Cardiff City Forum



A forum for all things Cardiff City

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:31 pm

Frantic wrote:I thought it was made pretty clear when all of this kit change started bubbling up.

The budget for players wasn't £100 million, but the overall investment was £100 million which would include a budget for players.


Im fully aware of that but its still nowhere near 100 million.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:46 pm

I made a thread about this last night, most said "DonT BE SIllY YOu OLd mAn cAUSe ThERe WILl Be 100M to SPEnds". Well there f*cking isn't.

It was number THEY plucked out of the sky to hook the plastic elements, this is absolutely sickening. You call yourselfs f*cking Cardiff fans? f**k the premiership if it means staying blue.

:old: :old: :old:

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:50 pm

polo wrote:Reading that statement there is no guaranteed 100 million at all.

Sold your soul for 100 pieces of silver which turned out to be chocolate money.

In fairness they didnt specify what currencey if would be in, could be in dracmas.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:26 pm

polo wrote:
Bobbanker89 wrote:
polo wrote:Reading that statement there is no guaranteed 100 million at all.

Sold your soul for 100 pieces of silver which turned out to be chocolate money.



IF YOU DONT LIKE IT PISS OFF AND SUPPORT SOMONE ELSE CITY ARE NOW RED!


NO

:lol: :lol:

Although I find some of your postings a bit controversial at times , you always manage to post one that makes me laugh !
I will be going next season as I have for the majority of the past 42 years but this des not mean I am pro red or plastic,etc just Cardiff City is my passion and whilst that is their name and they play in Cardiff then I will follow that team albeit I will be wearing the blue shirt that was bought for me on my 50th birthday!

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:29 pm

Bobbanker89 wrote:
polo wrote:Reading that statement there is no guaranteed 100 million at all.

Sold your soul for 100 pieces of silver which turned out to be chocolate money.



IF YOU DONT LIKE IT PISS OFF AND SUPPORT SOMONE ELSE CITY ARE NOW RED!


A very well thought out and backed up answer.

How dare someone have concern for the future. :?

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:44 pm

polo wrote:Reading that statement there is no guaranteed 100 million at all.

Sold your soul for 100 pieces of silver which turned out to be chocolate money.


So easy to be negative...so easy to spread doom and gloom. Cheer up we might get promoted. :ayatollah:

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:47 pm

He's not being negative. He's being factual, there's a difference. It's not as if he's wishing relegation on CCFC. He's just making the masses aware that the 100 million is more like 20 million.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:48 pm

moonboots wrote:
polo wrote:Reading that statement there is no guaranteed 100 million at all.

Sold your soul for 100 pieces of silver which turned out to be chocolate money.


So easy to be negative...so easy to spread doom and gloom. Cheer up we might get promoted. :ayatollah:


That's all you f*cking care about isn't it? Premier League football. :old:

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:33 pm

Chip shop Alley wrote:He's not being negative. He's being factual, there's a difference. It's not as if he's wishing relegation on CCFC. He's just making the masses aware that the 100 million is more like 20 million.


At last someone with a bit of common sense :ayatollah:

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:35 pm

moonboots wrote:
polo wrote:Reading that statement there is no guaranteed 100 million at all.

Sold your soul for 100 pieces of silver which turned out to be chocolate money.


So easy to be negative...so easy to spread doom and gloom. Cheer up we might get promoted. :ayatollah:


How am I spreading doom and gloom?. Just pointing out everyone has rushed in and bent over backwards based on an "100 million windfall" that isnt really there.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:42 pm

Spot on polo we be lucky to spend 10m

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:44 pm

polo wrote:"A prudent and viable playing budget"

Hmmm, not quite competing with Real Madrid just yet then.

About as prudent and viable as the budget Malky was given in the Jan transfer window. :lol:

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:50 pm

We will prob put bids in for players that will never consider comeing to us just to pretend we got money

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:52 pm

keano wrote:Spot on polo we be lucky to spend 10m


So when/if we pay Langston off the £10m figure (again a figure talked about by carl in updates) it will wipe approx £24m off the outstanding aprox debt of £72m

Your theory leaves us with no money? :lol:

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:56 pm

We will STILL be losing £1.2 million a month though = £14.5 million per year.

5 year X £14.5 million = £72.5 million debt.

Nobody seems to realise this.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:03 pm

polo wrote:
d20 wrote:polo all the red heads will be moaning soon as possible when they see there wont be any big name signings...but they wanted it !!


Well if we dont get promoted then the re-branding will be deemed a failure.

I mean, after all, we only had to play in red and all our dreams and asspirations would come true.

Suckers.


It`ll all end in tears for the red barons.. :lol:

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:03 pm

polo wrote:
d20 wrote:polo all the red heads will be moaning soon as possible when they see there wont be any big name signings...but they wanted it !!


Well if we dont get promoted then the re-branding will be deemed a failure.

I mean, after all, we only had to play in red and all our dreams and asspirations would come true.

Suckers.


Just wait and see..

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:36 pm

i dont think the playing budget will be any different to the last couple of years...

we may see a couple of transfer fees paid and the rest of the squad made up of cheap young lower league talent and freebies..

we will also still have to balance the books and until we get rid of players that are not wanted , transfer activity could be slow..

im as gutted at anyone in the change of colour etc.. but am prepared to see where it takes us for the long term security of the club. but like wise i wont be blinkered into thinking we now have millions to spend etc...

and the question still hasnt been answered as to why the need to change the colour and badge?? what benefit will it bring???

to say they have listened to the supporters clubs etc... i believe is also bollocks.. they were always going to change the kit to red..

the minute the statement came out this morning the pictures of the finished badge and kits were released. these wernt done overnight.... (maybe the badge) but this has been in the planning for months...

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:45 pm

llangainbluebird wrote:There never was a £100m. The Malaysians are liars and cheats.


Agreed. This is the saddest day in my 30 years of being a City Supporter.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:19 pm

d20 wrote:polo all the red heads will be moaning soon as possible when they see there wont be any big name signings...but they wanted it !!






Spot on. :old:

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:05 pm

polo wrote:
moonboots wrote:
polo wrote:Reading that statement there is no guaranteed 100 million at all.

Sold your soul for 100 pieces of silver which turned out to be chocolate money.


So easy to be negative...so easy to spread doom and gloom. Cheer up we might get promoted. :ayatollah:


How am I spreading doom and gloom?. Just pointing out everyone has rushed in and bent over backwards based on an "100 million windfall" that isnt really there.


if we owe £70mil to everyone how do we keep going??? bareing in mind that is true amount anser please?
Last edited by pembroke allan on Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:05 pm

Leighton James Dont Like uS wrote:
d20 wrote:polo all the red heads will be moaning soon as possible when they see there wont be any big name signings...but they wanted it !!






Spot on. :old:

We want it for stability not big names. Christ.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:08 pm

The Lad wrote:
Leighton James Dont Like uS wrote:
d20 wrote:polo all the red heads will be moaning soon as possible when they see there wont be any big name signings...but they wanted it !!






Spot on. :old:

We want it for stability not big names. Christ.


you are waisting time on people like polo as if vt put £ 100mil in there account they would say its not real>? and christ doesnt have anser to our debts either!!! :lol:

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:11 pm

The Lad wrote:
Leighton James Dont Like uS wrote:
d20 wrote:polo all the red heads will be moaning soon as possible when they see there wont be any big name signings...but they wanted it !!






Spot on. :old:

We want it for stability not big names. Christ.

Clear this debt, dont invest in the team, keep losing 20 million a year, back to square one.

The malaysians and the current cretins on the board havent got a clue how to run a football club.

Paying premiership wages we cannot afford to average players.Theyve more than doubled our debt after only 2 years in charge.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:11 pm

pembroke allan wrote:
The Lad wrote:
Leighton James Dont Like uS wrote:
d20 wrote:polo all the red heads will be moaning soon as possible when they see there wont be any big name signings...but they wanted it !!






Spot on. :old:

We want it for stability not big names. Christ.


you are waisting time on people like polo as if vt put £ 100mil in there account they would say its not real>? and christ doesnt have anser to our debts either!!! :lol:

There is no 100m ffs. Nowhere near.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:15 pm

polo wrote:
The Lad wrote:
Leighton James Dont Like uS wrote:
d20 wrote:polo all the red heads will be moaning soon as possible when they see there wont be any big name signings...but they wanted it !!






Spot on. :old:

We want it for stability not big names. Christ.

Clear this debt, dont invest in the team, keep losing 20 million a year, back to square one.

The malaysians and the current cretins on the board havent got a clue how to run a football club.

Paying premiership wages we cannot afford to average players.Theyve more than doubled our debt after only 2 years in charge.

We've no choice in our owners, best we could get. protests wont change their minds and if we force them out, up shit creek then

And what if they invest in the team? Which they most likely will. Not big names or huge budgets, but the right purchases and we could go up with little debt.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:17 pm

polo wrote:Reading that statement there is no guaranteed 100 million at all.

Sold your soul for 100 pieces of silver which turned out to be chocolate money.


Show me their statement where they stated £100m. If it is then it was about clearing debt, building a training facility, extending the stadium and an amount for squad building. I know you're crap with figures but keep up

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:20 pm

HandyLegs wrote:
llangainbluebird wrote:There never was a £100m. The Malaysians are liars and cheats.


Agreed. This is the saddest day in my 30 years of being a City Supporter.


Bloody hell you have a short memory. I've been gutted so many times following CCFC it's beyond a joke. Today is a major positive for me as I'm prepared to give it a go. Exciting tines

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:22 pm

Carpe Diem wrote:
polo wrote:Reading that statement there is no guaranteed 100 million at all.

Sold your soul for 100 pieces of silver which turned out to be chocolate money.


Show me their statement where they stated £100m. If it is then it was about clearing debt, building a training facility, extending the stadium and an amount for squad building. I know you're crap with figures but keep up

A figure given in the meeting by our CEO, Alan Whitley, as confirmed by various members present at the meeting, both sides of the colour debate.

All hes done is offered Sam 3 milion. No confirmation hes turned his 40m into equity.

And whats the point of extending the stadium if you dont invest in the team?

We couldnt sell out a playoff semi 2 years in a row.

Re: So there ISNT actually 100 million then?

Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:26 pm

wkdblue wrote:
polo wrote:
d20 wrote:polo all the red heads will be moaning soon as possible when they see there wont be any big name signings...but they wanted it !!


Well if we dont get promoted then the re-branding will be deemed a failure.

I mean, after all, we only had to play in red and all our dreams and asspirations would come true.

Suckers.


It`ll all end in tears for the red barons.. :lol:


Explain what you mean by ending in tears? And who is a red baron? Childish avatar too.