" TIME FOR THE MALAYSIANS TO DELIVER ? By Carl Curtis "

By Carl Curtis


http://www.walesonline.co.uk/footballna ... -28765759/

honestly, someone with more time on their hands could punch several large holes through that article. Whilst it makes an interesting read, it certainly does not bear any resemblance to the world of corporate finance that I know.

Unfortunately the comment underneath the article regarding the aftermath of Sam's departure is correct.

Nobody can doubt Sam's love for the club, and his wishes to see us succeed, but the points made in the articles comment do highlight the actual reality of the situation back then.

I do thank Sam Hammam for the good that he did here, and If he says that he has money to spend on the club, as well as having the powers to write off the Langston Debt, I wouldn't be too bothered if he came back purely on a football only (director of football etc etc) basis.....

The decision will lay with TG & VT and after having looked through the whole situation, If they decide to allow Sam back on board in that capacity, then I trust them to make the correct decision and go along with it.

Sam has to remember that second chances in football are extremely rare!

The decision will lay with TG & VT and after having looked through the whole situation, If they decide to allow Sam back on board in that capacity, then I trust them to make the correct decision and go along with it.

thats about the long and short of it. if it works best for VT and TG then Hammam will be back.

Sam has to remember that second chances in football are extremely rare!

very true


I want to know as the fans representative, will Carl Curtis be writing an article next week extolling the virtues of why Hammam should not return. After all, the fans are divided on the issue, so for impartiality, we should see an article against Hammam returning.

honestly, someone with more time on their hands could punch several large holes through that article. Whilst it makes an interesting read, it certainly does not bear any resemblance to the world of corporate finance that I know.

"honourably fell on his sword for Cardiff city"
couldent be further from the truth

I reall don't get this eaither:


"When the club is at a crossroads as it is at this time, with debts levels reaching new heights as a result of the era that preceded Sam’s years, it is important that the powers-that-be running our club bring everything under control."

So the debt levels are so high at the club for something that now occurred before Sam arrived???? How can the £30 million (or £60 million as some now claim) be attributed to the Pre-Sam era???

Carl, the echo has done it to you again, last week it was the ridiculous title of "fans leader" this week its "fans representitive" that title they give you implies you represent the fans and their views and that article, im sorry to say represents your views. I think you should question the echo of why they are giving you titles and putting you in awkward positions.

Correct me if im wrong but didnt Sam buy the club for £3m which was essentially our debt at the time and we had a clean slate, yet the article attributes our current debt of £50m + to the era that "preceded" Sams reign??

I reall don't get this eaither:


"When the club is at a crossroads as it is at this time, with debts levels reaching new heights as a result of the era that preceded Sam’s years, it is important that the powers-that-be running our club bring everything under control."

So the debt levels are so high at the club for something that now occurred before Sam arrived???? How can the £30 million (or £60 million as some now claim) be attributed to the Pre-Sam era???

I read that as the chronic under investment in our club pre-2000 necessitated the 'investment/debt' accrued during Sams reign - the club was in such a mess, that millions HAD to be invested in order to fix the club

I reall don't get this eaither:


"When the club is at a crossroads as it is at this time, with debts levels reaching new heights as a result of the era that preceded Sam’s years, it is important that the powers-that-be running our club bring everything under control."

So the debt levels are so high at the club for something that now occurred before Sam arrived???? How can the £30 million (or £60 million as some now claim) be attributed to the Pre-Sam era???

I read that as the chronic under investment in our club pre-2000 necessitated the 'investment/debt' accrued during Sams reign - the club was in such a mess, that millions HAD to be invested in order to fix the club

but millions were not invested, not in the manner we where lead to belive. millions were loaned, but not invested.

I reall don't get this eaither:


"When the club is at a crossroads as it is at this time, with debts levels reaching new heights as a result of the era that preceded Sam’s years, it is important that the powers-that-be running our club bring everything under control."

So the debt levels are so high at the club for something that now occurred before Sam arrived???? How can the £30 million (or £60 million as some now claim) be attributed to the Pre-Sam era???

I read that as the chronic under investment in our club pre-2000 necessitated the 'investment/debt' accrued during Sams reign - the club was in such a mess, that millions HAD to be invested in order to fix the club

but millions were not invested, not in the manner we where lead to belive. millions were loaned, but not invested.

Did Sam Hammam Ever invest in CCFC?

Carl with his views on Sam certainly doesn't represent me.

I reall don't get this eaither:


"When the club is at a crossroads as it is at this time, with debts levels reaching new heights as a result of the era that preceded Sam’s years, it is important that the powers-that-be running our club bring everything under control."

So the debt levels are so high at the club for something that now occurred before Sam arrived???? How can the £30 million (or £60 million as some now claim) be attributed to the Pre-Sam era???

I read that as the chronic under investment in our club pre-2000 necessitated the 'investment/debt' accrued during Sams reign - the club was in such a mess, that millions HAD to be invested in order to fix the club

but millions were not invested, not in the manner we where lead to belive. millions were loaned, but not invested.

First you say there was no investment, then you say 'not in the manner..'. Which is it mate?

Regardless, the source of the funds is irrelevant in this instance - the point about the amount of work that had to be done in our club is what is important. Whether that money was donated by Pol Pot, or the result of a bandit jackpot - the point stands that money was spent to improve the club. If it was through loans is a moot point in this instance.

By Carl Curtis


http://www.walesonline.co.uk/footballna ... -28765759/

Annis.
Carl Curtis does not represent me and I am totally upset by his article. I will comment no more on this or anyother topics please withdraw my membership from your board. Many thanks for the past year and half and much I enjoyed. Carl Curtis and his agenda has spoilt it.

First you say there was no investment, then you say 'not in the manner..'. Which is it mate?

we were led to beleive that Hammam was investing his own money, then it became apparent that what had happened was the club had an overdraft, not Hammam's personal funds. In other words, it was not investment by Hammam. It was debt taken on by the football club.

As Swansea, hull, Burnley and Plymouth have shown, you don't ned to spend £24m to get out of the dungeon into the Championship. Cardiff City did, and that is a direct result of Hammam being profligate with the cheque book. If it was his own money then fair enough, but it was not - it was the football clubs.

Regardless, the source of the funds is irrelevant in this instance - the point about the amount of work that had to be done in our club is what is important. Whether that money was donated by Pol Pot, or the result of a bandit jackpot - the point stands that money was spent to improve the club. If it was through loans is a moot point in this instance.

I am under no illusion that investment was required, I just think the magnitude of that investment was over egged somewhat. I've already alluded to Swansea et al getting out of the dungeon with far less investment. clearly their owners are much more astute and canny about getting much bigger bang for their buck than Hammam ever was.

If it was Hammam's own cash that he put up then so be it, however it was not, it was the football clubs, a debt we are still trying to get to grips with now.

By Carl Curtis


http://www.walesonline.co.uk/footballna ... -28765759/

Annis.
Carl Curtis does not represent me and I am totally upset by his article. I will comment no more on this or anyother topics please withdraw my membership from your board. Many thanks for the past year and half and much I enjoyed. Carl Curtis and his agenda has spoilt it.

I agree. It does make me think about why I joined this board.

I certainly didn't realise that there's this pathetic agenda to bring Sam back!!!

And who is this Carl Curtis? Strikes me that he's just doing Annis's bidding for him. Why are you both distorting the facts so much?

Virtually no respondents to this article agree with Carl and that's on this board as well as the other one. Perhaps that will give both of you some food for thought. You are not the "fans leader" or "fans representative."

You do not speak for me Messrs. Curtis or Abraham.

Our debt levels are getting bigger but our assets, both on and off the pitch, have become less and less, we cannot keep on as a going concern while this trend continues.

The biggest single asset of Cardiff City Football Club has to be the CCS so I really cannot see how any claim can be made that the clubs assets are putting it in danger of being unable to continue as a going concern.

We are all probably aware of our largest stakeholder, Langston via a loan note, which came about through debts raised under the reign of Sam Hammam.

Langston are stakeholders but lets face it they are unsecured creditors and have absolutely no power to influence matters realting to the clubs operation. They could take legal action AGAIN to recover their loan but having lost out once well best of luck in the courts but lets face it SH could never ever try his LOVE of the club nonsense should Langston try to force issues through the courts.

There has been much blame laid at Sam’s door for holding us back and that the Langston loan note continued to prove problematic for the club, but I question those statements, considering the Langston loan note has never been settled or had any money paid off the capital of the loan.

SH held all decision making power at the club during his time so he must accept responsibility for the creation of that debt, having said that I'm sure he never wanted his involvement with the club to end in the way it did but make no mistake he would have taken the profit available from the Leckwith development in a heartbeat as would any of us. This argument regarding repayment of the capital sum was tested in the summary judgement hearing in the High Court and as the agreement with the Council allowed for no repayment of capital on this loan note before September 2016 that for me is the legally binding situation.

One thing the Malaysians have done is to make payments on the interest on the loan and that should be taken as a clear indication of their business dealings. Ridsdale didn't pay a penny but these guys are different beasts and we should recognise that fact.

What the Malaysians have done for our club in the last year cannot be overstated as the club would surely have folded without their intervention, to know suggest it is time for them to deliver to me shows little or no gratitude for their support during the last 12 months. I remember an interview with TG where he said the Malaysians were in it for the long haul and one of the only things that would change that was if they felt they we being taken for granted, sadly for me suggesting it's time for them to deliver does exactly that it takes their involvement for granted.

I would love to see SH back at the club I feel his passion itself could be the difference between success and failure in the promotion stakes but I also feel the Malaysians have good business acumen and in the long term will sort the club out.

So in my opinion I disagree with most of this article because I believe the Malaysians have and will continue to deliver on our behalf, we just need to trust them and not take them for granted.

In fairness it says ' a fans representitive' not '[url]the[/url] fans representitive'.
His opinions therefore represent the feelings of some fans, which is true. But not all fans.

So to slate Carl on this point is unfair.

Chances are that was put in by the editors to give some weight to the article.

Nothing in that article represents my thoughts on hamman.

In fairness it says ' a fans representitive' not '[url]the[/url] fans representitive'.
His opinions therefore represent the feelings of some fans, which is true. But not all fans.

So to slate Carl on this point is unfair.

Chances are that was put in by the editors to give some weight to the article.

You beat me to it mate, was gonna post that just.

I think it has got to a point where people are nitpicking things not relevant to the argument.

Also, others are using this article as an opportunity to attack Carl, rather than debate the article. Grow some balls, and have some dignity.

chances are the editor hasn't put all of what call wrote for that article too. Who knows, to slate carl is unfair

By Carl Curtis


http://www.walesonline.co.uk/footballna ... -28765759/

Annis.
Carl Curtis does not represent me and I am totally upset by his article. I will comment no more on this or anyother topics please withdraw my membership from your board. Many thanks for the past year and half and much I enjoyed. Carl Curtis and his agenda has spoilt it.

I agree. It does make me think about why I joined this board.

I certainly didn't realise that there's this pathetic agenda to bring Sam back!!!

And who is this Carl Curtis? Strikes me that he's just doing Annis's bidding for him. Why are you both distorting the facts so much?

Virtually no respondents to this article agree with Carl and that's on this board as well as the other one. Perhaps that will give both of you some food for thought. You are not the "fans leader" or "fans representative."

You do not speak for me Messrs. Curtis or Abraham.

I am accused of being Sam's mouthpiece and now John you say I am doing Annis' bidding for him, can I not have my own opinions, Can I not stand up for what I believe in?

If you believe in what you are doing and believe in, wouldn't you stand up and say it despite however many people claim you could be wrong?

I am not a total representation of all Cardiff City fans, but I know of many people who share the same view as me, I could just write what people want to hear but I would not waste my time in doing so.

I stood out on this forum as one of the few that supported Dave Jones this season and will continue to to vshow appreciation for what he has done for this club, I had many people tell me I was wrong but I did not roll over and change my views because of it.

There is a comments section for anybody to add their view of my article and show that ' my view ' is not shared by theirs.

This forum was not created for a Sam Hammam agenda as you can see by the many responses that share the belief that they would not want Sam back. Your entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine, we may disagree on issues but that is what a messageboard is about.

Vincent Tan and TG are the best things to happen to our football club for a very long time. To suggest that it is now time for them to deliver is quite frankly unbelieveable. They have delivered already by saving our Club and by backing DJ to the hilt this season. The fact that HE FAILED is not their fault. I trust them to do the right thing but if it means that they walk away who could blame them. They don't owe us anything. Personally I think they will turn things around because they are hooked on achieving Premiership football and all the massive benefits that they will get on lots of different levels.

"..... We have much to thank Sam Hammam for, given the fact he came into our club and paid off all our debts ....."

"..... debts levels reaching new heights as a result of the era that preceded Sam’s years ....."

If Sam paid off all the clubs debt when he arrived, why are the current debts a result of the era BEFORE Sam?

Carl with his views on Sam certainly doesn't represent me.

that is fair enough and I knew that when I wrote this piece I would receive a reaction I would not have thought it represented everyone's view.

Vincent Tan and TG are the best things to happen to our football club for a very long time. To suggest that it is now time for them to deliver is quite frankly unbelieveable. They have delivered already by saving our Club and by backing DJ to the hilt this season. The fact that HE FAILED is not their fault. I trust them to do the right thing but if it means that they walk away who could blame them. They don't owe us anything. Personally I think they will turn things around because they are hooked on achieving Premiership football and all the massive benefits that they will get on lots of different levels.

I am asking that we have a statement of intent.

Of course they are the best thing, I said as much. I even said the best thing for everybody would be that they owned the club outright and done away with Langston, PMG, Ray Ranson (Sports Assets Group).

If they came out and said that despite failing twice we are fully committed and responsible for the club then I would be happy, I am not asking to see their strategy but to hear that they are here for the long term.

Because heaven forbid I would hate the thought that they said, no more we have had enough and want out.

In fairness it says ' a fans representitive' not '[url]the[/url] fans representitive'.
His opinions therefore represent the feelings of some fans, which is true. But not all fans.

So to slate Carl on this point is unfair.

Chances are that was put in by the editors to give some weight to the article.

I spoke with the Echo last week and told them of my embarrassment at being labelled 'fan's leader'. This was not my decision nor was I party to the tag line either.

Annis.

Carl Curtis does not represent me and I am totally upset by his article. I will comment no more on this or anyother topics please withdraw my membership from your board. Many thanks for the past year and half and much I enjoyed. Carl Curtis and his agenda has spoilt it.[/quote]

I agree. It does make me think about why I joined this board.

I certainly didn't realise that there's this pathetic agenda to bring Sam back!!!

And who is this Carl Curtis? Strikes me that he's just doing Annis's bidding for him. Why are you both distorting the facts so much?

Virtually no respondents to this article agree with Carl and that's on this board as well as the other one. Perhaps that will give both of you some food for thought. You are not the "fans leader" or "fans representative."

You do not speak for me Messrs. Curtis or Abraham.[/quote]
I am accused of being Sam's mouthpiece and now John you say I am doing Annis' bidding for him, can I not have my own opinions, Can I not stand up for what I believe in?

If you believe in what you are doing and believe in, wouldn't you stand up and say it despite however many people claim you could be wrong?

I am not a total representation of all Cardiff City fans, but I know of many people who share the same view as me, I could just write what people want to hear but I would not waste my time in doing so.

I stood out on this forum as one of the few that supported Dave Jones this season and will continue to to vshow appreciation for what he has done for this club, I had many people tell me I was wrong but I did not roll over and change my views because of it.

There is a comments section for anybody to add their view of my article and show that ' my view ' is not shared by theirs.

This forum was not created for a Sam Hammam agenda as you can see by the many responses that share the belief that they would not want Sam back. Your entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine, we may disagree on issues but that is what a messageboard is about.[/quote]



Good on you for having opinions. I think you'll find that all us City fans have opinions, not just you!!!

Apart from the blatant lies in your article, who gave you this "fans representative" tag? Last week you were the "fans leader" from which you distanced yourself, no doubt stung by the criticism you rightly received.

So you thought you'd try "representative" instead. Do you plan on distancing yourself from this title?

As a wanabee "journalist" I suggest you check out both message boards to see what the vast majority are saying about your self-imposed title and the content of your article. Perhaps you'll have the decency to reflect this majority view in your next SWE article.

The decision will lay with TG & VT and after having looked through the whole situation, If they decide to allow Sam back on board in that capacity, then I trust them to make the correct decision and go along with it.

thats about the long and short of it. if it works best for VT and TG then Hammam will be back.

Sam has to remember that second chances in football are extremely rare!

very true


I want to know as the fans representative, will Carl Curtis be writing an article next week extolling the virtues of why Hammam should not return. After all, the fans are divided on the issue, so for impartiality, we should see an article against Hammam returning.

Damien, why do I have to be impartial, I am a fan not a journo.

I did not hear people claiming I should be writing an article why Dave Jones should be sacked the week after I am asking everyone to support him.

I am asking that we have a statement of intent.

we are paying customers, to VT and TG it is a business. Usually businesses do not tell their customers what there long term intentions are. that's business.

Of course they are the best thing, I said as much. I even said the best thing for everybody would be that they owned the club outright and done away with Langston, PMG, Ray Ranson (Sports Assets Group).

perhaps next week you can reiterate this and say as much but in much more succinct fashion.

If they came out and said that despite failing twice we are fully committed and responsible for the club then I would be happy, I am not asking to see their strategy but to hear that they are here for the long term.

you need to define fail here. To you and I not getting promoted may be a failure. To VT and TG steadying the ship, clearing the backlog of debts so there is no legacy debt and only current/future debt may be deemed a success. you should not equate VT/TG's business goals with the fans own goals, not in the short term.

Because heaven forbid I would hate the thought that they said, no more we have had enough and want out.[/quote]

I am not a Sam lover or someone who wants him back. I think some are taken in by his large character but thats up to them.

Having read the article I think some are being a bit harsh on Carl Curtis (I don't know him by the way). The article does seem to represent itself as the feeling of all fans but it doesn't actually say that and is clearly a Sam love in. Some of it is probably bollocks but its a newspaper article so what's new. What I would object to is the title as the malaysians have been great for the club in my view and any disrespect towards them in favour of Sam seem unwarranted.

We are all a bit sensitive at the moment and looking for reasons, excuses, people to blame. The best thing is to chill and wait and see what VT decides as in reality he is the only one that counts. All I know is that DJ and his squad were not good enough/committed enough to get promoted so we weren't - again. Its up to VT to decide if he wants a manger and squad who are and if he can afford the same. We sadly are only spectators who love our club. We can express our opinions but not make decisions. In fighting is pointless.