Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Everyone's FOR a takeover then?

2»

Comments

  • If its a press conference with Dermot O Leary head for the hills. . .
  • [cite]Posted By: falconwood_1[/cite]Its laughable people wondering who our next owners will be, one thing is certain they'll need big cash and be certifiable . . .

    exactly , i mean you have to be mad ... if it goes right you might make small money in the grand scheme of things and get a few pats on the back..... if it goes wrong , you've done a fortune and you've got 10thousand ungrateful punters moaning at you ... waste of time imo... but good luck to whoever takes on the poisoned chalice
  • I booked it that way too but you never know nowadays.
  • [cite]Posted By: Swisdom[/cite]As long as they are worth squillions I don't care who they are.

    Osama bin Jordan then?
  • 'i think it's admirable that everyone says "i don't care about the money".........but come on.....when zabeel were about to take us over, we were all licking our lips bigtime. picking our dream elevens, wondering who we'd buy first. i'm the same as the next man in that whoever takes over charlton i want them to keep the traditions alive but if we weren't taken over, got promoted, got into the premiership, got into europe, the club would evolve.'

    What I think others mean is that they would rather be pragmatic about a potential takeover or they wouldn't be happy to foresake stability for an oil tycoon-type injection of wealth in the club. After all, existentialism is important here, and has precedence over supporting a club that becomes a fortune500 plaything that no longer resembles the club we supported (ask any 'old school' Chelsea fan about this) and could fold over night if the plug is suddenly pulled by the sugar daddy.

    I know I would far rather have Varney leading a consortium because he is a fan, he has an entrenched understanding of what Charlton means, how we tick, how we operate, and we wouldn't have to ponder whether he was 'only in it for the take' and we wouldn't turn into a 'soccer franchise' of McDonalds F.C. We certainly wouldn't have any such trust (at least initially) with an Uzbeki gas entrepeneur, or Glazer-esque/Tango-esque chairman.
  • [cite]Posted By: Stu of HU16[/cite]I doubt that would happen Chizz, would those directors really want all their hard work destroyed? They are fans as well, yes they've made their fair share of mistakes over the last couple of years but I don't think they'd do anything of that magnitude to harm the club simply to better their own financial positions.


    Its already been destroyed hasnt it...... losing money everyday, selling everything that isnt nailed down...
  • Its all about money, Im afraid that is the inherent nature of modern footbal.....

    So if a bunch of guys can turn up service the debt and give us even 10 million to spend then bacng, unless old Parky is incompetent we should be a force in this league...

    We have had such a bad few seasons that any good news would give the whole club a huge boost and see us playing some decent football again, hopefully...
  • [cite]Posted By: mascot88[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: Stu of HU16[/cite]I doubt that would happen Chizz, would those directors really want all their hard work destroyed?


    Its already been destroyed hasnt it...... losing money everyday, selling everything that isnt nailed down...

    exactly!!
  • [cite]Posted By: mascot88[/cite]ts already been destroyed hasnt it...... losing money everyday, selling everything that isnt nailed down...

    Hang on a minute...

    I think we will start on Saturday with a midfield of Shelvey, Bailey, Racon.

    And possibly Gray up front, although some might argue whether that's a good thing. But he wasn't nailed down, and would command a fee.

    What were the odds on that being possible, back in May?
  • With hindsight the appointment of Dowie and Pardew were disasters but at the time they were good appointments and were backed with cash; Les Reed was a choice I supported at the time and the board moved quickly when that looked like failing. So for me the only failings of the board was sticking with Parky in the face of results, but like others I am gradually coming round.

    So if the takeover is a change of supporter in the boardroom, I'm not 100% in favour. However, if outside parties are bringing a real cash injection, then I'm for it assuming we get a Randy Lerner type rather than the Liverpool clowns. Given that we are not a viable investment at the moment, I'd hope for the former.
  • Sponsored links:


  • we don't know there have been firm offers on any of our players, Parky even suggested there hadn't been any some weeks back (Hudders being the exception of course and that deal may have been done way back)
  • [cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]we don't know there have been firm offers on any of our players

    We may argue about what is a 'firm offer" but there has definitely been serious interest in both Shelvey and Bailey, both could and would have been sold weeks ago if emergency fund-raising was the only thing on the agenda. And yes, I was told that by someone who would know.

    Of course I know its not deadline day...but...
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!