Just been on the News now site and there was disturbing reading there, a link to The Guardian website involving a discreet take over discussion involving a certain Wet Spam, the name Zabeel was mentioned what the feck is that all about?
[quote][cite]Posted By: pilchard[/cite]...maybe just a little bit of a crap stir from the gruniad or a slow evening in their news room, but I fair have the collywobbles..........[/quote]
why would they want to buy that debt ridden.... massive expenses high wages nightmare...
[cite]Posted By: pilchard[/cite]Just been on the News now site and there was disturbing reading there, a link to The Guardian website involving a discreet take over discussion involving a certain Wet Spam, the name Zabeel was mentioned what the feck is that all about?
Morning all. I tend to lurk here but i thought I'd better say something about this. I've corresponded with Matt Scott, the Guardian journalist concerned, in the past. I don't know him well enough to go back to him and ask him what its all about, although I might if I in turn have something to feed him . I'll look into whether that's possible or desirable from Charlton's point of view. But I read over my past dialogues with him. We were discussing Tevez amongst other things. Its obvious that he was well briefed from West Ham then. That doesn't make him a fan, but obviously journalists are human and feel well disposed towards people who help him out. He's obviously an intelligent guy and does not seem to be into scurrillous rumour. If he were, he wouldn't stay at the Guardian. (and BTW the Guardian was THE supporter of the Valley Party among the nationals, but most of the people there have long gone unfortunately). So my advice for the moment is; prepare for the worst, BUT, I don't think Matt is sure of his ground, and no other heavyweight journo has picked it up. He is probably being manipulated but by whom and for what end, is not yet clear. Tonight's City Addicks meeting will tell us a lot more
[cite]Posted By: PragueAddick[/cite]Morning all. I tend to lurk here but i thought I'd better say something about this. I've corresponded with Matt Scott, the Guardian journalist concerned, in the past. I don't know him well enough to go back to him and ask him what its all about, although I might if I in turn have something to feed him . I'll look into whether that's possible or desirable from Charlton's point of view. But I read over my past dialogues with him. We were discussing Tevez amongst other things. Its obvious that he was well briefed from West Ham then. That doesn't make him a fan, but obviously journalists are human and feel well disposed towards people who help him out. He's obviously an intelligent guy and does not seem to be into scurrillous rumour. If he were, he wouldn't stay at the Guardian. (and BTW the Guardian was THE supporter of the Valley Party among the nationals, but most of the people there have long gone unfortunately). So my advice for the moment is; prepare for the worst, BUT, I don't think Matt is sure of his ground, and no other heavyweight journo has picked it up. He is probably being manipulated but by whom and for what end, is not yet clear. Tonight's City Addicks meeting will tell us a lot more
That's not what I wanted to read particularly after I'd convinced myself that the Guardian article was a load of old bull.
Sorry mate but thats as full of holes as your jurno mates article. NO ONE thats NO ONE other than those very high up in Zeebel will know what their primary driver is . If its geting a club that is well run and has potential will small debt and sound foundations its us. If its linked in anyway to the Olympics then maybe they would look at WHU. That Jurno cant know that because neither anyone at CAFC or WHU would know, unles he suddenly has a amte of a mates cat who was in an office in Dubai when this was all discussed. As for WHU they are in the prem , but again who knows what is their actal debt ? who knows how much shit their owner is actually in ?
The meeting onite will tell you little that you dont know now. That is 100 % that a DD is being undertaken by Zeebel on CAFC, you might find out a possible time scale but even that dosnt mean you will get an answer !
Zeebel may well undertake several DDs at the same time or we might find they complete CAFC and deside to de WHU before making a buy.
Various other websites picking over the bones of the Guardian article, re-working, re-writing or in most cases just plain copying it. Still it has to be said- how discreet could the wet spam thing be when it is first muted in the press whereas ours was released in an official statement. Very discreet indeed...
I'll be very happy to find out that everything I wrote was full of holes. Matt Scott is not my mate. But its obvious that he is not the kind of scumbag that writes for the Sun, the type happy to assist Chelsea in getting Parker. He's been fed something from Upton Park, that much is clear. Nothing else is, I agree. If anyone's going to City Addicks tonight, it would be very interesting to find out if due diligence has already started. In most areas of business its very unusual for a buyer to conduct due diligence with more than one seller at a time in the same market. The process of due diligence is a bloody nightmare for the seller, and no reasonable seller would agree to due diligence without the commitment to do the deal unless the process threw up some nasties. If we are already in that phase, I'd personally be more optimistic that its going through, and the story may be desperate attempt by West Ham to scream "hey don't buy them, you can buy us".
PA, I appreciate your insight into these things. I suspect that due diligence has started because of the stock exchange announcement today. It has also been reported today that Chappell and Whitehand have been told by Rothchild not to go to the meeting in Bromley tonight (which I assume is the one you are referring to)? I also think that the Dubai people will be extremely honorable in their dealings and of course, the announcement made on Friday was done with their agreement. Given that we are a PLC and any move by the potential purchasers to consider buying anybody else at this stage could have a major negative impact on the share price, I cannot believe that this story is true. What may be true is that another Dubai based group is talking to West Ham, but I'd be astonished if it was Zabeel. I suspect it's most likely to be summed up by your final sentence.
Prague A just because he writes for the gardian and not the Sun dont mean he dosnt write to fill space. Of course when you ask him how he knows im sure he will say " Prague old mate i made it up " ------ only the people in Zeebel know why and wot they are looking for. There is 100% nothing wrong or underhand in a company looking for a business etc and taking on DD in severalplaces at the same time or one after the other.
"There is 100% nothing wrong or underhand in a company looking for a business etc and taking on DD in severalplaces at the same time or one after the other."
Well look, it probably doesn't matter, because people seem to think its started at Charlton and the article doesn't suggest it has at West Ham. But there is a lot wrong with carrying out DD on more than one company in the same area, and it generally does not happen. When you do due diligence, the selling company opens up everything. Every way it makes money, every trick of the trade. There is no way it does that lightly, and certainly no way they do it with a company that is apparently getting the same level of knowledge about a competitor. Imagine if Lloyds TSB had done DD on both HBOS and Barclays, before buying HBOS. They would know everything about Barclays and could from then on proceed to take them to the cleaners.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm lecturing you, I don't mean to. But it shows that if indeed we have entered DD stage then it increases the likelihood that the article is way off the truth. Which we both want. Too bad City Addicks meet is shafted.
[quote][cite]Posted By: PragueAddick[/cite]"There is 100% nothing wrong or underhand in a company looking for a business etc and taking on DD in severalplaces at the same time or one after the other."
Well look, it probably doesn't matter, because people seem to think its started at Charlton and the article doesn't suggest it has at West Ham. But there is a lot wrong with carrying out DD on more than one company in the same area, and it generally does not happen. When you do due diligence, the selling company opens up everything. Every way it makes money, every trick of the trade. There is no way it does that lightly, and certainly no way they do it with a company that is apparently getting the same level of knowledge about a competitor. Imagine if Lloyds TSB had done DD on both HBOS and Barclays, before buying HBOS. They would know everything about Barclays and could from then on proceed to take them to the cleaners.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm lecturing you, I don't mean to. But it shows that if indeed we have entered DD stage then it increases the likelihood that the article is way off the truth. Which we both want. Too bad City Addicks meet is shafted.[/quote]
Judging by this from Standard (posted elsewhere on the site), Zabeel are denying the Hammers link and we are in the due diligence stage already so we will have to sit tight and wait til this develops, I am with PragueAddick, we would not throw open the books unless it was serious.
[quote][cite]Posted By: PragueAddick[/cite]"There is 100% nothing wrong or underhand in a company looking for a business etc and taking on DD in severalplaces at the same time or one after the other."
Well look, it probably doesn't matter, because people seem to think its started at Charlton and the article doesn't suggest it has at West Ham. But there is a lot wrong with carrying out DD on more than one company in the same area, and it generally does not happen. When you do due diligence, the selling company opens up everything. Every way it makes money, every trick of the trade. There is no way it does that lightly, and certainly no way they do it with a company that is apparently getting the same level of knowledge about a competitor. Imagine if Lloyds TSB had done DD on both HBOS and Barclays, before buying HBOS. They would know everything about Barclays and could from then on proceed to take them to the cleaners.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm lecturing you, I don't mean to. But it shows that if indeed we have entered DD stage then it increases the likelihood that the article is way off the truth. Which we both want. Too bad City Addicks meet is shafted.[/quote]
its all bollocks now anyway ... have alook at one of the other threads
[cite]Posted By: PragueAddick[/cite]"There is 100% nothing wrong or underhand in a company looking for a business etc and taking on DD in severalplaces at the same time or one after the other."
Well look, it probably doesn't matter, because people seem to think its started at Charlton and the article doesn't suggest it has at West Ham. But there is a lot wrong with carrying out DD on more than one company in the same area, and it generally does not happen. When you do due diligence, the selling company opens up everything. Every way it makes money, every trick of the trade. There is no way it does that lightly, and certainly no way they do it with a company that is apparently getting the same level of knowledge about a competitor. Imagine if Lloyds TSB had done DD on both HBOS and Barclays, before buying HBOS. They would know everything about Barclays and could from then on proceed to take them to the cleaners.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm lecturing you, I don't mean to. But it shows that if indeed we have entered DD stage then it increases the likelihood that the article is way off the truth. Which we both want. Too bad City Addicks meet is shafted.
Totally agree PA with all of that. Now backed up by the Zabeel comment reported in the (sub) Standard. If the Journalist you know is not in the business of fabricating information then somebody at West Ham is seriously pulling his pisser and trying to make it sprinkle on our parade.
Good points PA. I don't think anyone though thought these sources originated from Charlton though.
It is clear the journalist was fed from someone at Wham. No problem with that whatsoever. But at a supposed quality broadsheet, i would expect a bit more depth to a story rather than a wishy washy 'club sources indicate' that i would expect off the Sun, Mirror and Sky Sports News.
It was just too speculative for what should be filling a broadsheet page IMO.
Not to keep going on about this but I don't think anyone is suggesting due dilligence on both clubs, more an enquiry. If you were under offer on a house and another one next door came up that was better and keenly priced you might well see what the asking price was and have a look around.
Mascot i know (because i was on the team) that a company can and does under take DD in several places at once if it is open to all parties and has the cash to do so.
People seem to think that DD is some sort of test that you pass or fail , it isnt really like that. Its a set of RFIs (requests for information) that Zeebel will review. They then take a measured approach as to the risk against outlay. If outlay is no problem -- then it might be return on investment--- or it might be little capital works investment required ------- even if the DD went tits up Zeebal may think "i want it" and go ahead just as much as it going well and they change their mind.
Please please dont think there is some sort of clock ticking here it takes as long as they want or untill CAFC say make your mind up time.
[quote][cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]Mascot i know (because i was on the team) that a company can and does under take DD in several places at once if it is open to all parties and has the cash to do so.
People seem to think that DD is some sort of test that you pass or fail , it isnt really like that. Its a set of RFIs (requests for information) that Zeebel will review. They then take a measured approach as to the risk against outlay. If outlay is no problem -- then it might be return on investment--- or it might be little capital works investment required ------- even if the DD went tits up Zeebal may think "i want it" and go ahead just as much as it going well and they change their mind.
Please please dont think there is some sort of clock ticking here it takes as long as they want or untill CAFC say make your mind up time.[/quote]
oh ok.... I thought it was a case of weve talked and talked and yeah lets go fot it, and the due dilligence was simply a test of whether the stuff we had used to sell the club with is true or not......
It smacks of single sourcing, and it looks like Mr Scott saw a story, and ran with it without checking it, either by putting a call in Zabeel, or even with Rothchilds.
To me this seem like message management on behalf of West Ham, there supporters have the arsehole at the moment that Charlton are potentially in the money, and they are feeling the heat, so to spin something out there which will keep supporters happy seems to be what they've done.
I would have brought this more if it had been in a tabloid.
"Mascot i know (because i was on the team) that a company can and does under take DD in several places at once if it is open to all parties and has the cash to do so."
Well you obviously have the experience, but its certainly not mine. I think the key is "open to all parties". In my field -advertising - there's not a cat in hell's chance that a selling ad agency would submit to due diligence if they thought the buyer was or intending to do it with another agency before making a buying decision. And I think football clubs are similar businesses, their key assets are highly paid individuals. If your approach was followed, they could buy West Ham and know every last thing about CAFC. And vice-versa. Wages, which agents they use, all the tax avoidance schemes..They might even uncover evidence of Mrs Defoe's house purchase, for heaven's sake :-) Neither club would want to risk that, would they. And btw, companies like WPP don't mess around with RFI's. They expect to go crawling around the offices in person. Don't know about a football deal, but I think I'd be doing the same if I was a diligent buyer. Sure it can go on as long as the buyer wants, and the seller puts up with, but again i don't think Charlton would agree unless they had assurances about the scope and the process. I hope so.
West Ham, being in the Premier League and everyone knows they are in trouble (the BBC's had a reporter out there all day pissing away licence fee money on some stuff about football and the credit crunch), so they're a lot more attractive to news editors than little old Charlton (TM).
And yeah, West Ham still retain the services of a very expensive PR firm which will be wanting to keep supporters sweet. Suspect this will keep bobbing up and down like Robert Maxwell after he fell off his yacht.
"Good points PA. I don't think anyone though thought these sources originated from Charlton though."
Sorry, I didn't write well. I meant that due diligence had started at Charlton, not the story. I think on reflection your comments about the article are 100% valid. I hope so. If it turns out that way, I might try and take him to task and see what he says. My only worry is that he just did not seem to be that stupid.
Comments
A few more banners would be a start. Where's Rothko?
why would they want to buy that debt ridden.... massive expenses high wages nightmare...
Charlton all the way
It's all about journo scum needings a story.
That's not what I wanted to read particularly after I'd convinced myself that the Guardian article was a load of old bull.
The meeting onite will tell you little that you dont know now. That is 100 % that a DD is being undertaken by Zeebel on CAFC, you might find out a possible time scale but even that dosnt mean you will get an answer !
Zeebel may well undertake several DDs at the same time or we might find they complete CAFC and deside to de WHU before making a buy.
I'll be very happy to find out that everything I wrote was full of holes. Matt Scott is not my mate. But its obvious that he is not the kind of scumbag that writes for the Sun, the type happy to assist Chelsea in getting Parker. He's been fed something from Upton Park, that much is clear. Nothing else is, I agree.
If anyone's going to City Addicks tonight, it would be very interesting to find out if due diligence has already started. In most areas of business its very unusual for a buyer to conduct due diligence with more than one seller at a time in the same market. The process of due diligence is a bloody nightmare for the seller, and no reasonable seller would agree to due diligence without the commitment to do the deal unless the process threw up some nasties. If we are already in that phase, I'd personally be more optimistic that its going through, and the story may be desperate attempt by West Ham to scream "hey don't buy them, you can buy us".
Agreed with Pilchard about the word dicreet from the article, and GH 'unless there was a cat sittng in the office in Dubai when this was discussed'.
I fully expect more 'tripe' until it is all finalised.
Well look, it probably doesn't matter, because people seem to think its started at Charlton and the article doesn't suggest it has at West Ham. But there is a lot wrong with carrying out DD on more than one company in the same area, and it generally does not happen. When you do due diligence, the selling company opens up everything. Every way it makes money, every trick of the trade. There is no way it does that lightly, and certainly no way they do it with a company that is apparently getting the same level of knowledge about a competitor. Imagine if Lloyds TSB had done DD on both HBOS and Barclays, before buying HBOS. They would know everything about Barclays and could from then on proceed to take them to the cleaners.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm lecturing you, I don't mean to. But it shows that if indeed we have entered DD stage then it increases the likelihood that the article is way off the truth. Which we both want. Too bad City Addicks meet is shafted.
Well look, it probably doesn't matter, because people seem to think its started at Charlton and the article doesn't suggest it has at West Ham. But there is a lot wrong with carrying out DD on more than one company in the same area, and it generally does not happen. When you do due diligence, the selling company opens up everything. Every way it makes money, every trick of the trade. There is no way it does that lightly, and certainly no way they do it with a company that is apparently getting the same level of knowledge about a competitor. Imagine if Lloyds TSB had done DD on both HBOS and Barclays, before buying HBOS. They would know everything about Barclays and could from then on proceed to take them to the cleaners.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm lecturing you, I don't mean to. But it shows that if indeed we have entered DD stage then it increases the likelihood that the article is way off the truth. Which we both want. Too bad City Addicks meet is shafted.[/quote]
Judging by this from Standard (posted elsewhere on the site), Zabeel are denying the Hammers link and we are in the due diligence stage already so we will have to sit tight and wait til this develops, I am with PragueAddick, we would not throw open the books unless it was serious.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-sport/article-23572422-details/article.do?ito=newsnow&
Well look, it probably doesn't matter, because people seem to think its started at Charlton and the article doesn't suggest it has at West Ham. But there is a lot wrong with carrying out DD on more than one company in the same area, and it generally does not happen. When you do due diligence, the selling company opens up everything. Every way it makes money, every trick of the trade. There is no way it does that lightly, and certainly no way they do it with a company that is apparently getting the same level of knowledge about a competitor. Imagine if Lloyds TSB had done DD on both HBOS and Barclays, before buying HBOS. They would know everything about Barclays and could from then on proceed to take them to the cleaners.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm lecturing you, I don't mean to. But it shows that if indeed we have entered DD stage then it increases the likelihood that the article is way off the truth. Which we both want. Too bad City Addicks meet is shafted.[/quote]
its all bollocks now anyway ... have alook at one of the other threads
Totally agree PA with all of that. Now backed up by the Zabeel comment reported in the (sub) Standard. If the Journalist you know is not in the business of fabricating information then somebody at West Ham is seriously pulling his pisser and trying to make it sprinkle on our parade.
It is clear the journalist was fed from someone at Wham. No problem with that whatsoever. But at a supposed quality broadsheet, i would expect a bit more depth to a story rather than a wishy washy 'club sources indicate' that i would expect off the Sun, Mirror and Sky Sports News.
It was just too speculative for what should be filling a broadsheet page IMO.
People seem to think that DD is some sort of test that you pass or fail , it isnt really like that. Its a set of RFIs (requests for information) that Zeebel will review. They then take a measured approach as to the risk against outlay. If outlay is no problem -- then it might be return on investment--- or it might be little capital works investment required ------- even if the DD went tits up Zeebal may think "i want it" and go ahead just as much as it going well and they change their mind.
Please please dont think there is some sort of clock ticking here it takes as long as they want or untill CAFC say make your mind up time.
People seem to think that DD is some sort of test that you pass or fail , it isnt really like that. Its a set of RFIs (requests for information) that Zeebel will review. They then take a measured approach as to the risk against outlay. If outlay is no problem -- then it might be return on investment--- or it might be little capital works investment required ------- even if the DD went tits up Zeebal may think "i want it" and go ahead just as much as it going well and they change their mind.
Please please dont think there is some sort of clock ticking here it takes as long as they want or untill CAFC say make your mind up time.[/quote]
oh ok.... I thought it was a case of weve talked and talked and yeah lets go fot it, and the due dilligence was simply a test of whether the stuff we had used to sell the club with is true or not......
It smacks of single sourcing, and it looks like Mr Scott saw a story, and ran with it without checking it, either by putting a call in Zabeel, or even with Rothchilds.
To me this seem like message management on behalf of West Ham, there supporters have the arsehole at the moment that Charlton are potentially in the money, and they are feeling the heat, so to spin something out there which will keep supporters happy seems to be what they've done.
I would have brought this more if it had been in a tabloid.
Well you obviously have the experience, but its certainly not mine. I think the key is "open to all parties". In my field -advertising - there's not a cat in hell's chance that a selling ad agency would submit to due diligence if they thought the buyer was or intending to do it with another agency before making a buying decision. And I think football clubs are similar businesses, their key assets are highly paid individuals. If your approach was followed, they could buy West Ham and know every last thing about CAFC. And vice-versa. Wages, which agents they use, all the tax avoidance schemes..They might even uncover evidence of Mrs Defoe's house purchase, for heaven's sake :-) Neither club would want to risk that, would they. And btw, companies like WPP don't mess around with RFI's. They expect to go crawling around the offices in person. Don't know about a football deal, but I think I'd be doing the same if I was a diligent buyer. Sure it can go on as long as the buyer wants, and the seller puts up with, but again i don't think Charlton would agree unless they had assurances about the scope and the process. I hope so.
And yeah, West Ham still retain the services of a very expensive PR firm which will be wanting to keep supporters sweet. Suspect this will keep bobbing up and down like Robert Maxwell after he fell off his yacht.
"Good points PA. I don't think anyone though thought these sources originated from Charlton though."
Sorry, I didn't write well. I meant that due diligence had started at Charlton, not the story. I think on reflection your comments about the article are 100% valid. I hope so. If it turns out that way, I might try and take him to task and see what he says. My only worry is that he just did not seem to be that stupid.