BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

A forum for all things Cardiff City

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Always City » Tue Jan 26, 2021 4:42 pm

Worrying times for City

Dalman may be tired of answering questions about Tan & his commitments to Cardiff City,but when Dalman himself was exposed trying to buy Charlton & leave City only a few months ago, these questions will be inevitable.

I have real concerns the club don't have real plans for what to do next (other than review at end of season), short-term manager, parachute money runs out this summer and debt levels are as bad as ever, if not worse, despite Tan's backing and fantastic parachute payments enjoyed in 6 of the last 7 seasons, also with Vincent Tan at the helm for 11 years that we still haven't resolved legal matters with three cases, worth up to £50mill.
Dalman saying if Sala case is lost then club could go under, wow?
Always City
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:22 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Advertisement

Advertisement
Login or Register to remove this ad.

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Forever Blue » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:15 pm

I was shocked no one discussed this?




The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.
Annis Jnr Author and Publisher of 7 Books.

My 7th Book is Available Now "MY STORY"

http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/books/buy-books/
http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/news/

My email : annisabraham@aol.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/annisabraham
User avatar
Forever Blue
Admin
 
Posts: 131846
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:30 am

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby fred keenor » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:18 pm

Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?




The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.



May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?
fred keenor
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Forever Blue » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:20 pm

fred keenor wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?




The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.



May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?



I would like that as long as Welsh Prem :bluebird: :bluebird:

Better than Under 23’s .
Annis Jnr Author and Publisher of 7 Books.

My 7th Book is Available Now "MY STORY"

http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/books/buy-books/
http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/news/

My email : annisabraham@aol.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/annisabraham
User avatar
Forever Blue
Admin
 
Posts: 131846
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:30 am

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Welshman in CA » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:28 pm

Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.
Welshman in CA
 
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Welshman in CA » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:30 pm

Forever Blue wrote:
fred keenor wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?




The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.



May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?



I would like that as long as Welsh Prem :bluebird: :bluebird:

Better than Under 23’s .


Agreed but would the Welsh FA allow us to have a team in both the English & Welsh leagues?
Welshman in CA
 
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Forever Blue » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:40 pm

Welshman in CA wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
fred keenor wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?




The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.



May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?



I would like that as long as Welsh Prem :bluebird: :bluebird:

Better than Under 23’s .




Agreed but would the Welsh FA allow us to have a team in both the English & Welsh leagues?



That’s a question def needs to be answered?
Annis Jnr Author and Publisher of 7 Books.

My 7th Book is Available Now "MY STORY"

http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/books/buy-books/
http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/news/

My email : annisabraham@aol.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/annisabraham
User avatar
Forever Blue
Admin
 
Posts: 131846
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:30 am

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Forever Blue » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:49 pm

My prediction and sorry to say I feel it very strongly


Tan will lose
Emiliano Sala case could end up costing CCFC up to £25mill


Tan will win easily
Michael Isaacs suing for £10mill for his 2% stake in CCFC.



Tan without a doubt will lose because he signed and agreed to it.
Langston suing for up to £15mill for an agreement Tan signed with them and has not been resolved.
Annis Jnr Author and Publisher of 7 Books.

My 7th Book is Available Now "MY STORY"

http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/books/buy-books/
http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/news/

My email : annisabraham@aol.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/annisabraham
User avatar
Forever Blue
Admin
 
Posts: 131846
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:30 am

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Ponty Bluebird » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:49 pm

Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.

It was called the Barclays premier reserve league :thumbright:
Ponty Bluebird
 
Posts: 281
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2020 12:49 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby skidemin » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:50 pm

pembroke allan wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"

Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).

The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.

My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).

I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.



why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....



Wimbledon is good enough reason that makes him not fit or proper ask their fans! Langston us another! Would you trust a guy who made club lose ground for profit council didn't
trust him.... and a guy who is suing club? Langston=sam, as for others well we know nothing about them for anyone to form opinion ...



nail on head...mention langston.,. mention wimbledon...no meat....
Wimbledon had not played a first team game on plough lane for over 7 years when he sold it mate.... at which time he was no longer the majority shareholder at Wimbledon..... he did oversee 4 promotions and an FA cup though... go ask any fan of a non league club how they would feel if the next 10 years included a cup ,4 promotions and finishing has high as 6th in the premier league before the chairman then sold up.... langston ? please do explain. looks to me he is owed money ?
yoy do KNOW the Wimbledon stuff because its been on here a hundred times....but just as some posters rant about tan sometimes with no substance you seem to be doing the same with Sam....
skidemin
 
Posts: 4703
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Welshman in CA » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:53 pm

Ponty Bluebird wrote:
Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.

It was called the Barclays premier reserve league :thumbright:


Before the premier league was invented. Now it's annoying me that I can't remember but I know I will when someone says it.
Welshman in CA
 
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Ponty Bluebird » Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:59 pm

Welshman in CA wrote:
Ponty Bluebird wrote:
Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.

It was called the Barclays premier reserve league :thumbright:


Before the premier league was invented. Now it's annoying me that I can't remember but I know I will when someone says it.

It was called Pontins Reserve league?
Ponty Bluebird
 
Posts: 281
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2020 12:49 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby skidemin » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:26 pm

Forever Blue wrote:
Welshman in CA wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
fred keenor wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?




The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.



May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?



I would like that as long as Welsh Prem :bluebird: :bluebird:

Better than Under 23’s .




Agreed but would the Welsh FA allow us to have a team in both the English & Welsh leagues?



That’s a question def needs to be answered?



nope...cant have teams from the same club playing in 2 different national leagues.... its also why we are no longer in the Welsh cup amongst other things including Newport who were told they had to join the then Konica Welsh league refusing and having to play home games in England....while legal battles took place
skidemin
 
Posts: 4703
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby skidemin » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:32 pm

Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.



football combination is what i think your thinking of...
we have competed in the welsh lge 2 but not for decades
skidemin
 
Posts: 4703
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Forever Blue » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:48 pm

skidemin wrote:
Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.



football combination is what i think your thinking of...
we have competed in the welsh lge 2 but not for decades



I use to watch the football combination on a Wednesday afternoon, leave school early :lol:

City played top clubs and many times saw big names coming back from injury.
Annis Jnr Author and Publisher of 7 Books.

My 7th Book is Available Now "MY STORY"

http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/books/buy-books/
http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/news/

My email : annisabraham@aol.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/annisabraham
User avatar
Forever Blue
Admin
 
Posts: 131846
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:30 am

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Forever Blue » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:49 pm

skidemin wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
Welshman in CA wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
fred keenor wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?




The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.



May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?



I would like that as long as Welsh Prem :bluebird: :bluebird:

Better than Under 23’s .




Agreed but would the Welsh FA allow us to have a team in both the English & Welsh leagues?



That’s a question def needs to be answered?



nope...cant have teams from the same club playing in 2 different national leagues.... its also why we are no longer in the Welsh cup amongst other things including Newport who were told they had to join the then Konica Welsh league refusing and having to play home games in England....while legal battles took place



Bang goes that then , I wonder what they are on about?

Or maybe another 5yr plan :lol:
Annis Jnr Author and Publisher of 7 Books.

My 7th Book is Available Now "MY STORY"

http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/books/buy-books/
http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/news/

My email : annisabraham@aol.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/annisabraham
User avatar
Forever Blue
Admin
 
Posts: 131846
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:30 am

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby skidemin » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:53 pm

Forever Blue wrote:
skidemin wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
Welshman in CA wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
fred keenor wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?




The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.



May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?



I would like that as long as Welsh Prem :bluebird: :bluebird:

Better than Under 23’s .




Agreed but would the Welsh FA allow us to have a team in both the English & Welsh leagues?



That’s a question def needs to be answered?



nope...cant have teams from the same club playing in 2 different national leagues.... its also why we are no longer in the Welsh cup amongst other things including Newport who were told they had to join the then Konica Welsh league refusing and having to play home games in England....while legal battles took place



Bang goes that then , I wonder what they are on about?

Or maybe another 5yr plan :lol:



was talking about 5 year plans with my mate earlier... we reckon there must have been at least 20 and therefore we must both be young looking 150 years old
skidemin
 
Posts: 4703
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Bakedalasker » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:53 pm

Was it not the Welsh FA that banned us from playing in their competitions if we remained in the English matrix?
User avatar
Bakedalasker
 
Posts: 16515
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Derby

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Ray Bishop » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:56 pm

Forever Blue wrote:My prediction and sorry to say I feel it very strongly


Tan will lose
Emiliano Sala case could end up costing CCFC up to £25mill


Tan will win easily
Michael Isaacs suing for £10mill for his 2% stake in CCFC.



Tan without a doubt will lose because he signed and agreed to it.
Langston suing for up to £15mill for an agreement Tan signed with them and has not been resolved.


In regards to Langstone, if it’s right what you say about Langstone definitely winning, surely the settlement will be nowhere near £15 million? Langstone already had a fortune off the club. How is Sam coming up with the £15 million figure?
Ray Bishop
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:20 am

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby skidemin » Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:02 pm

Bakedalasker wrote:Was it not the Welsh FA that banned us from playing in their competitions if we remained in the English matrix?



was the FAW and UEFA.... .. FAW wanted more representation within UEFA competitions for their clubs, at that point it was just the cup winners....UEFA wanted a proper national league for that to happen.... prior to this the Welsh system was split north/south with 8 clubs playing in the English pyramid.... initially the FAW tried telling all 8 to play in a Welsh lge... backed down over the 4 highest placed at the time , ourselves, Swansea , Merthyr and Wrexham... while the other 4 upped sticks and played in England . some longer than others... Newport are now called the exiles for this reason....
skidemin
 
Posts: 4703
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby skidemin » Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:05 pm

Ray Bishop wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:My prediction and sorry to say I feel it very strongly


Tan will lose
Emiliano Sala case could end up costing CCFC up to £25mill


Tan will win easily
Michael Isaacs suing for £10mill for his 2% stake in CCFC.



Tan without a doubt will lose because he signed and agreed to it.
Langston suing for up to £15mill for an agreement Tan signed with them and has not been resolved.


In regards to Langstone, if it’s right what you say about Langstone definitely winning, surely the settlement will be nowhere near £15 million? Langstone already had a fortune off the club. How is Sam coming up with the £15 million figure?



its not a new figure that he has just conjured up.... the figure is agreed on just not paid....
skidemin
 
Posts: 4703
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby piledriver64 » Tue Jan 26, 2021 9:42 pm

skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"

Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).

The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.

My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).

I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.



why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....


My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.

It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.

My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.

The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.

I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.
piledriver64
 
Posts: 2840
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby skidemin » Tue Jan 26, 2021 10:01 pm

piledriver64 wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"

Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).

The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.

My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).

I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.



why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....


My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.

It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.

My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.

The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.

I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.



im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....
skidemin
 
Posts: 4703
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Sven » Tue Jan 26, 2021 10:04 pm

Welshman in CA wrote:
Ponty Bluebird wrote:
Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.

It was called the Barclays premier reserve league :thumbright:


Before the premier league was invented. Now it's annoying me that I can't remember but I know I will when someone says it.

Combination League... :thumbup:
"Never argue with an idiot; they'll drag you down to their gutter level and beat you with experience!"
User avatar
Sven
Moderator
 
Posts: 19867
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 6:14 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby pembroke allan » Tue Jan 26, 2021 10:11 pm

skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"

Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).

The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.

My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).

I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.



why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....


My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.

It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.

My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.

The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.

I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.



im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....



He sold the stadium promising a new ground but instead built houses on site and left Wimbledon with no ground as you know they've been without a ground upto this season... ans its common knowledge Cardiff council wouldnt deal with him when he was at city as they did not like his financial. Plans regarding city and new stadium... hence there is a clause that anyone owns city cannot sell ground.... hope this clears up for you? All I've said as been public
domain at time of events... Anyway that's me out of here :wave:
User avatar
pembroke allan
 
Posts: 23847
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 10:00 pm
Location: Cardiff

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby skidemin » Tue Jan 26, 2021 10:37 pm

pembroke allan wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"

Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).

The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.

My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).

I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.



why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....


My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.

It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.

My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.

The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.

I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.



im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....



He sold the stadium promising a new ground but instead built houses on site and left Wimbledon with no ground as you know they've been without a ground upto this season... ans its common knowledge Cardiff council wouldnt deal with him when he was at city as they did not like his financial. Plans regarding city and new stadium... hence there is a clause that anyone owns city cannot sell ground.... hope this clears up for you? All I've said as been public
domain at time of events... Anyway that's me out of here :wave:



AFC Wimbledon are a new club and nothing to do with Sam, now or have they ever been ...or is that club anything to do with the original plough lane come to that...
infact the club AFC Wimbledon was not even formed until 2 years after Sam had cut all ties to the original and at the time still in existence Wimbledon FC who by then had moved to Milton Keynes under different ownership.....
Sam did not build houses on it... the property had changed hands twice before the then owners built on it...
shame you cant figure out how to research things in the public domain mate..
you are fully aware of all this because the facts have been put to you a number of times and are easily available to check....but you insist on posting a made up version..
what is very very strange is that you are less than willing when people are unfairly critical of VT but do the exact same thing yourself...and you are not alone....
skidemin
 
Posts: 4703
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby piledriver64 » Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:02 am

skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"

Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).

The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.

My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).

I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.



why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....


My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.

It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.

My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.

The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.

I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.



im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....


So those who are not anti-Tan can't speculate (I made it clear it was just my view) yet it's OK for anti-Tan posters to make claims such as the offer to buy the club was wrongly dismissed ?

Nobody apart from the board and the people behind the bid know what the bid entailed or who was actually behind it. Therefore nobody on here can know whether the bid was good, bad or indifferent for the club or even Tan !
piledriver64
 
Posts: 2840
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby Forever Blue » Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:35 am

piledriver64 wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"

Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).

The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.

My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).

I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.



why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....


My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.

It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.

My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.

The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.

I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.



im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....


So those who are not anti-Tan can't speculate (I made it clear it was just my view) yet it's OK for anti-Tan posters to make claims such as the offer to buy the club was wrongly dismissed ?

Nobody apart from the board and the people behind the bid know what the bid entailed or who was actually behind it. Therefore nobody on here can know whether the bid was good, bad or indifferent for the club or even Tan !



Wrong, first I know who did both offers and second both agreed to give Tan what he wanted and even Dalman said it was a good offer for the club.

I put it out on here over a year ago and certain posters said I was talking rubbish and guess what I was proved right and those posters vanished .

I said I can’t divulge as private.

I agree Tan followers or what ever are all allowed their views and opinions that’s what this forum is for :bluebird:
Annis Jnr Author and Publisher of 7 Books.

My 7th Book is Available Now "MY STORY"

http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/books/buy-books/
http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/news/

My email : annisabraham@aol.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/annisabraham
User avatar
Forever Blue
Admin
 
Posts: 131846
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:30 am

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby skidemin » Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:43 am

piledriver64 wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"

Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).

The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.

My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).

I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.



why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....


My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.

It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.

My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.

The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.

I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.



im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....


So those who are not anti-Tan can't speculate (I made it clear it was just my view) yet it's OK for anti-Tan posters to make claims such as the offer to buy the club was wrongly dismissed ?

Nobody apart from the board and the people behind the bid know what the bid entailed or who was actually behind it. Therefore nobody on here can know whether the bid was good, bad or indifferent for the club or even Tan !




im not anti VT at all. things could always be better but being someone that watched us every week in the bottom division ,i do know it could be a damn site worse.. .. its just every time i see Sam mentioned its always a nod nod wink wink...yeah you know he was terrible and a few vague accusations ..but every time ive asked someone why and then checked whats been said its not what actually happened... . . he has actually been blamed on this thread { not by you } of a club not now having a ground because Sam sold it...trouble is that he sold the ground in 1998 and the club did not even exist until 2002 , 4 years later .. :? i do think if your going to be strongly anti someone it should be for real reasons... as for langstone and the debt... it was either recorded properly and owed it or not , which is a court thing.. ... i know some think him not being open about whether he is or is not langstone is the crime of the century... ive always thought its his business { the issue seems to be more about who langstone are than the money itself ? } but its exactly the same as if it turns out the tormen finance loan turns out to be VT...?
skidemin
 
Posts: 4703
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:45 pm

Re: BREAKING: " TODAYS CCFC MEETING "

Postby piledriver64 » Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:16 am

Forever Blue wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:
skidemin wrote:
piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"

Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).

The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.

My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).

I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.



why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....


My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.

It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.

My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.

The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.

I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.



im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....


So those who are not anti-Tan can't speculate (I made it clear it was just my view) yet it's OK for anti-Tan posters to make claims such as the offer to buy the club was wrongly dismissed ?

Nobody apart from the board and the people behind the bid know what the bid entailed or who was actually behind it. Therefore nobody on here can know whether the bid was good, bad or indifferent for the club or even Tan !



Wrong, first I know who did both offers and second both agreed to give Tan what he wanted and even Dalman said it was a good offer for the club.

I put it out on here over a year ago and certain posters said I was talking rubbish and guess what I was proved right and those posters vanished .

I said I can’t divulge as private.

I agree Tan followers or what ever are all allowed their views and opinions that’s what this forum is for :bluebird:


Just to make my position clear, I'm not a Tan follower, I'm a Cardiff City fan and will support the current regime until I think they threaten this club or there is an offer on the table that will improve it.

I appreciate you can't, nor should, divulge the details of a private bid.

However, you would not have been privy to the detailed documentation of any bid unless you were behind it or part of it !! As is always said "the devil is in the detail" and it would only take a couple of minor clauses to make a deal a bad deal.

You are right that Dalman said that it was a good deal for the club. But he didn't say it was a good deal for Tan !! Big difference and the likelihood of Tan selling now when the markets are so low is virtually zero so we have to push forward with the current regime until the economy recovers.
piledriver64
 
Posts: 2840
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:45 pm

PreviousNext


Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Big Hill Blue, bluebirdoct1962, ccfcblue1980, GENERAL CHAT, Google [Bot], Jock, Majestic-12 [Bot], mugsy, nick_strin, nubbsy, Pencoed, Tony Blue Williams, zapo and 234 guests

Disclaimer :
The views and comments entered in these forums are personal and are not necessarily those of the management of this board.
The management of this board is not responsible for the content of any external internet sites.