Quote Originally Posted by Badly Ironed Shirt View Post
Yes, I am telling you exactly that. Whenever I have mentioned debt to equity, I have heard a number of different reasons why I am wrong. I started this thread to see whether there was evidence that backed up some of these claims, and because every time I mentioned it in other threads, people told me to start my own thread! When I do that, people then claim I have an agenda.

That there is evidence (of FFP rules) that Tan was unable to convert debt to equity in recent years because of that rule. It was not, as some claim, due to Malaysian regulation laws - although I wonder where those people got that information from. You are starting to fall into the category of playing the man and not the ball - although in fairness you often take both (that is not a criticism by the way).

As for there being other reasons, of course there were. Surely you remember Tan saying that Hammam was the main stumbling block to making Cardiff City debt free. When Hammam was no longer a stumbling block, it was promotion to the PL that would see the club debt free. Have we always been at war with Eurasia? The current FFP started for the 2016/17 season. Were the FFP rules also preventing debt to equity in 2014-2016?

As for 18/19 - my understanding from some of the above posts is that Tan will not be able to convert debt to equity in Cardiff's first season in the PL.
Well you do have an agenda don't you. I know what a big City fan you were because of what you did regarding the book Richard Holt and I wrote five years ago - that's why I find it sad that it has come to this with you.

While the current version of FFP came in for 16/17, the table at 5.3 in the link Penarth Blues provided shows figures from 11/12 right through to 15/16, so that must tell us surely that they were what was in place during those years? Therefore, the highest Vincent Tan could have converted in any season since 11/12 was £8 million (the amount that has been knocked off the club's debt to him through this method over the past two or three seasons).

Based on the link I posted from 2010 about Man City's owner making a huge debt to equity conversion in 2010 while he still could because he knew the time for such things was running out, Vincent Tan may have had a year or so after he became more heavily involved with City in 2010 where he could have made a full and complete debt to equity conversion, but I'm not sure it could have happened at any time after that.

This would mean that a complete debt to equity conversion would not have been possible in May 2012 when all of the controversy about the rebrand broke and yet I was at a meeting with club officials where a group of City fans were told that such a conversion was "imminent".

Maybe Keith could confirm whether I'm right about debt to equity restrictions being in place from 11/12 onwards or whether I'm adding two and two and getting five?