Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

A forum for all things Cardiff City

Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Wayne S » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:08 pm

Nicely placed team to push on in the New Year and provide an instant profit when we go up. :lol:

On the flip side, anyone think Sam will hold out a bit longer, for a bit more cash? ;)
User avatar
Wayne S
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:51 am

Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Advertisement

Advertisement
Login or Register to remove this ad.

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Ben » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:09 pm

i dont think sam will sign :cry:
My Opinion!
User avatar
Ben
 
Posts: 6046
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:27 am

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Wayne S » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:11 pm

Ben wrote:i dont think sam will sign :cry:


That's it, spoil a perfect night. :D
User avatar
Wayne S
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:51 am

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby hailesy » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:12 pm

I got a feeling Sam won't Sam either. He will feel he is getting shafted like before so will hold on to the last grasp.
hailesy
 
Posts: 1134
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:55 am

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby wayne » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:15 pm

If Vincent tan wants the club he will get it
wayne
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:00 pm

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Ben » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:24 pm

ohhh yer, 10mil or 20mil owed to same is like him losing £10 or £20 :lol:

bugger all really lol
My Opinion!
User avatar
Ben
 
Posts: 6046
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:27 am

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby jonah » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:27 pm

f**k Hamman he is a c**t, Held us to randsom for years, great chance to punch on in the new year and the cockroach will pull all the heart strings he only thinks about one thing HIMSELF :twisted:
jonah
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 10:04 pm
Location: Brighton

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Owain » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:29 pm

jonah wrote:f**k Hamman he is a c**t, Held us to randsom for years, great chance to punch on in the new year and the cockroach will pull all the heart strings he only thinks about one thing HIMSELF :twisted:


So Sam loses out on £10m while PR and the rest of the cronies make a shed load if they're shareholding gets bought out
Owain
 
Posts: 2898
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 12:35 am
Location: Cardiff

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby birchblue » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:33 pm

Owain wrote:
jonah wrote:f**k Hamman he is a c**t, Held us to randsom for years, great chance to punch on in the new year and the cockroach will pull all the heart strings he only thinks about one thing HIMSELF :twisted:


So Sam loses out on £10m while PR and the rest of the cronies make a shed load if they're shareholding gets bought out


How is sam losing money we as a club could not have run that much debt up the only one to blame is sam and the 10mil is just his greed
birchblue
 
Posts: 1923
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 10:20 pm

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Wayne S » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:36 pm

Ben wrote:ohhh yer, 10mil or 20mil owed to same is like him losing £10 or £20 :lol:

bugger all really lol


Have we had a breakdown to prove the debt to Langston is as high as mentioned? Always confused me that it got so high and have never seen proof that it was the figure mentioned.
User avatar
Wayne S
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:51 am

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Tony Blue Williams » Wed Dec 09, 2009 8:13 am

Wayne S wrote:
Ben wrote:ohhh yer, 10mil or 20mil owed to same is like him losing £10 or £20 :lol:

bugger all really lol


Have we had a breakdown to prove the debt to Langston is as high as mentioned? Always confused me that it got so high and have never seen proof that it was the figure mentioned.


When Ridsdale and Co. took over in 2007 they accepted the club had a debt of £15m capital and £9m naming rights to Langston. I presume they did their own due diligence beforehand.

Therefore it doesn't matter how the original £24m was spent the club have an unsecured liability for that amount to Langston, unless it is amended by the new agreement.
User avatar
Tony Blue Williams
 
Posts: 14424
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:25 am

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Wayne S » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:09 am

Tony Blue Williams wrote:
Wayne S wrote:
Ben wrote:ohhh yer, 10mil or 20mil owed to same is like him losing £10 or £20 :lol:

bugger all really lol


Have we had a breakdown to prove the debt to Langston is as high as mentioned? Always confused me that it got so high and have never seen proof that it was the figure mentioned.


When Ridsdale and Co. took over in 2007 they accepted the club had a debt of £15m capital and £9m naming rights to Langston. I presume they did their own due diligence beforehand.

Therefore it doesn't matter how the original £24m was spent the club have an unsecured liability for that amount to Langston, unless it is amended by the new agreement.


That said, I would have to give Sam great credit if he signs away that much money even if he is being threatened with pennies from administration.

With investment on the horizon no wonder SH is a bit peeved at being asked to take a cut knowing full well the current incumbents are going to make a packet.

Perhaps SH should meet up with Vincent Tan, perhaps Sam would write off more debt if he was involved in a little coup to oust the regime. ;)
User avatar
Wayne S
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:51 am

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby BluebirdsFan101 » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:55 am

elliott wrote:
Owain wrote:
jonah wrote:f**k Hamman he is a c**t, Held us to randsom for years, great chance to punch on in the new year and the cockroach will pull all the heart strings he only thinks about one thing HIMSELF :twisted:


So Sam loses out on £10m while PR and the rest of the cronies make a shed load if they're shareholding gets bought out


How is sam losing money we as a club could not have run that much debt up the only one to blame is sam and the 10mil is just his greed


Sam is owed at least £20m at the moment. Perhaps more.

It's not Sam's fault that Ridsdale has just let the debt grow and grow over his tenure here the past 4-5 years. That's Ridsdale's fault.

Owain is right - Ridsdale has come here paying nothing into the club, and could well walk away having made £5m+ profit (looking at wages, bonuses, 'on the cheap' shares etc) - and his friends who he's employed will have made good wages too. Then Ridsdale is going around moaning about Sam, blaming everything on him, refusing to give him a place on the board, and asking him to take a 50% cut in the money owed to him.

I'm not a Sam fan, but you must realise that the current situation is Ridsdale's fault, not Sam's.

If I was Sam I certainly would never consider writing off 50% off my debt, especially after the way Ridsdale has been acting.
User avatar
BluebirdsFan101
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:13 am

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Uccello Azzurro » Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:10 am

Owain wrote:
jonah wrote:f**k Hamman he is a c**t, Held us to randsom for years, great chance to punch on in the new year and the cockroach will pull all the heart strings he only thinks about one thing HIMSELF :twisted:


So Sam loses out on £10m while PR and the rest of the cronies make a shed load if they're shareholding gets bought out


Like everything, the answer usually lies somewhere in the middle and both will have to compromise. PR "and his cronies" took their risk and deserve a slice for driving on in the face of difficulties. Risk-Return: that's just business..
User avatar
Uccello Azzurro
 
Posts: 573
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:23 am

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Forever Blue » Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:13 am

Uccello Azzurro wrote:
Owain wrote:
jonah wrote:f**k Hamman he is a c**t, Held us to randsom for years, great chance to punch on in the new year and the cockroach will pull all the heart strings he only thinks about one thing HIMSELF :twisted:


So Sam loses out on £10m while PR and the rest of the cronies make a shed load if they're shareholding gets bought out


Like everything, the answer usually lies somewhere in the middle and both will have to compromise. PR "and his cronies" took their risk and deserve a slice for driving on in the face of difficulties. Risk-Return: that's just business..


I AGREE they both have to compromise.
Annis Jnr Author and Publisher of 7 Books.

My 7th Book is Available Now "MY STORY"

http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/books/buy-books/
http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/news/

My email : annisabraham@aol.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/annisabraham
User avatar
Forever Blue
Admin
 
Posts: 163300
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:30 am

Re: Vincent Tan Should Be Happy

Postby Zabier » Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:03 am

If they are to compromise then what will it mean for the club. I hate to say it but I can't see that compromise is the best thing for the club. I don't blame Hammam for doing what he's doing but personally I hate it. For the benefit of the club I just want this sorted and Hammam to move on. That seems very unlikely to happen in the near future and I can see Hammam's name being linked with us in some shape or form for the foreseeable future.

Still, let's focus on what's occurring on the pitch because that future is much brighter.
User avatar
Zabier
 
Posts: 8365
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:51 pm
Location: Cardiff, Wales.



Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazonbot [Bot], Clickagy [Bot], Clusterman, cmorris1927, Don Keydick, Google [Bot], Grapeshot [Bot], ias [Bot], Proximic [Bot] and 195 guests

Disclaimer :
The views and comments entered in these forums are personal and are not necessarily those of the management of this board.
The management of this board is not responsible for the content of any external internet sites.