Fao Castleblue

Hi mate,

To be honest I always have respect your posts and find them very interesting to read, and most importantly to the facts on what you have read mixed with your experience.

Quick question - What's your view on the announcements from VT and TG over the past few days?

Hi mate,

To be honest I always have respect your posts and find them very interesting to read, and most importantly to the facts on what you have read mixed with your experience.

Quick question - What's your view on the announcements from VT and TG over the past few days?

I agree, Castleblue does posts some excellent posts

Hi mate,

To be honest I always have respect your posts and find them very interesting to read, and most importantly to the facts on what you have read mixed with your experience.

Quick question - What's your view on the announcements from VT and TG over the past few days?

I agree, Castleblue does posts some excellent posts

Could have thought he was online??

Hi mate,

To be honest I always have respect your posts and find them very interesting to read, and most importantly to the facts on what you have read mixed with your experience.

Quick question - What's your view on the announcements from VT and TG over the past few days?

Thank you for that it's always nice to be appreciated but boy what a question.

My honest opinion is that the statement was intended to steady the ship following the previous days announcement of DJ sacking, or was he sacked? or is he still on the payroll and just serving out his notice? I ask those questions because I'm unsure and the silence from DJ is well deafening.

Also yesterday the announcement about reaching agreement with historical creditors was wierd again why save the announcement until the day after the manager is sacked. I gaurantee that whatever agreements have been reached were not all agreed yesterday, or the day before more likely the culmination on a years hard work by TG & VT. So thats why I think it was intended only to steady the ship by saying well we've been here a year we have achieved all this, historical debts, we supported the previous manager but he messed up so we sacked him but we are preparing to have another go next season.

What disappointed me was the wording regarding Langston and SH because whatever the rights and wrongs of why the debt was run up, which loan note is in play or which forensic accountants are now going to be used was it really the right thing to do to say they have been unable to reach agreement with Langston because of the stance of SH.

I wonder how many who give Annis and Carl a hard time because of their friendship with SH have thought for a single second that they haven't said that SH and Langston have been unable to reach agreement over the debt because of the stance of VT & TG.

It's obvious that both parties cannot reach agreement and it should be left at that because this reference to 3rd party forensic accountants what does that mean, there are 2 parties to this debt issue, Langston and Cardiff City FC (now VT & TG) so does this mean that both those parties have agree to a 3rd independant party i.e. forensic accountants now looking at the debt.

In my opinion it leaves more questions unanswered than answered but whats different with Langston it's a mess.

So I'm going to consider these statements as nothing more than an Annual Report of their first year in charge with one or two cheap embellishments in them.

Hi mate,

To be honest I always have respect your posts and find them very interesting to read, and most importantly to the facts on what you have read mixed with your experience.

Quick question - What's your view on the announcements from VT and TG over the past few days?

Thank you for that it's always nice to be appreciated but boy what a question.

My honest opinion is that the statement was intended to steady the ship following the previous days announcement of DJ sacking, or was he sacked? or is he still on the payroll and just serving out his notice? I ask those questions because I'm unsure and the silence from DJ is well deafening.

Also yesterday the announcement about reaching agreement with historical creditors was wierd again why save the announcement until the day after the manager is sacked. I gaurantee that whatever agreements have been reached were not all agreed yesterday, or the day before more likely the culmination on a years hard work by TG & VT. So thats why I think it was intended only to steady the ship by saying well we've been here a year we have achieved all this, historical debts, we supported the previous manager but he messed up so we sacked him but we are preparing to have another go next season.

What disappointed me was the wording regarding Langston and SH because whatever the rights and wrongs of why the debt was run up, which loan note is in play or which forensic accountants are now going to be used was it really the right thing to do to say they have been unable to reach agreement with Langston because of the stance of SH.

I wonder how many who give Annis and Carl a hard time because of their friendship with SH have thought for a single second that they haven't said that SH and Langston have been unable to reach agreement over the debt because of the stance of VT & TG.

It's obvious that both parties cannot reach agreement and it should be left at that because this reference to 3rd party forensic accountants what does that mean, there are 2 parties to this debt issue, Langston and Cardiff City FC (now VT & TG) so does this mean that both those parties have agree to a 3rd independant party i.e. forensic accountants now looking at the debt.

In my opinion it leaves more questions unanswered than answered but whats different with Langston it's a mess.

So I'm going to consider these statements as nothing more than an Annual Report of their first year in charge with one or two cheap embellishments in them.

I really enjoyed reading that post and some very interesting points

Good post again Gary,and thanks for your kind words on the top 10 thread the other week

Thank you for that it's always nice to be appreciated but boy what a question.

My honest opinion is that the statement was intended to steady the ship following the previous days announcement of DJ sacking, or was he sacked? or is he still on the payroll and just serving out his notice? I ask those questions because I'm unsure and the silence from DJ is well deafening.

Also yesterday the announcement about reaching agreement with historical creditors was wierd again why save the announcement until the day after the manager is sacked. I gaurantee that whatever agreements have been reached were not all agreed yesterday, or the day before more likely the culmination on a years hard work by TG & VT. So thats why I think it was intended only to steady the ship by saying well we've been here a year we have achieved all this, historical debts, we supported the previous manager but he messed up so we sacked him but we are preparing to have another go next season.

What disappointed me was the wording regarding Langston and SH because whatever the rights and wrongs of why the debt was run up, which loan note is in play or which forensic accountants are now going to be used was it really the right thing to do to say they have been unable to reach agreement with Langston because of the stance of SH.

I wonder how many who give Annis and Carl a hard time because of their friendship with SH have thought for a single second that they haven't said that SH and Langston have been unable to reach agreement over the debt because of the stance of VT & TG.

It's obvious that both parties cannot reach agreement and it should be left at that because this reference to 3rd party forensic accountants what does that mean, there are 2 parties to this debt issue, Langston and Cardiff City FC (now VT & TG) so does this mean that both those parties have agree to a 3rd independant party i.e. forensic accountants now looking at the debt.

In my opinion it leaves more questions unanswered than answered but whats different with Langston it's a mess.

So I'm going to consider these statements as nothing more than an Annual Report of their first year in charge with one or two cheap embellishments in them.

I really enjoyed reading that post and some very interesting points

Thanks Annis I know you enjoy a good debate perhaps we should start one on what peoples opinions are of this weeks statements from the club.

You know light the blue touch paper and step back.

Thank you for that it's always nice to be appreciated but boy what a question.

My honest opinion is that the statement was intended to steady the ship following the previous days announcement of DJ sacking, or was he sacked? or is he still on the payroll and just serving out his notice? I ask those questions because I'm unsure and the silence from DJ is well deafening.

Also yesterday the announcement about reaching agreement with historical creditors was wierd again why save the announcement until the day after the manager is sacked. I gaurantee that whatever agreements have been reached were not all agreed yesterday, or the day before more likely the culmination on a years hard work by TG & VT. So thats why I think it was intended only to steady the ship by saying well we've been here a year we have achieved all this, historical debts, we supported the previous manager but he messed up so we sacked him but we are preparing to have another go next season.

What disappointed me was the wording regarding Langston and SH because whatever the rights and wrongs of why the debt was run up, which loan note is in play or which forensic accountants are now going to be used was it really the right thing to do to say they have been unable to reach agreement with Langston because of the stance of SH.

I wonder how many who give Annis and Carl a hard time because of their friendship with SH have thought for a single second that they haven't said that SH and Langston have been unable to reach agreement over the debt because of the stance of VT & TG.

It's obvious that both parties cannot reach agreement and it should be left at that because this reference to 3rd party forensic accountants what does that mean, there are 2 parties to this debt issue, Langston and Cardiff City FC (now VT & TG) so does this mean that both those parties have agree to a 3rd independant party i.e. forensic accountants now looking at the debt.

In my opinion it leaves more questions unanswered than answered but whats different with Langston it's a mess.

So I'm going to consider these statements as nothing more than an Annual Report of their first year in charge with one or two cheap embellishments in them.

I really enjoyed reading that post and some very interesting points

Thanks Annis I know you enjoy a good debate perhaps we should start one on what peoples opinions are of this weeks statements from the club.

You know light the blue touch paper and step back.

Gary
I think I will give it a rest for a couple of days, I am still celebrating Jones going