Cards on the table

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Oldsparkey

Oldsparkey

Well-Known Member
Forum Moderator
Jan 27, 2011
29,000
14,604
113
Porthcawl Riviera
This admission by the club of a transfer embargo because of an alleged breach off FFP explains a lot. Despite the club saying they thought they were within the regulations, the probability of this sanction has been known for a long time.

The press speculation over the likes of Weghorst and Vela joining us along with the "certainty" of the Watt deal going through were all pie in the sky with the impending embargo - and the club knew it.

All this cost cutting being undertaken this past 12 months. It was nothing to do with Tan getting some of his money back. It has been all to do with potential blatant breaches of the FFP protocol - and the club knew it.

Why is Slade still here? The answer is pretty simple. It isn't just that he's "Tan's man", what manager worthy of the job could you honestly recruit to replace him knowing that you'd have to tell the new man he'd have no funds to bring in his players this window - and the club knew it.

No prizes for naivety in this game. We are in the **** as a club and poorly managed on and off the pitch. Totally dependent upon Tan to make the right decisions to either secure our future of cancel it altogether - and the club knows it.
 
Spot on Sparks.

Slade's job brief - cut costs and keep us in the Championship regardless of the negative effect on morale, atmosphere inside and outside the club and lack of regard for supporters.

We have to admit he has achieved a positive contract assessment in all areas.

Will he get a bonus?
 
But I read that the breach of FFP is related somehow to how loans are viewed? And that we had too much loans. it therefore implies that converting loans will possibly get us out of sanctions? Or it is inevitable that the level of club loans dropped us into FFP trouble.
 
The way I read it, debt doesn't come into it. its down to operating profit or loss.

capitalising the loans wouldn't help.
 
ccfcremotesupport said:
The way I read it, debt doesn't come into it. its down to operating profit or loss.

capitalising the loans wouldn't help.
Click to expand...

Correct, it is about losses combined with owner's investments.

The unknown factor would possibly be the amount of money invested by Tan beyond that permitted under the FFP regulation for that particular year.

Maybe if he had capitalised that instead of just loaning it increasing the effective losses, it could have been a different scenario.
 
That was my reading of it from the WoL report.

For me that has always created a doubt about Tan. He said he would capitalise once the Langston/Hammam situation was sorted. Nothwithstanding the more recent fall out, there was an agreement with Hammam about 2 years ago, a substantial sum was paid, there should have been further payments to clear the debt, Hammam was made Life President and had his man on the board.

Tan has never honoured his promise to transfer loans into shares. If he had I do not believe we would be where we are now with FFP.
 
BluefromBridgend said:
That was my reading of it from the WoL report.

For me that has always created a doubt about Tan. He said he would capitalise once the Langston/Hammam situation was sorted. Nothwithstanding the more recent fall out, there was an agreement with Hammam about 2 years ago, a substantial sum was paid, there should have been further payments to clear the debt, Hammam was made Life President and had his man on the board.

Tan has never honoured his promise to transfer loans into shares. If he had I do not believe we would be where we are now with FFP.
Click to expand...

In fairness 'we' went back on our acceptance of red for a bucket load of cash too. The stadium was packed and bouncing supporting a red side winning promotion with a few mumblings of discontent. It kicked off when the football turned **** and the small tan out/blue back contingent used that discontent to create a massive **** storm around the shirt colour. If all those fans had protested all the way through promotion and the PL season they'd have some credibility but they didn't and they haven't imo. Some did and they can rightly say they never accepted the red for cash offer. The vast majority did accept the terms offered by Tan initially though only to change their mind at a later date. Does anyone really wonder why he can't be ****ed with us any more?

I actually think the FFP thing suits the club in a weird sort of way. However clueless our board are they must have some pretty major questions about Slade's ability. They've got a perfect excuse not to spend a penny this Jan, let the season play out and make a decision in the summer. I don't think we'll start next season with Slade in charge (unless Saturday was the beginning of a promotion charge <laugh>) but I do believe the board would much rather he got to the summer without having to be replaced.
 
I haven't given up the idea of a promotion charge. The team we have can make the top 6. We do not need new signings, we just need the current squad to lift its intensity on match days. Slade sets the team up to be solid and to be fair in the Championship there are not a lot of tactical geniuses. A lot comes down to motivation and consistency. Maybe the FFP ruling will actually help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whiffletree
TempleofBlue said:
I haven't given up the idea of a promotion charge. The team we have can make the top 6. We do not need new signings, we just need the current squad to lift its intensity on match days. Slade sets the team up to be solid and to be fair in the Championship there are not a lot of tactical geniuses. A lot comes down to motivation and consistency. Maybe the FFP ruling will actually help.
Click to expand...

Now That's what I call 'Glass Full'...Totally Agree, though.
 
TempleofBlue said:
I haven't given up the idea of a promotion charge. The team we have can make the top 6. We do not need new signings, we just need the current squad to lift its intensity on match days. Slade sets the team up to be solid and to be fair in the Championship there are not a lot of tactical geniuses. A lot comes down to motivation and consistency. Maybe the FFP ruling will actually help.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that myself. With no possible newcomers to distract their thinking, perhaps it will settle them down to look at themselves.

Time for the existing squad to start fighting the fight instead of just talking it.
 
I was told that as City have not got a full squad compliment, they can make up the deficiency with loan players. That is 3 players.

If so, get a striker who can play of the shoulder if City are going to go 4-5-1. Mason is not that type of player.

(Also hope that Morrison gets fit and Connelly stays as Manga again nearly a total liability inside the first few minutes.)
 
With no reason why we shouldn't have a decent chance in 6 of our next 7 games then a promotion charge isn't out of the question. I don't think it'll happen but I'll be more than happy if we can get it together and go on a run <ok>
 
CARDIFF CITY'S CEO KEN CHOO/SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF OWNER VINCENT TAN '

He was just interviewed after the game at Molyneux.

EMBARGO:
We do not have to sell players.
FFP current squad target is 24. We currently have 21 so 3 loanees are being targetted.

SELLING PLAYERS:
We will not be selling 'core' squad players or 'crown jewels'.

VT:
Still very much interested in City. He speaks with him and coaches nearly every day. Still wants to achieve promotion/play-offs.

TONY WATT:
Charlton have said they do not want Watt at City on a loan extension. We want it but they have said no to it. Watt has knee injury and has returned to Charlton. RS says still trying but KC said that they have said no.

RUSSELL SLADE:
Said he is going all out and trying his best.
 
So all good then and I need to buy a season ticket for the Premiership next season!!!! And happy I am to do that!!!!! (**** me, I sound like Yoda).
Actually, a glass half full is always better even if it means it comes with regular doses of disappointment. Hope dies last.
 
Very true, Tan has taken us for a mug, he has fukt up and is now trying to fix the mess.
 
So much of a mug he has put upwards of £150million into the club, saved us from administration 5 years ago, financed us to the Prem - okay and back out again. You may be right and he is trying to address the situation. If so then more credit to him.

He has made a number of cock ups along the way as we all know but I wish I knew more mugs like him. I don't see a queue of million or billionaires waiting to buy him out. Do you really want to see us playing in the conference or worse?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaiJones
You can blame Tan for his naivety in the early years, but not his commitment. Although the club is financially dependent upon him, the crux of the problem lies with the local management of the club - and that's not just Slade at pitch level.

The spending fiasco under Malky/Moody and Simon Lim started the ball rolling and Dalman's appointment of OGS to take over to save our Premier season were some of the worse examples of bad management off the pitch.

The subsequent failure to comply with the FFP rules has more to do with the lack of local understanding of the regulations by those running the club rather than Tan sitting back home in Malaysia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back