" VERY IMPORTANT POINT "

Those words 'But Langston have to be sorted first' were never written written by me.

Another point would be is that you were in the meeting, what did you hear?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... clnk&gl=uk

The plot Thickens

This is what happens when only the select few are invited to meetings. Things depend on only one or two people's recollections. Minuted, public fans' meetings which the real fans are invited to, not just internet forum representatives, bloggers and other representatives should have been the way to go.

What I'd say to that is that, if there had to be meetings, they should have come after the club had put all of the info out into the public domain for everyone to see (I'm talking about before the leak after the West Ham game here). Those who went to those meetings could then have been in the position of putting across supporters' opinions (after proper consultation with them) and not one in which they were asked to give their individual opinions.

On this one Carl, I believe Alan Whitley said that there would be no investment if Langston did not sign up.
After the meeting, I asked u to put an update out and u said I can only do a small bit of my phone, I said no problem I will update it and I did by including what I believed was said. As I see it, u believed it was never said.

On this one Carl, I believe Alan Whitley said that there would be no investment if Langston did not sign up.
After the meeting, I asked u to put an update out and u said I can only do a small bit of my phone, I said no problem I will update it and I did by including what I believed was said. As I see it, u believed it was never said.

I did write a small update and when I had seen the words you added regarding Langston I removed them immediately as I did not want those words attributed to me as I know it was not delivered in the way you think Annis.

For the life of me I cannot understand how anyone in that room did not hear Alan Whiteley say exactly what I have stated and in fact he actually corrected somebody in the meeting who said the investment won't happen unless Langston are sorted and he said it on more than one occasion that only the debt to equity part of the investment was subject to the settlement of the Langston debt.

Carl it is only picking holes in TLGs blog isn't it ? What the Malaysians have told us are LIES, DOWNRIGHT LIES, AND MORE FOOKING LIES, AND THEY ARE STILL LYING TO US. Why don't you state the un truths they are spouting ?

So on what basis are they lying? Or are you just spouting nonsense. I hear people saying the VT and TG are lying about this and that but can never back it up with what the actual reality is behind these so called lies.

Far too many sheep on here!

I wouldn't pay this garb too much notice it's just nukes after all. They haven't lied. Infact they had an idea, heard it wasn't popular so scrapped it, then heard that was bollox so went back to the original idea. Such irony as Clemo, kumar, sam and riddler never lied did they and many on here all holy holy never going again now. Farkin hypocrites the lot of you.
We have always had divided fans for as long as I can recall so nothing new really, we come from too wide an area I reckon. Vt should have walked away after the Blackpool game and let us sink.

On this one Carl, I believe Alan Whitley said that there would be no investment if Langston did not sign up.
After the meeting, I asked u to put an update out and u said I can only do a small bit of my phone, I said no problem I will update it and I did by including what I believed was said. As I see it, u believed it was never said.

I did write a small update and when I had seen the words you added regarding Langston I removed them immediately as I did not want those words attributed to me as I know it was not delivered in the way you think Annis.

For the life of me I cannot understand how anyone in that room did not hear Alan Whiteley say exactly what I have stated and in fact he actually corrected somebody in the meeting who said the investment won't happen unless Langston are sorted and he said it on more than one occasion that only the debt to equity part of the investment was subject to the settlement of the Langston debt.

On this one Carl, we beg to differ, I honestly believe Whitley said it and not only did I put it in yours and update it for u, oops(I did say I would update yours), I put it out myself in some of my own topics.

On this one Carl, I believe Alan Whitley said that there would be no investment if Langston did not sign up.
After the meeting, I asked u to put an update out and u said I can only do a small bit of my phone, I said no problem I will update it and I did by including what I believed was said. As I see it, u believed it was never said.

I did write a small update and when I had seen the words you added regarding Langston I removed them immediately as I did not want those words attributed to me as I know it was not delivered in the way you think Annis.

The post was created on the 08th May and was still in its original form on the 10th May, when the page was cached.

On this one Carl, I believe Alan Whitley said that there would be no investment if Langston did not sign up.
After the meeting, I asked u to put an update out and u said I can only do a small bit of my phone, I said no problem I will update it and I did by including what I believed was said. As I see it, u believed it was never said.

I did write a small update and when I had seen the words you added regarding Langston I removed them immediately as I did not want those words attributed to me as I know it was not delivered in the way you think Annis.

For the life of me I cannot understand how anyone in that room did not hear Alan Whiteley say exactly what I have stated and in fact he actually corrected somebody in the meeting who said the investment won't happen unless Langston are sorted and he said it on more than one occasion that only the debt to equity part of the investment was subject to the settlement of the Langston debt.

On this one Carl, we beg to differ, I honestly believe Whitley said it and not only did I put it in yours and update it for u, oops(I did say I would update yours), I put it out myself in some of my own topics.

For about the 3rd time in a few weeks , I find myself posting that I agree with something that you have posted Annis. If this carries on , I am have to have to go and have a long lie down in a dark room to recover

I actually wrote down what Alan Whiteley said at the meeting (boring accountant turns up at short notice in suit and happens to have a pen and diary in pocket shock!!) . He categorically stated that the VT investment was dependent upon Langston being settled first and he categorically stated that the change to red was non-negotiable.

Why Carl is saying differently on both points now is a mystery unless it was me , you , Dave Sugarman and Paul (TOBW) who all misheard and Carl didn`t . If Carl genuinely believes that wasn`t the case , why leave his own post up agreeing with the rest of us for so long and only edit it now when it does not support his claim that DS is not telling the truth?

And can we now go back to disagreeing on something again - if only to make me feel better.

This board is getting a very bad reputation for allowing a couple of moderators to edit , delete and generally tamper with messages to totally alter their content and meaning to suit the purposes of a chosen few and save them embarrassment . Carl`s attempt to change threads (or even worse parts of individual posts) after the event in this case only increases that bad reputation and does him or you (as the messageboard owner) no favours at all.

We all make mistakes in posting things and what`s the harm in that - it is supposed to be a forum for expressing opinions and those opinions can be wrong and can change, but the vast majority of posters don`t get the opportunity of a "cover up" through editing and denial to hide reference to those mistakes.Why not leave such posts as they were originally made?

On this one Carl, I believe Alan Whitley said that there would be no investment if Langston did not sign up.
After the meeting, I asked u to put an update out and u said I can only do a small bit of my phone, I said no problem I will update it and I did by including what I believed was said. As I see it, u believed it was never said.

I did write a small update and when I had seen the words you added regarding Langston I removed them immediately as I did not want those words attributed to me as I know it was not delivered in the way you think Annis.

The post was created on the 08th May and was still in its original form on the 10th May, when the page was cached.

I think someone is taking posters on here for fools. You've been caught out Carl. Now, why not tell us the truth about what has changed your mind. You clearly stated one thing last month, but have altered your mind now. What is the reason for this?

No point in deleting these messages as it appears people are doing screengrabs.

Hello Carl,

I do read your updates some i find useful some i take with a pinch of salt, However just for my own Clarification , are you claiming that the addition to the badge of our belovedBluebird was down to you and the people attending the meeting on the 8th alone? because thats the way I have interpreted your statement futher up the board.

Many Thanks in advance .

Steve

Carl, this is not looking good for you.

TLG posted a response on Michael Morris' Board last night;

http://www.ccmb.co.uk/fudforum/index.ph ... sg_3242796

in which he included a link to Carl's brief report on the meeting held on 8 May. TLG posted that Carl had said;

"Vincent Tan is close to agreeing a £100m investment in CCFC. But Langston has to be sorted first."

"The meeting was told that the change to red kit and Welsh dragon badge was non-negotiable."

However, the words "But Langston has to be sorted first" do not appear in the link TLG used when you click on it. The strange thing is though, that if you go to page 7 of the "Headlines from tonight's meeting" thread and look at the post by Maesteg Bluebirds at 8.49 am on 9/5/12, the words "But Langston has to be sorted first" appear in the quote of Carl's original message.

Now, in view of the claim and counter claims going on here, I think it's only fair that some explanation be given as to why the words "But Langston has to be sorted first" appear in the quote in Maesteg's Bluebird's post, but not in Carl's message when you go to it now.

Of course, if the club had seen fit to get this information out into the public domain beforehand instead of briefing selected members of the fanbase on it at a meeting, disputes like this would not arise.

It's all getting on my tits, to be honest.

Who the Hell do these Super Fans think they are. Their little ego's have been massaged by those in positions at the club to the point where they actually think they are important !! They are all as bad as each other....trying to out-do each other on what they are so important enough 'to know'. Just bugger off to the beach and come back in August..... whatever will happen, will happen. With or without these egoistic Super Fans stirring everything up.

I tell you what, you pay for my holiday on the beach until August and I'll not bother you again until then .

Carl, this is not looking good for you.

.

I think. people. there. must. hear. whatever. they. want to hear. It was stated the shirts were red, the plan their was going ahead, but the investment would not be turned. into equity until langston. was settled. So until then, the money invested would still be owed to VT rather than in the form of ownership and equity. no confusion there.

I think. people. there. must. hear. whatever. they. want to hear. It was stated the shirts were red, the plan their was going ahead, but the investment would not be turned. into equity until langston. was settled. So until then, the money invested would still be owed to VT rather than in the form of ownership and equity. no confusion there.

TLG has been open to a lot of negative attention recently over his views over the rebranding.

Not sure what benefit, 'smearing' an internet blogger/ ccmb poster, has to anyone.

Carl has obviously been caught out big time here.

Both message boards are becoming more and more 'car crash tv' every day...........keeps us punters turning up every day I suppose.

If this one was a boxing match.......it's a TKO win for TLG for me!

Carl.......big news on signings could get your points score back up a bit as that is what all this seems to boil down to....points scoring.

Ask yourself this.If as TAG says he heard it, then how is it the investment is already being used and spent as we speak.TAG is saying no investment without Langston, obviously wrong, the investment is being spent.

Carl it is only picking holes in TLGs blog isn't it ? What the Malaysians have told us are LIES, DOWNRIGHT LIES, AND MORE FOOKING LIES, AND THEY ARE STILL LYING TO US. Why don't you state the un truths they are spouting ?

So on what basis are they lying? Or are you just spouting nonsense. I hear people saying the VT and TG are lying about this and that but can never back it up with what the actual reality is behind these so called lies.

Far too many sheep on here!

That's not a lie, that's someone changing his mind based on the vocal support for the change expressed by far more fans than were against it. So if you change your mind from one point to the next does that always mean you were lying in the first instance????