' CARDIFF CITY TRAINING GROUND ? '

Alex, Tan certainly has not done debt to equity as promised 2 years ago.

Funnily enough, it's the biggest one of the lot too... The one most people begrudgingly accepted his horrific rebrand for.

Correct Alex, the biggest promise of them all and the most important one and yet some still stick up for him even though he also divided our club and stripped us of our identity. And guess what after all that were a Championship club,with only 14,000 season tickets sold.

Be great if people who run message boards could actually encourage people to get behind the team rather than knock every decision. Imagine the crowds we could get then?

Funny enough we do,we're just stating the facts regarding Tan and his false promises.

Nope, just pushing what you want, all the time to create a negative impression. Enough people are seeing through it now though which is a good thing

You accepted the stripping of our identity and back Tan,I 100% don't and won't ever accept it,I have pride

some would argue you lost your pride years ago rolling over for Scam and that you've still not learnt your lesson

See, at it again. I doesn't mean I have no pride. That's just a slant you want to put on things to make me look inferior and re-inforce your narrow minded opinion.

Where does Annis say you didn't have any pride?!

In this post if you actually read it and also many times via pm.

In this post if you actually read it and also many times via pm.

Quote? Can't see it.

In this post if you actually read it and also many times via pm.

Quote? Can't see it.

Chuckles F**k off now or I will spill the beans , You derailing threads is

In this post if you actually read it and also many times via pm.

Quote? Can't see it.

Chuckles F**k off now or I will spill the beans , You derailing threads is

Well done Grumpyguts! He seems to have given this thread a steer now although there's one or two other people I notice he's begun to troll recently.

In this post if you actually read it and also many times via pm.

Quote? Can't see it.

Why do you need a quote? You are one step behind every time. Bad memory?

But I thought to many a poster on here Vincent Tan wasn't upholding his promises???? can we just use this to reinforce the point that he is and the work is being done on all fronts, its just the usual bureaucratic back log which is holding this up.

Natman Red

One of his promises was to clear debts nearly 2 years ago now they're way bigger

But I thought to many a poster on here Vincent Tan wasn't upholding his promises???? can we just use this to reinforce the point that he is and the work is being done on all fronts, its just the usual bureaucratic back log which is holding this up.

Natman Red

One of his promises was to clear debts nearly 2 years ago now they're way bigger

tell me how that means he still won't clear them.

But I thought to many a poster on here Vincent Tan wasn't upholding his promises???? can we just use this to reinforce the point that he is and the work is being done on all fronts, its just the usual bureaucratic back log which is holding this up.

Natman Red

One of his promises was to clear debts nearly 2 years ago now they're way bigger

tell me how that means he still won't clear them.

Nat, even u should be man enough to admit that Tan stated the debt would be cleared in days, now its 2 years

But I thought to many a poster on here Vincent Tan wasn't upholding his promises???? can we just use this to reinforce the point that he is and the work is being done on all fronts, its just the usual bureaucratic back log which is holding this up.

Natman Red

One of his promises was to clear debts nearly 2 years ago now they're way bigger

tell me how that means he still won't clear them.

Because basically Nathaniel he has lately claimed he might clear some of it.

But I thought to many a poster on here Vincent Tan wasn't upholding his promises???? can we just use this to reinforce the point that he is and the work is being done on all fronts, its just the usual bureaucratic back log which is holding this up.

Natman Red

One of his promises was to clear debts nearly 2 years ago now they're way bigger

tell me how that means he still won't clear them.

Nat, even u should be man enough to admit that Tan stated the debt would be cleared in days, now its 2 years

I can't remember him saying that about days. besides, things change as do business plans, that doesn't make him a liar even if did

on the other hand you said you wouldn't talk about me make it personal but you have.... liar!

But I thought to many a poster on here Vincent Tan wasn't upholding his promises???? can we just use this to reinforce the point that he is and the work is being done on all fronts, its just the usual bureaucratic back log which is holding this up.

Natman Red

One of his promises was to clear debts nearly 2 years ago now they're way bigger

tell me how that means he still won't clear them.

Nat, even u should be man enough to admit that Tan stated the debt would be cleared in days, now its 2 years

I can't remember him saying that about days. besides, things change as do business plans, that doesn't make him a liar even if did

on the other hand you said you wouldn't talk about me make it personal but you have.... liar!

This is not personal, this is getting to the truth

Only a few days ago the link was put on here.

But I thought to many a poster on here Vincent Tan wasn't upholding his promises???? can we just use this to reinforce the point that he is and the work is being done on all fronts, its just the usual bureaucratic back log which is holding this up.

Natman Red

One of his promises was to clear debts nearly 2 years ago now they're way bigger

tell me how that means he still won't clear them.

Nat, even u should be man enough to admit that Tan stated the debt would be cleared in days, now its 2 years

I can't remember him saying that about days. besides, things change as do business plans, that doesn't make him a liar even if did

on the other hand you said you wouldn't talk about me make it personal but you have.... liar!

This is not personal, this is getting to the truth

Only a few days ago the link was put on here.

There you are Nat

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=142382

pmsl. I was about ready to admit I was wrong until I read the article. Read it again! The only thing mentioned in regards to being days away is settling Langstone not the debt to equity. There is never a time frame mentioned in regards to that rather the sub clause if 'could' is used by the bbc (not Tan himself) and Tan is quoted as it being his aim (again no time frame).

Now I know chuckles twists things and won't admit he's wrong but how about you owning up no Annis on two accounts;

1) you've completely misread and misrepresented that article

2) you've made it personal in other threads on here The last few days

But I thought to many a poster on here Vincent Tan wasn't upholding his promises???? can we just use this to reinforce the point that he is and the work is being done on all fronts, its just the usual bureaucratic back log which is holding this up.

Natman Red

One of his promises was to clear debts nearly 2 years ago now they're way bigger

tell me how that means he still won't clear them.

Because basically Nathaniel he has lately claimed he might clear some of it.

He promised two years ago that he would aim to make us debt free, not to make us debt free two years ago. subtle but big difference

But I thought to many a poster on here Vincent Tan wasn't upholding his promises???? can we just use this to reinforce the point that he is and the work is being done on all fronts, its just the usual bureaucratic back log which is holding this up.

Natman Red

One of his promises was to clear debts nearly 2 years ago now they're way bigger

tell me how that means he still won't clear them.

Because basically Nathaniel he has lately claimed he might clear some of it.

He promised two years ago that he would aim to make us debt free, not to make us debt free two years ago. subtle but big difference

Spot on again. And he can't now, he need to increase value. Or donate 100 mill. He and Malky messed up, simple as, and that change the timeframe..

funny, annis and chuckles have give quiet

But I thought to many a poster on here Vincent Tan wasn't upholding his promises???? can we just use this to reinforce the point that he is and the work is being done on all fronts, its just the usual bureaucratic back log which is holding this up.

Natman Red

One of his promises was to clear debts nearly 2 years ago now they're way bigger

tell me how that means he still won't clear them.

Because basically Nathaniel he has lately claimed he might clear some of it.

He promised two years ago that he would aim to make us debt free, not to make us debt free two years ago. subtle but big difference

Spot on again. And he can't now, he need to increase value. Or donate 100 mill. He and Malky messed up, simple as, and that change the timeframe..

I'm honestly trying to work out whether people are just too dull to be able to read it properly or whether they're deliberately misinterpreting it to the fans for an agenda??? The way people have misread this article beggars belief!

pmsl. I was about ready to admit I was wrong until I read the article. Read it again! The only thing mentioned in regards to being days away is settling Langstone not the debt to equity. There is never a time frame mentioned in regards to that rather the sub clause if 'could' is used by the bbc (not Tan himself) and Tan is quoted as it being his aim (again no time frame).

Now I know chuckles twists things and won't admit he's wrong but how about you owning up no Annis on two accounts;

1) you've completely misread and misrepresented that article

2) you've made it personal in other threads on here The last few days

So your saying Tan has not promised to change the debt in to equity the first year and 2nd yr?

Even if word for word is not there, u know he has promised it as in our meetings with his CEOS they promised it on his behalf

pmsl. I was about ready to admit I was wrong until I read the article. Read it again! The only thing mentioned in regards to being days away is settling Langstone not the debt to equity. There is never a time frame mentioned in regards to that rather the sub clause if 'could' is used by the bbc (not Tan himself) and Tan is quoted as it being his aim (again no time frame).

Now I know chuckles twists things and won't admit he's wrong but how about you owning up no Annis on two accounts;

1) you've completely misread and misrepresented that article

2) you've made it personal in other threads on here The last few days

So your saying Tan has not promised to change the debt in to equity the first year and 2nd yr?

Even if word for word is not there, u know he has promised it as in our meetings with his CEOS thy promised it on his behalf

My point is that people were saying it would be done imminently. Tan has never said that we would be debt free within days as Chuckles' post claims and as you were suggesting. The 'days away from an agreement' was in terms of Langstone, not debt to equity or anything else.

His goal is to make the club debt-free. There's nothing to suggest that hasn't changed, and we can't say the time frame has changed as its never been mentioned by Tan.

pmsl. I was about ready to admit I was wrong until I read the article. Read it again! The only thing mentioned in regards to being days away is settling Langstone not the debt to equity. There is never a time frame mentioned in regards to that rather the sub clause if 'could' is used by the bbc (not Tan himself) and Tan is quoted as it being his aim (again no time frame).

Now I know chuckles twists things and won't admit he's wrong but how about you owning up no Annis on two accounts;

1) you've completely misread and misrepresented that article

2) you've made it personal in other threads on here The last few days

So your saying Tan has not promised to change the debt in to equity the first year and 2nd yr?

Even if word for word is not there, u know he has promised it as in our meetings with his CEOS thy promised it on his behalf

My point is that people were saying it would be done imminently. Tan has never said that we would be debt free within days as Chuckles' post claims and as you were suggesting. The 'days away from an agreement' was in terms of Langstone, not debt to equity or anything else.

His goal is to make the club debt-free. There's nothing to suggest that hasn't changed, and we can't say the time frame has changed as its never been mentioned by Tan.

Ok if were not saying days.

Then how come Tan blamed it on Sam for the delay? then that got solved. But still No debt to equity.
A year later Tan blamed it on Malky', thats now solved and were still waiting, True?

Nat, your clutching at straws to stick up for Tan, who has already stripped us of our pride and identity as a club, ask Steve Davies what he thinks.

pmsl. I was about ready to admit I was wrong until I read the article. Read it again! The only thing mentioned in regards to being days away is settling Langstone not the debt to equity. There is never a time frame mentioned in regards to that rather the sub clause if 'could' is used by the bbc (not Tan himself) and Tan is quoted as it being his aim (again no time frame).

Now I know chuckles twists things and won't admit he's wrong but how about you owning up no Annis on two accounts;

1) you've completely misread and misrepresented that article

2) you've made it personal in other threads on here The last few days

So your saying Tan has not promised to change the debt in to equity the first year and 2nd yr?

Even if word for word is not there, u know he has promised it as in our meetings with his CEOS thy promised it on his behalf

My point is that people were saying it would be done imminently. Tan has never said that we would be debt free within days as Chuckles' post claims and as you were suggesting. The 'days away from an agreement' was in terms of Langstone, not debt to equity or anything else.

His goal is to make the club debt-free. There's nothing to suggest that hasn't changed, and we can't say the time frame has changed as its never been mentioned by Tan.

Ok if were not saying days.

Then how come Tan blamed it on Sam for the delay? then that got solved. But still No debt to equity.
A year later Tan blamed it on Malky', thats now solved and were still waiting, True?

Nat, your clutching at straws to stick up for Tan, who has already stripped us of our pride and identity as a club, ask Steve Davies what he thinks.

I've seen what Steve Davies thinks. But i'm telling you what i think. These things take time

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=142406&p=1502272#p1502270

pmsl. I was about ready to admit I was wrong until I read the article. Read it again! The only thing mentioned in regards to being days away is settling Langstone not the debt to equity. There is never a time frame mentioned in regards to that rather the sub clause if 'could' is used by the bbc (not Tan himself) and Tan is quoted as it being his aim (again no time frame).

Now I know chuckles twists things and won't admit he's wrong but how about you owning up no Annis on two accounts;

1) you've completely misread and misrepresented that article

2) you've made it personal in other threads on here The last few days

So your saying Tan has not promised to change the debt in to equity the first year and 2nd yr?

Even if word for word is not there, u know he has promised it as in our meetings with his CEOS thy promised it on his behalf

My point is that people were saying it would be done imminently. Tan has never said that we would be debt free within days as Chuckles' post claims and as you were suggesting. The 'days away from an agreement' was in terms of Langstone, not debt to equity or anything else.

His goal is to make the club debt-free. There's nothing to suggest that hasn't changed, and we can't say the time frame has changed as its never been mentioned by Tan.

Ok if were not saying days.

Then how come Tan blamed it on Sam for the delay? then that got solved. But still No debt to equity.
A year later Tan blamed it on Malky', thats now solved and were still waiting, True?

Nat, your clutching at straws to stick up for Tan, who has already stripped us of our pride and identity as a club, ask Steve Davies what he thinks.

I've seen what Steve Davies thinks. But i'm telling you what i think. These things take time

Do they? well in May 2012 we were told this would be all done within months by Tans, CEO Whitley in a meeting on Tans behalf.

pmsl. I was about ready to admit I was wrong until I read the article. Read it again! The only thing mentioned in regards to being days away is settling Langstone not the debt to equity. There is never a time frame mentioned in regards to that rather the sub clause if 'could' is used by the bbc (not Tan himself) and Tan is quoted as it being his aim (again no time frame).

Now I know chuckles twists things and won't admit he's wrong but how about you owning up no Annis on two accounts;

1) you've completely misread and misrepresented that article

2) you've made it personal in other threads on here The last few days

So your saying Tan has not promised to change the debt in to equity the first year and 2nd yr?

Even if word for word is not there, u know he has promised it as in our meetings with his CEOS thy promised it on his behalf

My point is that people were saying it would be done imminently. Tan has never said that we would be debt free within days as Chuckles' post claims and as you were suggesting. The 'days away from an agreement' was in terms of Langstone, not debt to equity or anything else.

His goal is to make the club debt-free. There's nothing to suggest that hasn't changed, and we can't say the time frame has changed as its never been mentioned by Tan.

Ok if were not saying days.

Then how come Tan blamed it on Sam for the delay? then that got solved. But still No debt to equity.
A year later Tan blamed it on Malky', thats now solved and were still waiting, True?

Nat, your clutching at straws to stick up for Tan, who has already stripped us of our pride and identity as a club, ask Steve Davies what he thinks.

I've seen what Steve Davies thinks. But i'm telling you what i think. These things take time

Do they? well in May 2012 we were told this would be all done within months by Tans, CEO Whitley in a meeting on Tans behalf.

Of course they do. If someone owed you that amount of money would you do it without taking any repayments and no interest (as Tan is currently doing). And would you just write off that value of money willy nilly? No, you would plane your way and develop a business plan to do it in an appropriate manner

flippin'ell, it hasn't even started yet???

I thought the new facility was up and ready to go...
That's what you get, when you don't get German investors

' CARDIFF CITY TRAINING GROUND ? '......... oh yes one of the other promises from 2 years ago yet ive not seen ONE promise thats been delivered yet for a red shirt just extended promises time after time with more bullshit

' CARDIFF CITY TRAINING GROUND ? '......... oh yes one of the other promises from 2 years ago yet ive not seen ONE promise thats been delivered yet for a red shirt just extended promises time after time with more bullshit

Hardly a broken promise. They are waiting for planning permission, which can take a long time you numptey lol

' CARDIFF CITY TRAINING GROUND ? '......... oh yes one of the other promises from 2 years ago yet ive not seen ONE promise thats been delivered yet for a red shirt just extended promises time after time with more bullshit

Hardly a broken promise. They are waiting for planning permission, which can take a long time you numptey lol

And don't forget the stadium expansion and squad investment

' CARDIFF CITY TRAINING GROUND ? '......... oh yes one of the other promises from 2 years ago yet ive not seen ONE promise thats been delivered yet for a red shirt just extended promises time after time with more bullshit

Hardly a broken promise. They are waiting for planning permission, which can take a long time you numptey lol

Where is it then or any promise for that matter enlighten us all craig although i couldnt give a toss about any other promise than the so called " DEBT TO EQUITY " thats like an episode of eastenders its been dragged out that much. Most accepted this red crap and fans divide for this reason only