Cardiff City Forum



A forum for all things Cardiff City

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:40 pm

Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:So you think taking debt from a quid to seven quid is worse than taking it from 1 million quid to 4 million quid? :?

Sorry but this is stupid.

Id say the debt has been taken from possibly manageable to ridiculously astronomical regardless of %.


the first part of your post is spot on.............

then you move on to being some sort of financial expert........ridiculously astronomical to you,to me, maybe
but its neither your money or mine.........


Christ you are boring :laughing6:

£150m is a debt figure the club cannot bear via its own means. This is a fact.


the only bore here is you...............
look go and play make believe businessman with the kids nxt door eh

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:47 pm

Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:So you think taking debt from a quid to seven quid is worse than taking it from 1 million quid to 4 million quid? :?

Sorry but this is stupid.

Id say the debt has been taken from possibly manageable to ridiculously astronomical regardless of %.


the first part of your post is spot on.............

then you move on to being some sort of financial expert........ridiculously astronomical to you,to me, maybe
but its neither your money or mine.........


Christ you are boring :laughing6:

£150m is a debt figure the club cannot bear via its own means. This is a fact.


should i put my trust in a man thats a self made billionaire,who has top experts to advise him,and who has businesses in various countries
or put my faith in some gimps guesses........

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:58 pm

Natman Blue wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:So you think taking debt from a quid to seven quid is worse than taking it from 1 million quid to 4 million quid? :?

Sorry but this is stupid.

Id say the debt has been taken from possibly manageable to ridiculously astronomical regardless of %.


the first part of your post is spot on.............

then you move on to being some sort of financial expert........ridiculously astronomical to you,to me, maybe
but its neither your money or mine.........


Christ you are boring :laughing6:

£150m is a debt figure the club cannot bear via its own means. This is a fact.


But to be fair neither was the amount we previously owed.


fair doesnt come into it...........another with an agenda or 2..........desperate for us to chase tan out...and desperate to have some sort of meaning to his life............
and your correct Nat..........as a championship club up to our eyes in debt,and no parachute payments, unlikely to be able to recruit descent players we had no chance of ever clearing the debts pre tan...........

they say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing..............roathie has very little

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:00 pm

simon.wiesenthal wrote:
should i put my trust in a man thats a self made billionaire,who has top experts to advise him,and who has businesses in various countries
or put my faith in some gimps guesses........


You can put your trust in who ever you wish, however as a self made millionaire many times over with businesses in various countries - I can tell you that £150m debt for a club such as cardiff cannot be bared by the club alone.

Now stop your tantrums and talk some sense, there is a good lad :thumbup:

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:06 pm

Natman Blue wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:So you think taking debt from a quid to seven quid is worse than taking it from 1 million quid to 4 million quid? :?

Sorry but this is stupid.

Id say the debt has been taken from possibly manageable to ridiculously astronomical regardless of %.


the first part of your post is spot on.............

then you move on to being some sort of financial expert........ridiculously astronomical to you,to me, maybe
but its neither your money or mine.........


Christ you are boring :laughing6:

£150m is a debt figure the club cannot bear via its own means. This is a fact.


But to be fair neither was the amount we previously owed.


I disagree, i stated at the time how it could be managed given the financial report at the time. Lets not forget that Langston could readily have been settled at £10m wiping out most of the debt.

Its just that cardiff decided to go the wrong way of two ways and straight into debt based business plans... Which only end one way.

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:21 pm

Roath, you can't change history. We couldn't manege it, had Tan not stepped in we would be gone for that very reason.

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:11 am

Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
should i put my trust in a man thats a self made billionaire,who has top experts to advise him,and who has businesses in various countries
or put my faith in some gimps guesses........


You can put your trust in who ever you wish, however as a self made millionaire many times over with businesses in various countries - I can tell you that £150m debt for a club such as cardiff cannot be bared by the club alone.

Now stop your tantrums and talk some sense, there is a good lad :thumbup:


i doubt your a self made millionaire roath.............you just dont get so much..talk finance like a first year college student......plus most millionaires on here,and there are a few, dont say it..dont need too..........you obviously have lots of little boots and dogs at home from all the monopoly sets..........

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:16 am

:ayatollah:
Natman Blue wrote:Roath, you can't change history. We couldn't manege it, had Tan not stepped in we would be gone for that very reason.


roath has this book...............covers everything re..finance and business.......no matter what the problem it covers it with various options...........he having a degree in economics and maths knows always which options this club should have taken............its never ever the one the club has taken............wierd..... :ayatollah: :ayatollah: :ayatollah: :ayatollah: :thumbright:

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:34 am

Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
should i put my trust in a man thats a self made billionaire,who has top experts to advise him,and who has businesses in various countries
or put my faith in some gimps guesses........


You can put your trust in who ever you wish, however as a self made millionaire many times over with businesses in various countries - I can tell you that £150m debt for a club such as cardiff cannot be bared by the club alone.

Now stop your tantrums and talk some sense, there is a good lad :thumbup:


yours must be a very sad world....your a millionaire many times over and if asked can solve everything from Brazils debts to famines in Africa........the ultimate brain of all brains..........yet you regularly get torched on a message board..........
pleb..unlucky kentucky..nosense,,tantrums,,rants.......good lad.young lad..lots of laughing heads and thumsups...........unable to ever actually win a debate....you just revert to gobldegook , belittling..and childrens stuff...........
well done you.......................try getting a maths A level.............then come back and say youve done the maths eh.......at least then youd be semi qualified...........

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:48 am

Roath_Magic_ wrote:
Natman Blue wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:So you think taking debt from a quid to seven quid is worse than taking it from 1 million quid to 4 million quid? :?

Sorry but this is stupid.

Id say the debt has been taken from possibly manageable to ridiculously astronomical regardless of %.


the first part of your post is spot on.............

then you move on to being some sort of financial expert........ridiculously astronomical to you,to me, maybe
but its neither your money or mine.........


Christ you are boring :laughing6:

£150m is a debt figure the club cannot bear via its own means. This is a fact.


But to be fair neither was the amount we previously owed.


I disagree, i stated at the time how it could be managed given the financial report at the time. Lets not forget that Langston could readily have been settled at £10m wiping out most of the debt.

Its just that cardiff decided to go the wrong way of two ways and straight into debt based business plans... Which only end one way.

you stated at the time?............the time of course being prior to tans involvement.......was this on here? .. to anyone that would agree to your claim...???????..or is it just you trying to credit yourself ?.........youre gonna feel a tad foolish reading this..do everyone a favour ..if you do reply try and be an adult eh.........

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:17 am

simon.wiesenthal wrote:
i doubt your a self made millionaire roath.............you just dont get so much..talk finance like a first year college student......plus most millionaires on here,and there are a few, dont say it..dont need too..........you obviously have lots of little boots and dogs at home from all the monopoly sets..........


I dont care what you doubt :D You being up someone being a self made millionaire with lots of businesses then I can also claim such a thing, you started it :thumbright:

The rest of your post is nonsense as usual :lol:

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:20 am

simon.wiesenthal wrote:
yours must be a very sad world....your a millionaire many times over and if asked can solve everything from Brazils debts to famines in Africa........the ultimate brain of all brains..........yet you regularly get torched on a message board..........
pleb..unlucky kentucky..nosense,,tantrums,,rants.......good lad.young lad..lots of laughing heads and thumsups...........unable to ever actually win a debate....you just revert to gobldegook , belittling..and childrens stuff...........
well done you.......................try getting a maths A level.............then come back and say youve done the maths eh.......at least then youd be semi qualified...........


Again nonsense ranting.

You seem annoyed that im clever, thats the gist of it anyway. If you disagree by all means do so, but give something to the thread. Tell me which part you disagree with and why... The debate can then develop.

Instead you just sound like a jealous child ranting on the internet :D

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:22 am

simon.wiesenthal wrote:
you stated at the time?............the time of course being prior to tans involvement.......was this on here? .. to anyone that would agree to your claim...???????..or is it just you trying to credit yourself ?.........youre gonna feel a tad foolish reading this..do everyone a favour ..if you do reply try and be an adult eh.........


Yep stated at the time young man. The time being when debt levels were manageable. Yes it was on here and well known to mostly everyone :thumbup:

Now then, how about an adult sensible reply for once soulofthesea? You are coming across very much a pleb again :lol:

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:55 am

Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
yours must be a very sad world....your a millionaire many times over and if asked can solve everything from Brazils debts to famines in Africa........the ultimate brain of all brains..........yet you regularly get torched on a message board..........
pleb..unlucky kentucky..nosense,,tantrums,,rants.......good lad.young lad..lots of laughing heads and thumsups...........unable to ever actually win a debate....you just revert to gobldegook , belittling..and childrens stuff...........
well done you.......................try getting a maths A level.............then come back and say youve done the maths eh.......at least then youd be semi qualified...........


Again nonsense ranting.

You seem annoyed that im clever, thats the gist of it anyway. If you disagree by all means do so, but give something to the thread. Tell me which part you disagree with and why... The debate can then develop.

Instead you just sound like a jealous child ranting on the internet :D

Yes, very impresses with you, and very jealous. Especially with your inhabilty to read copyright and count incomes

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 6:11 am

7Summit wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
yours must be a very sad world....your a millionaire many times over and if asked can solve everything from Brazils debts to famines in Africa........the ultimate brain of all brains..........yet you regularly get torched on a message board..........
pleb..unlucky kentucky..nosense,,tantrums,,rants.......good lad.young lad..lots of laughing heads and thumsups...........unable to ever actually win a debate....you just revert to gobldegook , belittling..and childrens stuff...........
well done you.......................try getting a maths A level.............then come back and say youve done the maths eh.......at least then youd be semi qualified...........


Again nonsense ranting.

You seem annoyed that im clever, thats the gist of it anyway. If you disagree by all means do so, but give something to the thread. Tell me which part you disagree with and why... The debate can then develop.

Instead you just sound like a jealous child ranting on the internet :D

Yes, very impresses with you, and very jealous. Especially with your inhabilty to read copyright and count incomes


Inhability? Is that an inability to live? :lol:

Still smarting at being made to look silly I see Pete? :laughing6:

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:52 am

Roath_Magic_ wrote:
7Summit wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
yours must be a very sad world....your a millionaire many times over and if asked can solve everything from Brazils debts to famines in Africa........the ultimate brain of all brains..........yet you regularly get torched on a message board..........
pleb..unlucky kentucky..nosense,,tantrums,,rants.......good lad.young lad..lots of laughing heads and thumsups...........unable to ever actually win a debate....you just revert to gobldegook , belittling..and childrens stuff...........
well done you.......................try getting a maths A level.............then come back and say youve done the maths eh.......at least then youd be semi qualified...........


Again nonsense ranting.

You seem annoyed that im clever, thats the gist of it anyway. If you disagree by all means do so, but give something to the thread. Tell me which part you disagree with and why... The debate can then develop.

Instead you just sound like a jealous child ranting on the internet :D

Yes, very impresses with you, and very jealous. Especially with your inhabilty to read copyright and count incomes


Inhability? Is that an inability to live? :lol:

Still smarting at being made to look silly I see Pete? :laughing6:

Yes, I look like a total idiot reading what's right. If I where wrong I would be able to say so. Unlike some.

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:57 am

If you where (sic) wrong? :?

Come on Pete there was nothing to read. It was common sense :laughing6:

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:03 am

Roath_Magic_ wrote:If you where (sic) wrong? :?

Come on Pete there was nothing to read. It was common sense :laughing6:

I'm able to get the point presented to you in this thread and read copyrights. All good thanx

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:05 am

7Summit wrote:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:If you where (sic) wrong? :?

Come on Pete there was nothing to read. It was common sense :laughing6:

I'm able to get the point presented to you in this thread and read copyrights. All good thanx


Thanx? (sic) :?

Reading copyrights and understanding copyrights are completely different, the thread is still going if you would like to take it up with me again? :thumbright:

As for this thread? What point has been presented young man? £150m is manageable for the club alone because tan is a successful businessman? :lol:

Nice.

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:11 am

Well now
Yes I do believe 700 % debt increase is worse than 400% debt increase
Please explain to me how im wrong in thinking this
Surely if we had carried on increasing debt at rate of 700% we would have been worse off
Now prove that the debt under sam was manageable as imo history proves it wasnt
Now prove to me that our debt of today (alledgedly upto 150million ) is not manageable ( how much is our owner worth) :bluescarf: :ole:

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:17 am

troobloo3339 wrote:Well now
Yes I do believe 700 % debt increase is worse than 400% debt increase
Please explain to me how im wrong in thinking this
Surely if we had carried on increasing debt at rate of 700% we would have been worse off
Now prove that the debt under sam was manageable as imo history proves it wasnt
Now prove to me that our debt of today (alledgedly upto 150million ) is not manageable ( how much is our owner worth) :bluescarf: :ole:


So you think Hammam was worse because he could have mad the club worse off by spending at that level, which he didn't.

Why not use the same criteria for Tan then? If we keep increasing the debt at current levels, we will be even more worse off...

:laughing6: what ridiculous reasoning.

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:22 am

Barry Chuckle wrote:
troobloo3339 wrote:Well now
Yes I do believe 700 % debt increase is worse than 400% debt increase
Please explain to me how im wrong in thinking this
Surely if we had carried on increasing debt at rate of 700% we would have been worse off
Now prove that the debt under sam was manageable as imo history proves it wasnt
Now prove to me that our debt of today (alledgedly upto 150million ) is not manageable ( how much is our owner worth) :bluescarf: :ole:


So you think Hammam was worse because he could have mad the club worse off by spending at that level, which he didn't.

Why not use the same criteria for Tan then? If we keep increasing the debt at current levels, we will be even more worse off...

:laughing6: what ridiculous reasoning.



Not exactly because Tan might not increase the debt and might not increase the debt to those levels. Sam did!

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:24 am

Natman Blue wrote:

Not exactly because Tan might not increase the debt and might not increase the debt to those levels. Sam did!


Absolutely ridiculous reasoning, to suggest Sam is worse because he COULD have increased it even more... When he didn't.

Sam increased the debt, but in doing so, the club actually progressed. Tan has out the club in to ridiculous amounts of debt, has already said he will not be doing a total debt to equity swap, despite saying he would & even after that would leave the club in 100 million of debt, in a hideous colour, with a split fan base.

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:42 am

Barry Chuckle wrote:
Natman Blue wrote:

Not exactly because Tan might not increase the debt and might not increase the debt to those levels. Sam did!


Absolutely ridiculous reasoning, to suggest Sam is worse because he COULD have increased it even more... When he didn't.

Sam increased the debt, but in doing so, the club actually progressed. Tan has out the club in to ridiculous amounts of debt, has already said he will not be doing a total debt to equity swap, despite saying he would & even after that would leave the club in 100 million of debt, in a hideous colour, with a split fan base.


Read it again, I've not said that. My point was Sam increased the debt to an amount whereby he couldn't manage it (Black Friday), Tan categorically has not done that. There is debt but he is still managing it.

Neither has he denied he will do a swap and if you actually read some of the very informative posts by Danny Blue amongst others you would see why he is going to stage it. You know, the post that is towards the end of the tripe that you published.

here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=142406&start=150#p1502786

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:47 am

Barry Chuckle wrote:
Natman Blue wrote:

Not exactly because Tan might not increase the debt and might not increase the debt to those levels. Sam did!


Absolutely ridiculous reasoning, to suggest Sam is worse because he COULD have increased it even more... When he didn't.

Sam increased the debt, but in doing so, the club actually progressed. Tan has out the club in to ridiculous amounts of debt, has already said he will not be doing a total debt to equity swap, despite saying he would & even after that would leave the club in 100 million of debt, in a hideous colour, with a split fan base.


progress though isnt always a graph with a smooth upward rise..........
we have got to a carling cup final, play offs,,won the championship and had 1 year in the prem.........the players?//we should have a better squad,they certainly cost enough and earn more than what had been here prior to him....nxt year we have parachute payments......so we have progressed........ridiculous amounts of debt?..depends who you are Barry..........your listening to that monopoly millionaire too much...........dont you want this club to go foward?............

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:49 am

:ayatollah:
Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
i doubt your a self made millionaire roath.............you just dont get so much..talk finance like a first year college student......plus most millionaires on here,and there are a few, dont say it..dont need too..........you obviously have lots of little boots and dogs at home from all the monopoly sets..........


I dont care what you doubt :D You being up someone being a self made millionaire with lots of businesses then I can also claim such a thing, you started it :thumbright:

The rest of your post is nonsense as usual :lol:



:ayatollah: :ayatollah: :ayatollah: :ayatollah: ..yes the bits you cant deal with on the monopoly board as usual are rants,nonsense............im not up anyone.........but the person you are talking about doesnt drop it into every interview how rich he is.........he doesnt have to..........

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:50 am

Can soulofthesea tell us why he thinks £150m isnt much debt? :D

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:52 am

Roath_Magic_ wrote:
simon.wiesenthal wrote:
yours must be a very sad world....your a millionaire many times over and if asked can solve everything from Brazils debts to famines in Africa........the ultimate brain of all brains..........yet you regularly get torched on a message board..........
pleb..unlucky kentucky..nosense,,tantrums,,rants.......good lad.young lad..lots of laughing heads and thumsups...........unable to ever actually win a debate....you just revert to gobldegook , belittling..and childrens stuff...........
well done you.......................try getting a maths A level.............then come back and say youve done the maths eh.......at least then youd be semi qualified...........


Again nonsense ranting.

You seem annoyed that im clever, thats the gist of it anyway. If you disagree by all means do so, but give something to the thread. Tell me which part you disagree with and why... The debate can then develop.

Instead you just sound like a jealous child ranting on the internet :D


copying what i have said about you now.............once again lots of childish icons, .....yes im annoyed your on here saying things that that are crap.........we had TWO options etc.......yes pay the tax man or fold

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:52 am

simon.wiesenthal wrote:

:ayatollah: :ayatollah: :ayatollah: :ayatollah: ..yes the bits you cant deal with on the monopoly board as usual are rants,nonsense............im not up anyone.........but the person you are talking about doesnt drop it into every interview how rich he is.........he doesnt have to..........


If the conversation was that roath magic was correct because he owns many businesses and a self made multi millionaire - he would mention it i assure you :lol:

How about YOU tell us why £150m isnt much debt? :D

Re: sam =700% tan =400%

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:53 am

simon.wiesenthal wrote:
copying what i have said about you now.............once again lots of childish icons, .....yes im annoyed your on here saying things that that are crap.........we had TWO options etc.......yes pay the tax man or fold


Saying as i see it pal.

I have no idea what you are talking about regarding the two options. Are you telling me your tax bill was £150m?? :shock: