" THURSDAY MARCH 29th 2012 UPDATE "

As you all know I am one of those doubters and will continue to be so until I see different.

However just a couple of points, firstly I will wait until everything is confirmed before really taking this issue seriously and a second point which maybe Keith could help on is that if the Malaysians did come to an agreement with two creditors of the club theres nothing saying that the monies which was outstanding would just be owed to the Malaysians instead with a possible larger interest rate. Or am I missing something..?

If or when the Malaysians become the large majority shareholders, what do you think they've got to gain by racking up a bigger debt?

So we should stop loaning money and go bust?
I though u wanted more players?

How does Tan get money back from a business losing mass amounts of money again?

Blue, with all due respect you are completely out of your depth here. As an example if you have two creditors who are charing you 2% for monies loaned then would it be beneficial to transfer those debts to a different creditor for 4%..? Of course not because I would end up paying more for the same amount of money owed so surely that 'could' be the same here.

As you all know I am one of those doubters and will continue to be so until I see different.

However just a couple of points, firstly I will wait until everything is confirmed before really taking this issue seriously and a second point which maybe Keith could help on is that if the Malaysians did come to an agreement with two creditors of the club theres nothing saying that the monies which was outstanding would just be owed to the Malaysians instead with a possible larger interest rate. Or am I missing something..?

If or when the Malaysians become the large majority shareholders, what do you think they've got to gain by racking up a bigger debt?

Higher interest rates which generate more profits for them personally leaving the club more out of pocket over that period.

As you all know I am one of those doubters and will continue to be so until I see different.

However just a couple of points, firstly I will wait until everything is confirmed before really taking this issue seriously and a second point which maybe Keith could help on is that if the Malaysians did come to an agreement with two creditors of the club theres nothing saying that the monies which was outstanding would just be owed to the Malaysians instead with a possible larger interest rate. Or am I missing something..?

If or when the Malaysians become the large majority shareholders, what do you think they've got to gain by racking up a bigger debt?

Higher interest rates which generate more profits for them personally leaving the club more out of pocket over that period.

So they'll end up owing themselves a lot of money then?

Brilliant news

Cheers Carl

As you all know I am one of those doubters and will continue to be so until I see different.

However just a couple of points, firstly I will wait until everything is confirmed before really taking this issue seriously and a second point which maybe Keith could help on is that if the Malaysians did come to an agreement with two creditors of the club theres nothing saying that the monies which was outstanding would just be owed to the Malaysians instead with a possible larger interest rate. Or am I missing something..?

If or when the Malaysians become the large majority shareholders, what do you think they've got to gain by racking up a bigger debt?

Higher interest rates which generate more profits for them personally leaving the club more out of pocket over that period.

So they'll end up owing themselves a lot of money then?

What..? Uneducated comments like that just shows the IQ level on this board at times. The Peter Ridsdale school of business must be full of AAMB members these days,

So we should stop loaning money and go bust?
I though u wanted more players?

How does Tan get money back from a business losing mass amounts of money again?

Blue, with all due respect you are completely out of your depth here. As an example if you have two creditors who are charing you 2% for monies loaned then would it be beneficial to transfer those debts to a different creditor for 4%..? Of course not because I would end up paying more for the same amount of money owed so surely that 'could' be the same here.

Well dodged

So how does tan get his money back from a company even more in debt and losing even more money?

And how would spending more in jan which you kept on about helped?

As you all know I am one of those doubters and will continue to be so until I see different.

However just a couple of points, firstly I will wait until everything is confirmed before really taking this issue seriously and a second point which maybe Keith could help on is that if the Malaysians did come to an agreement with two creditors of the club theres nothing saying that the monies which was outstanding would just be owed to the Malaysians instead with a possible larger interest rate. Or am I missing something..?

If or when the Malaysians become the large majority shareholders, what do you think they've got to gain by racking up a bigger debt?

Higher interest rates which generate more profits for them personally leaving the club more out of pocket over that period.

So they'll end up owing themselves a lot of money then?

What..? Uneducated comments like that just shows the IQ level on this board at times. The Peter Ridsdale school of business must be full of AAMB members these days,

I'm fully aware that there are ways of racking up a load of debt, pulling the plug and then walking away with a pretty profit, whilst leaving the club in the mire, but as the Malaysians have been so prudent and honouring our historic debts, do you really think that this is their plan, or are you just shit stirring again?

Whilst we are on about the levels of IQ's on here though, do you think that its wise for councillors to make racist comments on message boards, which end up with the threads having to be deleted?

So we should stop loaning money and go bust?
I though u wanted more players?

How does Tan get money back from a business losing mass amounts of money again?

Blue, with all due respect you are completely out of your depth here. As an example if you have two creditors who are charing you 2% for monies loaned then would it be beneficial to transfer those debts to a different creditor for 4%..? Of course not because I would end up paying more for the same amount of money owed so surely that 'could' be the same here.

Well dodged

So how does tan get his money back from a company even more in debt and losing even more money?

And how would spending more in jan which you kept on about helped?

The same reason as Sam Hamman and any other personal creditor in the end gets their money. You can still be a personal creditor to a business you have a majority shareholding of.

As you all know I am one of those doubters and will continue to be so until I see different.

However just a couple of points, firstly I will wait until everything is confirmed before really taking this issue seriously and a second point which maybe Keith could help on is that if the Malaysians did come to an agreement with two creditors of the club theres nothing saying that the monies which was outstanding would just be owed to the Malaysians instead with a possible larger interest rate. Or am I missing something..?

If or when the Malaysians become the large majority shareholders, what do you think they've got to gain by racking up a bigger debt?

Higher interest rates which generate more profits for them personally leaving the club more out of pocket over that period.

So they'll end up owing themselves a lot of money then?

What..? Uneducated comments like that just shows the IQ level on this board at times. The Peter Ridsdale school of business must be full of AAMB members these days,

I'm fully aware that there are ways of racking up a load of debt, pulling the plug and then walking away with a pretty profit, whilst leaving the club in the mire, but as the Malaysians have been so prudent and honouring our historic debts, do you really think that this is their plan, or are you just shit stirring again?

Whilst we are on about the levels of IQ's on here though, do you think that its wise for councillors to make racist comments on message boards, which end up with the threads having to be deleted?

Whos a Councillor...? Where have I been raist in my comments..? and they haven't been honouring the clubs historic debts because as it stands Langston haven't been paid a penny.

And you think Sam or Langston will profit in the end?

SO Angry Man, you seem quite an impressively clever pperson, in your opinion what should the Malaysians do? besides hand over a money tree

And you think Sam or Langston will profit in the end?

SO Angry Man, you seem quite an impressively clever pperson, in your opinion what should the Malaysians do? besides hand over a money tree

Of course they will.

As Ive said all along, come clean of excatly they are going to do so that the supporters can scrutinise any steps they make. At the moment everything seems idle or even going backwards especially when the latest set of accounts shown increased debt levels.

And you think Sam or Langston will profit in the end?

SO Angry Man, you seem quite an impressively clever pperson, in your opinion what should the Malaysians do? besides hand over a money tree

Of course they will.

As Ive said all along, come clean of excatly they are going to do so that the supporters can scrutinise any steps they make. At the moment everything seems idle or even going backwards especially when the latest set of accounts shown increased debt levels.

Very much doubt that..

No I mean what should they actually do, you say spend on players but reduce the debt.
You say they wont take over but if they pay off other creditors thats bad?

What would make V Tan a "good person" in your books except give us money for a laugh

Who's a Councillor...? Where have I been raist in my comments..? and they haven't been honouring the clubs historic debts because as it stands Langston haven't been paid a penny.

Point 1. Deny the councillor bit as much as you want, but you were the cause of a thread being deleted last week, as you made racist remarks!

Point 2. They have been honouring historic debts, as they have paid up many local businesses that weren't expecting to get their money and correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the Malaysians been paying around £80,000 to £90,000 per month to Langston? The fact that they are doing this and continuing with their negotiations with Sam in the meantime, makes complete sense to me and makes them totally honourable IMO!

And you think Sam or Langston will profit in the end?

SO Angry Man, you seem quite an impressively clever pperson, in your opinion what should the Malaysians do? besides hand over a money tree

Of course they will.

As Ive said all along, come clean of excatly they are going to do so that the supporters can scrutinise any steps they make. At the moment everything seems idle or even going backwards especially when the latest set of accounts shown increased debt levels.

Very much doubt that..

No I mean what should they actually do, you say spend on players but reduce the debt.
You say they wont take over but if they pay off other creditors thats bad?

What would make V Tan a "good person" in your books except give us money for a laugh

You either putting words into my mouth or are useless at spin. I have never said that paying off creditors is bad, what I have said is that by transfering a debt to another creditor could workout worse for the club in the longer term because no-one knows the interest which Tan would then put on the transferred debt.

Also how can anyone call someone they don't know personally 'good'..? What I do know is that Tan is a businessman who has seen a gab in the football market and wants to exploit it. Fair play to him because thats the global market we all live in but if you or anyone else feel that its just a toy to him then you are very much mistaken because 'if' it was a toy then (a) he would have brought it 100% like Roman did with Chelsea and (b) MM would have been able to strengthen in Jan.

Who's a Councillor...? Where have I been raist in my comments..? and they haven't been honouring the clubs historic debts because as it stands Langston haven't been paid a penny.

Point 1. Deny the councillor bit as much as you want, but you were the cause of a thread being deleted last week, as you made racist remarks!

Point 2. They have been honouring historic debts, as they have paid up many local businesses that weren't expecting to get their money and correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the Malaysians been paying around £80,000 to £90,000 per month to Langston? The fact that they are doing this and continuing with their negotiations with Sam in the meantime, makes complete sense to me and makes them totally honourable IMO!

I will correct you because they have fallen back on a previous agreement with Langston and no payment has ever been made. Because of that the only reasons why they are negotiating with Sam again is because he could take them back to the high court due to payments not being made.

His current interest rate is 7% I believe, same as Langston and Lower than some others. I don't have a crystal ball so no idea what the future interest rate would be but we haven't been paying langstones. We only know that the Malaysians can turn debt into shares at anytime they want.

So you don't have an opinion on what they should do but constantly snipe at everything that they do.

His current interest rate is 7% I believe, same as Langston and Lower than some others. I don't have a crystal ball so no idea what the future interest rate would be but we haven't been paying langstones. We only know that the Malaysians can turn debt into shares at anytime they want.
So you don't have an opinion on what they should do but constantly snipe at everything that they do.

I was hoping someone would mention this because weren't they going to do this very recently but it never materialised

Who's a Councillor...? Where have I been raist in my comments..? and they haven't been honouring the clubs historic debts because as it stands Langston haven't been paid a penny.

Point 1. Deny the councillor bit as much as you want, but you were the cause of a thread being deleted last week, as you made racist remarks!

Point 2. They have been honouring historic debts, as they have paid up many local businesses that weren't expecting to get their money and correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the Malaysians been paying around £80,000 to £90,000 per month to Langston? The fact that they are doing this and continuing with their negotiations with Sam in the meantime, makes complete sense to me and makes them totally honourable IMO!

I will correct you because they have fallen back on a previous agreement with Langston and no payment has ever been made. Because of that the only reasons why they are negotiating with Sam again is because he could take them back to the high court due to payments not being made.

Well I'm not going to get into whether Sam deserves to get any money back or not, as it will cause ructions on this board, but how do you know that they have fallen back on a previous agreement?

You accept that many of our other creditors have been paid though?

Sam should take us to court and would get laughed out again

Who's a Councillor...? Where have I been raist in my comments..? and they haven't been honouring the clubs historic debts because as it stands Langston haven't been paid a penny.

Point 1. Deny the councillor bit as much as you want, but you were the cause of a thread being deleted last week, as you made racist remarks!

Point 2. They have been honouring historic debts, as they have paid up many local businesses that weren't expecting to get their money and correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the Malaysians been paying around £80,000 to £90,000 per month to Langston? The fact that they are doing this and continuing with their negotiations with Sam in the meantime, makes complete sense to me and makes them totally honourable IMO!

I will correct you because they have fallen back on a previous agreement with Langston and no payment has ever been made. Because of that the only reasons why they are negotiating with Sam again is because he could take them back to the high court due to payments not being made.

Well I'm not going to get into whether Sam deserves to get any money back or not, as it will cause ructions on this board, but how do you know that they have fallen back on a previous agreement?

You accept that many of our other creditors have been paid though?

No I don't accept many other creditors have been paid and of course they have fallen back on a previous agreement if they haven't paid him a penny.

As you all know I am one of those doubters and will continue to be so until I see different.

However just a couple of points, firstly I will wait until everything is confirmed before really taking this issue seriously and a second point which maybe Keith could help on is that if the Malaysians did come to an agreement with two creditors of the club theres nothing saying that the monies which was outstanding would just be owed to the Malaysians instead with a possible larger interest rate. Or am I missing something..?

Just got back in to pick up on this thread again.

Could just be a transfer of debt , but more likely to be a further share issue , to the Malaysians and/or any new major investor brought in by Mehmet Dalman.

In interest rate terms , both the Malaysians and Langston have been charging (but not getting paid) interest at 7% p.a , PMG at 5% over base rate and S Borley and M Isaac at 3% over base rate in recent years.

Sam should take us to court and would get laughed out again

Well thats his decision surely but surely if he would be laughed out again then why are the Malaysians re-opened talks with him..?

Do you accept that anybody has been paid then?

HMRC and our shirt suppliers etc!

Sam should take us to court and would get laughed out again

Well thats his decision surely but surely if he would be laughed out again then why are the Malaysians re-opened talks with him..?

He still has a right to be repaid just not yet. A much lower amount for an early payment of an unsecured creditor. Makes sense all round.

Sam should take us to court and would get laughed out again

Well thats his decision surely but surely if he would be laughed out again then why are the Malaysians re-opened talks with him..?

Because they know what they are doing and always intended to do so!

As you all know I am one of those doubters and will continue to be so until I see different.

However just a couple of points, firstly I will wait until everything is confirmed before really taking this issue seriously and a second point which maybe Keith could help on is that if the Malaysians did come to an agreement with two creditors of the club theres nothing saying that the monies which was outstanding would just be owed to the Malaysians instead with a possible larger interest rate. Or am I missing something..?

Just got back in to pick up on this thread again.

Could just be a transfer of debt , but more likely to be a further share issue , to the Malaysians and/or any new major investor brought in by Mehmet Dalman.

In interest rate terms , both the Malaysians and Langston have been charging (but not getting paid) interest at 7% p.a , PMG at 5% over base rate and S Borley and M Isaac at 3% over base rate in recent years.

Thanks for that info Keith. Whilst you say that it would be more likely a share issue would you agree with me that my theory isn't 'pie in the sky' as others would want to believe on here.

Do you accept that anybody has been paid then?

HMRC and our shirt suppliers etc!

Stop trying to twist my words. You were wrong on the Langstone debt currently being paid and whilst I agree that other debts like HMRC are been serviced not 'all' other creditors are being paid.

Sam should take us to court and would get laughed out again

Well thats his decision surely but surely if he would be laughed out again then why are the Malaysians re-opened talks with him..?

He still has a right to be repaid just not yet. A much lower amount for an early payment of an unsecured creditor. Makes sense all round.

Doesn't mean that the club will automatically owe a lower amount if the debt changes hands.

As you all know I am one of those doubters and will continue to be so until I see different.

However just a couple of points, firstly I will wait until everything is confirmed before really taking this issue seriously and a second point which maybe Keith could help on is that if the Malaysians did come to an agreement with two creditors of the club theres nothing saying that the monies which was outstanding would just be owed to the Malaysians instead with a possible larger interest rate. Or am I missing something..?

Just got back in to pick up on this thread again.

Could just be a transfer of debt , but more likely to be a further share issue , to the Malaysians and/or any new major investor brought in by Mehmet Dalman.

In interest rate terms , both the Malaysians and Langston have been charging (but not getting paid) interest at 7% p.a , PMG at 5% over base rate and S Borley and M Isaac at 3% over base rate in recent years.

Thanks for that info Keith. Whilst you say that it would be more likely a share issue would you agree with me that my theory isn't 'pie in the sky' as others would want to believe on here.

Don't think anybody has said your theories are pie in the sky, just that there are just as many positive permutations, as your chosen negative views and conspiracy theories!

Whst it's your right to think this way, most people on here prefer to think of the positive option!