YESTERDAY, TODAY AND TOMORROW

guilty as charged

You're not the only one, Steve. I'm expecting Annis to send round a crate of lager by way of an apology.

TLG on THIS YOUVE BEEN PROVED WRONG and IT WILL ALL BE REVEALED NOW GET OVET IT

TLG on THIS YOUVE BEEN PROVED WRONG and IT WILL ALL BE REVEALED NOW GET OVET IT

On what have I been proved wrong? PMG?

Yesterday I created a thread about the club being in crisis, it is in crisis a management crisis, nobody has control down there.

Yesterday in the very thread I told how Langston must be paid £10 million by the end of the year or it reverts back to £24 million I will explain how and why.

1. There has been 3 agreements with Langston, the first of which was an unsecured loan of £24 million taken out by Sam but not against the club, when the council were in talks with the club over the land for the new stadium they told the club that it could afford a debt of £24 million an dto work it on it.

2. That is why the 2nd agreement came into place, it was £15 million and then £9 million for stadium naming rights, this was done to satisfy the council but the amount remained at £24 million for Langston, whether the 2nd agreement is legally binding is a matter for the courts because of certain actions.

3. The 3rd agreement is the latest one that we all know has been written down to £10 million but due to the incompetence of our previous chairman this agreement has never been signed off, it was agreed but never signed, so that leaves Langston in the driving seat, they could have at any time called in the £24 million but they have remained patient for the good of the club. So it will be £24 million at the end of the year and not increasing to £11 million, then £12 million and so on, this will become public knowledge.

Yesterday I told how we must pay Sunderland £1.5 million for the remainder of the deal, it was reported differently by our then Chairman Peter Ridsdale but today the press backed up my claims exactly.

Today I received a message from TG after he read my Club in Crisis post and I am pleased at his response, here is Tg's message :

"We came through when the club needed the support most. And now you can imagine that we are wading thru 5years of a previous regime.
It is not an easy task. We are 36per cent and have put in 6m pounds as promised.
All I ask at this stage is rally round to support this club and help us undo 5years of the previous setting. We have to do this together whether as a fan, shareholder, employee and so on.
We have the resolve and I want the fans to have the resolve to. We need all the support we can get."
Best regards,
Tg

So I have asked many times for everyone to be patient and there TG is asking to for the fans support and resolve, these malaysians are in it for the long haul let's support them.

Tomorrow, the solution will become more apparent, in tomorrow's Echo there will be big headlines on Sam Hammam and the possibility of his return to Cardiff City, I would welcome Sam's return because Sam cares for our club, Sam knows football and how to succeed in it.

Hi Carl,

I have been in contact with TG for over 6 months and I can honestly say at no time did I sense any wavering in his resolve towards sorting out the mess at CCFC. He has stated this on numerous occasions. Furthermore, it is clear that in these few short months he truly is a City fan. He loves the Club and WILL get the morasse of the Rizla's reign of terror sorted. Clearly such a mess is not going to be cleaned-up in a month, probably a year-plus is nearer the mark. But as I posted yesterday, in TG and SB we have two excellent assets and during these diifcult months please support and encourage them both. Together we will get the Club in the PL.

StT.

If you are right then it smacks of rank amateurism on the malaysians part which is somewhat different to how they have come across.

Precisely, Steve.

We have been told in the past by Carl and others that the Malaysians were incredibly thorough during the due diligence process and uncovered problems the directors didn't even know about.

Now we are being told by the same people that the amendments to the Langston deal (only worth £20 million or so!) were never signed off and the Malaysians didn't notice! To me, it just doesn't add up. Literally.

Dave the point you raise about directors not knowing uncovered problems and the due diligence was actually brought to the attention of this board by the very person you responded too, Steve Davies but again you choose to name only me.

And Steve, who made the mistake on the Haslebank contract ?

exactly my point annis
after that do you think the malaysians would let him deal with the most important piece of documentation in the clubs history without checking the incompetant halfwit had done it

Unless they actively wanted him to f**k it up...

If you are right then it smacks of rank amateurism on the malaysians part which is somewhat different to how they have come across.

Precisely, Steve.

We have been told in the past by Carl and others that the Malaysians were incredibly thorough during the due diligence process and uncovered problems the directors didn't even know about.

Now we are being told by the same people that the amendments to the Langston deal (only worth £20 million or so!) were never signed off and the Malaysians didn't notice! To me, it just doesn't add up. Literally.

Dave the point you raise about directors not knowing uncovered problems and the due diligence was actually brought to the attention of this board by the very person you responded too, Steve Davies but again you choose to name only me.

He fancies you really...

Because Dave it's quite apparent to everyone else that you've got some sort of obsession with Carl's posts or Carl himself.

I've only met Carl once. He seemed like a really nice bloke.

Carl's posts drive me crackers though.

"Great news! VT is backing DJ all the way! Bellamy is signing! We don't need to sell players! We're on the up!"

A week later.....

"Bad news. The club's in crisis. We're skint."

So Dave. Carl's posts are driving you crackers. I think we are starting to make some ground here. Now can you think of another time, maybe in your childhood, that something written down drove you crackers?

I have reached the clear conclusion that this is not a case for summary judgment,
because on the assumed facts the Club has a real prospect of a successful defence,
MR JUSTICE BRIGGS
Approved Judgment
Langston v. Cardiff City FC
treating its alternative claim for rectification as part of that defence. It follows that it
is unnecessary for me to address issues (if there any) as to quantum, and that I should
express my reasons for my conclusion in a form which does not pre-judge the
outcome of the relevant issues, once the facts have been fully deployed and tested at a
trial.
not my words the judges.
http://clients.squareeye.com/uploads/oec/CCFCjmnt.pdf

So if Risdale didn't sign the deal off no money due until 2016
so TG and Sam look to be reaching some kind of an argeement.
sleepwalker

Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:30 pm
Private messageE-mail sleepwalker

Exactly, and what the judge was saying is that the club should be allowed to put up a defence and they had a case for a defence.
However it wasn't about Sam asking for immediate payment, i don't know where people get that idea from. The whole case was brought about because the agreement the club had with Langstones was that no other creditors could be brought in and given prefferentail status, which is exactly what it did for PMG. This meant that if the club went into admin, the secured prefferential loan that was set up breaking the agreement meant that PMg would get first dibs and Langstones get nowt.

Now I'd be pissed if I was lanstones or Sam, and i'd want it dealt with legally, Sam was hoping that the case would be won with a summary judgement meaning the club had no defence, the Judge stated that they had a defence and should be given the chance to try it in a court. That don't mean they won the case, it don't mean they were innocent, it meant they were given a chance to defend their actions.

It would have taken yeras to get a full trial and cost eaach party hundreds of thousands to take it on,no one would have gained and part of the agreement the club made after with Sam was they would honour the loan notes etc which they re negotiated if he would hold off with the full trial action.

but also in the summing up gwyn the judge said that if it went to full trial where there would have to be full disclosure and in his opinion sam and langstone would be found to be one and the same. something of which sam denies to this day.

Dave the point you raise about directors not knowing uncovered problems and the due diligence was actually brought to the attention of this board by the very person you responded too, Steve Davies but again you choose to name only me.

I didn't know Steve had said that. I tend to ignore his posts (joke! joke!). But you've mentioned it on many occasions, I'm sure. And I've heard the same myself.

Therefore, I find it very hard to believe that the most important deal of the lot went unsigned and they somehow didn't notice.

Because Dave it's quite apparent to everyone else that you've got some sort of obsession with Carl's posts or Carl himself.

I've only met Carl once. He seemed like a really nice bloke.

Carl's posts drive me crackers though.

"Great news! VT is backing DJ all the way! Bellamy is signing! We don't need to sell players! We're on the up!"

A week later.....

"Bad news. The club's in crisis. We're skint."

So Dave. Carl's posts are driving you crackers. I think we are starting to make some ground here. Now can you think of another time, maybe in your childhood, that something written down drove you crackers?

Dave the point you raise about directors not knowing uncovered problems and the due diligence was actually brought to the attention of this board by the very person you responded too, Steve Davies but again you choose to name only me.

I didn't know Steve had said that. I tend to ignore his posts (joke! joke!). But you've mentioned it on many occasions, I'm sure. And I've heard the same myself.

Therefore, I find it very hard to believe that the most important deal of the lot went unsigned and they somehow didn't notice.

whether you find it hard to believe or not is neither here nor there Dave.

So Dave. Carl's posts are driving you crackers. I think we are starting to make some ground here. Now can you think of another time, maybe in your childhood, that something written down drove you crackers?

So anonymous, are you a psychologist? If so, I'll have to book a session.

whether you find it hard to believe or not is neither here nor there Dave.

That's true, Carl. We'll have to wait to see what Sam Hammam and the South Wales Echo have to say. They are both usually very reliable.

Carl Dont waste your time with them, I know its TRUE and You Know its TRUE, And WE WILL BE PROVEN RIGHT, I will take £500 Bet with Steve or TLG.

Carl Dont waste your time with them, I know its TRUE and You Know its TRUE, And WE WILL BE PROVEN RIGHT, I will take £500 Bet with Steve or TLG.

I ain't got that sort of money to chuck around. And you know it.

Carl Dont waste your time with them, I know its TRUE and You Know its TRUE, And WE WILL BE PROVEN RIGHT, I will take £500 Bet with Steve or TLG.

I ain't got that sort of money to chuck around. And you know it.

How about whichever one of you is wrong has to be photographed in a Swansea shirt

whether you find it hard to believe or not is neither here nor there Dave.

That's true, Carl. We'll have to wait to see what Sam Hammam and the South Wales Echo have to say. They are both usually very reliable.

Given the Echo are always unreliable, I'm surprised you put yourself in the position of being misquoted by them so often...

Carl Dont waste your time with them, I know its TRUE and You Know its TRUE, And WE WILL BE PROVEN RIGHT, I will take £500 Bet with Steve or TLG.

I ain't got that sort of money to chuck around. And you know it.

How about whichever one of you is wrong has to be photographed in a Swansea shirt

ACCEPTED

["carlccfc"]["The Lone Gunman"]["steve davies"]If you are right then it smacks of rank amateurism on the malaysians part which is somewhat different to how they have come across

Precisely, Steve.

We have been told in the past by Carl and others that the Malaysians were incredibly thorough during the due diligence process and uncovered problems the directors didn't even know about.

Now we are being told by the same people that the amendments to the Langston deal (only worth £20 million or so!) were never signed off and the Malaysians didn't notice! To me, it just doesn't add up. Literally

Dave the point you raise about directors not knowing uncovered problems and the due diligence was actually brought to the attention of this board by the very person you responded too, Steve Davies but again you choose to name only me. [/quote]


this is very true carl and i got slaughtered in some quarters for it but now it would seem that it did genuinly happen on a lot of occassions

So Dave. Carl's posts are driving you crackers. I think we are starting to make some ground here. Now can you think of another time, maybe in your childhood, that something written down drove you crackers?

So anonymous, are you a psychologist? If so, I'll have to book a session.

No I'm a nutter.
You used the word anonymous. Would it be more comfortable for you if I had a name? You could call me Carl if you want.

So Dave. Carl's posts are driving you crackers. I think we are starting to make some ground here. Now can you think of another time, maybe in your childhood, that something written down drove you crackers?

So anonymous, are you a psychologist? If so, I'll have to book a session.

No I'm a nutter.
You used the word anonymous. Would it be more comfortable for you if I had a name? You could call me Carl if you want.

So Dave. Carl's posts are driving you crackers. I think we are starting to make some ground here. Now can you think of another time, maybe in your childhood, that something written down drove you crackers?

So anonymous, are you a psychologist? If so, I'll have to book a session.

No I'm a nutter.
You used the word anonymous. Would it be more comfortable for you if I had a name? You could call me Carl if you want.

Dude, you do know he has an uncontrollable allergic reaction when that name is used...

Would it be more comfortable for you if I had a name? You could call me Carl if you want.

That wouldn't be good. I get drawn to that name like a moth to a flame.

Would it be more comfortable for you if I had a name? You could call me Carl if you want.

That wouldn't be good. I get drawn to that name like a moth to a flame.

Okay that's fine, lets choose another name. Perhaps a female name might be better. How would you feel about Carla?

Would it be more comfortable for you if I had a name? You could call me Carl if you want.

That wouldn't be good. I get drawn to that name like a moth to a flame.

Okay that's fine, lets choose another name. Perhaps a female name might be better. How would you feel about Carla?

Okay that's fine, lets choose another name. Perhaps a female name might be better. How would you feel about Carla?

No good. Puts me in mind of Ingrid Pitt in the House that Dripped Blood. I couldn't concentrate.

Okay that's fine, lets choose another name. Perhaps a female name might be better. How would you feel about Carla?

No good. Puts me in mind of Ingrid Pitt in the House that Dripped Blood. I couldn't concentrate.

Lets borrow some feel good factor from the world cup. Spain are doing okay. Carlos then?

Carl Dont waste your time with them, I know its TRUE and You Know its TRUE, And WE WILL BE PROVEN RIGHT, I will take £500 Bet with Steve or TLG.

Annis by them i assume you mean me and dave
i dont do betting and all i am trying to do here is to debate as if the malaysians were really that careless in their dealings about langston.

i have spoken to someone in the last ten minutes who insist that the malaysian and langston lawyers sat around a table to thrash the deal out with our ex chairman taking the credit again.

as i am just a couple of posts away from being probably labelled a sniper for having different opinions i will take my leave of this board and contribute no further

Carl Dont waste your time with them, I know its TRUE and You Know its TRUE, And WE WILL BE PROVEN RIGHT, I will take £500 Bet with Steve or TLG.

Annis by them i assume you mean me and dave
i dont do betting and all i am trying to do here is to debate as if the malaysians were really that careless in their dealings about langston.

i have spoken to someone in the last ten minutes who insist that the malaysian and langston lawyers sat around a table to thrash the deal out with our ex chairman taking the credit again.

as i am just a couple of posts away from being probably labelled a sniper for having different opinions i will take my leave of this board and contribute no further

Steve, Why would we call you a sniper, your a good poster, just because your opinion is different or we have different answers, I have not got a prob with that

Carl Dont waste your time with them, I know its TRUE and You Know its TRUE, And WE WILL BE PROVEN RIGHT, I will take £500 Bet with Steve or TLG.

Annis by them i assume you mean me and dave
i dont do betting and all i am trying to do here is to debate as if the malaysians were really that careless in their dealings about langston.

i have spoken to someone in the last ten minutes who insist that the malaysian and langston lawyers sat around a table to thrash the deal out with our ex chairman taking the credit again.

as i am just a couple of posts away from being probably labelled a sniper for having different opinions i will take my leave of this board and contribute no further

but was you told the agreement was signed off Steve ?