' NOT FOR GENEROSITY OR CHARITY BY VINCENT TAN ? '

Vincent Tan is a good businessman there is little doubt anybody could argue with that but thinking over the wiping out of interest of nearly £6m and providing another £50m as interest free got me wondering why has Tan done that, surely he is not doing it for charity or to please maybe the fans after the past weeks events.

Don't get me wrong it must be a good thing for the football club and that is the crux of the matter but why has he done it, as we all appreciate and as I stated above he is a businessman and good businessmen don't just give away money, the skeptic in me thinks there must be other reasons behind this latest development.

Vincent Tan got involved in Cardiff City as it was recognised there was money to be made and I don't think there will be too many who would have had an issue with that when he came in and my own belief is still the same as back then. Tan's plan all along has been to get all the shares, float the club to then sell up and make money.

This is nothing new by myself, anyone can check back through my posts to see that I have been consistent for a couple of years that he wanted to float the club in the far east.

I am no financial expert and I admit I know very little about share issues but I have thought about a few things since the statement from yesterday and wonder if any of the following are reasons behind what appears to be a generous move.

Hopefully those with more knowledge on such matters could clarify or set me straight.

1. Financial fair play rules - with our income streams and outgoings as they can we continue with the current debt levels to satisfy the financial fair play rules that are coming in to affect?

2. Balancing the books - is there further investment coming in and Tan does not want to be seen to be charging interest on his investment?

3. Why would an owner charge himself interest as he will own 98% of the club once the debt to equity is rubber stamped?

4. If the plan is to sell to Chinese or any other investor then surely it would help the sale if there is less debt?

5. If and when Tan does decide to float on the stock market, if we had a heavy debt or the interest was still payable the value of the shares would be lower, so the healthier the balance sheet then the share price is higher?

As stated above, I am asking these questions as I am genuinely puzzled why any businessman would wipe out so many millions when it was only agreed just over a year ago that he would receive interest on his loans and nobody seems to have kicked a fuss up about the interest being charged.

Hopefully we will be provided with sensible informative replies.

Vincent Tan is a good businessman there is little doubt anybody could argue with that but thinking over the wiping out of interest of nearly £6m and providing another £50m as interest free got me wondering why has Tan done that, surely he is not doing it for charity or to please maybe the fans after the past weeks events.

Don't get me wrong it must be a good thing for the football club and that is the crux of the matter but why has he done it, as we all appreciate and as I stated above he is a businessman and good businessmen don't just give away money, the skeptic in me thinks there must be other reasons behind this latest development.

Vincent Tan got involved in Cardiff City as it was recognised there was money to be made and I don't think there will be too many who would have had an issue with that when he came in and my own belief is still the same as back then. Tan's plan all along has been to get all the shares, float the club to then sell up and make money.

This is nothing new by myself, anyone can check back through my posts to see that I have been consistent for a couple of years that he wanted to float the club in the far east.

I am no financial expert and I admit I know very little about share issues but I have thought about a few things since the statement from yesterday and wonder if any of the following are reasons behind what appears to be a generous move.

Hopefully those with more knowledge on such matters could clarify or set me straight.

1. Financial fair play rules - with our income streams and outgoings as they can we continue with the current debt levels to satisfy the financial fair play rules that are coming in to affect?

2. Balancing the books - is there further investment coming in and Tan does not want to be seen to be charging interest on his investment?

3. Why would an owner charge himself interest as he will own 98% of the club once the debt to equity is rubber stamped?

4. If the plan is to sell to Chinese or any other investor then surely it would help the sale if there is less debt?

5. If and when Tan does decide to float on the stock market, if we had a heavy debt or the interest was still payable the value of the shares would be lower, so the healthier the balance sheet then the share price is higher?

As stated above, I am asking these questions as I am genuinely puzzled why any businessman would wipe out so many millions when it was only agreed just over a year ago that he would receive interest on his loans and nobody seems to have kicked a fuss up about the interest being charged.

Hopefully we will be provided with sensible informative replies.

Why on earth are you trying to understand what goes on in a mans mind who gets rid of one of the most respected talent spotters in the country with a 23year old painter whose expertise has been gained from playing FIFA 13 on x box.
There comes a time in your life Carl where you stop torturing yourself for answers because your dealing with someone who is a sandwich short of a picnic who only decides who's life he is going to feck up when he opens the curtains in the morning.
Forget tan think beer

Vincent Tan is a good businessman there is little doubt anybody could argue with that but thinking over the wiping out of interest of nearly £6m and providing another £50m as interest free got me wondering why has Tan done that, surely he is not doing it for charity or to please maybe the fans after the past weeks events.

Don't get me wrong it must be a good thing for the football club and that is the crux of the matter but why has he done it, as we all appreciate and as I stated above he is a businessman and good businessmen don't just give away money, the skeptic in me thinks there must be other reasons behind this latest development.

Vincent Tan got involved in Cardiff City as it was recognised there was money to be made and I don't think there will be too many who would have had an issue with that when he came in and my own belief is still the same as back then. Tan's plan all along has been to get all the shares, float the club to then sell up and make money.

This is nothing new by myself, anyone can check back through my posts to see that I have been consistent for a couple of years that he wanted to float the club in the far east.

I am no financial expert and I admit I know very little about share issues but I have thought about a few things since the statement from yesterday and wonder if any of the following are reasons behind what appears to be a generous move.

Hopefully those with more knowledge on such matters could clarify or set me straight.

1. Financial fair play rules - with our income streams and outgoings as they can we continue with the current debt levels to satisfy the financial fair play rules that are coming in to affect?

2. Balancing the books - is there further investment coming in and Tan does not want to be seen to be charging interest on his investment?

3. Why would an owner charge himself interest as he will own 98% of the club once the debt to equity is rubber stamped?

4. If the plan is to sell to Chinese or any other investor then surely it would help the sale if there is less debt?

5. If and when Tan does decide to float on the stock market, if we had a heavy debt or the interest was still payable the value of the shares would be lower, so the healthier the balance sheet then the share price is higher?

As stated above, I am asking these questions as I am genuinely puzzled why any businessman would wipe out so many millions when it was only agreed just over a year ago that he would receive interest on his loans and nobody seems to have kicked a fuss up about the interest being charged.

Hopefully we will be provided with sensible informative replies.

once hes 98% share holder hes only earning interest to himself which im not sure if hes legally entitled to do ,if we are debt free the share price will be worth alot more and he could ,sell say 30% by floating it at a higher price and possibly get just as much as hes put in and still own 70% but its all if and butts ,whatever he does if the debt gets wiped its good for cardiff city ,im sure keith(since 62) said we have to be debt free to float and also we couldnt float on any far east stock exchanges for the next 3 years due to the rules

Steve, I am pondering over a glass of red

Carl, I normally back you. But I have have to ask the question. ... have you been speaking to Sam recently?

Just thought I would repost this story from Walesonline as a reminder to everyone:

Cardiff City backer Vincent Tan says “God willing” he hopes to wipe out the club’s massive debts in just two months.

In a press conference launching his Thanks a Million giveaway to local charities yesterday Mr Tan said he was working hard to increase his share-holding in the club.

He said he had a couple of other directors who he was working to buy shares off and hoped to be able to take his own share-holding of the club as high as 90%.

Mr Tan added that once those deals were in place, it would pave the way for the debts the club owes him to be converted into equity.

If that came about as quickly as Mr Tan hopes, it would mean the club’s debts – put as high as £83m in the club’s latest accounts in January would be wiped out.

Mr Tan said: “I came in three or four years ago. I own most of the club and eventually maybe all of it.”

Asked to clarify the share-holding position, Mr Tan confirmed he had the 51% controlling stake but wanted to add more before converting his own debt which was put at £37,431,000 in January’s accounts.

“We are in the process,” he said.

“We would like to resolve some of the shareholders first.

“In the next couple of months the club will be debt-free, God willing.”



We know Tan has agreements in place to buy out the larger shareholders so all appears to be on track.

What we have to remember regarding this new offer of £50m interest free and its intended use is that there is a stadium expansion and new training ground to pay for....

Carl, I normally back you. But I have have to ask the question. ... have you been speaking to Sam recently?

Yes I have but nothing to do with this post though if that is what you were thinking, this is something I have been thinking about since the statement.

I heard somewhere that Vincent Tan spends in the region of 100 Million per annum in advertising for his various businesses of which a few are spread around the ground so surely three billion people tuning in every week to watching Premier league football has vast advertising benefits ?, the only thing that really surprises me is that one of his companies or one of his Countrymen has not taken up naming rights on the Stadium.

I think the only guy who could fathom out wotz goin on in the head of Pol Pot Crack Pot Tin Pot Tan Pot is someone we call a psychiatrist ! He's a strawberry short of a Summer Pudding ! Sooner he settles into a nursing home in downtown Kuala Lumpur the better for the beautiful game ! Odd guy !

I can see a future buy out for the club or as stated above, initially a take over and a clear out of debt, consolidation and advertisement via premier league football.

30% of the club sold for +EV Equity
70% of the club owed to tan for a further number of years seeing out a return on investment and added equity through business
advertisement globally,

Positive press and status to tans business CV resulting in cardiff city filling a stop gap for future projects to develop -

*whilest all this is going on there is also a gamble factor involved if we are successful and end up winning trophy's and european football there is added revenue and added potential in and out of football for V tan

Carl, I normally back you. But I have have to ask the question. ... have you been speaking to Sam recently?

Yes I have but nothing to do with this post though if that is what you were thinking, this is something I have been thinking about since the statement.

It might be better if you stop thinking and stick to bus trips.

Carl, I normally back you. But I have have to ask the question. ... have you been speaking to Sam recently?

Yes I have but nothing to do with this post though if that is what you were thinking, this is something I have been thinking about since the statement.

It might be better if you stop thinking and stick to bus trips.

How long did it take you to think of that response ?

He may be eccentric but he will have a business plan. Somewhere there's an accountant or two (including someone who's a tax expert and someone who knows about fx/international investment/tax losses etc)and a data inputter and a lawyer's input which informs a cash flow.This changes and is updated. He has monthly/quarterly meetings when he gets an update on budgets etc over and above his regular chats with selected operational staff in different companies.
Mr Tan is aware of global economic trends and has contact with other big hitters. He's a member of the Bill Gates Foundation. He gets to hear about things like sport franchising and what the Yanks think about owning baseball and soccer clubs.He is very well connected in Asia.
He has someone who advises him on the PL/FA finance rules which again informs his business plan/cash flow model.Also defines what the balance sheet and p+l ratios must look like which influences debt/interest write-offs etc
His plan incorporates a total investment and an exit valuation at a future point in time(3-5yrs from entry). Sale/part sale or flotation- who knows - maybe all are options. He may well think that in terms of his very well known market i.e. Asia red is a colour that gets him the best chance of securing investment from retail investors or even single magnates so that's part of his marketing strategy.

He had to adjust his plan when he did a deal with hammam which gave sam some cash and a cut of the exit profit.

And so on.

He finds it's a pain managing this business as he has to deal with a new way of thinking and lots of complications. Awkward 'customers' who they only matter up to a point.But he will see it through and if anyone gets in his way or jeopardizes his ultimate aims -they go!

It's harsh but don't forget Mr Tan's interests and those of the fans coincide totally as he absolutely requires PL football to make it all work.

It's harsh but don't forget Mr Tan's interests and those of the fans coincide totally as he absolutely requires PL football to make it all work.[/quote]

premier league football is not my main interest. my main interest is getting our football club back. i think a lot of fans agree with that so they hardly coincide totally

"sandwich short of a picnic"
"strawberry short of a summer pudding"
simple but so apt

It's harsh but don't forget Mr Tan's interests and those of the fans coincide totally as he absolutely requires PL football to make it all work.

premier league football is not my main interest. my main interest is getting our football club back. i think a lot of fans agree with that so they hardly coincide totally[/quote]

point taken - I didn't edit and would have changed that with hindsight (i'ts been a long day)

I think it's right however that for most of the current fan base and for the financial well being of the club PL is what counts

It's an interesting one this. Having stepped down from the Berjaya Group to pursue charitable and other interests, he has now signed up to 'The Giving Pledge' and seems hell bent on promoting and giving back to the country of his birth.

Is it possible that he isn't in this purely for personal wealth reasons? Maybe that was the original plan with Cardiff before his 'retirement' but then again perhaps he only ever got involved in the crazy world of football ownership as he saw City as a way of promoting Malaysia and improving grass roots football there. It certainly would seem strange to have set up the links between Cardiff and Malaysia to only then sell it to say a Chinese Businessman who would have no interests in Malyasia.

For me recent events would indicate, as has been suggested on here, a flotation with him retaining a majority interest in the club which would ensure a continuing legacy to his home country rather than to simply sell up and hand over 50% of the profits to charity

http://givingpledge.org/

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Steve, I am pondering over a glass of red

Carl, don't mention 'red' on here. You'll start a riot!

On a serious note, I think a number of your Q's are viable, but I am drawn to Q No.2: "Balancing the books - is there further investment coming in and Tan does not want to be seen to be charging interest on his investment?"

Isn't this one of the supposed reasons the 23-year old Khazak was being 'looked after' so to speak?

"sandwich short of a picnic"
"strawberry short of a summer pudding"
simple but so apt

Don't be so hard on yourself, dude

Number 3 baffles me more than anything else tbh carl it makes no sence at all to me.

Possibly Q3 could be making sure his investment is safe. i.e. if the other shareholders don't sell to him he still gets his money back and a bit of profit on top, where as if the said plan goes ahead and he takes 98% stake in the club he can just wipe the debt out and continue with his plans (what ever that maybe)?? This is just a theory and my opinion.

For me though I don't see how he is going to get his money back. Take a look at Swansea, they had just about made a profit the year they sold allen and Sinclair. If they had not sold thoughs players they would have made a loss.

Vincent Tan is a good businessman there is little doubt anybody could argue with that...

Oh, I could easily argue with that. Just because you have billions does not mean you are a good businessman. It could just mean you have good connections. And a good team to run the "business" for you.

In a professional capacity, I've met a few people with wealth similar to Tan's. I wouldn't trust some of them to run a bath, let alone a business. Some of them displayed tendenceies very similar to VT.

The problem for CCFC is that it's not clear who the good people are that are running this particular business.

Possibly Q3 could be making sure his investment is safe. i.e. if the other shareholders don't sell to him he still gets his money back and a bit of profit on top, where as if the said plan goes ahead and he takes 98% stake in the club he can just wipe the debt out and continue with his plans (what ever that maybe)?? This is just a theory and my opinion.

For me though I don't see how he is going to get his money back. Take a look at Swansea, they had just about made a profit the year they sold allen and Sinclair. If they had not sold thoughs players they would have made a loss.

the other share holders have to sell to him as hes over the threshold for a full take over ,a agreement was made when tan invested the first 6 million he put in 2010 also you cant compare us to swansea as we have much more income streams ie through larger stadium and the fact we own it and also this seasons tv money is the largest ever with finishing bottom still get 63 million