' Benefit of debt to Tan '

I'd like him to convert debt to equity as much as anyone but the simple truth is the club isn't worth the debt that Tan is owed. However recently there have been a few more benefits of the debt being to Tan as opposed to the multitude of debtors before Tan.

1) The money WE will receive due to sell on clause from McCormack transfer. Pre Tan that would have been Ray Ransomes.
2) Pre Tan we would not have been able to resist the offer for Mutch, Marshall or lower offers for caulker or medel.
3) This Summer we would have probably been on our arses money wise with the lower amount of season tickets sold.

Please feel free to put in more points or counter points without it descending into anarchy.

Without tans investment you could argue we wouldn't have these players to start with.But good points by yourself,if tan stopped supporting city financially (which is highly unlikely because of what's owed to him and where he wants to take the club) our best players would go on the cheap just to pay the bills as in years gone by.

Some good points regarding short term "safety" with Tan at the helm, though the figures banded around for debt will always give me concern whether it is to one person or to many people.

Tan has done some good things for this club, just a shame he blotted his copy book with the rebrand. He would be touted as a hero around these parts right now, otherwise.

Some good points regarding short term "safety" with Tan at the helm, though the figures banded around for debt will always give me concern whether it is to one person or to many people.

Tan has done some good things for this club, just a shame he blotted his copy book with the rebrand. He would be touted as a hero around these parts right now, otherwise.

Spot on

Some good points regarding short term "safety" with Tan at the helm, though the figures banded around for debt will always give me concern whether it is to one person or to many people.

Tan has done some good things for this club, just a shame he blotted his copy book with the rebrand. He would be touted as a hero around these parts right now, otherwise.

I'd argue given Tan's track record the long term has never looked better. Before him there was no long term.

Tan is a hero for what he has done for us financially, with the team, the stadium, community based projects and much more, whether we like it or not.

It appears as though Tan was justified in sacking Malky and Moody.

Tan in a lot of people's eyes is a tw@t for the rebrand.

Does that sum up the key points of the situation at Cardiff ?

Some good points regarding short term "safety" with Tan at the helm, though the figures banded around for debt will always give me concern whether it is to one person or to many people.

Tan has done some good things for this club, just a shame he blotted his copy book with the rebrand. He would be touted as a hero around these parts right now, otherwise.

I'd argue given Tan's track record the long term has never looked better. Before him there was no long term.

There would be no term at all and nothing for chuckles to be so pedantic about in the first place.

Some good points regarding short term "safety" with Tan at the helm, though the figures banded around for debt will always give me concern whether it is to one person or to many people.

Tan has done some good things for this club, just a shame he blotted his copy book with the rebrand. He would be touted as a hero around these parts right now, otherwise.

I'd argue given Tan's track record the long term has never looked better. Before him there was no long term.

Agree, fella

Some good points regarding short term "safety" with Tan at the helm, though the figures banded around for debt will always give me concern whether it is to one person or to many people.

Tan has done some good things for this club, just a shame he blotted his copy book with the rebrand. He would be touted as a hero around these parts right now, otherwise.

I'd argue given Tan's track record the long term has never looked better. Before him there was no long term.

spot on..........and there is a huge difference in owing money to one person than many, especially if the one person is yourself......

Some good points regarding short term "safety" with Tan at the helm, though the figures banded around for debt will always give me concern whether it is to one person or to many people.

Tan has done some good things for this club, just a shame he blotted his copy book with the rebrand. He would be touted as a hero around these parts right now, otherwise.

I'd argue given Tan's track record the long term has never looked better. Before him there was no long term.

spot on..........and there is a huge difference in owing money to one person than many, especially if the one person is yourself......

Hell yeah

Some good points regarding short term "safety" with Tan at the helm, though the figures banded around for debt will always give me concern whether it is to one person or to many people.

Tan has done some good things for this club, just a shame he blotted his copy book with the rebrand. He would be touted as a hero around these parts right now, otherwise.

I'd argue given Tan's track record the long term has never looked better. Before him there was no long term.

spot on..........and there is a huge difference in owing money to one person than many, especially if the one person is yourself......

Assets are so much higher now too.

I'd like him to convert debt to equity as much as anyone but the simple truth is the club isn't worth the debt that Tan is owed. However recently there have been a few more benefits of the debt being to Tan as opposed to the multitude of debtors before Tan.

1) The money WE will receive due to sell on clause from McCormack transfer. Pre Tan that would have been Ray Ransomes.
2) Pre Tan we would not have been able to resist the offer for Mutch, Marshall or lower offers for caulker or medel.
3) This Summer we would have probably been on our arses money wise with the lower amount of season tickets sold.

Please feel free to put in more points or counter points without it descending into anarchy.

To counter point 3, we wouldn't have such low season ticket sales if we were still in blue.

Regarding points 1 and 2, I don't care about all that, I just want to watch my team play in blue, whatever the level. If that means we have to sell all our best players and other assets on the cheap, play our youth team and plummet down to the Conference, so be it. I would still be a lot happier watching my team in blue at Forest Green than I currently do now.

I'd like him to convert debt to equity as much as anyone but the simple truth is the club isn't worth the debt that Tan is owed. However recently there have been a few more benefits of the debt being to Tan as opposed to the multitude of debtors before Tan.

1) The money WE will receive due to sell on clause from McCormack transfer. Pre Tan that would have been Ray Ransomes.
2) Pre Tan we would not have been able to resist the offer for Mutch, Marshall or lower offers for caulker or medel.
3) This Summer we would have probably been on our arses money wise with the lower amount of season tickets sold.

Please feel free to put in more points or counter points without it descending into anarchy.

To counter point 3, we wouldn't have such low season ticket sales if we were still in blue.

Regarding points 1 and 2, I don't care about all that, I just want to watch my team play in blue, whatever the level. If that means we have to sell all our best players and other assets on the cheap, play our youth team and plummet down to the Conference, so be it. I would still be a lot happier watching my team in blue at Forest Green than I currently do now.

Colour has little effect on season ticket sales. We have been red for years with higher season ticket sales. The lower amount this year is due to relegation.

Without Tan it would be total network solutions and Bangor not forest green.

I'd like him to convert debt to equity as much as anyone but the simple truth is the club isn't worth the debt that Tan is owed. However recently there have been a few more benefits of the debt being to Tan as opposed to the multitude of debtors before Tan.

1) The money WE will receive due to sell on clause from McCormack transfer. Pre Tan that would have been Ray Ransomes.
2) Pre Tan we would not have been able to resist the offer for Mutch, Marshall or lower offers for caulker or medel.
3) This Summer we would have probably been on our arses money wise with the lower amount of season tickets sold.

Please feel free to put in more points or counter points without it descending into anarchy.

To counter point 3, we wouldn't have such low season ticket sales if we were still in blue.

Regarding points 1 and 2, I don't care about all that, I just want to watch my team play in blue, whatever the level. If that means we have to sell all our best players and other assets on the cheap, play our youth team and plummet down to the Conference, so be it. I would still be a lot happier watching my team in blue at Forest Green than I currently do now.

Re point 2. You so realise we would have taken 1.5 million for the guy you said is part of the future spine of the England team.

I'd like him to convert debt to equity as much as anyone but the simple truth is the club isn't worth the debt that Tan is owed. However recently there have been a few more benefits of the debt being to Tan as opposed to the multitude of debtors before Tan.

1) The money WE will receive due to sell on clause from McCormack transfer. Pre Tan that would have been Ray Ransomes.
2) Pre Tan we would not have been able to resist the offer for Mutch, Marshall or lower offers for caulker or medel.
3) This Summer we would have probably been on our arses money wise with the lower amount of season tickets sold.

Please feel free to put in more points or counter points without it descending into anarchy.

To counter point 3, we wouldn't have such low season ticket sales if we were still in blue.

Regarding points 1 and 2, I don't care about all that, I just want to watch my team play in blue, whatever the level. If that means we have to sell all our best players and other assets on the cheap, play our youth team and plummet down to the Conference, so be it. I would still be a lot happier watching my team in blue at Forest Green than I currently do now.

Re point 2. You so realise we would have taken 1.5 million for the guy you said is part of the future spine of the England team.

Yes, but for me, how we do on the pitch comes second compared to getting our blue back.

I'd like him to convert debt to equity as much as anyone but the simple truth is the club isn't worth the debt that Tan is owed. However recently there have been a few more benefits of the debt being to Tan as opposed to the multitude of debtors before Tan.

1) The money WE will receive due to sell on clause from McCormack transfer. Pre Tan that would have been Ray Ransomes.
2) Pre Tan we would not have been able to resist the offer for Mutch, Marshall or lower offers for caulker or medel.
3) This Summer we would have probably been on our arses money wise with the lower amount of season tickets sold.

Please feel free to put in more points or counter points without it descending into anarchy.

To counter point 3, we wouldn't have such low season ticket sales if we were still in blue.

Regarding points 1 and 2, I don't care about all that, I just want to watch my team play in blue, whatever the level. If that means we have to sell all our best players and other assets on the cheap, play our youth team and plummet down to the Conference, so be it. I would still be a lot happier watching my team in blue at Forest Green than I currently do now.

Re point 2. You so realise we would have taken 1.5 million for the guy you said is part of the future spine of the England team.

Yes, but for me, how we do on the pitch comes second compared to getting our blue back.

Blue in the league of wales? Heard it all now.

I'd like him to convert debt to equity as much as anyone but the simple truth is the club isn't worth the debt that Tan is owed. However recently there have been a few more benefits of the debt being to Tan as opposed to the multitude of debtors before Tan.

1) The money WE will receive due to sell on clause from McCormack transfer. Pre Tan that would have been Ray Ransomes.
2) Pre Tan we would not have been able to resist the offer for Mutch, Marshall or lower offers for caulker or medel.
3) This Summer we would have probably been on our arses money wise with the lower amount of season tickets sold.

Please feel free to put in more points or counter points without it descending into anarchy.

To counter point 3, we wouldn't have such low season ticket sales if we were still in blue.

Regarding points 1 and 2, I don't care about all that, I just want to watch my team play in blue, whatever the level. If that means we have to sell all our best players and other assets on the cheap, play our youth team and plummet down to the Conference, so be it. I would still be a lot happier watching my team in blue at Forest Green than I currently do now.

Re point 2. You so realise we would have taken 1.5 million for the guy you said is part of the future spine of the England team.

Yes, but for me, how we do on the pitch comes second compared to getting our blue back.

Blue in the league of wales? Heard it all now.

We will never end up in the League of Wales. We are the capital of Wales and football in Wales will suffer drastically if we're not in the football league, that simply won't be allowed to happen. Stop scaremongering!

I'd like him to convert debt to equity as much as anyone but the simple truth is the club isn't worth the debt that Tan is owed. However recently there have been a few more benefits of the debt being to Tan as opposed to the multitude of debtors before Tan.

1) The money WE will receive due to sell on clause from McCormack transfer. Pre Tan that would have been Ray Ransomes.
2) Pre Tan we would not have been able to resist the offer for Mutch, Marshall or lower offers for caulker or medel.
3) This Summer we would have probably been on our arses money wise with the lower amount of season tickets sold.

Please feel free to put in more points or counter points without it descending into anarchy.

To counter point 3, we wouldn't have such low season ticket sales if we were still in blue.

Regarding points 1 and 2, I don't care about all that, I just want to watch my team play in blue, whatever the level. If that means we have to sell all our best players and other assets on the cheap, play our youth team and plummet down to the Conference, so be it. I would still be a lot happier watching my team in blue at Forest Green than I currently do now.

Re point 2. You so realise we would have taken 1.5 million for the guy you said is part of the future spine of the England team.

Yes, but for me, how we do on the pitch comes second compared to getting our blue back.

Blue in the league of wales? Heard it all now.

We will never end up in the League of Wales. We are the capital of Wales and football in Wales will suffer drastically if we're not in the football league, that simply won't be allowed to happen. Stop scaremongering!

isnt the conference as you stated just as bad??? will it end there? as what you are saying means tan will leave and with it all our income and that spells liquidation as hmrc does not accept 1p in pound its winding up only no administration!, sorry you'll have to accept tan is here until he wants to sell ? end of story!

Just adding to this.

Tan has so far now paid Langston £21.5mill back and is paying monthly to Sam/Langston until it reaches £24mill,after that Sam has to remove his Director from the board.

Season tickets were always going to be at there lowest for a few years. We've just been relegated that always loses a few. Prior to that we had malkys first season l, a change in manager brings new found optimism and increased numbers. We also had the start of the TG VT times, we kept going close to promotion and have had carling cup finals and better players.

if we get promoted again the numbers will increase up again

Just adding to this.

Tan has so far now paid Langston £21.5mill back and is paying monthly to Sam/Langston until it reaches £24mill,after that Sam has to remove his Director from the board.

is this good or bad annis being off board i mean?

I'd like him to convert debt to equity as much as anyone but the simple truth is the club isn't worth the debt that Tan is owed. However recently there have been a few more benefits of the debt being to Tan as opposed to the multitude of debtors before Tan.

1) The money WE will receive due to sell on clause from McCormack transfer. Pre Tan that would have been Ray Ransomes.
2) Pre Tan we would not have been able to resist the offer for Mutch, Marshall or lower offers for caulker or medel.
3) This Summer we would have probably been on our arses money wise with the lower amount of season tickets sold.

Please feel free to put in more points or counter points without it descending into anarchy.

To counter point 3, we wouldn't have such low season ticket sales if we were still in blue.

Regarding points 1 and 2, I don't care about all that, I just want to watch my team play in blue, whatever the level. If that means we have to sell all our best players and other assets on the cheap, play our youth team and plummet down to the Conference, so be it. I would still be a lot happier watching my team in blue at Forest Green than I currently do now.

Re point 2. You so realise we would have taken 1.5 million for the guy you said is part of the future spine of the England team.

Yes, but for me, how we do on the pitch comes second compared to getting our blue back.

Blue in the league of wales? Heard it all now.

We will never end up in the League of Wales. We are the capital of Wales and football in Wales will suffer drastically if we're not in the football league, that simply won't be allowed to happen. Stop scaremongering!

isnt the conference as you stated just as bad??? will it end there? as what you are saying means tan will leave and with it all our income and that spells liquidation as hmrc does not accept 1p in pound its winding up only no administration!, sorry you'll have to accept tan is here until he wants to sell ? end of story!

Tan may have to accept he will have to make a loss, but he won't want to make that much of a loss. Therefore, it's complete scaremongering to suggest we could end up in the League of Wales. Like you say, Tan is here until he wants to sell, so it's up to us to make him want to sell asap.

Just adding to this.

Tan has so far now paid Langston £21.5mill back and is paying monthly to Sam/Langston until it reaches £24mill,after that Sam has to remove his Director from the board.

is this good or bad annis being off board i mean?

Allan,
Its good the debt will have totally been paid off
But also shows Langston were in the right and nothing found on them as Tan tried every way not to pay.

Tan as you know, now has the Stadium rights.

Sams Director on the board only squables with the rest of them and has no actual say like the rest of them, at the end of the day.

So,it wont change anything once gone.

Just adding to this.

Tan has so far now paid Langston £21.5mill back and is paying monthly to Sam/Langston until it reaches £24mill,after that Sam has to remove his Director from the board.

is this good or bad annis being off board i mean?

Allan,
Its good the debt will have totally been paid off
But also shows Langston were in the right and nothing found on them as Tan tried every way not to pay.

Tan as you know, now has the Stadium rights.

Sams Director on the board only squables with the rest of them and has no actual say like the rest of them, at the end of the day.

So,it wont change anything once gone.

a lot of postering by sounds of it originally then! not sure of point then if he had no say but guess there was a reason for sam, i still believe tan as plan for club some time in future as putting in money even as a loan does not make sense considering the size of debt already.

Some good points regarding short term "safety" with Tan at the helm, though the figures banded around for debt will always give me concern whether it is to one person or to many people.

Tan has done some good things for this club, just a shame he blotted his copy book with the rebrand. He would be touted as a hero around these parts right now, otherwise.

Have always said Tans biggest weapon in his arsenal at the club,he turned on himself.
Had he not rebranded he would be witnessing marches of worship not hatred.

Just adding to this.

Tan has so far now paid Langston £21.5mill back and is paying monthly to Sam/Langston until it reaches £24mill,after that Sam has to remove his Director from the board.

is this good or bad annis being off board i mean?

Allan,
Its good the debt will have totally been paid off
But also shows Langston were in the right and nothing found on them as Tan tried every way not to pay.

Tan as you know, now has the Stadium rights.

Sams Director on the board only squables with the rest of them and has no actual say like the rest of them, at the end of the day.

So,it wont change anything once gone.

a lot of postering by sounds of it originally then! not sure of point then if he had no say but guess there was a reason for sam, i still believe tan as plan for club some time in future as putting in money even as a loan does not make sense considering the size of debt already.

By Sam having a Director on board it meant he could keep him informed.

Just adding to this.

Tan has so far now paid Langston £21.5mill back and is paying monthly to Sam/Langston until it reaches £24mill,after that Sam has to remove his Director from the board.

is this good or bad annis being off board i mean?

Allan,
Its good the debt will have totally been paid off
But also shows Langston were in the right and nothing found on them as Tan tried every way not to pay.

Tan as you know, now has the Stadium rights.

Sams Director on the board only squables with the rest of them and has no actual say like the rest of them, at the end of the day.

So,it wont change anything once gone.

a lot of postering by sounds of it originally then! not sure of point then if he had no say but guess there was a reason for sam, i still believe tan as plan for club some time in future as putting in money even as a loan does not make sense considering the size of debt already.

By Sam having a Director on board it meant he could keep him informed.

you will have to do that now annis?
once he is not on board

Last edited by pembroke allan on Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Just adding to this.

Tan has so far now paid Langston £21.5mill back and is paying monthly to Sam/Langston until it reaches £24mill,after that Sam has to remove his Director from the board.

is this good or bad annis being off board i mean?

Allan,
Its good the debt will have totally been paid off
But also shows Langston were in the right and nothing found on them as Tan tried every way not to pay.

Tan as you know, now has the Stadium rights.

Sams Director on the board only squables with the rest of them and has no actual say like the rest of them, at the end of the day.

So,it wont change anything once gone.

a lot of postering by sounds of it originally then! not sure of point then if he had no say but guess there was a reason for sam, i still believe tan as plan for club some time in future as putting in money even as a loan does not make sense considering the size of debt already.

By Sam having a Director on board it meant he could keep him informed.

you will have to do that now annis?

Allan, not for Sam, but for this Forum

Just adding to this.

Tan has so far now paid Langston £21.5mill back and is paying monthly to Sam/Langston until it reaches £24mill,after that Sam has to remove his Director from the board.

is this good or bad annis being off board i mean?

Allan,
Its good the debt will have totally been paid off
But also shows Langston were in the right and nothing found on them as Tan tried every way not to pay.

Tan as you know, now has the Stadium rights.

Sams Director on the board only squables with the rest of them and has no actual say like the rest of them, at the end of the day.

So,it wont change anything once gone.

a lot of postering by sounds of it originally then! not sure of point then if he had no say but guess there was a reason for sam, i still believe tan as plan for club some time in future as putting in money even as a loan does not make sense considering the size of debt already.

By Sam having a Director on board it meant he could keep him informed.

you will have to do that now annis?

Allan, not for Sam, but for this Forum

thats good then always nice to know whats happening good or bad!

Just adding to this.

Tan has so far now paid Langston £21.5mill back and is paying monthly to Sam/Langston until it reaches £24mill,after that Sam has to remove his Director from the board.

is this good or bad annis being off board i mean?

Allan,
Its good the debt will have totally been paid off
But also shows Langston were in the right and nothing found on them as Tan tried every way not to pay.

Tan as you know, now has the Stadium rights.

Sams Director on the board only squables with the rest of them and has no actual say like the rest of them, at the end of the day.

So,it wont change anything once gone.

a lot of postering by sounds of it originally then! not sure of point then if he had no say but guess there was a reason for sam, i still believe tan as plan for club some time in future as putting in money even as a loan does not make sense considering the size of debt already.

By Sam having a Director on board it meant he could keep him informed.

you will have to do that now annis?

Allan, not for Sam, but for this Forum

thats good then always nice to know whats happening good or bad!

You know me Allan