' STRIKER or DEBT? - POLL '

I think from the moment we won the battle to return to blue, and gave tan a huge amount of criticism at the same time, we kissed goodbye to any further investment in the club. Can't see much money being thrown around while Tan is here, and I still believe his number one priority is to get back as much of his investment as possible, before trying to find a new owner.

He's writing off 150 million isn't that investment?

You have no idea about his personal final deficit until he leaves the club. We don't know how much additional revenue will come in from the sale of players, TV rights, season tickets etc. over the next couple of years, and what percentage of that will be repaid against the present amount written off. We only know the financial position up to the last published set of accounts. There is no doubt he will lose money with this venture, as do the majority of football club owners. I think you are in for a disapointment if you really think Tan has any particular love for a football team based half way around the world from his home, in a country that means nothing to him. This is purely business, and I can't see him risking any more vast sums of money on something that has already cost him a fortune.

unfortunately i agree with you on this, he said recently that we was down to40m debt did he not? if thats the case after he pockets the parachute payments AGAIN then surely he can write off the rest and just go, in footballing terms we are further from the premier league than we have ever been

pocketed the money he's writing off 170 million 60 odd of it isn't his doing and your still moaning:lol:

And you don't think he's going to get back any of that?

no not unless we get promoted and he sells to some other idiot ,football clubs are money pits

Get some back but highly unlikely to get anywhere near £100m for club in 4yrs time when all debt turned to equity ? More like 100 pennies

Im worried that we are cutting too much to remain competetive in this league. Im guessing our parachute payments were absorbed by the debts?

I agree we have been too liberal with the cash over the years but we do need some investment as relegation would hurt us even more financially.

And lets remember 90% of our debt that reached as much as £150mill plus was created by Vincent Tan himself.

bullshit annis we were 69 million in debt before he came, your not very good at figures are you so it can't be 90%

Bullshit Wez,We were not that high and I believe it reached £170mill under Tan

I can tell you this,Im very good at keeping my own accounts in order and in credit

we've had this conversation loads of times and I prove you wrong everytime we were 69 m8llion in debt when tan took us over so it can't be 90% can it it,good job you've got a good account

Vincent Tan started investing his money into the club in about September 2010 , which was when he first took security for his loans over the assets. The accounts immediately prior to that were for the year to 31 May 2010. As at that date , the club had total assets of £59m and total liabilities of £63m , leaving it with a net debt of just £4m.
As at 31 May 2015 , the latest filed accounts , the club had total assets of £91m and total liabilities of £140m , leaving it with net debts of £59m , an increase of £55m over that 5 year period.

Im worried that we are cutting too much to remain competetive in this league. Im guessing our parachute payments were absorbed by the debts?

I agree we have been too liberal with the cash over the years but we do need some investment as relegation would hurt us even more financially.

And lets remember 90% of our debt that reached as much as £150mill plus was created by Vincent Tan himself.

bullshit annis we were 69 million in debt before he came, your not very good at figures are you so it can't be 90%

Bullshit Wez,We were not that high and I believe it reached £170mill under Tan

I can tell you this,Im very good at keeping my own accounts in order and in credit

we've had this conversation loads of times and I prove you wrong everytime we were 69 m8llion in debt when tan took us over so it can't be 90% can it it,good job you've got a good account

Vincent Tan started investing his money into the club in about September 2010 , which was when he first took security for his loans over the assets. The accounts immediately prior to that were for the year to 31 May 2010. As at that date , the club had total assets of £59m and total liabilities of £63m , leaving it with a net debt of just £4m.
As at 31 May 2015 , the latest filed accounts , the club had total assets of £91m and total liabilities of £140m , leaving it with net debts of £59m , an increase of £55m over that 5 year period.

so we were 63 million excluding assets when he took over and now 140 million

Im worried that we are cutting too much to remain competetive in this league. Im guessing our parachute payments were absorbed by the debts?

I agree we have been too liberal with the cash over the years but we do need some investment as relegation would hurt us even more financially.

And lets remember 90% of our debt that reached as much as £150mill plus was created by Vincent Tan himself.

bullshit annis we were 69 million in debt before he came, your not very good at figures are you so it can't be 90%

Bullshit Wez,We were not that high and I believe it reached £170mill under Tan

I can tell you this,Im very good at keeping my own accounts in order and in credit

we've had this conversation loads of times and I prove you wrong everytime we were 69 m8llion in debt when tan took us over so it can't be 90% can it it,good job you've got a good account

Vincent Tan started investing his money into the club in about September 2010 , which was when he first took security for his loans over the assets. The accounts immediately prior to that were for the year to 31 May 2010. As at that date , the club had total assets of £59m and total liabilities of £63m , leaving it with a net debt of just £4m.
As at 31 May 2015 , the latest filed accounts , the club had total assets of £91m and total liabilities of £140m , leaving it with net debts of £59m , an increase of £55m over that 5 year period.

What I've noticed on this forum is that some posters only take into account the liability column, and seem to forget that the club has a few assetts which need to be offset against this. There is no doubt that Tan has pumped a lot of money into the club, but he will get some back by selling anything that's not nailed down, providing someone meets his valuation. He is not a football man, he is a businessman and every decision will be based on what will benefit him and not how the fans will feel if he takes a certain action. He is not interested in Wez or me, he will do what benefits himself the most.

Im worried that we are cutting too much to remain competetive in this league. Im guessing our parachute payments were absorbed by the debts?

I agree we have been too liberal with the cash over the years but we do need some investment as relegation would hurt us even more financially.

And lets remember 90% of our debt that reached as much as £150mill plus was created by Vincent Tan himself.

bullshit annis we were 69 million in debt before he came, your not very good at figures are you so it can't be 90%

Bullshit Wez,We were not that high and I believe it reached £170mill under Tan

I can tell you this,Im very good at keeping my own accounts in order and in credit

we've had this conversation loads of times and I prove you wrong everytime we were 69 m8llion in debt when tan took us over so it can't be 90% can it it,good job you've got a good account

Vincent Tan started investing his money into the club in about September 2010 , which was when he first took security for his loans over the assets. The accounts immediately prior to that were for the year to 31 May 2010. As at that date , the club had total assets of £59m and total liabilities of £63m , leaving it with a net debt of just £4m.
As at 31 May 2015 , the latest filed accounts , the club had total assets of £91m and total liabilities of £140m , leaving it with net debts of £59m , an increase of £55m over that 5 year period.

What I've noticed on this forum is that some posters only take into account the liability column, and seem to forget that the club has a few assetts which need to be offset against this. There is no doubt that Tan has pumped a lot of money into the club, but he will get some back by selling anything that's not nailed down, providing someone meets his valuation. He is not a football man, he is a businessman and every decision will be based on what will benefit him and not how the fans will feel if he takes a certain action. He is not interested in Wez or me, he will do what benefits himself the most.

what saleable assets we have that's worth £91m? Whilst understand ground is included in this amount tan cannot sell it can he? So bit of false amount is £91m, when it comes to tan getting any Money will anyone want to pay any money for something they may not own?

Getting in a decent striker is only half the problem.

The other problem is the service to them. A striker is only as good as the service he gets. The service yesterday was diabolical.

Plus also the inability to stay onside.

Im worried that we are cutting too much to remain competetive in this league. Im guessing our parachute payments were absorbed by the debts?

I agree we have been too liberal with the cash over the years but we do need some investment as relegation would hurt us even more financially.

And lets remember 90% of our debt that reached as much as £150mill plus was created by Vincent Tan himself.

bullshit annis we were 69 million in debt before he came, your not very good at figures are you so it can't be 90%

Bullshit Wez,We were not that high and I believe it reached £170mill under Tan

I can tell you this,Im very good at keeping my own accounts in order and in credit

we've had this conversation loads of times and I prove you wrong everytime we were 69 m8llion in debt when tan took us over so it can't be 90% can it it,good job you've got a good account

Vincent Tan started investing his money into the club in about September 2010 , which was when he first took security for his loans over the assets. The accounts immediately prior to that were for the year to 31 May 2010. As at that date , the club had total assets of £59m and total liabilities of £63m , leaving it with a net debt of just £4m.
As at 31 May 2015 , the latest filed accounts , the club had total assets of £91m and total liabilities of £140m , leaving it with net debts of £59m , an increase of £55m over that 5 year period.

What I've noticed on this forum is that some posters only take into account the liability column, and seem to forget that the club has a few assetts which need to be offset against this. There is no doubt that Tan has pumped a lot of money into the club, but he will get some back by selling anything that's not nailed down, providing someone meets his valuation. He is not a football man, he is a businessman and every decision will be based on what will benefit him and not how the fans will feel if he takes a certain action. He is not interested in Wez or me, he will do what benefits himself the most.

what saleable assets we have that's worth £91m? Whilst understand ground is included in this amount tan cannot sell it can he? So bit of false amount is £91m, when it comes to tan getting any Money will anyone want to pay any money for something they may not own?

Like I said, when he leaves he will leave with a loss to his name. Obviously don't know how much. Players come to mind as far as your question is concerned, although most of them are not worth a huge sum, while others are just a drain on club resources. Then again, Tan can take some responsibility for the ones we are stuck with. If he had appointed someone with football experience to run the club, and a proven manager other than OGS, our finances would be looking a lot better.

Im worried that we are cutting too much to remain competetive in this league. Im guessing our parachute payments were absorbed by the debts?

I agree we have been too liberal with the cash over the years but we do need some investment as relegation would hurt us even more financially.

And lets remember 90% of our debt that reached as much as £150mill plus was created by Vincent Tan himself.

bullshit annis we were 69 million in debt before he came, your not very good at figures are you so it can't be 90%

Bullshit Wez,We were not that high and I believe it reached £170mill under Tan

I can tell you this,Im very good at keeping my own accounts in order and in credit

we've had this conversation loads of times and I prove you wrong everytime we were 69 m8llion in debt when tan took us over so it can't be 90% can it it,good job you've got a good account

Vincent Tan started investing his money into the club in about September 2010 , which was when he first took security for his loans over the assets. The accounts immediately prior to that were for the year to 31 May 2010. As at that date , the club had total assets of £59m and total liabilities of £63m , leaving it with a net debt of just £4m.
As at 31 May 2015 , the latest filed accounts , the club had total assets of £91m and total liabilities of £140m , leaving it with net debts of £59m , an increase of £55m over that 5 year period.

What I've noticed on this forum is that some posters only take into account the liability column, and seem to forget that the club has a few assetts which need to be offset against this. There is no doubt that Tan has pumped a lot of money into the club, but he will get some back by selling anything that's not nailed down, providing someone meets his valuation. He is not a football man, he is a businessman and every decision will be based on what will benefit him and not how the fans will feel if he takes a certain action. He is not interested in Wez or me, he will do what benefits himself the most.

what saleable assets we have that's worth £91m? Whilst understand ground is included in this amount tan cannot sell it can he? So bit of false amount is £91m, when it comes to tan getting any Money will anyone want to pay any money for something they may not own?

Sorry , my mistake re the asset figure of £91m - that was as at 31 May 2014 , not 2015 where the total assets were in fact £81m. With total liabilities of £140m that gave the net liability figure of £59m.

The assets of £81m included £54m re the stadium and £12m re players. As at 31 May 2010 , the stadium value was £50m and the player value just £2m in the accounts.

Tan has undoubtedly lost huge financially,we took the Devils pound and were very happy
to do so when things went well we need to accept the situation now things are not going well.

It's very obvious he has lost interest and all we have ever been to him is a play thing.

He will play out time trying to break even whilst pocketing parachute money until it stops.

Then it's a big sell off of everything he owns at the club which is virtually everything.

He did not become a billionaire for nothing.

I think from the moment we won the battle to return to blue, and gave tan a huge amount of criticism at the same time, we kissed goodbye to any further investment in the club. Can't see much money being thrown around while Tan is here, and I still believe his number one priority is to get back as much of his investment as possible, before trying to find a new owner.

He's writing off 150 million isn't that investment?

You have no idea about his personal final deficit until he leaves the club. We don't know how much additional revenue will come in from the sale of players, TV rights, season tickets etc. over the next couple of years, and what percentage of that will be repaid against the present amount written off. We only know the financial position up to the last published set of accounts. There is no doubt he will lose money with this venture, as do the majority of football club owners. I think you are in for a disapointment if you really think Tan has any particular love for a football team based half way around the world from his home, in a country that means nothing to him. This is purely business, and I can't see him risking any more vast sums of money on something that has already cost him a fortune.

unfortunately i agree with you on this, he said recently that we was down to40m debt did he not? if thats the case after he pockets the parachute payments AGAIN then surely he can write off the rest and just go, in footballing terms we are further from the premier league than we have ever been

pocketed the money he's writing off 170 million 60 odd of it isn't his doing and your still moaning:lol:

And you don't think he's going to get back any of that?

no not unless we get promoted and he sells to some other idiot ,football clubs are money pits

problem is he caused the debt by being poor owner throwing money about like a kid in a sweet shop, but hey well done vincent for clearing some of the debt u caused what a hero u are!! the guys made mistakes but instead of admitting to them and going hes dragging us backwards so he can recoup some of his money,shit owner and the sooner hes gone the better

Tan has undoubtedly lost huge financially,we took the Devils pound and were very happy
to do so when things went well we need to accept the situation now things are not going well.

It's very obvious he has lost interest and all we have ever been to him is a play thing.

He will play out time trying to break even whilst pocketing parachute money until it stops.

Then it's a big sell off of everything he owns at the club which is virtually everything.

He did not become a billionaire for nothing.

I 100% was not happy to take his money, in fact my words were in the meeting was "I would rather be relegated than take his money and be stripped of our identity and pride"

Plus there are a few thousand other diehards who felt the same

Tan has undoubtedly lost huge financially,we took the Devils pound and were very happy
to do so when things went well we need to accept the situation now things are not going well.

It's very obvious he has lost interest and all we have ever been to him is a play thing.

He will play out time trying to break even whilst pocketing parachute money until it stops.

Then it's a big sell off of everything he owns at the club which is virtually everything.

He did not become a billionaire for nothing.

How is he pocketing the parachute money ? he's had to write off over 140 million owed to him and the parachute money is running the day to day costs of the club we do not generate a profit for tan to pocket any money ,football has become too much reliant on rich owners who gamble and most of them lose

Tan has undoubtedly lost huge financially,we took the Devils pound and were very happy
to do so when things went well we need to accept the situation now things are not going well.

It's very obvious he has lost interest and all we have ever been to him is a play thing.

He will play out time trying to break even whilst pocketing parachute money until it stops.

Then it's a big sell off of everything he owns at the club which is virtually everything.

He did not become a billionaire for nothing.

How is he pocketing the parachute money ? he's had to write off over 140 million owed to him and the parachute money is running the day to day costs of the club we do not generate a profit for tan to pocket any money ,football has become too much reliant on rich owners who gamble and most of them lose

And they can afford it..