A QUESTION RE VT INVESTMENT

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

I thought that's exactly what they said?

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

I think they knew what they wanted/intended in doing from the start Gwyn, it was never their intention to inform us of what was happening and only down to a leak during the west ham game that actually gave us some light into what his plans were.

As for the original question though my answe would've been, Yes providing there is consideration and communication from all parties involved.

Without the rebrand there was no investment it was said from whiteleys mouth wasnt it, some said without langston payed there was no investment. But no i would have said NO to it all if we had a choice and taken are chances because they had to much money involved at that point anyway to liquidate us

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

I think they knew what they wanted/intended in doing from the start Gwyn, it was never their intention to inform us of what was happening and only down to a leak during the west ham game that actually gave us some light into what his plans were.

As for the original question though my answe would've been, Yes providing there is consideration and communication from all parties involved.

I really don't think they did in honesty, apparently TG and even some of VT's family were shocked and against this change and there has been a bit of fall out among them behind the scenes, I really think VT has taken this decision on his own, but looking for positives hopefully he's done it because he has long term plans and will pull a rabbit out of the hat.

hopefully time will provide us with the answers, and success will at least justify his decision, fingers crossed.

Gwyn,
I'll be honest i personally would have been alot happier with any of the changes if they had changed their loans to equity first and paid Langston (making us debt free).
I just hope they are true to their word as we have already been lied to!

I think Gwyn is talking about when they first got involved with the club when the Riddler was at the helm.

We were really so close to going for good. I think most people would have welcomed them with the changes.

There was no other deals on the table, realistic ones anyway.

Without the rebrand there was no investment it was said from whiteleys mouth wasnt it, some said without langston payed there was no investment. But no i would have said NO to it all if we had a choice and taken are chances because they had to much money involved at that point anyway to liquidate us

Missing the point, what i'm asking is if they had given us the option before they even got involved at the very start.

Gwyn,
I'll be honest i personally would have been alot happier with any of the changes if they had changed their loans to equity first and paid Langston (making us debt free).
I just hope they are true to their word as we have already been lied to!

They couldn't mate, as soon as they took more equity at the club, then Sam/Langston could claim the full amount and with interest that could be around 35 million.
As it stands if Sam went to court now and won, who could he claim the money off, if it went to admin he'd get little as an unsecured creditor.

Without the rebrand there was no investment it was said from whiteleys mouth wasnt it, some said without langston payed there was no investment. But no i would have said NO to it all if we had a choice and taken are chances because they had to much money involved at that point anyway to liquidate us

Missing the point, what i'm asking is if they had given us the option before they even got involved at the very start.

Oh rite, well at the time we was in shit street from the riddler so yes we would have all had to except it if it was either a rebrand or getting liquidated as they would have had no money in at all then so they had nothing to lose unlike now as where we had eveything to lose on two options lose the club or rebrand, so i would have gone rebrand.

Last edited by Bluebird1977 on Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:06 am, edited 2 times in total.

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

I,ve said on numerous occasions since the re-branding took place, some people have a selective memory, before VT took over we already had two winding up orders against the club with another one pending, we were in the middle of a transfer embargo and Risdale had mortgaged the next £3.5 million worth of player transfer money to Ray Ranson, we were also losing about £1.2 million a month, since VT has taken financial control there have been no court appearances and we are signing players. Put all that to one side, including where we all think the re-branding is going to end up because i would like to also put a question to the doubters, if VT didn,t step in when he did, who would have paid HMRC?? who would have payed the staff wages?? who would have met the £1.2 million shortfall every month???
By the way Gwyn, Annis also bought me a pint when i met up with him in Majorca, his wallet must be taking a hammering

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

I,ve said on numerous occasions since the re-branding took place, some people have a selective memory, before VT took over we already had two winding up orders against the club with another one pending, we were in the middle of a transfer embargo and Risdale had mortgaged the next £3.5 million worth of player transfer money to Ray Ranson, we were also losing about £1.2 million a month, since VT has taken financial control there have been no court appearances and we are signing players. Put all that to one side, including where we all think the re-branding is going to end up because i would like to also put a question to the doubters, if VT didn,t step in when he did, who would have paid HMRC?? who would have payed the staff wages?? who would have met the £1.2 million shortfall every month???
By the way Gwyn, Annis also bought me a pint when i met up with him in Majorca, his wallet must be taking a hammering

So paul you would have said no rebrand and we get liquidated

Tough one this.

If the scenario was that the Club was going to the wall, and we were told that Tan would
come in and immediately implement the rebrand? AND wipe off all historical debt. AND
we could see into the future at the new manager, and the current (unfinished) squad?

Would many of us have said "f**k you, i want to stay blue"?

See, many might have said "f**k it" lets start all over again and go into Admin"

Tough one this.

If the scenario was that the Club was going to the wall, and we were told that Tan would
come in and immediately implement the rebrand? AND wipe off all historical debt. AND
we could see into the future at the new manager, and the current (unfinished) squad?

Would many of us have said "f**k you, i want to stay blue"?

See, many might have said "f**k it" lets start all over again and go into Admin"

But in our case it would more likely have to be liquidation, and because of league rules and us being a Welsh club we may not have even been allowed back in the English pyramid system.

It is pointless raising such an issue now. Had we been consulted on these proposals at the outset and given the full story then perhaps things might be a little different. Why raise this now Gwyn because you have gone on record and stated that you did not believe we had the right to consultation with VT anyway.
The facts are that we were not told of these proposed changes and they were leaked and brought in through the back door. When we spoke out against the proposals we were threatened by keeping quiet or face losing the investment. There are some that might hail VT as the new messiah but many feel that he has hijacked us against our will. I certainly do not have the same looks on him now.

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

Gwyn,
I am a strong Believer that we should be Playing in Blue at home.
However to answer your question , if at the outset the Malaysians said we will Invest , Clear the debt , but the compromise is we will play in Red at Home. I would have accepted it reluctantly , because the bottom line is the Club has to come first and has to survive.
My real grouse with this whole situation , which lets face it has caused a huge split in the Fanbase , Is why didnt the Investors , just be open about the ReBrand and canvass opinion of the customer base. ie Season Ticket Holders , Ambassador etc.
If they had done that and still decided to play in Red , then I personally would have found it easier to accept. as at least we could have given an opinion, instead of just being told its red end of!
I do an awful lot of business myself in Asia and do understand the significance of Red and how the Asian people see it as very lucky and honourable so I get the reason for a Red Shirt.

But I really struggle to understand why we couldnt have Blue at Home and Red away , that way everyone wins!!
I will be at every game and will support the Boys 100 per cent , there will be no protesting for me whilst the team are on the pitch. And anyone who does that ,in game time is an idiot.
Bluebrd For Life,
Steve

Would have snapped his hand off,

At one point we had a season ticket for the courts. Nearly went out of business multiple times, god knows how many begging letters we wrote to the HMRC asking for more time. We were saved big time by Tan. And we still want more from him and actually want a say in how he does it!

to be fair gwyn, isnt that exactly how you painted it on bbc news etc when you gave your views ?

for what its worth i would have looked for other options

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

Forget about Ben Steele - It would have been a similar situation to Black Friday however there is a big difference - It would have been administarion ,with the Administrator taking over the running of the club trying to negotiate a settlement with the creditors but also being charged to find a buyer for the club.

The difference is that we had sellable assets Stadium & playing staff - There was not a cat in hells chance we would have been liquidated

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

Forget about Ben Steele - It would have been a similar situation to Black Friday however there is a big difference - It would have been administarion ,with the Administrator taking over the running of the club trying to negotiate a settlement with the creditors but also being charged to find a buyer for the club.

The difference is that we had sellable assets Stadium & playing staff - There was not a cat in hells chance we would have been liquidated

That's what rangers said....

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

Forget about Ben Steele - It would have been a similar situation to Black Friday however there is a big difference - It would have been administarion ,with the Administrator taking over the running of the club trying to negotiate a settlement with the creditors but also being charged to find a buyer for the club.

The difference is that we had sellable assets Stadium & playing staff - There was not a cat in hells chance we would have been liquidated

That's what rangers said....

Big difference though we had debts of £35m, Rangers owed the Taxman somthing like £70m and there is now way they would negotiate on that. If the administrator cannot work with the creditors then there would be the possibilty of liquidation

I think and still do , if they follow through their promises and sort the debt out etc I would have accepted the re-brand.
I have supported City since 1970 and most Definately would want us to play in blue , but not at a cost of losing this opportunity.
In reality , the game has changed in recent years and we need to change and go with it. The game is a family sport now , there are alot of new fans (commonly called plastics) , and we evenly won family club of the year , times certainly are changing.
The issue of playing in red is not so much an issue with many fans , myself , I cannot see the need to do so and am disappointed , but it won't stop me going down and supporting the boys .i think we are building a squad that is getting to our strongest ever ... JUST SORT THE DEBT OUT

I think the days of football clubs using adimistration as a tool like Swansea are dead now since pompy and rangers situation. We defaulted on all payments when we were at the point of going, so who is to say we would have been the ones who were told that all payments must be met and theres no negotiating. I know it's all if buts and maybes but I don't think administration is to be messed with these days.

I think the days of football clubs using adimistration as a tool like Swansea are dead now since pompy and rangers situation. We defaulted on all payments when we were at the point of going, so who is to say we would have been the ones who were told that all payments must be met and theres no negotiating. I know it's all if buts and maybes but I don't think administration is to be messed with these days.

HMRC take the hardball attitude now and it's pay up - In the 80's wer saw the likes of Wolves, Swansea, Bristol City, Charlton , Middlesborough effictivly wound up but allowed to form new clubs and still remain at the same level in the football league

I think the days of football clubs using adimistration as a tool like Swansea are dead now since pompy and rangers situation. We defaulted on all payments when we were at the point of going, so who is to say we would have been the ones who were told that all payments must be met and theres no negotiating. I know it's all if buts and maybes but I don't think administration is to be messed with these days.

HMRC take the hardball attitude now and it's pay up - In the 80's wer saw the likes of Wolves, Swansea, Bristol City, Charlton , Middlesborough effictivly wound up but allowed to form new clubs and still remain at the same level in the football league

True, those days are over. If somebody is going to save your club you snap the hand off these days. Rangers messed about the guy who runs sale rugby, when he could have saved the liquidation process.

to be fair gwyn, isnt that exactly how you painted it on bbc news etc when you gave your views ?

for what its worth i would have looked for other options

Other options, don't you think the club had looked at other options before the Malaysians stepped in, do you think there was a queue waiting to help us. oh yes there was that Ben Steele chap wasn't there.

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

Forget about Ben Steele - It would have been a similar situation to Black Friday however there is a big difference - It would have been administarion ,with the Administrator taking over the running of the club trying to negotiate a settlement with the creditors but also being charged to find a buyer for the club.

The difference is that we had sellable assets Stadium & playing staff - There was not a cat in hells chance we would have been liquidated

To get out of admin, you have to reach agreement with 60% of the debtors to accept X pence in the pound, now Langston being the biggest creditor and unsecured, could you honestly see them accepting pennies or saying well f**k you.

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

Gwyn,
I am a strong Believer that we should be Playing in Blue at home.
However to answer your question , if at the outset the Malaysians said we will Invest , Clear the debt , but the compromise is we will play in Red at Home. I would have accepted it reluctantly , because the bottom line is the Club has to come first and has to survive.
My real grouse with this whole situation , which lets face it has caused a huge split in the Fanbase , Is why didnt the Investors , just be open about the ReBrand and canvass opinion of the customer base. ie Season Ticket Holders , Ambassador etc.
If they had done that and still decided to play in Red , then I personally would have found it easier to accept. as at least we could have given an opinion, instead of just being told its red end of!



Not having a dig, but are you saying that if they had balloted the fans, and a majority had said no, and they had still gone ahead with it, you would have been OK with it, because I think personally it would have pissed more off than it as even this way, can you imagine the fans saying, why ask if you ain't going to listen. The truth is, they own the business and we are customers, if they piss off the customers enough, then the customers will walk, so far fifty have walked and a few hundred others wont buy merchandise, the Malaysians have made a decision, and they will stand or fall by it.


I do an awful lot of business myself in Asia and do understand the significance of Red and how the Asian people see it as very lucky and honourable so I get the reason for a Red Shirt.

But I really struggle to understand why we couldnt have Blue at Home and Red away , that way everyone wins!!
I will be at every game and will support the Boys 100 per cent , there will be no protesting for me whilst the team are on the pitch. And anyone who does that ,in game time is an idiot.
Bluebrd For Life,
Steve

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

Forget about Ben Steele - It would have been a similar situation to Black Friday however there is a big difference - It would have been administarion ,with the Administrator taking over the running of the club trying to negotiate a settlement with the creditors but also being charged to find a buyer for the club.

The difference is that we had sellable assets Stadium & playing staff - There was not a cat in hells chance we would have been liquidated

To get out of admin, you have to reach agreement with 60% of the debtors to accept X pence in the pound, now Langston being the biggest creditor and unsecured, could you honestly see them accepting pennies or saying well f**k you.

To get out of Administration by way of a CVA (which is the route the League insists on) you have to have 75% in value of unsecured creditor votes in favour (debtors don`t come into it).

Langston are currently the biggest value unsecured creditor but , to protect their position (and because they don`t trust Sam as far as they could throw him) , Cardiff Council have a clause in the lease agreement for the ground that , on any insolvency , they would become the biggest unsecured creditor and would therefore control the CVA vote.

When we first heard of their intereset in backing our club at the critical time they did, if they had said one of the conditions was the rebrand, how many do you think would have turned it down considering the only other likely outcome was liquidation, especially after our joking Jersey millionaire Ben Steele fecked off after his free day out on our expense.

Try and keep comments serious and realistic and make it an healthy debate (Annis needs lot's of hits for the revenue, the holiday is costing him more than he thought, he didn't realise Carl could drink so much so if not for me ,do it for Annis's account. (bank account )

Forget about Ben Steele - It would have been a similar situation to Black Friday however there is a big difference - It would have been administarion ,with the Administrator taking over the running of the club trying to negotiate a settlement with the creditors but also being charged to find a buyer for the club.

The difference is that we had sellable assets Stadium & playing staff - There was not a cat in hells chance we would have been liquidated

To get out of admin, you have to reach agreement with 60% of the debtors to accept X pence in the pound, now Langston being the biggest creditor and unsecured, could you honestly see them accepting pennies or saying well f**k you.

To get out of Administration by way of a CVA (which is the route the League insists on) you have to have 75% in value of unsecured creditor votes in favour (debtors don`t come into it).

Langston are currently the biggest value unsecured creditor but , to protect their position (and because they don`t trust Sam as far as they could throw him) , Cardiff Council have a clause in the lease agreement for the ground that , on any insolvency , they would become the biggest unsecured creditor and would therefore control the CVA vote.

So, and genuine question Keith, could we go into and come of admin fairly easily, also is there as I understand a complication nowadays with a Welsh club getting back into the English pyramid if we liquidated and reformed or went into admin?

There's all us fans arguing over all the bollox under the sun and you musst be hovering waiting fora pot with the words, finance, investment or money in the title.