Langston/Sam

I do not know anything along the lines of the football financial world but this is how I see things……….


Sam put money in to CCFC in order to get what he wanted (his vision) at the club and now wants the money back that he put in to get that vision. Sam allowed CCFC to punch above its weight financially so that we could ultimately become a premier football club. Sam made these decisions using his business knowledge that ultimately fell short and nearly killed off CCFC right???

Now VT is continuing what Sam started with more money and more investment, the problem that I have at the moment is that VT is getting allot of stick from the pro Sam fans in saying that this is a loan that will turn into shares if the deal with Langston (which is Sam, which he tried to cover up it was him for a long time) gets Sam’s approval.

My point so far is why is VT getting so much stick for having a business plan and also saying how he plans to get there?

I would also like to ask why Sam feels that he deserves the money back in full as it was his vision and his money that he used to TRY and develop HIS vision under his plans?

In simple terms:

I pay £100.00 for a pair of football boots which I feel will make me a better footballer after 2 years of having these boots then feel that my plan has not worked and I am a little better at football but no way near as good as I thought I would be with these new boots? Do I then go to nike/puma whoever and demand a percentage of what I have paid because I feel I haven’t achieved what I wanted from these boots?????

If I could get an answer or an explanation of why I am wrong that would be awesome, I do not process to a financial genius but if I could get a decent answer it would be peachy 

BB89

I do not know anything along the lines of the football financial world but this is how I see things……….


Sam put money in to CCFC in order to get what he wanted (his vision) at the club and now wants the money back that he put in to get that vision. Sam allowed CCFC to punch above its weight financially so that we could ultimately become a premier football club. Sam made these decisions using his business knowledge that ultimately fell short and nearly killed off CCFC right???

Now VT is continuing what Sam started with more money and more investment, the problem that I have at the moment is that VT is getting allot of stick from the pro Sam fans in saying that this is a loan that will turn into shares if the deal with Langston (which is Sam, which he tried to cover up it was him for a long time) gets Sam’s approval.

My point so far is why is VT getting so much stick for having a business plan and also saying how he plans to get there?

I would also like to ask why Sam feels that he deserves the money back in full as it was his vision and his money that he used to TRY and develop HIS vision under his plans?

In simple terms:

I pay £100.00 for a pair of football boots which I feel will make me a better footballer after 2 years of having these boots then feel that my plan has not worked and I am a little better at football but no way near as good as I thought I would be with these new boots? Do I then go to nike/puma whoever and demand a percentage of what I have paid because I feel I haven’t achieved what I wanted from these boots?????

If I could get an answer or an explanation of why I am wrong that would be awesome, I do not process to a financial genius but if I could get a decent answer it would be peachy 

BB89

I will try to keep it short.

VT is getting stick mainly because of the rebranding; changing our colours from Blue to Red without really explaining why. In fairness he has offered £100m in return.

Whether Sam/Langston 'deserves' their money back is immaterial. There is a contract between Langston and CCFC for the loan notes to be repaid.

To answer your final point, you could go and ask for a refund/compensation from Nike/Puma if the boots were sold you on the premise that they would make you a world class player, but didn't. Basically it comes down to contracts/legal stuff.

I do not know anything along the lines of the football financial world but this is how I see things……….


Sam put money in to CCFC in order to get what he wanted (his vision) at the club and now wants the money back that he put in to get that vision. Sam allowed CCFC to punch above its weight financially so that we could ultimately become a premier football club. Sam made these decisions using his business knowledge that ultimately fell short and nearly killed off CCFC right???

Now VT is continuing what Sam started with more money and more investment, the problem that I have at the moment is that VT is getting allot of stick from the pro Sam fans in saying that this is a loan that will turn into shares if the deal with Langston (which is Sam, which he tried to cover up it was him for a long time) gets Sam’s approval.

My point so far is why is VT getting so much stick for having a business plan and also saying how he plans to get there?

I would also like to ask why Sam feels that he deserves the money back in full as it was his vision and his money that he used to TRY and develop HIS vision under his plans?

In simple terms:

I pay £100.00 for a pair of football boots which I feel will make me a better footballer after 2 years of having these boots then feel that my plan has not worked and I am a little better at football but no way near as good as I thought I would be with these new boots? Do I then go to nike/puma whoever and demand a percentage of what I have paid because I feel I haven’t achieved what I wanted from these boots?????

If I could get an answer or an explanation of why I am wrong that would be awesome, I do not process to a financial genius but if I could get a decent answer it would be peachy 

BB89

I will try to keep it short.

VT is getting stick mainly because of the rebranding; changing our colours from Blue to Red without really explaining why. In fairness he has offered £100m in return.

Whether Sam/Langston 'deserves' their money back is immaterial. There is a contract between Langston and CCFC for the loan notes to be repaid.

To answer your final point, you could go and ask for a refund/compensation from Nike/Puma if the boots were sold you on the premise that they would make you a world class player, but didn't. Basically it comes down to contracts/legal stuff.

So Sam Hammam was better for club because he didn't change the colour of the kit? Even though he changed the badge. Left the club in severe financial trouble; 15 mins away from administration and later to face a winding up order?