' DEBT TO EQUITY - THE CURRENT SITUATION '

This has just been sent out by the Trust;-

"As most CCFC fans are aware, in February this year Tan Sri Vincent Tan made a public announcement that he would immediately be converting £68m of the debt due to him by the club into shares and would subsequently be carrying out further conversions over a 5 year period which would convert the balance due to him of approximately £40m. This announcement, at a meeting attended by Trust board representatives, would mean that the club would return to balance sheet solvency for the first time in many years and put the club in a far healthier financial position. The announcement was warmly welcomed by the Trust at the time.

Since February, the Trust board has been in regular and frequent contact with the club's CEO and Chair in meetings and via email and telephone conversations, and this matter has formed part of that agenda. To help prevent any misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the current position, the Trust can report as follows.

The change of such a large sum of money from debt to equity by TSVT requires the approval of the Malaysian regulatory authorities and the process can be slow. Therefore, although this approval continues to be pursued and the club board are entirely confident that the matter is being positively progressed, it is not yet formally complete and so the £68m conversion has not yet been finalised. However, the first of the expected £8m conversions has been approved and put in place and will be reflected as a note to the 2015/16 audited accounts when they are submitted to the football authorities and Companies House.

The Trust will continue to liaise with the club at its board meetings on this matter and provide updates as appropriate.!

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

advice from the board who wanted out and wanted there money

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

advice from the board who wanted out and wanted there money

Wez, a lot of people at fault over the whole sorry saga and many involved were happy to let Tan take the can

I maintain that people need to seriously separate the perceived issues individually and they might just start seeing the wood for the trees!

This all seems a bit far fetched....why would it need approval from the Malaysian regulators and if so why is it taking so long????

Hope I'm wrong but something doesn't seem quite right!!!!

This all seems a bit far fetched....why would it need approval from the Malaysian regulators and if so why is it taking so long????

Hope I'm wrong but something doesn't seem quite right!!!!

For me it's another delaying tactic and the whole circus show continues.

Some will continue to stick up for Tan, but I will state this and this is a fact.
Tan said five years ago he would make Cardiff City Debt Free and Tans been here 7 years.
We are more in debt than before Tan arrived and his CEO'S working for him have stated on his demand that Tan would make this club debt free, yet seven years later, his followers still say he is doing good for our club, you could not make it up.

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

Jimmy, Credit for what???

Please tell me ?

A question


Why did Vincent Tan make another promise in February that he was going to do it immediately? when he had not looked in to it properly, surely after seven years of his circus, he would of at least learnt from it.

This all seems a bit far fetched....why would it need approval from the Malaysian regulators and if so why is it taking so long????

Hope I'm wrong but something doesn't seem quite right!!!!

For me it's another delaying tactic and the whole circus show continues.

Some will continue to stick up for Tan, but I will state this and this is a fact.
Tan said five years ago he would make Cardiff City Debt Free and Tans been here 7 years.
We are more in debt than before Tan arrived and his CEO'S working for him have stated on his demand that Tan would make this club debt free, yet seven years later, his followers still say he is doing good for our club, you could not make it up.

I hated Tan for the rebrand but he has got rid of Langston debt which almost killed us off , no more taxman chasing us in the courts . It says 8m has been converted already , I think Tan will make us debt free and to my knowledge he is the only owner who has tried to make us debt free rather than just adding to it then selling up for someone else to sort out

This all seems a bit far fetched....why would it need approval from the Malaysian regulators and if so why is it taking so long????

Hope I'm wrong but something doesn't seem quite right!!!!

For me it's another delaying tactic and the whole circus show continues.

Some will continue to stick up for Tan, but I will state this and this is a fact.
Tan said five years ago he would make Cardiff City Debt Free and Tans been here 7 years.
We are more in debt than before Tan arrived and his CEO'S working for him have stated on his demand that Tan would make this club debt free, yet seven years later, his followers still say he is doing good for our club, you could not make it up.

come on Annis unless the trust is bullshiting then the debt to equity is happen and is a long drawn out process as stated by the op 8 million a year he can do as has continued to do

with regards debt to equity, i'll believe it when i see it. otherwise its just empty words, which i've come to expect from the club.

there is no reason for him to wait, the likes of abramovic would do this sort of thing overnight, and then announce it afterwards without any expectation of being worshipped. tan clearly expects an outpouring of gratitude and appreciation, but is reluctant to put any more money for the clubs long term health (given that he will not be here in 5 years) hence these things dragging on for years after promises have been made.

with a questionable track record, tan is not one to be trusted.

This all seems a bit far fetched....why would it need approval from the Malaysian regulators and if so why is it taking so long????

Hope I'm wrong but something doesn't seem quite right!!!!

For me it's another delaying tactic and the whole circus show continues.

Some will continue to stick up for Tan, but I will state this and this is a fact.
Tan said five years ago he would make Cardiff City Debt Free and Tans been here 7 years.
We are more in debt than before Tan arrived and his CEO'S working for him have stated on his demand that Tan would make this club debt free, yet seven years later, his followers still say he is doing good for our club, you could not make it up.

come on Annis unless the trust is bullshiting then the debt to equity is happen and is a long drawn out process as stated by the op 8 million a year he can do as has continued to do

Wez, When he makes us debt free as promised, even after being in charge 7 years later and promising for 5 years, I will then give him some credit, but like I say when it's done as promised

This all seems a bit far fetched....why would it need approval from the Malaysian regulators and if so why is it taking so long????

Hope I'm wrong but something doesn't seem quite right!!!!

For me it's another delaying tactic and the whole circus show continues.

Some will continue to stick up for Tan, but I will state this and this is a fact.
Tan said five years ago he would make Cardiff City Debt Free and Tans been here 7 years.
We are more in debt than before Tan arrived and his CEO'S working for him have stated on his demand that Tan would make this club debt free, yet seven years later, his followers still say he is doing good for our club, you could not make it up.

I hated Tan for the rebrand but he has got rid of Langston debt which almost killed us off , no more taxman chasing us in the courts . It says 8m has been converted already , I think Tan will make us debt free and to my knowledge he is the only owner who has tried to make us debt free rather than just adding to it then selling up for someone else to sort out

Darren, The Riddler took that debt on and it became bigger, Tan then knew what he was taking on and cost us Millinscetra through his messing around.

Seven years later which is a long time under Tan, we still have a bigger debt than before he arrived and I was not going to mention it but we've had a horrid time during it and just look at our support nowadays that says it all.

with regards debt to equity, i'll believe it when i see it. otherwise its just empty words, which i've come to expect from the club.

there is no reason for him to wait, the likes of abramovic would do this sort of thing overnight, and then announce it afterwards without any expectation of being worshipped. tan clearly expects an outpouring of gratitude and appreciation, but is reluctant to put any more money for the clubs long term health (given that he will not be here in 5 years) hence these things dragging on for years after promises have been made.

with a questionable track record, tan is not one to be trusted.

Excellent post

I don't quite understand why someone who is personally investing in Cardiff City, who as far as I am aware are part of Cardiff City Holdings Ltd who are a UK company, needs permission from Malaysia in order to invest his own personal money into the company. Obviously, I know nothing about financial regulations in Maylaya, but I would have thought Tan has plenty of funds already in the UK, and his dealings would be subject to British financial regulations. I am not disputing anything that has been said, just curious to know the background as to why Maylaysian rules have to be followed to trade in a British company.

Perhaps the reason why he needs the Malaysian approval is because it's not his money that was loaned to the club.

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

Jimmy, Credit for what???

Please tell me ?

He promised premier league football (Even if it did mean going to red, which I voted against) and he got us there with his investment.

He spent a lot of money while there to try and keep us there but to no avail.

He said he would make us debt free and he is in the process of that, even if it is taking longer than we would all like, remember this isn't going to be like taking a loan out somewhere else. Its going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than that. It probably goes against financial fair play as well.
Yes our debt may be higher now than when he came, but we are now able to manage it better. Other clubs owned by billionaires are not debt free. Chelsea and Utd are riddle with it, its just they have the income to handle it without concern

Fact is, if it wasn't for him, would we actually have a club to support?

Im not a fan of his, and the sooner he goes the better. But in the long run everyone needs to look at what could have been if he did not come when he was needed. Did you not wave a Malaysian flag when he first came on the seen Annis?

Be honest, if it wasn't for the rebrand would you have this animosity towards him?

If, and it's still an if, Tan does wipe away all the debt owed to him and people still hold a grudge I think they need to have a long hard look at themselves. I dont care if he is a billionaire, 60 million is a hell of a lot of money. Yes the rebrand was crazy, yes he can be petty, yes he thinks he knows more about football than he does (sounds like a few of our fans ) but wiping 60million plus off the slate for what in return? The ability to sell the club? In his eyes he hasn't been able to do anything he's wanted to do with this club for a prolonged period of time, he wanted the rebrand and we got it changed back (although I don't think this would have happened if we were in the premiership and we were in a packed stadium) I think that was more of a "crowds are down, they say they'll come back in blue" thing, I think he misjudged most of our fans there. We only get crowds when we are playing well or pushing for something. League 2 in blue my ass for most of the people who said it.

I don't love the man, but we are kind of lucky to have him. Most owners would've put us into admin by now, most owners wouldn't be saying that they're going to wipe the debt (if he wasn't going to do it, why say it? Is my argument for it happening) most owners would have told us to f**k off and kept us red (if they were mad enough to change it) I think he might have been trying to make amends, I don't know, but I think it's too late for most. But if he does wipe away the debt, I think he deserves a hell of a lot of credit for doing so.

Also, maybe if our owners before him weren't such a mess we wouldn't have been so desperate and he wouldn't have thought the rebrand with investment was a viable option for him. Maybe if Sam wiped his debt (which tan paid off) we never would've even had tan as an owner. But these are all ifs and buts.

Last edited by Kafka on Thu Sep 08, 2016 12:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

Jimmy, Credit for what???

Please tell me ?

He promised premier league football (Even if it did mean going to red, which I voted against) and he got us there with his investment.

He spent a lot of money while there to try and keep us there but to no avail.

He said he would make us debt free and he is in the process of that, even if it is taking longer than we would all like, remember this isn't going to be like taking a loan out somewhere else. Its going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than that. It probably goes against financial fair play as well.
Yes our debt may be higher now than when he came, but we are now able to manage it better. Other clubs owned by billionaires are not debt free. Chelsea and Utd are riddle with it, its just they have the income to handle it without concern

Fact is, if it wasn't for him, would we actually have a club to support?

Im not a fan of his, and the sooner he goes the better. But in the long run everyone needs to look at what could have been if he did not come when he was needed. Did you not wave a Malaysian flag when he first came on the seen Annis?

Be honest, if it wasn't for the rebrand would you have this animosity towards him?

You are right about the money that was ploughed into the club back in those days. It was being thrown around in all directions as if money was going out of fashion. I can't remember huge delays in players being bought while he had to await permission from Malaya to invest in the club, and that is the bit I don't understand now, as explained in my post above. Anyone able to help me out with the answer here?

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

Jimmy, Credit for what???

Please tell me ?

He promised premier league football (Even if it did mean going to red, which I voted against) and he got us there with his investment.

He spent a lot of money while there to try and keep us there but to no avail.

He said he would make us debt free and he is in the process of that, even if it is taking longer than we would all like, remember this isn't going to be like taking a loan out somewhere else. Its going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than that. It probably goes against financial fair play as well.
Yes our debt may be higher now than when he came, but we are now able to manage it better. Other clubs owned by billionaires are not debt free. Chelsea and Utd are riddle with it, its just they have the income to handle it without concern

Fact is, if it wasn't for him, would we actually have a club to support?

Im not a fan of his, and the sooner he goes the better. But in the long run everyone needs to look at what could have been if he did not come when he was needed. Did you not wave a Malaysian flag when he first came on the seen Annis?

Be honest, if it wasn't for the rebrand would you have this animosity towards him?

You are right about the money that was ploughed into the club back in those days. It was being thrown around in all directions as if money was going out of fashion. I can't remember huge delays in players being bought while he had to await permission from Malaya to invest in the club, and that is the bit I don't understand now, as explained in my post above. Anyone able to help me out with the answer here?

Maybe the funds are coming from one of his other companies in Malaysia and there is due diligence that needs to be done? Or possibly there are rules regarding these sums being transferred from Malaysia internationall? I wouldn't know to be honest. The positive thing to be taking from this is that it is actually getting done.. Slowly, yes, but its in the process of being made.

The rebrand from blue too red was wrong.it was voted for in the boardroom

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

Jimmy, Credit for what???

Please tell me ?

He promised premier league football (Even if it did mean going to red, which I voted against) and he got us there with his investment.

He spent a lot of money while there to try and keep us there but to no avail.

He said he would make us debt free and he is in the process of that, even if it is taking longer than we would all like, remember this isn't going to be like taking a loan out somewhere else. Its going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than that. It probably goes against financial fair play as well.
Yes our debt may be higher now than when he came, but we are now able to manage it better. Other clubs owned by billionaires are not debt free. Chelsea and Utd are riddle with it, its just they have the income to handle it without concern

Fact is, if it wasn't for him, would we actually have a club to support?

Im not a fan of his, and the sooner he goes the better. But in the long run everyone needs to look at what could have been if he did not come when he was needed. Did you not wave a Malaysian flag when he first came on the seen Annis?

Be honest, if it wasn't for the rebrand would you have this animosity towards him?

You are right about the money that was ploughed into the club back in those days. It was being thrown around in all directions as if money was going out of fashion. I can't remember huge delays in players being bought while he had to await permission from Malaya to invest in the club, and that is the bit I don't understand now, as explained in my post above. Anyone able to help me out with the answer here?

Can I suggest a (possible) scenario here to provide an answer to your query. It is a query I have had myself as well.

Even billionaires don`t tend to have over £100m sitting around in readily available "petty cash" , so I would imagine that the money Vincent Tan invested in his own name in CCFC was borrowed from a bank or banks in Malaysia. Security for that Malaysian borrowing would either have been by assigning the security he took himself against club assets such as the stadium, players etc.(there are two current debenture security documents registered in his name) or by giving security against assets elsewhere in his Berjaya or other corporate companies. Therefore , he would need Malaysian approval to convert the (potentially recoverable) debt due to him by the football club into shares which are not repayable and would only have a value if he finds a buyer for them.

Once he had access to the £100m+ to invest , he could spend it as he liked within reason so there would have been no need to seek approval to buy a player etc.

This is just a suggestion. I have no "insider knowledge" either claimed or actual as to how the funding was put in place. However , I have chatted about it with my colleagues in Malaysia and they advise that the theory could make sense.

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

Jimmy, Credit for what???

Please tell me ?

He promised premier league football (Even if it did mean going to red, which I voted against) and he got us there with his investment.

He spent a lot of money while there to try and keep us there but to no avail.

He said he would make us debt free and he is in the process of that, even if it is taking longer than we would all like, remember this isn't going to be like taking a loan out somewhere else. Its going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than that. It probably goes against financial fair play as well.
Yes our debt may be higher now than when he came, but we are now able to manage it better. Other clubs owned by billionaires are not debt free. Chelsea and Utd are riddle with it, its just they have the income to handle it without concern

Fact is, if it wasn't for him, would we actually have a club to support?

Im not a fan of his, and the sooner he goes the better. But in the long run everyone needs to look at what could have been if he did not come when he was needed. Did you not wave a Malaysian flag when he first came on the seen Annis?

Be honest, if it wasn't for the rebrand would you have this animosity towards him?

You are right about the money that was ploughed into the club back in those days. It was being thrown around in all directions as if money was going out of fashion. I can't remember huge delays in players being bought while he had to await permission from Malaya to invest in the club, and that is the bit I don't understand now, as explained in my post above. Anyone able to help me out with the answer here?

Can I suggest a (possible) scenario here to provide an answer to your query. It is a query I have had myself as well.

Even billionaires don`t tend to have over £100m sitting around in readily available "petty cash" , so I would imagine that the money Vincent Tan invested in his own name in CCFC was borrowed from a bank or banks in Malaysia. Security for that Malaysian borrowing would either have been by assigning the security he took himself against club assets such as the stadium, players etc.(there are two current debenture security documents registered in his name) or by giving security against assets elsewhere in his Berjaya or other corporate companies. Therefore , he would need Malaysian approval to convert the (potentially recoverable) debt due to him by the football club into shares which are not repayable and would only have a value if he finds a buyer for them.

Once he had access to the £100m+ to invest , he could spend it as he liked within reason so there would have been no need to seek approval to buy a player etc.

This is just a suggestion. I have no "insider knowledge" either claimed or actual as to how the funding was put in place. However , I have chatted about it with my colleagues in Malaysia and they advise that the theory could make sense.

Thanks, Keith

If, and it's still an if, Tan does wipe away all the debt owed to him and people still hold a grudge I think they need to have a long hard look at themselves. I dont care if he is a billionaire, 60 million is a hell of a lot of money. Yes the rebrand was crazy, yes he can be petty, yes he thinks he knows more about football than he does (sounds like a few of our fans ) but wiping 60million plus off the slate for what in return? The ability to sell the club? In his eyes he hasn't been able to do anything he's wanted to do with this club for a prolonged period of time, he wanted the rebrand and we got it changed back (although I don't think this would have happened if we were in the premiership and we were in a packed stadium) I think that was more of a "crowds are down, they say they'll come back in blue" thing, I think he misjudged most of our fans there. We only get crowds when we are playing well or pushing for something. League 2 in blue my ass for most of the people who said it.

I don't love the man, but we are kind of lucky to have him. Most owners would've put us into admin by now, most owners wouldn't be saying that they're going to wipe the debt (if he wasn't going to do it, why say it? Is my argument for it happening) most owners would have told us to f**k off and kept us red (if they were mad enough to change it) I think he might have been trying to make amends, I don't know, but I think it's too late for most. But if he does wipe away the debt, I think he deserves a hell of a lot of credit for doing so.

Also, maybe if our owners before him weren't such a mess we wouldn't have been so desperate and he wouldn't have thought the rebrand with investment was a viable option for him. Maybe if Sam wiped his debt (which tan paid off) we never would've even had tan as an owner. But these are all ifs and buts.

why would he put us in administration? most of the club debts are owed to him, so he would lose out financially. when he took over the debts were £30m, now they are probably around quadruple that.

if we wouldn't have had him, we would have gone down the swansea route of administration and finding a buyer who would run the club within its means. not ideal, and creditors would lose out, but at least we'd have a financial clean slate and could start afresh.

instead here we are, an average middling championship club (lower than when he took over) with massive debts and no further investment. a club muddling along with no clear strategy or direction.

There are loads of regulatory bodies in this country covering all sorts of businesses why not Malaysia.

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

Jimmy, Credit for what???

Please tell me ?

He promised premier league football (Even if it did mean going to red, which I voted against) and he got us there with his investment.

He spent a lot of money while there to try and keep us there but to no avail.

He said he would make us debt free and he is in the process of that, even if it is taking longer than we would all like, remember this isn't going to be like taking a loan out somewhere else. Its going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than that. It probably goes against financial fair play as well.
Yes our debt may be higher now than when he came, but we are now able to manage it better. Other clubs owned by billionaires are not debt free. Chelsea and Utd are riddle with it, its just they have the income to handle it without concern

Fact is, if it wasn't for him, would we actually have a club to support?

Im not a fan of his, and the sooner he goes the better. But in the long run everyone needs to look at what could have been if he did not come when he was needed. Did you not wave a Malaysian flag when he first came on the seen Annis?

Be honest, if it wasn't for the rebrand would you have this animosity towards him?

You are right about the money that was ploughed into the club back in those days. It was being thrown around in all directions as if money was going out of fashion. I can't remember huge delays in players being bought while he had to await permission from Malaya to invest in the club, and that is the bit I don't understand now, as explained in my post above. Anyone able to help me out with the answer here?

Can I suggest a (possible) scenario here to provide an answer to your query. It is a query I have had myself as well.

Even billionaires don`t tend to have over £100m sitting around in readily available "petty cash" , so I would imagine that the money Vincent Tan invested in his own name in CCFC was borrowed from a bank or banks in Malaysia. Security for that Malaysian borrowing would either have been by assigning the security he took himself against club assets such as the stadium, players etc.(there are two current debenture security documents registered in his name) or by giving security against assets elsewhere in his Berjaya or other corporate companies. Therefore , he would need Malaysian approval to convert the (potentially recoverable) debt due to him by the football club into shares which are not repayable and would only have a value if he finds a buyer for them.

Once he had access to the £100m+ to invest , he could spend it as he liked within reason so there would have been no need to seek approval to buy a player etc.

This is just a suggestion. I have no "insider knowledge" either claimed or actual as to how the funding was put in place. However , I have chatted about it with my colleagues in Malaysia and they advise that the theory could make sense.

Thanks, Keith

Yes, thank you for the answer. Sounds logical enough, and was along the lines of my thoughts. I obviously have no knowledge of exactly where Tan's money is, and what sort of notice is required to access funds, as well as any malaysian laws regarding moving substantial sums overseas. Wanted to clarify things as it would appear that it is going take a very long time to convert our current debt into shares, and your explanation sounds perfectly logical and would explain these delays.

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

Jimmy, Credit for what???

Please tell me ?

He promised premier league football (Even if it did mean going to red, which I voted against) and he got us there with his investment.

He spent a lot of money while there to try and keep us there but to no avail.

He said he would make us debt free and he is in the process of that, even if it is taking longer than we would all like, remember this isn't going to be like taking a loan out somewhere else. Its going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than that. It probably goes against financial fair play as well.
Yes our debt may be higher now than when he came, but we are now able to manage it better. Other clubs owned by billionaires are not debt free. Chelsea and Utd are riddle with it, its just they have the income to handle it without concern

Fact is, if it wasn't for him, would we actually have a club to support?

Im not a fan of his, and the sooner he goes the better. But in the long run everyone needs to look at what could have been if he did not come when he was needed. Did you not wave a Malaysian flag when he first came on the seen Annis?

Be honest, if it wasn't for the rebrand would you have this animosity towards him?

First answer is, to many our club thanks Tan is either sadly dead or virtually dead thanks to the Rebrand.

Second answer Martin, which you already know the truth.
Yes I with a loyal band of only 400 fans away at Coventry City on a Tuesday night, Welcomed TG, NOT Tan.
TG gave his word we would always be BLUE and keep our Identity, he eventually brought in Tan and when everything he promised us he realised under Tan would not happen, vanished so quick it was unbelievable.

I chatted to TG at Shsreholders meeting, he was an honourable man and felt embarrassed by what had happened. Never saw him again.


Also about 300 of those diehard fans don't go away anymore.

If it wasn't for the rebrand he would be going down in history as an absolute hero.

Whether it was his sole decision or whether it was bad advice from those around him regarding that we will never know.

Give credit where it is due. He's kept the majority of his promises

Jimmy, Credit for what???

Please tell me ?

He promised premier league football (Even if it did mean going to red, which I voted against) and he got us there with his investment.

He spent a lot of money while there to try and keep us there but to no avail.

He said he would make us debt free and he is in the process of that, even if it is taking longer than we would all like, remember this isn't going to be like taking a loan out somewhere else. Its going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than that. It probably goes against financial fair play as well.
Yes our debt may be higher now than when he came, but we are now able to manage it better. Other clubs owned by billionaires are not debt free. Chelsea and Utd are riddle with it, its just they have the income to handle it without concern

Fact is, if it wasn't for him, would we actually have a club to support?

Im not a fan of his, and the sooner he goes the better. But in the long run everyone needs to look at what could have been if he did not come when he was needed. Did you not wave a Malaysian flag when he first came on the seen Annis?

Be honest, if it wasn't for the rebrand would you have this animosity towards him?

First answer is, to many our club thanks Tan is either sadly dead or virtually dead thanks to the Rebrand.

Second answer Martin, which you already know the truth.
Yes I with a loyal band of only 400 fans away at Coventry City on a Tuesday night, Welcomed TG, NOT Tan.
TG gave his word we would always be BLUE and keep our Identity, he eventually brought in Tan and when everything he promised us he realised under Tan would not happen, vanished so quick it was unbelievable.

I chatted to TG at Shsreholders meeting, he was an honourable man and felt embarrassed by what had happened. Never saw him again.


Also about 300 of those diehard fans don't go away anymore.

I'm not talking about the reputational damage he has done to the club. I agree, he's disillusioned a generation of fans with his actions, I know several people who don't want to go to the club while he is there.

But you didn't really answer any of my questions Annis. He has kept a lot of the promises he's made. He said we would be premier league and we were. He said we would be debt free and we are in that process. There are also others he haven't kept. But those two were the key points with everyone's decision to accept the rebrand

I want him gone, but I also see that in the long run, he will probably do a lot more good in his time here than most other owners ever have.

If, and it's still an if, Tan does wipe away all the debt owed to him and people still hold a grudge I think they need to have a long hard look at themselves. I dont care if he is a billionaire, 60 million is a hell of a lot of money. Yes the rebrand was crazy, yes he can be petty, yes he thinks he knows more about football than he does (sounds like a few of our fans ) but wiping 60million plus off the slate for what in return? The ability to sell the club? In his eyes he hasn't been able to do anything he's wanted to do with this club for a prolonged period of time, he wanted the rebrand and we got it changed back (although I don't think this would have happened if we were in the premiership and we were in a packed stadium) I think that was more of a "crowds are down, they say they'll come back in blue" thing, I think he misjudged most of our fans there. We only get crowds when we are playing well or pushing for something. League 2 in blue my ass for most of the people who said it.

I don't love the man, but we are kind of lucky to have him. Most owners would've put us into admin by now, most owners wouldn't be saying that they're going to wipe the debt (if he wasn't going to do it, why say it? Is my argument for it happening) most owners would have told us to f**k off and kept us red (if they were mad enough to change it) I think he might have been trying to make amends, I don't know, but I think it's too late for most. But if he does wipe away the debt, I think he deserves a hell of a lot of credit for doing so.

Also, maybe if our owners before him weren't such a mess we wouldn't have been so desperate and he wouldn't have thought the rebrand with investment was a viable option for him. Maybe if Sam wiped his debt (which tan paid off) we never would've even had tan as an owner. But these are all ifs and buts.

why would he put us in administration? most of the club debts are owed to him, so he would lose out financially. when he took over the debts were £30m, now they are probably around quadruple that.

if we wouldn't have had him, we would have gone down the swansea route of administration and finding a buyer who would run the club within its means. not ideal, and creditors would lose out, but at least we'd have a financial clean slate and could start afresh.

instead here we are, an average middling championship club (lower than when he took over) with massive debts and no further investment. a club muddling along with no clear strategy or direction.

65 million was the debt when he took over

Perhaps the reason why he needs the Malaysian approval is because it's not his money that was loaned to the club.

Perhaps he borrowed it from........

Sam and Langston!