' NOT SO CLEAR CUT '

Tan will settle this when HE'S good and ready. He wont be dictated to.
This suddenly rearing its head again has got me thinking Langstone are
pissed off because Cardiff City Football Club are more concerned about
getting to the Premiership than paying them off. As fans, we have got
to back the Club and the man who has got us out of the shit and on the
brink of Premiership football. Surely?

Tan will settle this when HE'S good and ready. He wont be dictated to.
This suddenly rearing its head again has got me thinking Langstone are
pissed off because Cardiff City Football Club are more concerned about
getting to the Premiership than paying them off. As fans, we have got
to back the Club and the man who has got us out of the shit and on the
brink of Premiership football. Surely?

Generally speaking I think the majority of fans have put Langston on the back burner
or totally dismissed them. certain posters on this board mainly bang on about it.
Like you I agree there are certain issues such as this that should be left behind
closed doors. I have been consistent in saying that I believe it will only be resolved
When Tan says. At the moment he has a far more important agenda than Hamman and
his loan arrangers.

Tan will settle this when HE'S good and ready. He wont be dictated to.
This suddenly rearing its head again has got me thinking Langstone are
pissed off because Cardiff City Football Club are more concerned about
getting to the Premiership than paying them off. As fans, we have got
to back the Club and the man who has got us out of the shit and on the
brink of Premiership football. Surely?

Generally speaking I think the majority of fans have put Langston on the back burner
or totally dismissed them. certain posters on this board mainly bang on about it.
Like you I agree there are certain issues such as this that should be left behind
closed doors. I have been consistent in saying that I believe it will only be resolved
When Tan says. At the moment he has a far more important agenda than Hamman and
his loan arrangers.

Difference is, Tan has a THOUSAND MILLION to play with. This is a huge issue for Langstone
but I daresay Tan has had shit like this to deal with many many times before. I think its a
little bit naive to think Tan is tossing and turning every night and sees those loan notes in
his nightmares. Langstone want to make this a major issue. They want it in the public
domain. But the clear message coming from VT is "I got bigger fish to fry, catch ya later!"

Hi Carl, on this forum we hear everyone's view of TAN... Some hate him because of the rebrand, some appreciate what he's done so far..some are neutral. I don't think I ever seen you post your views of them.

Just wondering if you cater to give your opinion of them?

From what ive been told, they've agreed to pay Langston £14M at the end of the season. The deal is done, hence they don't need the people brought in to do anymore......

From what ive been told, they've agreed to pay Langston £14M at the end of the season. The deal is done, hence they don't need the people brought in to do anymore......

Hope so. I'd have preferred to see Langstone get a little less, but can see why Tan would
wait til we are promoted, then give a bit more. As long as they get nowhere near the full
amount they 'claim' to be owed... then it can only be good for Cardiff City FC

From what ive been told, they've agreed to pay Langston £14M at the end of the season. The deal is done, hence they don't need the people brought in to do anymore......

Funny 2 Directors gone so quick incl a QC. Hmm

I have been told totally different, but like I said the other day it will be resolved this year and Langston are now totally in the driving seat, Tan had his chance last July. But now lets concentrate on getting promoted and I will leave this for after the promotion party.

Langstone in driving seat??

Am I thick or have I missed something ?

How do these changes alter anything on the Langston issue.

The high court judge said in certain terms that the debt wasn't payable until 2016. Nor wad there a case for payment any earlier, he even said that the club had every likelihood of mounting a successful defence.

Whether VT ends up playing more than he would have previously we'll probably never know. Even if he had offered what Sam was asking for who's to say Sam wouldn't have changed the goalposts at the last minute ? He has got form !!

On the financial side I have confidence in VT than any other owner in our history ! There may be other issues I'm not so keen on but at the moment we seeem to be doing OK in most areas !

The Judge said no such thing. What he actually said was the club could mount a 'defence' which was more than fanciful. Judges (in the cases of Summary Judgements) are banned by law from making any kind of judgement to whether either party would be successful or not at a full High Court hearing, so there is no way he said the club could mount a 'successful defence'

He did however put a freeze on any further legal action to give both sides a chance to negotiate a settlement. That deadline ran out on the 31/12/2009 and the following day Loan Note 3 (drawn up Peter Ridsdale) became active (the settlement for £10m etc.)

Now the argument is did LN3 (which ran out on the 31/12/2010) replace LN2?

A court will have to decide that but as LN3 contained a clause committing the club to an ongoing dialogue for settling the principle sum should the £10m settlement not be taken up, so IMO I believe that LN3 is still active and the club have morally broken the contract by not matching the £10m offer.

Am I thick or have I missed something ?

How do these changes alter anything on the Langston issue.

The high court judge said in certain terms that the debt wasn't payable until 2016. Nor wad there a case for payment any earlier, he even said that the club had every likelihood of mounting a successful defence.

Whether VT ends up playing more than he would have previously we'll probably never know. Even if he had offered what Sam was asking for who's to say Sam wouldn't have changed the goalposts at the last minute ? He has got form !!

On the financial side I have confidence in VT than any other owner in our history ! There may be other issues I'm not so keen on but at the moment we seeem to be doing OK in most areas !

The Judge said no such thing. What he actually said was the club could mount a 'defence' which was more than fanciful. Judges (in the cases of Summary Judgements) are banned by law from making any kind of judgement to whether either party would be successful or not at a full High Court hearing, so there is no way he said the club could mount a 'successful defence'

He did however put a freeze on any further legal action to give both sides a chance to negotiate a settlement. That deadline ran out on the 31/12/2009 and the following day Loan Note 3 (drawn up Peter Ridsdale) became active (the settlement for £10m etc.)

Now the argument is did LN3 (which ran out on the 31/12/2010) replace LN2?

A court will have to decide that but as LN3 contained a clause committing the club to an ongoing dialogue for settling the principle sum should the £10m settlement not be taken up, so IMO I believe that LN3 is still active and the club have morally broken the contract by not matching the £10m offer.

No doubt you are correct should langstone seek a new hearing. BUT WILL THEY As a Major shareholder, secured Creditor
Tan is in a comfort Zone unlike Langston.As you know It takes only one creditor to start the process of administration.
The Taxman usually the forerunner, banks, Legal Institutions, Suppliers so on. Tan although not the owner is the paymaster Keeping them all happy which accounts for a large part of his loans to the club. While also leaving the creditors such as PMG (although secured) and langstone in a vulnerable position.

Tan is well aware that Langston is unlikely to take the hard stance. Central to the issue. Tan and langston are both creditors and neither own the Club one is a major shareholder and secured creditor a very clever move. Langston would be silly to go back to court at any time soon, it could upset the major creditor and give Langston major problems.It is obvious that Tan has loaned these monies via his portfolio's that carry Company loss making benefits of which there are many.

should he need to put the Club into Administration prior to that he can sell assets he has secured and cover any losses in later years from taxes on profits of other investments within the portfolio. He would also be in a very strong position to buy the Club out of administration via the CVA process. Taking the club to court is not an option that I think Langston will risk. I think Langstone will realise that there is a strong possibility Tan could put the Club into administration should they return to court and upset him.

I can not understand why anyone would see Langstone being in a strong position. The option of going to court is not an advantage to langston in my view, getting on side with Tan could be?.