Sam Hammam

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

Well I have great respect for Sam and what he did for my club so I don't understand what you are getting at Ian.

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

Well I have great respect for Sam and what he did for my club so I don't understand what you are getting at Ian.

Take a step back Neil.

It does not matter if Tan can afford it and Sam could not. If Tan picks sticks up and goes we as a club owe him £100m. In fact it is a lot worse than what Sam left us in as the debt would be secured against the club. The Tan can afford it is then taken away.

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

Well I have great respect for Sam and what he did for my club so I don't understand what you are getting at Ian.

Take a step back Neil.

It does not matter if Tan can afford it and Sam could not. If Tan picks sticks up and goes we as a club owe him £100m. In fact it is a lot worse than what Sam left us in as the debt would be secured against the club. The Tan can afford it is then taken away.

But with no means of the club paying him he couldn't get the money.

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

Well I have great respect for Sam and what he did for my club so I don't understand what you are getting at Ian.

Take a step back Neil.

It does not matter if Tan can afford it and Sam could not. If Tan picks sticks up and goes we as a club owe him £100m. In fact it is a lot worse than what Sam left us in as the debt would be secured against the club. The Tan can afford it is then taken away.

But with no means of the club paying him he couldn't get the money.

No Neil he would not unless he wants to wait a long time.

Hence why at £40m I would have caused his bluff.

Anyway lets get back on track whatever that was.

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

When Sam left we were only 30 million in debt but we owed money everywhere and no brand new stadium

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

When Sam left we were only 30 million in debt but we owed money everywhere and no brand new stadium

Who to besides Sam then Wez.

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

When Sam left we were only 30 million in debt but we owed money everywhere and no brand new stadium

Who to besides Sam then Wez.

Hmrc ,isacs ,players ,Sam could not afford to keep the club running there's was no money in the pot ,he had to go

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

When Sam left we were only 30 million in debt but we owed money everywhere and no brand new stadium

Who to besides Sam then Wez.

Hmrc ,isacs ,players ,Sam could not afford to keep the club running there's was no money in the pot ,he had to go

Yeah the VAT man. Was it Kavenaugh we sold to pay him?

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

When Sam left we were only 30 million in debt but we owed money everywhere and no brand new stadium

When Tan took us over debt was higher and losing a million a month weren't we?

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

When Sam left we were only 30 million in debt but we owed money everywhere and no brand new stadium

When Tan took us over debt was higher and losing a million a month weren't we?

yes debt around 70 million I think

[quotare Bakedalasker"]

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?[/quote]



We are screwed as not in million years will we be able to pay tan? But then tan will lose multi millions! But judging by what tan is doing he is unlikely to leave on a whim!

[quotare Bakedalasker"]

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

We are screwed as not in million years will we be able to pay tan? But then tan will lose multi millions! But judging by what tan is doing he is unlikely to leave on a whim! [/quote]

If he was going to he would have by now I think.

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

When Sam left we were only 30 million in debt but we owed money everywhere and no brand new stadium

Who to besides Sam then Wez.

Those debts were the big ones but we also owed money left, right and centre to suppliers. We lurched from one court case to another, as well as the threat of transfer embargo.

It got to the point where local small to medium sized firms wouldn't deal with the club unless they were paid upfront in cash. There was a long list of creditors that Tan paid off over a period of time that never got into the public domain.

When Sam left we owed him money and we had very few assets and a crumbling, outdated stadium. Very different scenario now, although still worrying I would still be surprised if we got anywhere near winding up whilst Tan is here.

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

It's not me that wants Tan gone. I'll send that question back at you. What if Tan leaves Ian which is what you want?

It's a very different scenario now though. Sam was forced out and able to be forced as he was reliant on others as he hadn't actually put much of his own money in. Tan cannot be forced out.

Hopefully Tan will leave with someone buying him out.

If Tan leave we will owe him £100m with a club that is mid table....With Sam it was £30m with a club top of the league looking definite promotion material. Sams debt was unsecured while Tans debt was secured. That means that anything we make a profit on like selling a young player the proceeds would most likely go to Tan. Sam had no say in such activities.

Just say Neil if Tan leaves say now would you think similar of him like you so Sam?

When Sam left we were only 30 million in debt but we owed money everywhere and no brand new stadium

Who to besides Sam then Wez.

Those debts were the big ones but we also owed money left, right and centre to suppliers. We lurched from one court case to another, as well as the threat of transfer embargo.

It got to the point where local small to medium sized firms wouldn't deal with the club unless they were paid upfront in cash. There was a long list of creditors that Tan paid off over a period of time that never got into the public domain.

When Sam left we owed him money and we had very few assets and a crumbling, outdated stadium. Very different scenario now, although still worrying I would still be surprised if we got anywhere near winding up whilst Tan is here.

One thing you can never take away from Tan is that he paid our 'historic' debts £ to £ and ensured we didn't go down (the preferred route of some?? ) the Swansea/Wimbledon/Portsmouth et al route and, in effect, become a 'new' club!

Yes, he (initially) gambled on DJ's promotion push, but ever since he has made sure the 'debt' is owed to him and I'd rather all our eggs be in one basket in this instance than have (as we did) a variety of vultures swooping overhead!

It's not rocket science; Tan wants us to be a successful club (it is in his own interests) and there is, to the best of my knowledge, no SERIOUS buyer in the wings

I'm no great fan of Tan the man, but sometimes (as other clubs have recently found out) better the devil you know than the devil that lurks in the wings waiting for easy pickings!

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

Ian, has he threatened that??

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

Ian, has he threatened that??

Yep....well according to some.

The Facts remain.

Vincent Tan has signed a contract agreeing to pay Langston after spending a £million on making sure there was no fraud etc.
Tan then signed and agreed to have a Langston Director on board until every penny was paid to Langston.
Tan also made Sam life President.

Tan then pays £millions upon £Millions, then does his usual games I'm not paying, I want to know who Langston is
Then Tan realises he is going to lose in the High Court,throws his toys out of his pram and says he will remove the Director and Sam.

The facts remain,are that Tan will find this totally illegal.

Tans circus continues

I await the out come.


Tan said he would not pay Ridsdale or Dave Jones both started court cases, guess what? Tan paid both in full.

To me I see no difference between Tan and Sam except that one does things a lot bigger than the other.

Sam debt was £30m while Tan is over £100m.

Tan could afford it, Sam couldn't.

What difference does that make Luke. Officially the club still owe £100m.

Ian, of course that makes a huge difference.

If you owe 10000 pounds to someone but you only have 2000 pounds then you are screwed but if you have 10000 pounds you can pay it back.

And what if Tan leaves just like Sam did then Neil?

Ian, has he threatened that??

Yep....well according to some.

Thanks, Ian. I wasn't sure, but wasn't aware either

But ultimately, there we have it...no firm evidence, so I guess it's simply a case of what people WANT to believe rather than what they know!

It's an age-old problem at most football clubs, I believe!