PLEASE SIR...CAN I HAVE SOME MORE ?

These drip feed payments we are getting from the Malaysians, what are they getting in return?

Ian, Only what I Believe they will want Shares in Return and eventually dilute the rest of the Shareholders.

That has to be the answer, the others don't want to know when it comes to paying the bills, it's time for a full takeover, with the other Malaysians and forming the dream team..........

Thats how I really see it, but just my Opinion.

That has to be the answer, the others don't want to know when it comes to paying the bills, it's time for a full takeover, with the other Malaysians and forming the dream team..........

Thats how I really see it, but just my Opinion.

Does that mean you believe in Daya's other Malaysians Annis

they took a 6 mil gamble and it hasnt payed off

You do realise most of that £6 mill was put in after the PO final.

I was under the impression that they were legally committed to investing that money as all the paperwork etc for the EGM had gone out. And that was prior to the play offs.

How could the Malaysians possibly be legally committed to investing when they needed the shareholders agreement first at the EGM held on 27th May?

The Malaysians could have pulled out at anytime before the 27th May, although they would probably have had a hell of a fight getting back the £1m they had already loaned the club.

How could the Malaysians possibly be legally committed to investing when they needed the shareholders agreement first at the EGM held on 27th May?

The Malaysians could have pulled out at anytime before the 27th May, although they would probably have had a hell of a fight getting the £1m they had already loaned the club back.

I'm no expert but I would have said that once the offer was made, they were duty bound to have it go through the shareholders meeting without being able to pull the plug themselves. The shareholders could have rejected it of course.

I'll let the legal/accounting experts confirm if I'm right or not.

How could the Malaysians possibly be legally committed to investing when they needed the shareholders agreement first at the EGM held on 27th May?

The Malaysians could have pulled out at anytime before the 27th May, although they would probably have had a hell of a fight getting the £1m they had already loaned the club back.

I'm no expert but I would have said that once the offer was made, they were duty bound to have it go through the shareholders meeting without being able to pull the plug themselves. The shareholders could have rejected it of course.

I'll let the legal/accounting experts confirm if I'm right or not.

If an offer was made it would have been subject to shareholders agreement. Therefore the shareholders could have rejected it and if that is the case the Malaysians had the same right to withdraw the offer before the EGM.

However, giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming your right, then why didn't these hugely successful businessmen simply wait until after the play-off final before making an offer?

How could the Malaysians possibly be legally committed to investing when they needed the shareholders agreement first at the EGM held on 27th May?

The Malaysians could have pulled out at anytime before the 27th May, although they would probably have had a hell of a fight getting the £1m they had already loaned the club back.

I'm no expert but I would have said that once the offer was made, they were duty bound to have it go through the shareholders meeting without being able to pull the plug themselves. The shareholders could have rejected it of course.

I'll let the legal/accounting experts confirm if I'm right or not.

If an offer was made it would have been subject to shareholders agreement. Therefore the shareholders could have rejected it and if that is the case the Malaysians had the same right to withdraw the offer before the EGM.

However, giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming your right, then why didn't these hugely successful businessmen simply wait until after the play-off final before making an offer?

Because the final HMRC winding up order was in court on the Wednesday after the last league game. If the investment had not been in place, the club would probably have been would up there and then.

Because the final HMRC winding up order was in court on the Wednesday after the last league game. If the investment had not been in place, the club would probably have been would up there and then.

At that point TG could have simply told the HMRC he had an intention to invest if the club made the Premiership.

Further it was highly likely that by then we had the cash to pay the HMRC due to the gate receipts from Leicester and Blackpool games.

Because the final HMRC winding up order was in court on the Wednesday after the last league game. If the investment had not been in place, the club would probably have been would up there and then.

At that point TG could have simply told the HMRC he had an intention to invest if the club made the Premiership.

Further it was highly likely that by then we had the cash to pay the HMRC due to the gate receipts from Leicester and Blackpool games.

If they had waited until after the Play-Off final either we'd win and there would be no need for the investment or it would have cost more. If they had waited until after the play-off and we had lost they probably would not have come in given the choice.

Because the final HMRC winding up order was in court on the Wednesday after the last league game. If the investment had not been in place, the club would probably have been would up there and then.

At that point TG could have simply told the HMRC he had an intention to invest if the club made the Premiership.

Further it was highly likely that by then we had the cash to pay the HMRC due to the gate receipts from Leicester and Blackpool games.

Or he just could have loaned the minimum necessary to cover it. Didn't need to commit to £6m of shares.

Although, in fairness he might have ended up paying a hell of a lot more had we won !

Because the final HMRC winding up order was in court on the Wednesday after the last league game. If the investment had not been in place, the club would probably have been would up there and then.

At that point TG could have simply told the HMRC he had an intention to invest if the club made the Premiership.

Further it was highly likely that by then we had the cash to pay the HMRC due to the gate receipts from Leicester and Blackpool games.

Looking back over it, HMRC asked the judge to give the club more time as the investment had been promised. Without this promise of investment the club would almost certainly have been wound up. I can't imagine that HMRC would agree to the postponement

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 742920.stm

Because the final HMRC winding up order was in court on the Wednesday after the last league game. If the investment had not been in place, the club would probably have been would up there and then.

At that point TG could have simply told the HMRC he had an intention to invest if the club made the Premiership.

Further it was highly likely that by then we had the cash to pay the HMRC due to the gate receipts from Leicester and Blackpool games.

If they had waited until after the Play-Off final either we'd win and there would be no need for the investment or it would have cost more. If they had waited until after the play-off and we had lost they probably would not have come in given the choice.

With respect mate that's not the point. I fail to see how an offer to buy anything is legally binding, you have the right to change your mind at any time and the Malaysians could have done that between May 22 and May 27 if they wanted to.

Because the final HMRC winding up order was in court on the Wednesday after the last league game. If the investment had not been in place, the club would probably have been would up there and then.

At that point TG could have simply told the HMRC he had an intention to invest if the club made the Premiership.

Further it was highly likely that by then we had the cash to pay the HMRC due to the gate receipts from Leicester and Blackpool games.

Looking back over it, HMRC asked the judge to give the club more time as the investment had been promised. Without this promise of investment the club would almost certainly have been wound up. I can't imagine that HMRC would agree to the postponement

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 742920.stm

Exactly the investment had been 'promised' that doesn't mean 'legally binding'

Exactly the investment had been 'promised' that doesn't mean 'legally binding'

Neither of us know it for a fact and are just guessing. Someone out there with a greater knowledge must know.

Exactly the investment had been 'promised' that doesn't mean 'legally binding'

Neither of us know it for a fact and are just guessing. Someone out there with a greater knowledge must know.

It is all opinion I agree with that, but this notion that highly successful businessmen were gambling on the outcome of our play-off bid is preposterous.

I agree with Tony on this and think that there is not a cat in hells chance on them putting £6 million on a chance of winning a football match.

Exactly the investment had been 'promised' that doesn't mean 'legally binding'

Neither of us know it for a fact and are just guessing. Someone out there with a greater knowledge must know.

It is all opinion I agree with that, but this notion that highly successful businessmen were gambling on the outcome of our play-off bid is preposterous.

A 4/1 shot of turning £6m into an absolute moneyspinner (£90m min although the outgoings would obviously be increased unless you do it the Blackpool way, which may be wise). That's a 1500% increase on the £6m.

I think any businessman who can afford to lose the inital £6m would think it would be preposterous not to take those odds compared to the potential return.

Well Carl, NEW STADIUMS DONT GUARANTEE YOUR FUTURE, I said THIS 2 Years ago, ALSO The RIDDLERS MISMANAGEMENT, Whilst the OTHER DIRECTORS STOOD BY and LET IT HAPPEN and SOME JUST RAPED OUR CLUB as WELL.
WE ARE NOW PAYING THE PRICE FOR THIS

And Sams mismanagement and leaving us in massive debt, thats where it started............

Left us £24 Mill owing to Langston, Reduced it to £10 mill, BUT SAM LEFT OVER £30 MILLION WORTH OF PLAYERS, Which THE RIDDLER SOLD, SO SAM NEVER LEFT A DEBT, Riddler should of paid the £10 million back. Also Sam left out line planning for a New Stadium.

Annis, surely you don't honestly believe that bull!!!

Natman.

They Are FACTS Not Bull, JUST ADD UP ALL THE MONEY RECEIVED IN THE LAST 3 YEARS FOR Sams players, Even Roger Johnson was Sams.

Natman.

They Are FACTS Not Bull, JUST ADD UP ALL THE MONEY RECEIVED IN THE LAST 3 YEARS FOR Sams players, Even Roger Johnson was Sams.

Match-day squad on 30th September 2006 (one month before Sam left);

Alexander
6 Loovens
2 Gilbert
19 Scimeca
3 McNaughton
5 Purse
11 Parry
16 Ledley
10 McPhail
8 Chopra
9 Thompson

Substitutes
12 Johnson
14 Flood
25 Kamara
20 Campbell
18 Glombard

30 MILLION!!!! You've got to be joking!!! Find me £30 there!!!

Rearrange: glasses tinted and rose to make a sentence. Sam does not 'love' the club, he has only ever had one thing in mind, his back pocket. He wracked up the initial debt, he had to seel Kav to fund the wages because of the messe he'd got things into. If he loves the club so much and has written down £24M to £10m why not go the full way if he 'loves' us so mcuh, his beloved cardiff is hurting and he could wave it all away. But he won't, why??? Money!!! he says that he will come in an invest more money, he won't, it'll be a loan as like he did previously. He's seen the malaysians and the money they have and much like Will Smith in Fresh Prince "Chu Ching", lets get on and 'invest' more money which will be an outstanding debt which I can hold aganst the club with a view to further financial gain.

If I lent £24 million to someone who stabbed me in the back I would want it all back. I would not reduce it down to £10 million.

No one seems to answer this for me when I aks the question. People say its not Sams money but he borrowed it. So how did Sam bring the debt down to £10million if its not his money?

If I lent £24 million to someone who stabbed me in the back I would want it all back. I would not reduce it down to £10 million.

No one seems to answer this for me when I aks the question. People say its not Sams money but he borrowed it. So how did Sam bring the debt down to £10million if its not his money?

two words: CON ARTIST

So what are you saying? How did he do that?

So what are you saying? How did he do that?

What I am saying is that there is probably little or no truth in alot of this. Just remember the 'loan' from the Football association because we were unable to pay wages when the next day we then went and got an additional player on loan. Everyone is saying that Gethin is a spin merchant, Sam is a master along with PR.

So what are you saying? How did he do that?

What I am saying is that there is probably little or no truth in alot of this. Just remember the 'loan' from the Football association because we were unable to pay wages when the next day we then went and got an additional player on loan. Everyone is saying that Gethin is a spin merchant, Sam is a master along with PR.

Sam is playing a game, TG and Vt are playing a game, PMG is playing a game, Ridsdale plaed a game. We are just the spectators in an off the field match. The game I feel is just kicking off and it may be a while before we get to full time, and like footballers will bend the rules of the game and dive etc I would presume wuch business men will know how to do likewise to achieve the result they need/want.

Natman, Gunter,Ramsey,Loovens,Chopra,Johnson,Ledley(not his fault City messed up) etc etc etc were All Sams

Natman, Gunter,Ramsey,Loovens,Chopra,Johnson,Ledley(not his fault City messed up) etc etc etc were All Sams

Jerome.

Natman, Gunter,Ramsey,Loovens,Chopra,Johnson,Ledley(not his fault City messed up) etc etc etc were All Sams

Jerome.

No sell on with Ramsey was a big Riddler cock up, naming the price too soon was another that cost the Club at least a mill too.

Whats their worths now.

Gunter 2.5

Ramsey 20 plus

Johnson 10-12 mill.

Ladley 4 mill.

Jerome 6 mill

Few bob there, all British players too where due to the up and coming new rules british players gonna be worth a lot more too!

Ledley was at the club well before Sam Hammam came along and Chris Gunter could well have been as well - given that Ledley was with Cardiff at the age of eight or nine, there even has to be a possibility that Aaron Ramsey's association with us also began in pre Sam Hammam times.

Ledley was at the club well before Sam Hammam came along and Chris Gunter could well have been as well - given that Ledley was with Cardiff at the age of eight or nine, there even has to be a possibility that Aaron Ramsey's association with us also began in pre Sam Hammam times.

But then though Bob would they have remained if not for the introduced Academy, I think it would have been highly unlikely, I see good lads leaving moving clubs simply because they want to play in the Academy system instead of the other option of COE. funny enough theres one at Liverpool today as we speak.

Loovens was a Ridsdale signing.
I'm sure there was an article on Wales online that DJ didn't want him, but Ridsdale got it done.

Also, I'm guessing Chopra was a Ridsdale signing rubber stamped by Jones