Did we accept rebrand by being duped or not accept it

I am confused as both sides are bandied by those that are anti-Tan.

Can anyone please answer then?

Were we duped to accept the rebrand with red or dead or did we not accept it? The way it is spoken of on here is that everyone has always been totally against it however there were hundreds with BU. However it is said that red or dead is the reason it was accepted. However apparently it wasn't accepted.

I'm confused so you can see why VT is. Especially as he is very much shielded from the majority of what occurs at our club.

Personally I never felt it was red or dead, never felt that's how the club sold it either.

A lot of people were happy to go along with it whole we did well.

No we did not accept the re-brand, it was forced upon us. The question is how was it forced?

For me Tan only listen to his immediate advisers. These advisers I believed called a number of prominent supports together, a collection of 13 people I believe. 10 disapproved, 2 sustained and 1 agreed. Enough evidence there to suggest a huge majority did not want it. Yet the club decided to go with it.

To me that indicates those who had Tans ear lied to him. Why did they lie. Well if it is who I think it is then they had a bit of investment at risk. Besides lying to him they managed to get the one fan who approved of the re-brand to disrupt any up rising and the red or dead was born.

That basically is how this sorry mess came about.

No we did not accept the re-brand, it was forced upon us. The question is how was it forced?

For me Tan only listen to his immediate advisers. These advisers I believed called a number of prominent supports together, a collection of 13 people I believe. 10 disapproved, 2 sustained and 1 agreed. Enough evidence there to suggest a huge majority did not want it. Yet the club decided to go with it.

To me that indicates those who had Tans ear lied to him. Why did they lie. Well if it is who I think it is then they had a bit of investment at risk. Besides lying to him they managed to get the one fan who approved of the re-brand to disrupt any up rising and the red or dead was born.

That basically is how this sorry mess came about.

Totally agree, we never had a choice.

Personally I never felt it was red or dead, never felt that's how the club sold it either.

A lot of people were happy to go along with it whole we did well.

The way I saw it dead was when TG and Tan took us over. We were saved from liquidation. I then felt Tan fell in love a little bit and wanted his favourite colour. In his defence he knew we were desperate by the spectacle of the Malaysian flags being draped everywhere.

The investment was his price for the rebrand. Not red or dead. Never did TG or Tan say the club would die. I don't remember that being bandied about it was more desperation for the investment which likely would get us up and get Langstone settled.

Who said red or dead if not TG or Tan?

Personally I never felt it was red or dead, never felt that's how the club sold it either.

A lot of people were happy to go along with it whole we did well.

The way I saw it dead was when TG and Tan took us over. We were saved from liquidation. I then felt Tan fell in love a little bit and wanted his favourite colour. In his defence he knew we were desperate by the spectacle of the Malaysian flags being draped everywhere.

The investment was his price for the rebrand. Not red or dead. Never did TG or Tan say the club would die. I don't remember that being bandied about it was more desperation for the investment which likely would get us up and get Langstone settled.

Who said red or dead if not TG or Tan?

Read my post Neil.

Personally I never felt it was red or dead, never felt that's how the club sold it either.

A lot of people were happy to go along with it whole we did well.

The way I saw it dead was when TG and Tan took us over. We were saved from liquidation. I then felt Tan fell in love a little bit and wanted his favourite colour. In his defence he knew we were desperate by the spectacle of the Malaysian flags being draped everywhere.

The investment was his price for the rebrand. Not red or dead. Never did TG or Tan say the club would die. I don't remember that being bandied about it was more desperation for the investment which likely would get us up and get Langstone settled.

Who said red or dead if not TG or Tan?

Read my post Neil.

I did that doesn't answer it. If you are implying Gwyn said red or dead I don't ever remember him saying that we would die without the investment.

Personally I never felt it was red or dead, never felt that's how the club sold it either.

A lot of people were happy to go along with it whole we did well.

The way I saw it dead was when TG and Tan took us over. We were saved from liquidation. I then felt Tan fell in love a little bit and wanted his favourite colour. In his defence he knew we were desperate by the spectacle of the Malaysian flags being draped everywhere.

The investment was his price for the rebrand. Not red or dead. Never did TG or Tan say the club would die. I don't remember that being bandied about it was more desperation for the investment which likely would get us up and get Langstone settled.

Who said red or dead if not TG or Tan?

Read my post Neil.

I did that doesn't answer it. If you are implying Gwyn said red or dead I don't ever remember him saying that we would die without the investment.

And what do you think he mean't when he went on about us playing in the Welsh league?

Personally I never felt it was red or dead, never felt that's how the club sold it either.

A lot of people were happy to go along with it whole we did well.

The way I saw it dead was when TG and Tan took us over. We were saved from liquidation. I then felt Tan fell in love a little bit and wanted his favourite colour. In his defence he knew we were desperate by the spectacle of the Malaysian flags being draped everywhere.

The investment was his price for the rebrand. Not red or dead. Never did TG or Tan say the club would die. I don't remember that being bandied about it was more desperation for the investment which likely would get us up and get Langstone settled.

Who said red or dead if not TG or Tan?

Read my post Neil.

I did that doesn't answer it. If you are implying Gwyn said red or dead I don't ever remember him saying that we would die without the investment.

And what do you think he mean't when he went on about us playing in the Welsh league?

That was never in relation to the rebrand but to the original investment made by the Malaysians which did save us from liquidation.

Personally I never felt it was red or dead, never felt that's how the club sold it either.

A lot of people were happy to go along with it whole we did well.

The way I saw it dead was when TG and Tan took us over. We were saved from liquidation. I then felt Tan fell in love a little bit and wanted his favourite colour. In his defence he knew we were desperate by the spectacle of the Malaysian flags being draped everywhere.

The investment was his price for the rebrand. Not red or dead. Never did TG or Tan say the club would die. I don't remember that being bandied about it was more desperation for the investment which likely would get us up and get Langstone settled.

Who said red or dead if not TG or Tan?

Read my post Neil.

I did that doesn't answer it. If you are implying Gwyn said red or dead I don't ever remember him saying that we would die without the investment.

And what do you think he mean't when he went on about us playing in the Welsh league?

That was never in relation to the rebrand but to the original investment made by the Malaysians which did save us from liquidation.

It is all tied in together Neil. Davies used that to justify his love for Tan at the time.

Personally I never felt it was red or dead, never felt that's how the club sold it either.

A lot of people were happy to go along with it whole we did well.

The way I saw it dead was when TG and Tan took us over. We were saved from liquidation. I then felt Tan fell in love a little bit and wanted his favourite colour. In his defence he knew we were desperate by the spectacle of the Malaysian flags being draped everywhere.

The investment was his price for the rebrand. Not red or dead. Never did TG or Tan say the club would die. I don't remember that being bandied about it was more desperation for the investment which likely would get us up and get Langstone settled.

Who said red or dead if not TG or Tan?

Read my post Neil.

I did that doesn't answer it. If you are implying Gwyn said red or dead I don't ever remember him saying that we would die without the investment.

And what do you think he mean't when he went on about us playing in the Welsh league?

That was never in relation to the rebrand but to the original investment made by the Malaysians which did save us from liquidation.

It is all tied in together Neil. Davies used that to justify his love for Tan at the time.

If Gwyn is grateful to Tan for saving the club after Sam and Ridsdale's mistakes with the club then I agree with him. If he hasn't actually said red or dead then I ask again were we duped into accepting the rebrand or just not accept it? There can only be one answer. If we were duped then who by?

Personally I never felt it was red or dead, never felt that's how the club sold it either.

A lot of people were happy to go along with it whole we did well.

The way I saw it dead was when TG and Tan took us over. We were saved from liquidation. I then felt Tan fell in love a little bit and wanted his favourite colour. In his defence he knew we were desperate by the spectacle of the Malaysian flags being draped everywhere.

The investment was his price for the rebrand. Not red or dead. Never did TG or Tan say the club would die. I don't remember that being bandied about it was more desperation for the investment which likely would get us up and get Langstone settled.

Who said red or dead if not TG or Tan?

Read my post Neil.

I did that doesn't answer it. If you are implying Gwyn said red or dead I don't ever remember him saying that we would die without the investment.

And what do you think he mean't when he went on about us playing in the Welsh league?

That was never in relation to the rebrand but to the original investment made by the Malaysians which did save us from liquidation.

It is all tied in together Neil. Davies used that to justify his love for Tan at the time.

If Gwyn is grateful to Tan for saving the club after Sam and Ridsdale's mistakes with the club then I agree with him. If he hasn't actually said red or dead then I ask again were we duped into accepting the rebrand or just not accept it? There can only be one answer. If we were duped then who by?

As I have tried to give hints Neil in my post. Those who have Tans ears and had something to lose, who were the guys pulling Davies strings.

The club and most of the supporters behaved like prostitutes, and Peter Ridsdale was the pimp. You grabbed the cash, and just like prostitutes, you are now getting screwed.

It amazes me that there are still posters on this forum who think some billionaire who has no connection to the capital is going to come along and become your benefactor. There are others who are willing to forgive and forget as long as you return to blue. He's treated the club like a bitch and kicked the supporters in the teeth for years, he's even a hero at the Liberty! Is there anyone on here who is going to admit that they are willing to forgive him.

Until Tan goes you will be in his debt and he'll do anything he can to humiliate you. We all know he's a very vindictive man.

Happy new owner and happy new year.

I do not believe for one second that Vincent Tan is the main pantomime villain, he is just the only one that everyone want to focus their anger on leaving the other villains at the club a free reign to rake in the cash serving their own agenda's.

The only choices we had was to not attend and to not buy merchandise. The rebrand was out of the fans hands!

The only choices we had was to not attend and to not buy merchandise. The rebrand was out of the fans hands!

Now two and a half years later, now that we are struggling we are talking about boycotting.

The only choices we had was to not attend and to not buy merchandise. The rebrand was out of the fans hands!

Now two and a half years later, now that we are struggling we are talking about boycotting.

Why not Neil. Tan has not lived up to his promises.

I do not believe for one second that Vincent Tan is the main pantomime villain, he is just the only one that everyone want to focus their anger on leaving the other villains at the club a free reign to rake in the cash serving their own agenda's.

Pretty true, the only reason Tan has free reign at the club is because he took over after the financial mess created by Sam and the Riddler.

The only choices we had was to not attend and to not buy merchandise. The rebrand was out of the fans hands!

Now two and a half years later, now that we are struggling we are talking about boycotting.

Why not Neil. Tan has not lived up to his promises.

Which promises are you talking about? He certainly kept some of them.

My choice was to continue to attend and support the team. I have never bought any re brand merchandise. I have never mentioned boycotting and as I have said in other posts I will be renewing my ST.

I do not believe for one second that Vincent Tan is the main pantomime villain, he is just the only one that everyone want to focus their anger on leaving the other villains at the club a free reign to rake in the cash serving their own agenda's.

But he's the one who hired the villains, pays the villains, and if he wanted, he could sack the villains.

I do not believe for one second that Vincent Tan is the main pantomime villain, he is just the only one that everyone want to focus their anger on leaving the other villains at the club a free reign to rake in the cash serving their own agenda's.

But he's the one who hired the villains, pays the villains, and if he wanted, he could sack the villains.

Sorry, my fault.......I meant the ones who initially told Tan we were happy to sell our soul and history when we wasn't ASKED but they lined their own pockets and left Tan to take all the flack....... Very clever!!!!

I do not believe for one second that Vincent Tan is the main pantomime villain, he is just the only one that everyone want to focus their anger on leaving the other villains at the club a free reign to rake in the cash serving their own agenda's.

But he's the one who hired the villains, pays the villains, and if he wanted, he could sack the villains.

Sorry, my fault.......I meant the ones who initially told Tan we were happy to sell our soul and history when we wasn't ASKED but they lined their own pockets and left Tan to take all the flack....... Very clever!!!!

Understood.

Hope you get a new owner in the new year.

I do not believe for one second that Vincent Tan is the main pantomime villain, he is just the only one that everyone want to focus their anger on leaving the other villains at the club a free reign to rake in the cash serving their own agenda's.

But he's the one who hired the villains, pays the villains, and if he wanted, he could sack the villains.

Sorry, my fault.......I meant the ones who initially told Tan we were happy to sell our soul and history when we wasn't ASKED but they lined their own pockets and left Tan to take all the flack....... Very clever!!!!

Understood.

Hope you get a new owner in the new year.

But who?

Skip to 2:00 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-18340432

Skip to 2:00 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-18340432

My memory was that a lot shared Gwyn's opinion. However everyone will say they were against it.