Talk:Michael Fay (banker)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

[edit] Title

Why 'banker'? why not 'thief'? see edits 9 June Richard 09:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

  • This page has information based on PR from far left political parties and web blogs. I am not sure it's encyclopedic, but some attempt has been made to make it neutral, so I shall leave it. We should be wary of people trying to turn this into a left-wing angst-fest, however Ham21 08:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. I added the citation requirements because I think many of the claims made in the article are doubtful. For the record, I don't like Sir Michael Fay, although I do enjoy the irony of a somewhat monarchist-leaning businessman enjoying the stability (and low taxes) of that great republic, Switzerland :-) --Lholden 21:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Oh I didn't realise he was a monarchist. Good for him :p Ham21 11:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Of course he's a monarchist, how else would he justify accepting the title "sir" <smile>. It must have meant something to him, even though the very fact that he (and many similar business types of that era) received it so debased the title in the eyes of his (ex) countrymen/women that it has been rendered obsolete. RichardJ Christie 12:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
So far as I understand, he's still a NZer... although NZ Business doesn't rate him as part of the rich list anymore :-) Some republics do retain titular titles - like Portugal --Lholden 01:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
I thought he was still on the '06 rich list? 202.180.112.131 23:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
He's knighted, so isn't it Sir as a title? 132.205.93.63 03:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Superficial article

For the record, this article is currently rubbish. It ignores Fay's important and highly controversial roll in the changes to the New Zealand economy in the 1980's and 1990's AND his personal enrichment from that involvement. The article concentrates only on the trivial - his sporting sponsorship. So not much has changed since Roman times; keep the masses ignorant and quiet by provision of cheap bread and the circus. I recommend readers read earlier versions of this article. RichardJ Christie 11:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sir Michael Fay

shouldn't Sir Michael Fay redirect here? 132.205.93.63 03:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I will go do that right now. Mathmo Talk 06:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)