Cardiff City Forum



A forum for all things Cardiff City

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:18 pm

CitySteve wrote:No, the value of the Club is uncountable, now PL Football is with us. If Promotion wasn't gained, it would be a whole lot more complex than it will be now.


So what is the 5% or £19m? You mentioned intellectual property and the rebrand in the same sentence, so is Sam getting 5% of VT's rebrand which is valued at £380m?

Just trying to follow your logic as I'm sure the deal to settle with Sam isn't going to be as straight forward as a cheque for £15-19m

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:21 pm

kingdong wrote:I've only ever called you a brown noser nice try though mate.

Also one currently plays in the prem no thanks to Sam. You'll have to remind me where Wimbledon football club currently play.


Again you are playing with facts. I just pointed out that you can put a spin on anything, so even if Wimbledon are no longer with us they did play in the PL under Sam but went tits up under Norwegian owners.

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:23 pm

Tony Blue Williams wrote:
kingdong wrote:I've only ever called you a brown noser nice try though mate.

Also one currently plays in the prem no thanks to Sam. You'll have to remind me where Wimbledon football club currently play.


Again you are playing with facts. I just pointed out that you can put a spin on anything, so even if Wimbledon are no longer with us they did play in the PL under Sam but went tits up under Norwegian owners.

Maybe because they didn't have there own ground why was that?

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:25 pm

Sams famous inner circle...thought they would of given up by now!!!

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:28 pm

beaky wrote:Sams famous inner circle...thought they would of given up by now!!!

They can smell Old Traffords hospitality suits :lol:

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:30 pm

kingdong wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
kingdong wrote:I've only ever called you a brown noser nice try though mate.

Also one currently plays in the prem no thanks to Sam. You'll have to remind me where Wimbledon football club currently play.


Again you are playing with facts. I just pointed out that you can put a spin on anything, so even if Wimbledon are no longer with us they did play in the PL under Sam but went tits up under Norwegian owners.

Maybe because they didn't have there own ground why was that?


TBH I really couldn't careless why Wimbledon went tits up. :?

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:38 pm

Tony Blue Williams wrote:
kingdong wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
kingdong wrote:I've only ever called you a brown noser nice try though mate.

Also one currently plays in the prem no thanks to Sam. You'll have to remind me where Wimbledon football club currently play.


Again you are playing with facts. I just pointed out that you can put a spin on anything, so even if Wimbledon are no longer with us they did play in the PL under Sam but went tits up under Norwegian owners.

Maybe because they didn't have there own ground why was that?


TBH I really couldn't careless why Wimbledon went tits up. :?

Somebody sold it to Safeway :lol: I will let you guess who.
So Mr Brown nose you can say you don't care but don't try an make out I'm spinning facts.

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:38 pm

Tony Blue Williams wrote:
kingdong wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
kingdong wrote:I've only ever called you a brown noser nice try though mate.

Also one currently plays in the prem no thanks to Sam. You'll have to remind me where Wimbledon football club currently play.


Again you are playing with facts. I just pointed out that you can put a spin on anything, so even if Wimbledon are no longer with us they did play in the PL under Sam but went tits up under Norwegian owners.

Maybe because they didn't have there own ground why was that?


TBH I really couldn't careless why Wimbledon went tits up. :?


AC Milan/Inter Milan and Swansea don't have or own their grounds.

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:39 pm

who cares if Sam lied, who cares if he acts as people friends to get publicity, who cares about 'Sam loves me more than you', who cares if he almost bankrupt the club, that's all in the past now... as long as the debt is sorted and the best is done for Cardiff City then we can all be happy and look forward to the future! :ayatollah:

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:45 pm

Bakedalasker wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
kingdong wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
kingdong wrote:I've only ever called you a brown noser nice try though mate.

Also one currently plays in the prem no thanks to Sam. You'll have to remind me where Wimbledon football club currently play.


Again you are playing with facts. I just pointed out that you can put a spin on anything, so even if Wimbledon are no longer with us they did play in the PL under Sam but went tits up under Norwegian owners.

Maybe because they didn't have there own ground why was that?


TBH I really couldn't careless why Wimbledon went tits up. :?


AC Milan/Inter Milan and Swansea don't have or own their grounds.

Really you just compared ac Milan and inter Milan to Wimbledon.
The jacks don't ground share with another football club and have to pay rent.
Ask Coventry how fun a football club is when you don't own a ground.

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:53 pm

Tony Blue Williams wrote:
CitySteve wrote:No, the value of the Club is uncountable, now PL Football is with us. If Promotion wasn't gained, it would be a whole lot more complex than it will be now.


So what is the 5% or £19m? You mentioned intellectual property and the rebrand in the same sentence, so is Sam getting 5% of VT's rebrand which is valued at £380m?

Just trying to follow your logic as I'm sure the deal to settle with Sam isn't going to be as straight forward as a cheque for £15-19m


What is the £380M that you have thought up. I dont know what the terms of the negotiations were between each Party. But, IS THE £380M THAT YOU SAY, is what the rebranding is worth, or is what Sam has spent when he walked into NP?? VT will not pay Sam Hammam, he is too shrewd to do that. He will have to work for the good of the Club. I'm sure his knowledge will benefit the Football Club,with SAM and TAN working together.

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:46 pm

kingdong wrote:
Bakedalasker wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
kingdong wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
kingdong wrote:I've only ever called you a brown noser nice try though mate.

Also one currently plays in the prem no thanks to Sam. You'll have to remind me where Wimbledon football club currently play.


Again you are playing with facts. I just pointed out that you can put a spin on anything, so even if Wimbledon are no longer with us they did play in the PL under Sam but went tits up under Norwegian owners.

Maybe because they didn't have there own ground why was that?


TBH I really couldn't careless why Wimbledon went tits up. :?


AC Milan/Inter Milan and Swansea don't have or own their grounds.

Really you just compared ac Milan and inter Milan to Wimbledon.
The jacks don't ground share with another football club and have to pay rent.
Ask Coventry how fun a football club is when you don't own a ground.


Your suggesting Wimbledon failed because they did not own their ground. I'm just giving you examples of successful teams that don't own their grounds.

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:56 pm

I was just saying how your examples weren't very good ones.

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:58 pm

kingdong wrote:I was just saying how your examples weren't very good ones.


Well I was just politely trying to say your statement was crap.

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:03 pm

Bakedalasker wrote:
kingdong wrote:I was just saying how your examples weren't very good ones.


Well I was just politely trying to say your statement was crap.

You can add Man City to that list as well, the Etihad Stadium is owned by Manchester City Council, it doesn't seem to have hampered them ;)

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:05 pm

Bakedalasker wrote:
kingdong wrote:I was just saying how your examples weren't very good ones.


Well I was just politely trying to say your statement was crap.

Well I was just politely saying your thick as shit for comparing two of the biggest football clubs in the world to Wimbledon.

Re: SURELY NOT

Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:05 pm

Gowerjack wrote:
Bakedalasker wrote:
kingdong wrote:I was just saying how your examples weren't very good ones.


Well I was just politely trying to say your statement was crap.

You can add Man City to that list as well, the Etihad Stadium is owned by Manchester City Council, it doesn't seem to have hampered them ;)

:lol: the comparisons just keep getting better