Administration over Tan

Over 75% would take it if it got rid of Tan. They obviously don't know what it entails.

Numpties

http://www.ccmb.co.uk/fudforum/index.php?t=msg&th=384970&start=0&rid=0

I can't go along with the "blue at any cost" mantra, as that could easily mean the club going out of business!

But then, I'm a pragmatist and football is just a game to me

Quite agree with above sentiments, it seems to me that the average age on the other board must be around 11 as it is full of this type of nonsense. I too would prefer the old colours back but ask the fans of Pompey if they would swap their position (and colours) for ours!
Also it is interesting to see how the "red noise" has increased this season as our league position has deteriorated, if we were in mid table, by now there would be hardly a murmur. It's Tans club not ours for gods sake, like it or not, he bought it and saved the club from possible extinction!

He's changed the colour and badge of a football club which he owns. Its his business and he has the right, with the amount of commitment and investment he's shown, to make decisions which he feels is in the best interests of the business. Business is very rarely a democracy.

He's yet to convert debt to equity, and has no plans to do so. Therefore we are racking up for bigger debts than at any other time in our history.

*** G L O V E S *** wrote:He's yet to convert debt to equity, and has no plans to do so. Therefore we are racking up for bigger debts than at any other time in our history.

I have no doubt that he will provided that we avoid relegation.  It makes no business sense to do so at the moment as I have said in another thread.  

Nevertheless, it is feasible that he could convert after we have been relegated, as there is not such a potential loss involved, i.e. as with a club falling out of the PL.  In fact, the reverse is true and he would stand to gain tremendously as the value of the club should increase when next promoted.

The story breaking today about the "inappropriate" bonus offer shows just how deperate he is to stay in the PL.......the loss of all that tv money would be a huge blow.

 

It baffles me that people are admitting Tan is unlikely to complete a promise he made years ago, and yet that's okay. I thought the major positive about Tans ownership was him clearing our debt? If he walks, or if someone buys him out, we are absolutely f*cked, pure and simple. That's much, much worse than relegation.

 

Comfy up there on the fence is it f-spot?

Red614 wrote:Comfy up there on the fence is it f-spot?

Uncertain what you mean.
But I reckon it`s because I`m here in Norway, and not in your "battlezone" hehe.

And yes it is comfy   

I meant that you agreed with both me and TDA, despite us arguing opposite sides of the topic

That`s because I see myself as a person who is capable of looking at things from all kinds of different angles, if you get my point   

Red614 wrote:It baffles me that people are admitting Tan is unlikely to complete a promise he made years ago, and yet that's okay. I thought the major positive about Tans ownership was him clearing our debt? If he walks, or if someone buys him out, we are absolutely f*cked, pure and simple. That's much, much worse than relegation.

Can't see the logic there Red, sorry.............  

Tan will convert to equity, but now is exactly the wrong time to do it.  If he created £70m in shares in the club today and we were relegated, the market value of that £70m would become, say, £50m, as the earning potential of the club will be far less in the Championship.

Not only would his investment (the transfer budget part anyway) have been poorly spent, he would lose £20m in equity, the club would lose a further £40m (per season) at least in TV money, plus probable losses on having to sell players with relegation clauses in their contracts.

However, if we are relegated and he then converts £70m to equity, that becomes perhaps £100m when the club returns to the PL and tv money floods in again.

By holding on and seeing what happens this season, he could generate a profit of £30m, instead of an equity loss of £20m..................it's a no-brainer really....... 

Cleve van Leef wrote:Over 75% would take it if it got rid of Tan.  They obviously don't know what it entails.
Numpties
http://www.ccmb.co.uk/fudforum/index.php?t=msg&th=384970&start=0&rid=0

no you are wrong! 75% of those who voted, just 102 people would say yes. that is all just 102 guys