Tan v. Hamman....The Poll!!

Anyone but Tan.

I Despise Tan End Off. No Contest.

Annis you disagree with everything that goes against your views,TAN HAS SAVED OUR CLUB.FACT

what the fudge???? of course he does, who the hell doesn't?

Whats fudge

I Despise Tan End Off. No Contest.

Annis you disagree with everything that goes against your views,TAN HAS SAVED OUR CLUB.FACT

sorry for butting in. but. we would not be at this stage. if it wasnt for sam. he saved our club. FACT

I Despise Tan End Off. No Contest.

Annis you disagree with everything that goes against your views,TAN HAS SAVED OUR CLUB.FACT

sorry for butting in. but. we would not be at this stage. if it wasnt for sam. he saved our club. FACT

He didn't in 2010, but VT did

I Despise Tan End Off. No Contest.

That's it then, nobody else should be allowed an opinion, as the leader and owner of this message board has spoken!

But you do have an opinion, you don't seem to have give it though

Yes. I do have an opinion which I have expressed many times!

My opinion is that everybody is entitled to their own opinion, which ceases to amount to anything in some people's minds , when they state things like "End off," cos as far as they are concerned, it's only their opinions that count!

I Despise Tan End Off. No Contest.

That's it then, nobody else should be allowed an opinion, as the leader and owner of this message board has spoken!

But you do have an opinion, you don't seem to have give it though

Yes. I do have an opinion which I have expressed many times!

My opinion is that everybody is entitled to their own opinion, which ceases to amount to anything in some people's minds , when they state things like "End off," cos as far as they are concerned, it's only their opinions that count!

I'm not sure that's what he meant by "end off" (sic)

He clearly meant that for him it was a no brainer. There have and continue to be plenty of people with contrary views to his, which are expressed on this board every day.

I Despise Tan End Off. No Contest.

100% ... every time ! Tan out !

Tan makes Sam look like a shit carboot seller

Tan makes Sam look like a shit carboot seller

I wasn't a big fan of Hammam, but at least he had some semblance of humanity, some soul, some heart. Tan just comes across as a cold hearted and callous individual to me. He clearly doesn't give a f**k about the fans, but hey he has money so he can do whatever he wants to us.

Tan makes Sam look like a shit carboot seller

I wasn't a big fan of Hammam, but at least he had some semblance of humanity, some soul, some heart. Tan just comes across as a cold hearted and callous individual to me. He clearly doesn't give a f**k about the fans, but hey he has money so he can do whatever he wants to us.

This isnt a game Tan clearly has a plan and will stick to it to get what he wants. Some will like some wont but the guy is proving his worth slowly just a shame he changed the colour and badge ..

Both have done wrong things but by f**k if you want someone who had clearly no business acumen and in my eyes nothing more than a Lebanese conman then you need your head checked. Tan might not be everyones cup of tea but he knows what he's doing and I trust him more with the clubs finances than I do Hamman.

Sams tactic was to get in with the fans so he could get away with more, by the looks of things it's worked a f*cking treat.

Both have done wrong things but by f**k if you want someone who had clearly no business acumen and in my eyes nothing more than a Lebanese conman then you need your head checked. Tan might not be everyones cup of tea but he knows what he's doing and I trust him more with the clubs finances than I do Hamman.

Sams tactic was to get in with the fans so he could get away with more, by the looks of things it's worked a f*cking treat.

Sense at last!

Both have done wrong things but by f**k if you want someone who had clearly no business acumen and in my eyes nothing more than a Lebanese conman then you need your head checked. Tan might not be everyones cup of tea but he knows what he's doing and I trust him more with the clubs finances than I do Hamman.

Sams tactic was to get in with the fans so he could get away with more, by the looks of things it's worked a f*cking treat.

Whereas tan tactic is to do whatever the hell he likes regardless of what the fans think.

Pretty conclusive, then

No surprise there. One (VT) delivered on his promises whilst the other (Sam) bled us dry and then came back for more

Wait for the re-worded 'poll' no doubt

Both have done wrong things but by f**k if you want someone who had clearly no business acumen and in my eyes nothing more than a Lebanese conman then you need your head checked. Tan might not be everyones cup of tea but he knows what he's doing and I trust him more with the clubs finances than I do Hamman.

Sams tactic was to get in with the fans so he could get away with more, by the looks of things it's worked a f*cking treat.

Whereas tan tactic is to do whatever the hell he likes regardless of what the fans think.

At least with Tan he is treating all fans equally and not pandering to a very small minority who have something to gain from Hamman being involved with the City.

Both have done wrong things but by f**k if you want someone who had clearly no business acumen and in my eyes nothing more than a Lebanese conman then you need your head checked. Tan might not be everyones cup of tea but he knows what he's doing and I trust him more with the clubs finances than I do Hamman.

Sams tactic was to get in with the fans so he could get away with more, by the looks of things it's worked a f*cking treat.

Whereas tan tactic is to do whatever the hell he likes regardless of what the fans think.

At least with Tan he is treating all fans equally and not pandering to a very small minority who have something to gain from Hamman being involved with the City.

^^^^^^^^^^^ this makes a lot of sense, and whereas I liked Sam when he was here, VT is in a different league alltogether, as far as having a suund business plan is concerned

It seems the vast majority are using common sense! Tan has saved the club, Tan's money has taken us to the verge of the premier league.

Sam Hammam bled the club dry and tried to put us through at the 11th hour.

It truely astonishes me that a few on here still sing his praises, but claim to hate Tan!

Maybe Tan should socialise with a few of the mods on here, they'd love him then!

At least Hammam tried to bribe the fans by giving them what they wanted! They are both as bad as each other in their own ways but I think Tan edges it and history will show that to be true in my opinion.

I've gone for Tan. He is commited for the long term, despite the rebrand happening he is a good owner of our club (hasn't taken a penny out). I sense good things for the future under him.

I've stopped posting on here because of morons like you, but every now and again an idiot so big pops up that I just can't help myself...

"Tan is commited for the long term, despite the rebrand happening he is a good owner of our club (hasn't taken a penny out)"

Have you got a degree in being a dumbass or something mate?

Tan is a glorified f*cking loan shark.

He hasn't committed long term, he is LOANING us money at 7% interest. If he was committed long term, he would have bought equity in our club, which he hasn't.

On your second point, he is taking money out of our club by accruing interest on the money he has LOANED us, not INVESTED in us.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Both have done wrong things but by f**k if you want someone who had clearly no business acumen and in my eyes nothing more than a Lebanese conman then you need your head checked. Tan might not be everyones cup of tea but he knows what he's doing and I trust him more with the clubs finances than I do Hamman.

Sams tactic was to get in with the fans so he could get away with more, by the looks of things it's worked a f*cking treat.

Whereas tan tactic is to do whatever the hell he likes regardless of what the fans think.

At least with Tan he is treating all fans equally and not pandering to a very small minority who have something to gain from Hamman being involved with the City.

Good point and echo's my remarks


One spent money at the club and then bled it dry, taking CCFC to the verge of extinction for another £500k. But is still loved by some.

Yea and we all know why Sam the Sham targeted certain individuals and made sure he knew who's backs to slap and buddy up with from the terraces just a matter then of inviting them to his home then a little holiday break together ( you getting the picture) f**k why not a candlelit dinner for two, these so called influential fans must have been walking around with permanent hard ons and in awe of an actual owner of C C F C wanting to be their best friends! and that is were the 25% Sam influence appears.
These people are still hoping Sam comes back so they continue their affair with him at the expense of Cardiff City.
These sycophants disguise their so called anti rebranding issues just to protect and implicate their own agendas,f**king shameful and anyone with a tad of sense on this forum knows just who these people are.

I've gone for Tan. He is commited for the long term, despite the rebrand happening he is a good owner of our club (hasn't taken a penny out). I sense good things for the future under him.

I've stopped posting on here because of morons like you, but every now and again an idiot so big pops up that I just can't help myself...

"Tan is commited for the long term, despite the rebrand happening he is a good owner of our club (hasn't taken a penny out)"

Have you got a degree in being a dumbass or something mate?

Tan is a glorified f*cking loan shark.

He hasn't committed long term, he is LOANING us money at 7% interest. If he was committed long term, he would have bought equity in our club, which he hasn't.

On your second point, he is taking money out of our club by accruing interest on the money he has LOANED us, not INVESTED in us.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

And this is the reason people stop posting.

I've gone for Tan. He is commited for the long term, despite the rebrand happening he is a good owner of our club (hasn't taken a penny out). I sense good things for the future under him.

I've stopped posting on here because of morons like you, but every now and again an idiot so big pops up that I just can't help myself...

"Tan is commited for the long term, despite the rebrand happening he is a good owner of our club (hasn't taken a penny out)"

Have you got a degree in being a dumbass or something mate?

Tan is a glorified f*cking loan shark.

He hasn't committed long term, he is LOANING us money at 7% interest. If he was committed long term, he would have bought equity in our club, which he hasn't.

On your second point, he is taking money out of our club by accruing interest on the money he has LOANED us, not INVESTED in us.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

No need to abuse another poster due to them having a different opinion to you.

1. VT has bought some shares
2. Yes the significant part of his money into CCFC (which grows monthly as we pay our bills and HMRC) is a loan at the moment (accruing interest but not being paid) but he has stated that he will convert this to equity once Sam is sorted. We will have to wait and see the outcome of this.

At the end of the day, without these loans we couldn't pay the bills - Fact.

POTENTIALLY, we could be a debt free premier league club once Sam is settled. This is why people will give VT a chance.

I've gone for Tan. He is commited for the long term, despite the rebrand happening he is a good owner of our club (hasn't taken a penny out). I sense good things for the future under him.

I've stopped posting on here because of morons like you, but every now and again an idiot so big pops up that I just can't help myself...

"Tan is commited for the long term, despite the rebrand happening he is a good owner of our club (hasn't taken a penny out)"

Have you got a degree in being a dumbass or something mate?

Tan is a glorified f*cking loan shark.

He hasn't committed long term, he is LOANING us money at 7% interest. If he was committed long term, he would have bought equity in our club, which he hasn't.

On your second point, he is taking money out of our club by accruing interest on the money he has LOANED us, not INVESTED in us.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

And the banks would treat us any different??

I think it is YOU that needs to wake up and smell the coffee, mate. The question was a simple Sam orTan and the overwhelming majority REALISE that (as lovable a rogue that he was) Sam ultimately FAILED to deliver the dream, whilst Tan has (so far) delivered on his promises and is about to take us to that dream

Some (including you) will argue weakly that Tan has still not transferred the 'debt to equity and that shows you up for the negative person you so obviously are.Tan will do sowhen he feels the time is right. He didn't become a billionaire by making poor financial decisons, eh?

No wonder you exiled yourself

I've gone for Tan. He is commited for the long term, despite the rebrand happening he is a good owner of our club (hasn't taken a penny out). I sense good things for the future under him.

I've stopped posting on here because of morons like you, but every now and again an idiot so big pops up that I just can't help myself...

"Tan is commited for the long term, despite the rebrand happening he is a good owner of our club (hasn't taken a penny out)"

Have you got a degree in being a dumbass or something mate?

Tan is a glorified f*cking loan shark.

He hasn't committed long term, he is LOANING us money at 7% interest. If he was committed long term, he would have bought equity in our club, which he hasn't.

On your second point, he is taking money out of our club by accruing interest on the money he has LOANED us, not INVESTED in us.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Yes the exact intrest that SAM "lent" us money at. At least with Tan you know he has the money to spend. Theyre as bad as each other but I will never choose hamman after he nearly put us out of buisness thank you.

Tan is obviously doing better for the survival of the club.

If I don't know what I'm talking about I stay out of a discussion.

People who think Tan is a whiter than white saviour of our club do a lot of damage by spreading wrongful information.

They will tell people how great he is and how his investment will save us and people will believe it. Making it harder for us to ever restore history to our once proud club.

The fact is, he hasn't invested in us. He's just loaned us money irrespective of our credit history.

I've got no problem with people being pro Tan, but back it up with substance instead of assumptions.

Tan will get the names like " rip off tw*t" and "c**t" tossed at him just like sam did when he goes, none are any diffrent who own a club there all the same these owners heros when there here then there whatever people want to call them when they move on

How can people make a judgement on Tan when he is still our current owner?

If we got promoted and he decided to pocket all the money himself, screws the club over and we do a Pompey or Blackburn you'd all be backtracking again.

I'll make a judgement on Tan further down the line when I have had more time to assess his true motives. For now im skeptical but will give him the benefit of the doubt in terms of business/money.

I think the way the game is now everyone should be a skeptic.

If I don't know what I'm talking about I stay out of a discussion.

People who think Tan is a whiter than white saviour of our club do a lot of damage by spreading wrongful information.

They will tell people how great he is and how his investment will save us and people will believe it. Making it harder for us to ever restore history to our once proud club.

The fact is, he hasn't invested in us. He's just loaned us money irrespective of our credit history.

I've got no problem with people being pro Tan, but back it up with substance instead of assumptions.

Wrong, mate. You got involved in THIS discussion which PROVES you don't know what you are talking about

Ultimately, it is only your opinion (the same as anyone elses) and you have no hard evidence that proves you right

Hey, neither do we (to some extent) but then again it is no 'we' who are banging on about it