Vincent Tan Clearly Has Vision

They sound nice people "if he didn't get his way he would destroy us just to make a point" nice guys

They are business people nice or not nice is not the point. They came in when we were in the brown stuff, because they believe its a good investment, it is potentionally a global brand thanks to their Malaysian connections and Sky.
Of course Tan would like the fans to warm to him but dont be surprised if he puts no importance on it. His view will be if he drives it forward both he and the fans will be winners. At present there are many more accepting it than there are rejecting it. Dont blame Tan for that. Cardiff without Tan who knows? reluctance does not come into it, have you noticed anyone being dragged into the Stadium shouting and Kicking I haven't.

This has never been about the rebrand. This hatred was around last season too.
People who used to be able to walk around thinking they were billy-big-time
are no longer welcome so they have been busy undermining Cardiff City FC from
afar. We HAD to have Vincent Tans money. What else have we had? A superbly
professionally set-up. Brilliant young manager, the kind of squad we could only
dream of, Confidence that we dont need to sell players, confidence that we CAN
now buy players...

These f*cking horrible kits are a rich mans fad. Sooner that for one/two seasons
and perhaps the opportunity to go back to Blue at another time..

Than have no Club.

Thats where we were going to be if we hadnt paid that Tax Bill

correct dave
people convenientlly forget that we were in the high court facing a winding up order which without tans intrvention at that stage would have meant liquidation of the football club.
never mind the red or dead issue without tans original investement we were dead anyway.
Has anybody ever thought that the reason tan does not understand why some fans have revolted against the red dragon is because we have a big red one on the flag of our country.
he sees us as patriotic he hears our anti english songs so perhaps he thought we would accept the dragon with no problem. It does not excuse the fact that he should have investigated the traditions of the club before making that decision but i can see where his train of thought came from.

See I spent most of last season sticking up for them when they'd done nothing wrong.
The fact that we fell away at the end was like oxygen for the haters. Instead of saying
"Well fair play, what an excellent season under the new manager" it was all about
unfounded allegations saying "Malky was lying when he said he'd been backed" etc etc
The abuse they got was ridiculous. You only have to open your eyes to see what they
have done for this Club since coming on board. Thats me being totally realistic, eyes
wide open and straight.

Rebrand? Well i cant agree with you personally. He has done his homework on every
other aspect of this Club, and I think its safe to assume he did not go into the rebrand
blindly. It was a calculated move and sadly, for many of us, he has been proved right.
The whole thing has gone through with barely a ripple, and in fact gates are now up.
He was right. But with regards to consultation? He lost me as a 'supporter' I think we
should have been given some input.

People probably think I'm a big fan of his now. I'm not. I'm a realist who hates hypocrisy
and double standards. I hope he stays, and goes back to Blue. Or fucks off and the new
owners come in and revert to blue. But I have to accept that tens of thousands are not
arsed either way... and he knows it!!

They sound nice people "if he didn't get his way he would destroy us just to make a point" nice guys

They are business people nice or not nice is not the point. They came in when we were in the brown stuff, because they believe its a good investment, it is potentionally a global brand thanks to their Malaysian connections and Sky.
Of course Tan would like the fans to warm to him but dont be surprised if he puts no importance on it. His view will be if he drives it forward both he and the fans will be winners. At present there are many more accepting it than there are rejecting it. Dont blame Tan for that. Cardiff without Tan who knows? reluctance does not come into it, have you noticed anyone being dragged into the Stadium shouting and Kicking I haven't.

This has never been about the rebrand. This hatred was around last season too.
People who used to be able to walk around thinking they were billy-big-time
are no longer welcome so they have been busy undermining Cardiff City FC from
afar. We HAD to have Vincent Tans money. What else have we had? A superbly
professionally set-up. Brilliant young manager, the kind of squad we could only
dream of, Confidence that we dont need to sell players, confidence that we CAN
now buy players...

These f*cking horrible kits are a rich mans fad. Sooner that for one/two seasons
and perhaps the opportunity to go back to Blue at another time..

Than have no Club.

Thats where we were going to be if we hadnt paid that Tax Bill

correct dave
people convenientlly forget that we were in the high court facing a winding up order which without tans intrvention at that stage would have meant liquidation of the football club.
never mind the red or dead issue without tans original investement we were dead anyway.
Has anybody ever thought that the reason tan does not understand why some fans have revolted against the red dragon is because we have a big red one on the flag of our country.
he sees us as patriotic he hears our anti english songs so perhaps he thought we would accept the dragon with no problem. It does not excuse the fact that he should have investigated the traditions of the club before making that decision but i can see where his train of thought came from.

See I spent most of last season sticking up for them when they'd done nothing wrong.
The fact that we fell away at the end was like oxygen for the haters. Instead of saying
"Well fair play, what an excellent season under the new manager" it was all about
unfounded allegations saying "Malky was lying when he said he'd been backed" etc etc
The abuse they got was ridiculous. You only have to open your eyes to see what they
have done for this Club since coming on board. Thats me being totally realistic, eyes
wide open and straight.

Rebrand? Well i cant agree with you personally. He has done his homework on every
other aspect of this Club, and I think its safe to assume he did not go into the rebrand
blindly. It was a calculated move and sadly, for many of us, he has been proved right.
The whole thing has gone through with barely a ripple, and in fact gates are now up.
He was right. But with regards to consultation? He lost me as a 'supporter' I think we
should have been given some input.

People probably think I'm a big fan of his now. I'm not. I'm a realist who hates hypocrisy
and double standards. I hope he stays, and goes back to Blue. Or fucks off and the new
owners come in and revert to blue. But I have to accept that tens of thousands are not
arsed either way... and he knows it!!

I think the point made above hits the nail on the head as far as the analysis Vincent Tan and his colleagues made.

Unfortunate as it is, it is the reality.

Serious question Gwyn, how do you know all about Tan's personality, as you've stated above, when you say you've never met him?

I've never met him, so wouldn't like to comment on what sort of personality Tan has.

Because all of the people and there are quite a good few who have met him and spoken to me about what sort of person he is have been pretty consistent in their assessments.

That doesn't mean anything other than me forming an opinion on the information I have recieved, and surely we are all allowed an opinion aren't we.

Gwyn is that you or the dog in your Avatar that is responding in this thread ?

They sound nice people "if he didn't get his way he would destroy us just to make a point" nice guys

They are business people nice or not nice is not the point. They came in when we were in the brown stuff, because they believe its a good investment, it is potentionally a global brand thanks to their Malaysian connections and Sky.
Of course Tan would like the fans to warm to him but dont be surprised if he puts no importance on it. His view will be if he drives it forward both he and the fans will be winners. At present there are many more accepting it than there are rejecting it. Dont blame Tan for that. Cardiff without Tan who knows? reluctance does not come into it, have you noticed anyone being dragged into the Stadium shouting and Kicking I haven't.

This has never been about the rebrand. This hatred was around last season too.
People who used to be able to walk around thinking they were billy-big-time
are no longer welcome so they have been busy undermining Cardiff City FC from
afar. We HAD to have Vincent Tans money. What else have we had? A superbly
professionally set-up. Brilliant young manager, the kind of squad we could only
dream of, Confidence that we dont need to sell players, confidence that we CAN
now buy players...

These f*cking horrible kits are a rich mans fad. Sooner that for one/two seasons
and perhaps the opportunity to go back to Blue at another time..

Than have no Club.

Thats where we were going to be if we hadnt paid that Tax Bill

correct dave
people convenientlly forget that we were in the high court facing a winding up order which without tans intrvention at that stage would have meant liquidation of the football club.
never mind the red or dead issue without tans original investement we were dead anyway.
Has anybody ever thought that the reason tan does not understand why some fans have revolted against the red dragon is because we have a big red one on the flag of our country.
he sees us as patriotic he hears our anti english songs so perhaps he thought we would accept the dragon with no problem. It does not excuse the fact that he should have investigated the traditions of the club before making that decision but i can see where his train of thought came from.

See I spent most of last season sticking up for them when they'd done nothing wrong.
The fact that we fell away at the end was like oxygen for the haters. Instead of saying
"Well fair play, what an excellent season under the new manager" it was all about
unfounded allegations saying "Malky was lying when he said he'd been backed" etc etc
The abuse they got was ridiculous. You only have to open your eyes to see what they
have done for this Club since coming on board. Thats me being totally realistic, eyes
wide open and straight.

Rebrand? Well i cant agree with you personally. He has done his homework on every
other aspect of this Club, and I think its safe to assume he did not go into the rebrand
blindly. It was a calculated move and sadly, for many of us, he has been proved right.
The whole thing has gone through with barely a ripple, and in fact gates are now up.
He was right. But with regards to consultation? He lost me as a 'supporter' I think we
should have been given some input.

People probably think I'm a big fan of his now. I'm not. I'm a realist who hates hypocrisy
and double standards. I hope he stays, and goes back to Blue. Or fucks off and the new
owners come in and revert to blue. But I have to accept that tens of thousands are not
arsed either way... and he knows it!!

totally agree taffy,lets see who stands by "not putting a penny into tans pocket" by not renewing there season
ticket for the coming season,without tan we would be where portsmouth are
we have alot to be thakful for

They sound nice people "if he didn't get his way he would destroy us just to make a point" nice guys

Who said they were nice, how many of us have met them or know them well enough to say they are nice. As far as I'm concerned they are simply business men who see an opportunity to turn around a failing business with some ideas and plans that they had.

When initially it looked d like the majority of fans didn't want to proceed with their plans, they said they would not proceed with their plans and walk away from further investment.

When people had the chance to weigh things up and realise the benefits far outweighed the costs involved emotionally and traditionally, they offered to proceed with their original plans.

Now I'm sure that was what they were hoping for and they would not have to follow up with their threat to walk away, but most of us weren't prepared to see if he was bluffing, not at the risk of losing our club anyway.

Does any of the above actions make them sounds nice, does anyone think they came into help us, or help themselves, do you think nice had anything to do with it.
If so, don't worry about being blue or red, because being green would be more like it.

If you had the choice of being run successfully with a secure future ahead, but by a hard nosed uncaring business man, or going bust and out of business whilst being run by a really nice man, which would you choose?

Gwyn I would say (as you have pointed out) that the Malaysians only ever threatened to walk away from further investment and not withdraw total support for the club. I think what upset a lot of people at the time was the sneaky way in which Tan's vision was introduced. He first assured us that we would be playing in blue in a statement and later withdrew this commitment without issuing another statement informing the fans that this promise would not be honoured. What is more worrying is that the actual commitments he did make to us (debt to equity) have not been honoured. The problem as I see it is there appears to be no group or individual at board level who is willing or poweful enough to bring Tan to account.

Gwyn is that you or the dog in your Avatar that is responding in this thread ?

Its not Gwyn Nucs he 's not got a red shirt on. Sorry Gwyn Ohh Sh i i tttttt.

Serious question Gwyn, how do you know all about Tan's personality, as you've stated above, when you say you've never met him?

I've never met him, so wouldn't like to comment on what sort of personality Tan has.

Because all of the people and there are quite a good few who have met him and spoken to me about what sort of person he is have been pretty consistent in their assessments.

That doesn't mean anything other than me forming an opinion on the information I have recieved, and surely we are all allowed an opinion aren't we.

Fair enough, it was a genuine question.

Gwyn is that you or the dog in your Avatar that is responding in this thread ?

You can tell when it's the dog, there's less spelling mistakes.

They sound nice people "if he didn't get his way he would destroy us just to make a point" nice guys

Who said they were nice, how many of us have met them or know them well enough to say they are nice. As far as I'm concerned they are simply business men who see an opportunity to turn around a failing business with some ideas and plans that they had.

When initially it looked d like the majority of fans didn't want to proceed with their plans, they said they would not proceed with their plans and walk away from further investment.

When people had the chance to weigh things up and realise the benefits far outweighed the costs involved emotionally and traditionally, they offered to proceed with their original plans.

Now I'm sure that was what they were hoping for and they would not have to follow up with their threat to walk away, but most of us weren't prepared to see if he was bluffing, not at the risk of losing our club anyway.

Does any of the above actions make them sounds nice, does anyone think they came into help us, or help themselves, do you think nice had anything to do with it.
If so, don't worry about being blue or red, because being green would be more like it.

If you had the choice of being run successfully with a secure future ahead, but by a hard nosed uncaring business man, or going bust and out of business whilst being run by a really nice man, which would you choose?

Gwyn I would say (as you have pointed out) that the Malaysians only ever threatened to walk away from further investment and not withdraw total support for the club. I think what upset a lot of people at the time was the sneaky way in which Tan's vision was introduced. He first assured us that we would be playing in blue in a statement and later withdrew this commitment without issuing another statement informing the fans that this promise would not be honoured. What is more worrying is that the actual commitments he did make to us (debt to equity) have not been honoured. The problem as I see it is there appears to be no group or individual at board level who is willing or poweful enough to bring Tan to account.

What they said was they would invest no more, but try and help the club to find new investors, and why do you think they would do that, because if any could be found, any investment they made would mean more returns for the Malaysians if we went in to admin or liquidation.
But does anyone believe that any investor would step in, because we were in a bigger mess than previously in the amount of debt factor, and we couldn't attract investors then, so why would they come in now.

I have had a small business, but have never considered myself a business man, but when Alan Whiteley the CEO, employed by the club made his not dead statement, what do you think the directors of the business would have said if while trying to attract investors to save us, he came out saying we are dead, that would be a real good selling point.

And as for the Malaysians saying we will stay for a while and try and help find further investors, in business speak in my opinion, that's as good as saying, f**k you we are off, but we'll hang about long enough to see what we can salvage from our investment, but we wont word it like that or all the creditors and people we deal with would be on us like a pack of wolves.

It's a bit like getting the sack, when they dress it up with we got to let you go speak, which is a PC polite way of saying the same thing, f**k OFF.

I think short term they would have made sure the players got their wages, because if they din't they would become free agents and be able to walk away for nowt and get their own deals sorted at new clubs.

By continuing to pay them, they could sell them and get some value.

Gwyn is that you or the dog in your Avatar that is responding in this thread ?

You can tell when it's the dog, there's less spelling mistakes.

They sound nice people "if he didn't get his way he would destroy us just to make a point" nice guys

Who said they were nice, how many of us have met them or know them well enough to say they are nice. As far as I'm concerned they are simply business men who see an opportunity to turn around a failing business with some ideas and plans that they had.

When initially it looked d like the majority of fans didn't want to proceed with their plans, they said they would not proceed with their plans and walk away from further investment.

When people had the chance to weigh things up and realise the benefits far outweighed the costs involved emotionally and traditionally, they offered to proceed with their original plans.

Now I'm sure that was what they were hoping for and they would not have to follow up with their threat to walk away, but most of us weren't prepared to see if he was bluffing, not at the risk of losing our club anyway.

Does any of the above actions make them sounds nice, does anyone think they came into help us, or help themselves, do you think nice had anything to do with it.
If so, don't worry about being blue or red, because being green would be more like it.

If you had the choice of being run successfully with a secure future ahead, but by a hard nosed uncaring business man, or going bust and out of business whilst being run by a really nice man, which would you choose?

Gwyn I would say (as you have pointed out) that the Malaysians only ever threatened to walk away from further investment and not withdraw total support for the club. I think what upset a lot of people at the time was the sneaky way in which Tan's vision was introduced. He first assured us that we would be playing in blue in a statement and later withdrew this commitment without issuing another statement informing the fans that this promise would not be honoured. What is more worrying is that the actual commitments he did make to us (debt to equity) have not been honoured. The problem as I see it is there appears to be no group or individual at board level who is willing or poweful enough to bring Tan to account.

What they said was they would invest no more, but try and help the club to find new investors, and why do you think they would do that, because if any could be found, any investment they made would mean more returns for the Malaysians if we went in to admin or liquidation.
But does anyone believe that any investor would step in, because we were in a bigger mess than previously in the amount of debt factor, and we couldn't attract investors then, so why would they come in now.

I have had a small business, but have never considered myself a business man, but when Alan Whiteley the CEO, employed by the club made his not dead statement, what do you think the directors of the business would have said if while trying to attract investors to save us, he came out saying we are dead, that would be a real good selling point.

And as for the Malaysians saying we will stay for a while and try and help find further investors, in business speak in my opinion, that's as good as saying, f**k you we are off, but we'll hang about long enough to see what we can salvage from our investment, but we wont word it like that or all the creditors and people we deal with would be on us like a pack of wolves.

It's a bit like getting the sack, when they dress it up with we got to let you go speak, which is a PC polite way of saying the same thing, f**k OFF.

I think short term they would have made sure the players got their wages, because if they din't they would become free agents and be able to walk away for nowt and get their own deals sorted at new clubs.

By continuing to pay them, they could sell them and get some value.

We will never know how things would have panned out as we never called his bluff so we can only speculate. My question is, how long do we give Tan to sort out the debt and will we allow him to make further changes such as the possibility of removing the bluebird ?

They sound nice people "if he didn't get his way he would destroy us just to make a point" nice guys

Who said they were nice, how many of us have met them or know them well enough to say they are nice. As far as I'm concerned they are simply business men who see an opportunity to turn around a failing business with some ideas and plans that they had.

When initially it looked d like the majority of fans didn't want to proceed with their plans, they said they would not proceed with their plans and walk away from further investment.

When people had the chance to weigh things up and realise the benefits far outweighed the costs involved emotionally and traditionally, they offered to proceed with their original plans.

Now I'm sure that was what they were hoping for and they would not have to follow up with their threat to walk away, but most of us weren't prepared to see if he was bluffing, not at the risk of losing our club anyway.

Does any of the above actions make them sounds nice, does anyone think they came into help us, or help themselves, do you think nice had anything to do with it.
If so, don't worry about being blue or red, because being green would be more like it.

If you had the choice of being run successfully with a secure future ahead, but by a hard nosed uncaring business man, or going bust and out of business whilst being run by a really nice man, which would you choose?

Gwyn I would say (as you have pointed out) that the Malaysians only ever threatened to walk away from further investment and not withdraw total support for the club. I think what upset a lot of people at the time was the sneaky way in which Tan's vision was introduced. He first assured us that we would be playing in blue in a statement and later withdrew this commitment without issuing another statement informing the fans that this promise would not be honoured. What is more worrying is that the actual commitments he did make to us (debt to equity) have not been honoured. The problem as I see it is there appears to be no group or individual at board level who is willing or poweful enough to bring Tan to account.

What they said was they would invest no more, but try and help the club to find new investors, and why do you think they would do that, because if any could be found, any investment they made would mean more returns for the Malaysians if we went in to admin or liquidation.
But does anyone believe that any investor would step in, because we were in a bigger mess than previously in the amount of debt factor, and we couldn't attract investors then, so why would they come in now.

I have had a small business, but have never considered myself a business man, but when Alan Whiteley the CEO, employed by the club made his not dead statement, what do you think the directors of the business would have said if while trying to attract investors to save us, he came out saying we are dead, that would be a real good selling point.

And as for the Malaysians saying we will stay for a while and try and help find further investors, in business speak in my opinion, that's as good as saying, f**k you we are off, but we'll hang about long enough to see what we can salvage from our investment, but we wont word it like that or all the creditors and people we deal with would be on us like a pack of wolves.

It's a bit like getting the sack, when they dress it up with we got to let you go speak, which is a PC polite way of saying the same thing, f**k OFF.

I think short term they would have made sure the players got their wages, because if they din't they would become free agents and be able to walk away for nowt and get their own deals sorted at new clubs.

By continuing to pay them, they could sell them and get some value.

We will never know how things would have panned out as we never called his bluff so we can only speculate. My question is, how long do we give Tan to sort out the debt and will we allow him to make further changes such as the possibility of removing the bluebird ?

It's his debt, when he clears it by paying himself back, do you think we'll be in a stronger position then, because personally and it's just my opinion, we'll be in exactly the same position.

Regardless of that Tan made the promise to clear the debt and has been given sufficient time to make good on his promise.

Regardless of that Tan made the promise to clear the debt and has been given sufficient time to make good on his promise.

He actually said that he would not clear the debt until the Langston issue had been settled, and unless you know something I don't, I think that is still up in the air.

I don't remember him putting a timescale on it, but perhaps I'm wrong and you have different information.

Regardless of that Tan made the promise to clear the debt and has been given sufficient time to make good on his promise.

Says who?

Is this how arrogant we've become?

The man has brought the Club from the brink of bankruptcy and got us on the brink of
Premier League Football. We're all talking about one debt here. The Sam Hammam debt.
It makes perfect business sense for Tan to hang on, not to 'take over' the Club because
the second he does that, he is LIABLE for that debt, and it weakens his position. One way
or another, the Langstone issue will be resolved. I'm sorry, but if it takes longer than we
and Sam would like, so what?... Its NOT affecting matters on the pitch

There's three whole divisions of clubs and even some Premier clubs who would jump at the chance of the investment and potential success we have with the Malaysians. Most have history and badges that they are proud of but would accept a rebranding that give some financial stability and potential success.
I've followed the club since 1966 and in all that time we've been the 'Sleeping Giant of Wales'....perhaps now we have finally got our wake up call.

Nonsense.

When will people realise investment means loans at interest. Lots of clubs can get loans if they wish to, and many do. But for the whole club to be bankrolled on loans? I don't think anyone n their right mind would do that for free let alone rebrand for it.

This is the crux of the whole matter. Chelsea and Man City are the best examples of two clubs
with Mega-Rich owners who are 'bankrolling' them. But to what extent??

Does ANYBODY seriously believe that when Roman Abramovich gets bored with football he will
just up and leave if things have taken a turn for the worse and he cannot find a buyer??? Do we
think he will say "well thats £300m I've spent on Chelsea, good times bad times, but ah well...
on to my next hobby"... WILL HE f**k. He will have protected his investment in one way or
another. When he goes his money will go with him, and if there is no buyer, Chelsea will be
absolutely fucked.

Same here, except Tan is being up front about it.

Would we prefer him to say "when I go the debt goes with me?"

Nope. Given our history over the last ten years I'd like to know exactly where we stand.

THIS is the cost of Premiership Football. Either we embrace it or we walk away. No half measures.
One or two have walked. TLG I'd have a lot more respect for if he'd go and stay gone, but he can't
leave well alone. The new fans, no standing, no swearing, no atmosphere, wanky stewards who
think they are 'Tommy-ten-men' in hi-vis jackets. People chatting, reading programmes during the
game, grasses, kids getting thrown out of grounds and banned for 'standing up' ffs.... this is the cost
of Cardiff City shedding its old reputation.

Rebrand? The shirt and the badge is just cosmetic. The REAL rebrand goes much much deeper

If somebody asked me would I accept the badge and the shirts and the investment quite happily if we
were allowed to get hammered, sing, shout, swear, jump up and down and turn the CCS into a bear-pit
like NP. With no dickhead jobsworth stewards larging it all day... Id say yes please!!! Because THAT is
the Cardiff City we all knew and loved.

But as it is, I've not protested against the rebrand. My reaction mirrors the reaction inside the ground
during the game nowadays. f**k all.

Would I happily go back to the Blue, the badge, the old days and lower league Football?

NOPE. Because Cardiff City fans will still be treated like a pariah wherever we go. The idea of going back
to getting wrecked away from home with thousands of City fans taking over all the pubs is a romantic
one. But its gone forever. Modern Football is what it is.

In truth, the Red, and the badge is nowhere near as depressing as whats happened to the whole experience
of watching City FC. The whole day out now is like a session on Diazepan

Superb post Taff and sums up my thoughts exactly. I try to go abroad once a year to get my fix of how football used to be. Football has basically become rugby, but at least if we go up i can watch a decent standard of player whereas if we did end up in the conference with shit players, a huge but empty stadium which we all had to sit down and stop swearing in it would just about tip me over the edge!
I hate what football in this country has become but there is absolutely nothing we can do about it, the horse bolted about 15 years ago and the lads day out has gone only to be replaced by a watered down rugby type experience

Regardless of that Tan made the promise to clear the debt and has been given sufficient time to make good on his promise.

Says who?

Is this how arrogant we've become?

The man has brought the Club from the brink of bankruptcy and got us on the brink of
Premier League Football. We're all talking about one debt here. The Sam Hammam debt.
It makes perfect business sense for Tan to hang on, not to 'take over' the Club because
the second he does that, he is LIABLE for that debt, and it weakens his position. One way
or another, the Langstone issue will be resolved. I'm sorry, but if it takes longer than we
and Sam would like, so what?... Its NOT affecting matters on the pitch. Its making Whitts play Shit Chief !

Regardless of that Tan made the promise to clear the debt and has been given sufficient time to make good on his promise.

Says who?

Is this how arrogant we've become?

The man has brought the Club from the brink of bankruptcy and got us on the brink of
Premier League Football. We're all talking about one debt here. The Sam Hammam debt.
It makes perfect business sense for Tan to hang on, not to 'take over' the Club because
the second he does that, he is LIABLE for that debt, and it weakens his position. One way
or another, the Langstone issue will be resolved. I'm sorry, but if it takes longer than we
and Sam would like, so what?... Its NOT affecting matters on the pitch. Its making Whitts play Shit Chief !

You got me!

I still can't and never will accept the rebrand.

Regardless of that Tan made the promise to clear the debt and has been given sufficient time to make good on his promise.

He actually said that he would not clear the debt until the Langston issue had been settled, and unless you know something I don't, I think that is still up in the air.

I don't remember him putting a timescale on it, but perhaps I'm wrong and you have different information.

You should remember a timescale Gwyn by your own words you gave him 6 months.

Regardless of that Tan made the promise to clear the debt and has been given sufficient time to make good on his promise.

Says who?

Is this how arrogant we've become?

The man has brought the Club from the brink of bankruptcy and got us on the brink of
Premier League Football. We're all talking about one debt here. The Sam Hammam debt.
It makes perfect business sense for Tan to hang on, not to 'take over' the Club because
the second he does that, he is LIABLE for that debt, and it weakens his position. One way
or another, the Langstone issue will be resolved. I'm sorry, but if it takes longer than we
and Sam would like, so what?... Its NOT affecting matters on the pitch

Your comment puzzlse me. How are we arrogant? We were made a promise that has not been honoured and now we ask the question we are somehow arrogant.Can't agree with your thought process sorry.

Regardless of that Tan made the promise to clear the debt and has been given sufficient time to make good on his promise.

Says who?

Is this how arrogant we've become?

The man has brought the Club from the brink of bankruptcy and got us on the brink of
Premier League Football. We're all talking about one debt here. The Sam Hammam debt.
It makes perfect business sense for Tan to hang on, not to 'take over' the Club because
the second he does that, he is LIABLE for that debt, and it weakens his position. One way
or another, the Langstone issue will be resolved. I'm sorry, but if it takes longer than we
and Sam would like, so what?... Its NOT affecting matters on the pitch

Your comment puzzlse me. How are we arrogant? We were made a promise that has not been honoured and now we ask the question we are somehow arrogant.Can't agree with your thought process sorry.

He promised to clear up the Historic debt. He never gave a date? Langstone would be
sorted by now but Hammam wouldnt accept the £10m after saying he would. Do you
think Tan should just bend over and take it up the arse on behalf of all the shithouses
who ruined the Club before him?

Regardless of that Tan made the promise to clear the debt and has been given sufficient time to make good on his promise.

He actually said that he would not clear the debt until the Langston issue had been settled, and unless you know something I don't, I think that is still up in the air.

I don't remember him putting a timescale on it, but perhaps I'm wrong and you have different information.

You should remember a timescale Gwyn by your own words you gave him 6 months.

Look back at your previous posts, you got shot down enough that time, I never gave them six months to transfer debt to equity, please try and keep up.

Regardless of that Tan made the promise to clear the debt and has been given sufficient time to make good on his promise.

Says who?

Is this how arrogant we've become?

The man has brought the Club from the brink of bankruptcy and got us on the brink of
Premier League Football. We're all talking about one debt here. The Sam Hammam debt.
It makes perfect business sense for Tan to hang on, not to 'take over' the Club because
the second he does that, he is LIABLE for that debt, and it weakens his position. One way
or another, the Langstone issue will be resolved. I'm sorry, but if it takes longer than we
and Sam would like, so what?... Its NOT affecting matters on the pitch

Your comment puzzlse me. How are we arrogant? We were made a promise that has not been honoured and now we ask the question we are somehow arrogant.Can't agree with your thought process sorry.

OK, put us out of our misery, tell us word for word what his promise was?

I still can't and never will accept the rebrand.

same here

I still can't and never will accept the rebrand.

same here

But you have Steph, you have put money in their pockets, isn't that a sign of acceptance?

The Ridler rebranded !

The supporters of virtually every team in the Football League would love to be in our position with our financial backing, and would quite happily change their club colours to achieve it.

People are deluding themselves if they think otherwise.

no they wouldnt. premier league isnt the be all and end all. its fantastic and obviously what everyone in the championship is aiming towards, but its not worth selling your identity and history for

Why do people keep on saying your selling your history that is deluded our history will never change our future is thanks to the Malaysians, also I work all over the country meeting loads of fans from different clubs and they ALL would love to be in our position.

I still can't and never will accept the rebrand.

same here

But you have Steph, you have put money in their pockets, isn't that a sign of acceptance?

where did I put money in their pockets? ok, if you count the BLUE stuff from last season, with our real crest, I picked up for next to nothing in the clubshop, then yes.

Apart from that, NOTHING...not even a programme or a drink