Vandalism! By the way, according to newest media news Qadbak Investments seems to be nothing else than a faked p.o.-box company, the so-called "investors" behind Qadbak don't even exist, 2 of them died decades ago... another one resulted to be an ex primeminister of Pakistan who has never heard of such a company. Even Oswald Grübel, new CEO of UBS and board member of BMW-Sauber, confirmed that there has not been any board meeting concerning a definitive sale of BMW-Sauber and that BMW-Sauber has not been sold yet, only unbinding talks have taken place. So be adviced, that any kind of propaganda in favour of what according to newspapers looks more and more like a faked p.o.-box company is absolutely unwelcome. --84.226.225.15 (talk) 17:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

It is quite clear from the manner of your posts that you are in fact the one with the deep-seated agenda. I will not bother addressing your false allegations and pejorative statements; Wikipedia is not a public forum for this sort of nonsense. Any allegations or original research cannot be included on Wikipedia; the vast majority of your posts have been removed due to being original research, non-notable and not conforming to the NPOV policy, not just by myself, but several other editors involved in other articles related to this topic, therefore bringing the interesting nature of your contributions to light. Take your allegations and threats somewhere else please. ···巌流^{? · talk to ganryuu} 18:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Public available newspaper-articles are not original research, so please stop writing such excuses. Btw: Have a look at this copy of last sundays article in Swiss SonntagsZeitung. I think there is nothing more to write. --84.226.22.253 (talk) 22:06, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The whole tone of this entry appears one sided to me. Wasn't it a simple case of Qadbak not proceeding with the BMW Sauber deal because they weren't guaranteed a place on the grid? That is what a spokesman for BMW told the Guardian newspaper, anyway. Please see link below.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/nov/27/bmw-sauber-qadbak-investments —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.3.214.177 (talk) 14:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Fact is, only 5 days after the new announcement of BMW the FIA confirmed that BMW Sauber have been granted a slot on the 2010 grid. So the problem of not getting a F-1 starting place in 2010 was obviously a Qadbak specific problem and not a BMW or Sauber problem. In fact Qadbak did not fulfill their contractual obligations as they don't even were able to pay the purchase price as several medias reported. --84.226.37.205 (talk) 14:15, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Just a thought fellow editors: there is a lot of "smoke and mirror" style PR with this company. Hence, much as though what we would normally consider reliable sources in most cases, seem to have run a great deal with what Quadbank's PR company and spin has fed them. Hence, although the normally reliable non-tabloid newspapers say its a Swiss based investment company operating through a series of BVI registered companies, if the most reliable sources (ie: the company registration and financial services authorities of that country), don't have documentation supporting their existence, then we should take that as the reliable source over anything a newspaper says. If this story had come from a financial over a sports angle, much of this would have been wiped away and never stated in the first place due to the lack of the factual documentation. I imagine that the facts of Quadbank will emerge as more financial journalists actually dig behind the spin, but at present we shouldn't wholly rely on what are normally good source newspapers as being fact based in this case. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 11:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

German language references

Having gone through a quieter version of this article, it seems we have a huge problem. A number of the Swiss contributors - both registered and Anon - have inserted German language references. Unfortunately, under WP:REF rules, only references in the language in which the wiki is written can be used to support that wiki, ie: refs to back up the English language wiki need to be in English. Unless we can find alternate references in English - not using online translation tools of the existing Swiss references - then we need to revert back to an earlier version of this article, or insert cite tags. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 13:23, 17 December 2009 (UTC)