Talk:Grant Shapps

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Grant Shapps. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:43, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grant Shapps. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:55, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Cryptocurrency ICO news coverage

The Financial Times ran an article on Shapps' involvement in an initial coin offering, OpenBrix. He was getting tokens with a notional value of £170k to £700k for his services as an advisor, but he put it in the register of MPs' interests as "unpaid": "Grant Shapps resigns from blockchain positions after FTAV discovers secret pay deal". It's all over the news in the last couple of days, and now a Labour MP is calling for him to be investigated "Labour calls for inquiry into ex-Tory chairman Grant Shapps". Is this worth mentioning? (I won't add it myself as I was one of Jemima Kelly's sources for the original FT story, looking into the OpenBrix ICO.)

It's not absolutely clear from the press coverage, but he didn't get £170k-£700k in cash, or even a reasonably convertible cryptocurrency - he would be getting a quantity of ICO tokens, presently worth 0 (hence his register entry as "unpaid"), but which might be worth a bundle later. The quantitiy he would have received would have been an amount they were selling for £170k-£700k. But of course converting those tokens back into cash, or a reasonably cash-equivalent crypto, would be rather more difficult - hence present value of 0 - David Gerard (talk) 18:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Correct. Unless and until some "actual specie value" exists, paying taxes on such items is silly. Or else I could give a person my own masterpiece painting "for services rendered", value it as $200,000 and make them pay taxes on it? Better yet, ask for an appraisal of your stack of "pseudo-currency". Collect (talk) 11:00, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Not trying to discuss the hypotheticals here, per WP:NOTFORUM - mostly whether and how to cover it in the article - David Gerard (talk) 12:10, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Heading

The heading Professional and writing career sounds missing leading after reading, sounds like he has written books, but nothing like that is noted. The few paragraphs are just Business ventures so would that not be a better sub-heading? Govvy (talk) 09:02, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

sounds good - David Gerard (talk) 09:11, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
k, changed it over, cheers. Govvy (talk) 09:16, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Shapps's web marketing business

'Shapps's web marketing business's 20/20 Challenge publication also drew criticism. It cost $497 and promised customers earnings of $20,000 in 20 days. Upon purchase, the "toolkit" was revealed to be an ebook, advising the user to create their own toolkit and recruit 100 "Joint Venture Partners" to resell it for a share of the profits.'

That sentence is well-sourced. The source doesn't call it a Ponzi scheme, but for the life of me I can't see what else it was. As much as I would like to, I cannot say that in Wikipedia's voice unless a source uses that (largely US) term or an equivalent. Narky Blert (talk) 00:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Well you can't really say Ponzi scheme unless a source says it! Other than that, I am not sure what else you're asking. Govvy (talk) 08:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Allegations that Shapps has edited Wikipedia do they need to be mentioned?

Fake testimonials

Dean Archer lawsuit

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI