" OFFICIAL - CCFC: PRECARIOUS POSITION AS A GOING CONCERN"

There are three massive assumptions from the anti-Tan brigade... A new owner will be better, bring more money and accept a 10m plus a year loss.

To be clear I'm not pro-Tan and would like an owner with a plan, but we need to look before we leap

There are three massive assumptions from the anti-Tan brigade... A new owner will be better, bring more money and accept a 10m plus a year loss.

To be clear I'm not pro-Tan and would like an owner with a plan, but we need to look before we leap

Spot on !!

That’s exactly how I feel.

There are three massive assumptions from the anti-Tan brigade... A new owner will be better, bring more money and accept a 10m plus a year loss.

To be clear I'm not pro-Tan and would like an owner with a plan, but we need to look before we leap

Bang on

There are three massive assumptions from the anti-Tan brigade... A new owner will be better, bring more money and accept a 10m plus a year loss.

To be clear I'm not pro-Tan and would like an owner with a plan, but we need to look before we leap

That's a balanced view which is healthy and reflects the thoughts of the majority of fans. Here's my opinion on that:

1: "A new owner will be better":
A new owner would have course have to be better. If they were worse then it would be pointless to change, as we would be worse off than we are. And VT has said that when he sells, we will be in a better position than when he bought us and it will be to a "suitable" owner, to presumably continue the good work.

We don't necessarily have to have a new owner to be better, we just need better decisions to be made. But let's be clear, Tan and his family want out, their present focus is the gambling business, have a look at the latest news on it, as it's worth $100BN a year.

$100BN per year potential sounds incredible doesn't it? But that's what it is and if I was VT, that's where I would be focusing too, and especially if my football portfolio "bet" was failing:

https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/categ ... pirations/

This is worth a scan too if you want a bit more insight, as to background, sequence of events and ambitions;

https://www.dimsumdaily.hk/tycoon-vince ... e-country/

2: "Bring more money":
That would be nice but it's not realistic, at this point anyway. We just need to be more effective with a sensible budget and not see it wasted ultimately by making poor decisions, as in point 1.

3: "Accept a 10m plus a year loss".
Most clubs make a loss. The question is by how much and how do you operate for growth and service against it as a "going concern'?. And given that, there are clubs in better positions than us operating at a loss. So why not us?

I'm not pro-Tan or anti-Tan. I'm pro Cardiff. Owners come and go, as so managers and players. That's life.

I don't care who the owner is as long as our club reaches it's sustainable realistic potential. Which we haven't and won't if the status quo remains.

There are three massive assumptions from the anti-Tan brigade... A new owner will be better, bring more money and accept a 10m plus a year loss.

To be clear I'm not pro-Tan and would like an owner with a plan, but we need to look before we leap

That's a balanced view which is healthy and reflects the thoughts of the majority of fans. Here's my opinion on that:

1: "A new owner will be better":
A new owner would have course have to be better. If they were worse then it would be pointless to change, as we would be worse off than we are. And VT has said that when he sells, we will be in a better position than when he bought us and it will be to a "suitable" owner, to presumably continue the good work.

We don't necessarily have to have a new owner to be better, we just need better decisions to be made. But let's be clear, Tan and his family want out, their present focus is the gambling business, have a look at the latest news on it, as it's worth $100BN a year.

$100BN per year potential sounds incredible doesn't it? But that's what it is and if I was VT, that's where I would be focusing too, and especially if my football portfolio "bet" was failing:

https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/categ ... pirations/

This is worth a scan too if you want a bit more insight, as to background, sequence of events and ambitions;

https://www.dimsumdaily.hk/tycoon-vince ... e-country/

2: "Bring more money":
That would be nice but it's not realistic, at this point anyway. We just need to be more effective with a sensible budget and not see it wasted ultimately by making poor decisions, as in point 1.

3: "Accept a 10m plus a year loss".
Most clubs make a loss. The question is by how much and how do you operate for growth and service against it as a "going concern'?. And given that, there are clubs in better positions than us operating at a loss. So why not us?

I'm not pro-Tan or anti-Tan. I'm pro Cardiff. Owners come and go, as so managers and players. That's life.

I don't care who the owner is as long as our club reaches it's sustainable realistic potential. Which we haven't and won't if the status quo remains.

Paul,


Fair play everything you say their is spot on and sense and your not for or against Tan, just honest and straight about it all.

Reality it’s all true and many don’t like hearing or reading the truth.


Paul worth starting a total new topic with this.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

That pic of tan
he looks like something out of inspector clouseau or some sort of villain.

That pic of tan
he looks like something out of inspector clouseau or some sort of villain.

He is the villain, stripped my club of its identity and pride

And now slowly killing us

There are three massive assumptions from the anti-Tan brigade... A new owner will be better, bring more money and accept a 10m plus a year loss.

To be clear I'm not pro-Tan and would like an owner with a plan, but we need to look before we leap

That's a balanced view which is healthy and reflects the thoughts of the majority of fans. Here's my opinion on that:

1: "A new owner will be better":
A new owner would have course have to be better. If they were worse then it would be pointless to change, as we would be worse off than we are. And VT has said that when he sells, we will be in a better position than when he bought us and it will be to a "suitable" owner, to presumably continue the good work.

We don't necessarily have to have a new owner to be better, we just need better decisions to be made. But let's be clear, Tan and his family want out, their present focus is the gambling business, have a look at the latest news on it, as it's worth $100BN a year.

$100BN per year potential sounds incredible doesn't it? But that's what it is and if I was VT, that's where I would be focusing too, and especially if my football portfolio "bet" was failing:

https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/categ ... pirations/

This is worth a scan too if you want a bit more insight, as to background, sequence of events and ambitions;

https://www.dimsumdaily.hk/tycoon-vince ... e-country/

2: "Bring more money":
That would be nice but it's not realistic, at this point anyway. We just need to be more effective with a sensible budget and not see it wasted ultimately by making poor decisions, as in point 1.

3: "Accept a 10m plus a year loss".
Most clubs make a loss. The question is by how much and how do you operate for growth and service against it as a "going concern'?. And given that, there are clubs in better positions than us operating at a loss. So why not us?

I'm not pro-Tan or anti-Tan. I'm pro Cardiff. Owners come and go, as so managers and players. That's life.

I don't care who the owner is as long as our club reaches it's sustainable realistic potential. Which we haven't and won't if the status quo remains.

Paul,


Fair play everything you say their is spot on and sense and your not for or against Tan, just honest and straight about it all.

Reality it’s all true and many don’t like hearing or reading the truth.


Paul worth starting a total new topic with this.

I agree this should be a new thread on its own merits...

This partly explains why so many people are missing the point on our current owner and his 'vision' for Cardiff City, i.e. it's now all about his exit strategy...

I know GrangeEndStar well through our shared love for the Bluebirds and its betterment and I know he is both considered and astute in his posting on the subject...

As you, Annis, have admitted, he is not overly 'anti-Tan, he simply wants the best for our club and as a former journo and through his extensive business dealings, he knowd his stuff in ways it's difficult for us to understand on occasion...

He's done his homework on this and what he's put out has enlightened me further...

Reply:

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Just reading up about Brighton and their manager on BBC sport. They've got to be the blueprint for other clubs. They seem so well run and yet there is no reason why we can't be like them...but we'll never be with our part time chairman/CEO and owner - none of whom seem to care a great deal about our club. How nice would it be to hear our men upstairs talking like this:

'He has got two more years to go (the manager). My understanding is that he is happy. He likes the club. He likes this group of players a lot. He knows he has a good owner. He knows he has good facilities. He knows it is a club that has a particular model and we won’t break it for anyone. Those are consistent. He also knows he can see me or Tony (owner Tony Bloom) at any time. There are no surprises.'

Just reading up about Brighton and their manager on BBC sport. They've got to be the blueprint for other clubs. They seem so well run and yet there is no reason why we can't be like them...but we'll never be with our part time chairman/CEO and owner - none of whom seem to care a great deal about our club. How nice would it be to hear our men upstairs talking like this:

'He has got two more years to go (the manager). My understanding is that he is happy. He likes the club. He likes this group of players a lot. He knows he has a good owner. He knows he has good facilities. He knows it is a club that has a particular model and we won’t break it for anyone. Those are consistent. He also knows he can see me or Tony (owner Tony Bloom) at any time. There are no surprises.'

Absolutely spot on. We really should be in Brightons position at the very least. And we are in a unique position as a single team capital city club and with a potential catchment area of 1.5M people. All the pieces are in place.

And look at the positive & realistic language that you've quoted from the interview with Brighton chief executive Paul Barber about their manager Roberto de Zerbi. Wouldn't it be great if we were hearing things like that from our Chief Executive? Because we really should be.

And he goes on to talk about having a continuity succession plan if and when De Zerbi moves on, of which he will eventually of course. It's baked into their plan and "philosophy" from the academy right up to the first team. No hot air. No empty platitudes. No firefighting. They have a blueprint and a plan that is baked into the clubs DNA.

And thats exactly the position we should be in now, if not better. And it's entirely possible in just a phone call and where everyone wins, including VT.

Here's a link to the interview, do take time to read it, it's only brief but shows just how it should be:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/ar ... 8zzr1l989o

Apparently the reason he's going is a difference in way owner and manager saw things moving forward.

Apparently the reason he's going is a difference in way owner and manager saw things moving forward.

And that's always eventually going to happen Al. But you have framework in place to manage the inevitable with minimum disruption and for a seamless transition as possible where the replacement part fits into the machine whilst its still running.

The jacks did it well and it resulted in 7 seasons in the PL.