‘ Cardiff City Chairman Dalman on video ‘

4 months ago.

Dalman Says Cardiff are £140 mill in debt.

£75mill to Vincent Tan and the rest to others on interest.

So once again those who say all the money owed to Tan are wrong as that is also in the acounts saying different and even more to others next time on high interest.

If we lose he said the Sala case then that will cost us £20million.

Listen to Around about 45-48 mins

https://youtu.be/tRrKVgRzVqc

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

4 months ago.

Dalman Says Cardiff are £140 mill in debt.

£75mill to Vincent Tan and the rest to others on interest.

So once again those who say all the money owed to Tan are wrong as that is also in the acounts saying different and even more to others next time on high interest.

If we lose he said the Sala case then that will cost us £20million.

Listen to Around about 45-48 mins

https://youtu.be/tRrKVgRzVqc

I have just looked at it again. I only saw it first time round some days after it went out when someone referred me to it. I must say that i thought that the podcast host Si was pretty poor as he had done little or no research before the interview, sort of bumbled his way through it and asked very few if any searching questions.

On the point of what Dalman said about the debt and the debt figures in the audited accounts, the following are the facts

1. Dalman said the total debt was about £130m not £140m. Still a huge figure mind.
2. Of the £130m , he said that £75m was due to Vincent Tan but that it would be converted to equity rather than have to be repaid (we will have to see if that happens)
3, He said that the remaining £55m of debts included the provision for the disputed debt due re Emiliano Sala(he didn`t say so but in the accounts at just over £20m)
4. He didn`t analyse what the remaining £35m of debts related to but the May 2021 audited accounts give a good clue

a) £15.8m was due to Tormen Finance Inc. a business which Mehmet Dalman was said to have a significant interest in
b) £3m was due to one of Vincent Tan`s sons
c) £2m was due re a loan from an unnamed director
d) £8.7m was due in respect of the Premier League loan he referred to briefly which most if not all Championship clubs took up to help with cash flows through the Covid period (should now be mostly repaid as I seem to recall it was a two year loan).


If you take out the numbers in a) to d) above then normal accrued debts (PAYE/NI , v.a.t , trade suppliers etc) came to around £5m which would be normal for a club of CCFC`s size.,

Hope this helps

Keith

4 months ago.

Dalman Says Cardiff are £140 mill in debt.

£75mill to Vincent Tan and the rest to others on interest.

So once again those who say all the money owed to Tan are wrong as that is also in the acounts saying different and even more to others next time on high interest.

If we lose he said the Sala case then that will cost us £20million.

Listen to Around about 45-48 mins

https://youtu.be/tRrKVgRzVqc

Thought you didnt believe what he says? .

4 months ago.

Dalman Says Cardiff are £140 mill in debt.

£75mill to Vincent Tan and the rest to others on interest.

So once again those who say all the money owed to Tan are wrong as that is also in the acounts saying different and even more to others next time on high interest.

If we lose he said the Sala case then that will cost us £20million.

Listen to Around about 45-48 mins

https://youtu.be/tRrKVgRzVqc

I have just looked at it again. I only saw it first time round some days after it went out when someone referred me to it. I must say that i thought that the podcast host Si was pretty poor as he had done little or no research before the interview, sort of bumbled his way through it and asked very few if any searching questions.

On the point of what Dalman said about the debt and the debt figures in the audited accounts, the following are the facts

1. Dalman said the total debt was about £130m not £140m. Still a huge figure mind.
2. Of the £130m , he said that £75m was due to Vincent Tan but that it would be converted to equity rather than have to be repaid (we will have to see if that happens)
3, He said that the remaining £55m of debts included the provision for the disputed debt due re Emiliano Sala(he didn`t say so but in the accounts at just over £20m)
4. He didn`t analyse what the remaining £35m of debts related to but the May 2021 audited accounts give a good clue

a) £15.8m was due to Tormen Finance Inc. a business which Mehmet Dalman was said to have a significant interest in
b) £3m was due to one of Vincent Tan`s sons
c) £2m was due re a loan from an unnamed director
d) £8.7m was due in respect of the Premier League loan he referred to briefly which most if not all Championship clubs took up to help with cash flows through the Covid period (should now be mostly repaid as I seem to recall it was a two year loan).


If you take out the numbers in a) to d) above then normal accrued debts (PAYE/NI , v.a.t , trade suppliers etc) came to around £5m which would be normal for a club of CCFC`s size.,

Hope this helps

Keith

Doesn't seem to bad when you put it that way , also as I said on another thread the amount to dalman has decreased a lot

I’ve seen higher figures than that bandied about so is this the definitive figure?

Crikey that’s a lot that.

Good job he’s good for it aint it else we would be facing administration or wind up proceedings for the third owner in a row.

I’ve seen higher figures than that bandied about so is this the definitive figure?

Crikey that’s a lot that.

Good job he’s good for it aint it else we would be facing administration or wind up proceedings for the third owner in a row.

I rember the amount of 200 million in debt being branded on here at one point ,Tan converts his 75 million in to shares then the debt is only 55 million

4 months ago.

Dalman Says Cardiff are £140 mill in debt.

£75mill to Vincent Tan and the rest to others on interest.

So once again those who say all the money owed to Tan are wrong as that is also in the acounts saying different and even more to others next time on high interest.

If we lose he said the Sala case then that will cost us £20million.

Listen to Around about 45-48 mins

https://youtu.be/tRrKVgRzVqc

I have just looked at it again. I only saw it first time round some days after it went out when someone referred me to it. I must say that i thought that the podcast host Si was pretty poor as he had done little or no research before the interview, sort of bumbled his way through it and asked very few if any searching questions.

On the point of what Dalman said about the debt and the debt figures in the audited accounts, the following are the facts

1. Dalman said the total debt was about £130m not £140m. Still a huge figure mind.
2. Of the £130m , he said that £75m was due to Vincent Tan but that it would be converted to equity rather than have to be repaid (we will have to see if that happens)
3, He said that the remaining £55m of debts included the provision for the disputed debt due re Emiliano Sala(he didn`t say so but in the accounts at just over £20m)
4. He didn`t analyse what the remaining £35m of debts related to but the May 2021 audited accounts give a good clue

a) £15.8m was due to Tormen Finance Inc. a business which Mehmet Dalman was said to have a significant interest in
b) £3m was due to one of Vincent Tan`s sons
c) £2m was due re a loan from an unnamed director
d) £8.7m was due in respect of the Premier League loan he referred to briefly which most if not all Championship clubs took up to help with cash flows through the Covid period (should now be mostly repaid as I seem to recall it was a two year loan).


If you take out the numbers in a) to d) above then normal accrued debts (PAYE/NI , v.a.t , trade suppliers etc) came to around £5m which would be normal for a club of CCFC`s size.,

Hope this helps

Keith

Doesn't seem to bad when you put it that way , also as I said on another thread the amount to dalman has decreased a lot

Wez,

That’s how Dalman wants you to think.

Let’s put it this way, it’s nearly 3 times the debt it was 10 yrs ago and it’s not all owed to Tan as it’s dKeats been portrayed, plus who made this dent so high, all this wasted money and now apparently we are skint.
I’m sure over the years on three different occasions, Tan promised us debt free??? It was that just bullshit.

Cant even buy a player or loan one if we don’t pay all the wages.

And still more court cases to come.

I’ve seen higher figures than that bandied about so is this the definitive figure?

Crikey that’s a lot that.

Good job he’s good for it aint it else we would be facing administration or wind up proceedings for the third owner in a row.

I rember the amount of 200 million in debt being branded on here at one point ,Tan converts his 75 million in to shares then the debt is only 55 million

That was Tan & Dalman both have said Tan has put £200mill in, if that’s true and all the monies we’ve received from Premier league twice. Both are pathetic at running our club as so much has been wasted beyond.


But it’s not all Tans money and we are only in this financial debt due to him and his regime, No one else.

There seems to be very obvious questions about the Sala deal that I don’t believe ever get asked. It sounds like the funds to cover the cost of the instalments are not in place, so it begs the question why not? Were they ever? If so, where did they go? Were they not set aside?

Bit left field but could dalman be f*cking us up and loaning us money to try buy us on the cheap off tan?
Nothing would suprise me anymore. Grateful for the good tan did and to me used to outweigh the bad but something needs to change now

Bit left field but could dalman be f*cking us up and loaning us money to try buy us on the cheap off tan?
Nothing would suprise me anymore. Grateful for the good tan did and to me used to outweigh the bad but something needs to change now

The thought had crossed my mind .

Ah the old debt to equity ploy. Don't think for a milli second that whether it's debt or equity will make one iota of difference to the hopeless lot running out club. The only difference whether it was debt or equity would be if we were in the premier league receiving big lump sums which tan could use to pay off some of his debt.
As importantly when these lot sell up you can guarantee that they will want every penny of these loans whether they be loans still itemized as cash or shares. Remember Sam Hamman, and all the lying about langstone , tan paid him out in the end. This will be the same with Tan.
Two more points loved the presence of the lawyer at the club and supporters "leaders" . All the lawyer is there is to stuff his own pockets with As much money as possible. They've had £100,000s already and the nose goes in the trough again. Can you imagine the meeting when he says to Choo, no don't sue the insurance broker it's pointless and you'll lose, save your money. More like ,I think we can do that in my considered opinion yes let's give it a go. £20,000 should be enough to get us started.

Why is any one from any supporters representative body attending these meetings, no prior warning, no agenda and outnumbered by club representatives who've had time to prepare. It allows our esteemed BOD to have some credence in their arguments. If no one had bothered going the rubbish they put out would look even lamer.

Ah the old debt to equity ploy. Don't think for a milli second that whether it's debt or equity will make one iota of difference to the hopeless lot running out club. The only difference whether it was debt or equity would be if we were in the premier league receiving big lump sums which tan could use to pay off some of his debt.
As importantly when these lot sell up you can guarantee that they will want every penny of these loans whether they be loans still itemized as cash or shares. Remember Sam Hamman, and all the lying about langstone , tan paid him out in the end. This will be the same with Tan.
Two more points loved the presence of the lawyer at the club and supporters "leaders" . All the lawyer is there is to stuff his own pockets with As much money as possible. They've had £100,000s already and the nose goes in the trough again. Can you imagine the meeting when he says to Choo, no don't sue the insurance broker it's pointless and you'll lose, save your money. More like ,I think we can do that in my considered opinion yes let's give it a go. £20,000 should be enough to get us started.

Why is any one from any supporters representative body attending these meetings, no prior warning, no agenda and outnumbered by club representatives who've had time to prepare. It allows our esteemed BOD to have some credence in their arguments. If no one had bothered going the rubbish they put out would look even lamer.

They were virtually hand picked, if you stand up to them, you don’t get another invite.

Sad thing is we will continue to let this lot reign supreme and we will do nothing about it, just sit back, write stuff on social media and let it rumble on to the point that we just say feck it, what is the point.

You never hear some rebellion at matches or anything to show or contempt for them, nothing and that includes me.