Trust’s New Year Plea to Vincent Tan

No doubt It can be considered another good effort, but that's as much as it is. The points in it are quite silly and something a billionaire will scoff and laugh at.

A fan on the board is a complete farce, quite laughable.

UK elections .... Laughable.

And trust letters quite laughable. The real reason Vincent thinks the fans backed him before was down to all the other open letters published by the gullible fans so called leaders, followed by all the red seen at the ground especially red scarf night.

As for debt to equity, at boardroom level the deal was never completed. Michael Issac at the last moment pulled out on the deal to sell his share holding. That's a fact whilst all other directors sold at the agreed price, so until Issac changes his mind, it won't happen anyway.

Finally with everyone now being anti what nugget would do it now anyway, and a nugget isn't what old VT is !!!

Debt to equity makes no difference to the average fan anyway, not the slightest bit of difference.

Steve, you are spot on with that post, fella

All p**s taking side, it shows how ignorant most of our fan base (and I include myself in that group on many issues) are when it comes to how/why/when things will or will not be done at the CCS

Michael Isaac is obviously looking out for no one except himself, but who can blame him in reality?

Hello Sven, happy new year to you fella. Michael Issac only ever looks after one person himself, although he did renegade on an agreement. But anyway that renegade stopped the debt to equity deal, and without trying to be disrespectful to anyone involved the trust should know that before penning in a letter.

Now let's be honest old Vincent is a very busy billionaire businessman and I'm sure he doesn't have the time to check who the leaders are of what supporters group, to him a customer is a customer and looks at the mass, and if we are all truthful the mass supported the red, the media reports too by the self professed fans leaders also supported by fans leaders letters printed in the media supported that, Paul Corkery, Gwyn Davies. Tony Jeffies , Vince Alm & Tim Hartley all had letters printed in the same issue backing Vincent and his investmement. Tan got to read those and it's a fact that's what he based his opinion on and also the feedback from directors who wanted to protect their investments , some who had claimed previous to have blue blood running through them, as well as basically incompetent club staff who just kissed ass best they could to impress.

So there is where Vincent's picture was formed. It's those exact people named above who to you blue boys should be hanging their heads in total shame especially the ones now to wanting Vincent out and back to blue, is that fickle or what ?

Sometimes the truth hurts but those are the facts.

Now if I was a Vincent ( Tan not Alm ) and had made those big investments and in return received the abuse he has from what were red supporters previous and fans leaders, I would dig my heels in and say FOOK YOU !!!

Harsh but true .... You're chance to get your point across and demonstrate was when you had the initial chance but that never happened right at the announcement , even said By Vince to himself ( Tan not Alm ). If you don't want it fine but I won't invest.

So the big question is WHO pushed home the red and convinced Tan the fans were happy with Red ???

Answers on a post card please !!!!!

Steve.

Just a few points re your posts in this thread.

Are you saying that VT took great notice of open letters in the past but not now?

MI selling his shares to VT would be equity to equity,not debt to equity

I think you have the wrong word in "renegade" when you refer to MI not honouring an agreement.

Do you agree with the above points?

Hello Keith,

Firstly happy new year to you.

Open letters - you do actually make a good point. But those open letters were provided to him with an agenda in an attempt to show him your fans backed the rebrand, in other words showing him what he wanted to hear. He doesn't want to read yours if you get my drift. But yes you do make a good point there I agree. If he reads it or it gets addressed to him it's made it point.

The MI shares are what I'm understood that he uses as an excuse or whatever you want to call it not to turn or follow through his debt to equity promise.

Yes not the word bloody auto word !! Welched probably a better word .... Mind you thin lizzy renegade lP one of my faves so it could have been on my mind !

I always get confused, the other day the trust were asking for debt to equity?

Do they want debt to equity or a return to blue or do they expect both?

I always get confused, the other day the trust were asking for debt to equity?

Do they want debt to equity or a return to blue or do they expect both?

Both with a fan on the board I believe which is asking the ridiculous in my opinion.

No doubt It can be considered another good effort, but that's as much as it is. The points in it are quite silly and something a billionaire will scoff and laugh at.

A fan on the board is a complete farce, quite laughable.

UK elections .... Laughable.

And trust letters quite laughable. The real reason Vincent thinks the fans backed him before was down to all the other open letters published by the gullible fans so called leaders, followed by all the red seen at the ground especially red scarf night.

As for debt to equity, at boardroom level the deal was never completed. Michael Issac at the last moment pulled out on the deal to sell his share holding. That's a fact whilst all other directors sold at the agreed price, so until Issac changes his mind, it won't happen anyway.

Finally with everyone now being anti what nugget would do it now anyway, and a nugget isn't what old VT is !!!

Debt to equity makes no difference to the average fan anyway, not the slightest bit of difference.

Steve, you are spot on with that post, fella

All p**s taking side, it shows how ignorant most of our fan base (and I include myself in that group on many issues) are when it comes to how/why/when things will or will not be done at the CCS

Michael Isaac is obviously looking out for no one except himself, but who can blame him in reality?

Hello Sven, happy new year to you fella. Michael Issac only ever looks after one person himself, although he did renegade on an agreement. But anyway that renegade stopped the debt to equity deal, and without trying to be disrespectful to anyone involved the trust should know that before penning in a letter.

Now let's be honest old Vincent is a very busy billionaire businessman and I'm sure he doesn't have the time to check who the leaders are of what supporters group, to him a customer is a customer and looks at the mass, and if we are all truthful the mass supported the red, the media reports too by the self professed fans leaders also supported by fans leaders letters printed in the media supported that, Paul Corkery, Gwyn Davies. Tony Jeffies , Vince Alm & Tim Hartley all had letters printed in the same issue backing Vincent and his investmement. Tan got to read those and it's a fact that's what he based his opinion on and also the feedback from directors who wanted to protect their investments , some who had claimed previous to have blue blood running through them, as well as basically incompetent club staff who just kissed ass best they could to impress.

So there is where Vincent's picture was formed. It's those exact people named above who to you blue boys should be hanging their heads in total shame especially the ones now to wanting Vincent out and back to blue, is that fickle or what ?

Sometimes the truth hurts but those are the facts.

Now if I was a Vincent ( Tan not Alm ) and had made those big investments and in return received the abuse he has from what were red supporters previous and fans leaders, I would dig my heels in and say FOOK YOU !!!

Harsh but true .... You're chance to get your point across and demonstrate was when you had the initial chance but that never happened right at the announcement , even said By Vince to himself ( Tan not Alm ). If you don't want it fine but I won't invest.

So the big question is WHO pushed home the red and convinced Tan the fans were happy with Red ???

Answers on a post card please !!!!!

Steve.

Just a few points re your posts in this thread.

Are you saying that VT took great notice of open letters in the past but not now?

MI selling his shares to VT would be equity to equity,not debt to equity

I think you have the wrong word in "renegade" when you refer to MI not honouring an agreement.

Do you agree with the above points?

Hello Keith,

Firstly happy new year to you.

Open letters - you do actually make a good point. But those open letters were provided to him with an agenda in an attempt to show him your fans backed the rebrand, in other words showing him what he wanted to hear. He doesn't want to read yours if you get my drift. But yes you do make a good point there I agree. If he reads it or it gets addressed to him it's made it point.

The MI shares are what I'm understood that he uses as an excuse or whatever you want to call it not to turn or follow through his debt to equity promise.

Yes not the word bloody auto word !! Welched probably a better word .... Mind you thin lizzy renegade lP one of my faves so it could have been on my mind !

Happy New Year to you and your family as well Steve.

I totally agree that the sycophants VT has surrounded himself with only pass on the information they think he wants to hear. Those that don`t are sacked (he badges it as "resigned" ).But open letters tend to be picked up by the press and other media , so not so easy for him to ignore , particularly if those parts of the Malasian press he doesn`t exert control over.

I don`t know Michael Isaac personally and have never dealt with him professionally. However , virtually every lawyer and accountant I have spoken to who has have nothing nice to say about him at all and say they wouldn`t trust him in the slightest. On that basis , I could well believe that he would delay a share deal for personal gain over the best deal for the club he purports to serve as a director. On top of that , of coiurse , when other directors were helping the club out with loans at 7% interest , he was charging 25%!!

When you were using "renegade" , I just assumed you had been watching too many Westerns on T.V. over the holiday period!

I always get confused, the other day the trust were asking for debt to equity?

Do they want debt to equity or a return to blue or do they expect both?

The Trust , like many fans , want Vincent Tan to honour his own pledge to convert all his debt into shares. It`s not a demand varying anything , just a reminder that he should be a man of his word and stick to what he has promised on more than one occasion.

I think it is pretty clear that the vast majority of fans want a return to blue and Trust members are no different , giving a very large vore to such effect when last polled.

There should therefore be no confusion in your mind as the two seperate issues have been fully explained over several months.

I always get confused, the other day the trust were asking for debt to equity?

Do they want debt to equity or a return to blue or do they expect both?

Both with a fan on the board I believe which is asking the ridiculous in my opinion.

I truly believe that the fan on the board route for all clubs will be in place in a few years time Steve as a result of the football authorities conceding to Government pressure.How it will work in practice (my own opinion is that part of the board agenda will have to be set aside for "fan issues" and the rest of the meetings conducted as now to deal with confidential or business sensitive matters) is uncertain , but it will happen.
At present , fan representation tends to be far more frequent at lower levels of the football pyramid , with Swansea being the obvious exception at the top level.