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

** Takeover rumours - ed. Deal 'allegedly' DONE p.66**

15556586061113

Comments

  • I'm told that staff are very unhappy indeed but have been promised funds will come in today.

    It's strange considering we had an "extra" home game this month, you'd think we might have slightly more cash in the kitty.

    Hope all those impacted get their wages very soon.
  • edited November 2013
    PaddyP17 said:

    JonnyK said:

    Great question about where it will leave peoples views on slater and TJ


    NSS asked me this last week, that if there was a take over and it turned out to be a very good financial deal for cafc

    Its taken a while for me to digest and consider but

    Then they should and would be held in terms of achievements whilst in role succesful and instrumental in helping rebuild the club from its lowest point

    Its a bit of bitter\sweet

    But like HI says I will believe it when its on the OS

    Just one further comment that may already have been made - the Daily Smail article is the first that I have read that specifically refers to KC as a backer. For a man who shuns publicity I wonder what he is thinking???

    Hadn't realised that.

    No, the Daily Mail used the phrase "Cash is claimed to be" or some other - thus they're not acknowledging a source, or stating outright, and therefore covering themselves from libel (I would think). Reading through various CL investigative work is what gives that impression, so yeah.
    It's not necessarily libellous to assert something that is not true. It would need to be defamatory as well.

    I think he's simply making clear that he doesn't know it to be the case.
  • PaddyP17 said:

    JonnyK said:

    Great question about where it will leave peoples views on slater and TJ


    NSS asked me this last week, that if there was a take over and it turned out to be a very good financial deal for cafc

    Its taken a while for me to digest and consider but

    Then they should and would be held in terms of achievements whilst in role succesful and instrumental in helping rebuild the club from its lowest point

    Its a bit of bitter\sweet

    But like HI says I will believe it when its on the OS

    Just one further comment that may already have been made - the Daily Smail article is the first that I have read that specifically refers to KC as a backer. For a man who shuns publicity I wonder what he is thinking???

    Hadn't realised that.

    No, the Daily Mail used the phrase "Cash is claimed to be" or some other - thus they're not acknowledging a source, or stating outright, and therefore covering themselves from libel (I would think). Reading through various CL investigative work is what gives that impression, so yeah.
    It's not necessarily libellous to assert something that is not true. It would need to be defamatory as well.

    I think he's simply making clear that he doesn't know it to be the case.
    You've put it far better than me, cheers
  • PaddyP17 said:

    PaddyP17 said:

    JonnyK said:

    Great question about where it will leave peoples views on slater and TJ


    NSS asked me this last week, that if there was a take over and it turned out to be a very good financial deal for cafc

    Its taken a while for me to digest and consider but

    Then they should and would be held in terms of achievements whilst in role succesful and instrumental in helping rebuild the club from its lowest point

    Its a bit of bitter\sweet

    But like HI says I will believe it when its on the OS

    Just one further comment that may already have been made - the Daily Smail article is the first that I have read that specifically refers to KC as a backer. For a man who shuns publicity I wonder what he is thinking???

    Hadn't realised that.

    No, the Daily Mail used the phrase "Cash is claimed to be" or some other - thus they're not acknowledging a source, or stating outright, and therefore covering themselves from libel (I would think). Reading through various CL investigative work is what gives that impression, so yeah.
    It's not necessarily libellous to assert something that is not true. It would need to be defamatory as well.

    I think he's simply making clear that he doesn't know it to be the case.
    You've put it far better than me, cheers
    K Cash may consider being associated with Charlton defamatory!!
  • edited November 2013
    Not defending the (potential) late payment of wages but over the past 5 years since the banking crisis there have been so many employees and sub contractors of UK businesses who have had to wait for salaries/invoices to be paid.

    However it seems crazy to 'rock the boat' when you are allegedly negotiating a trade sale of your business as it sends a message that the cupboard is bare which in turn encourages the potential purchaser to reduce the bid price surely?

    Football clubs in the UK have history for late payment of salaries but it us usually during the period leading up to and whilst being held in Administration!

    I think ES Mike mentioned that as a club supplier getting paid on invoices is like getting blood out of a stone - are there any other suppliers who post on here in the same boat?

  • edited November 2013

    JonnyK said:

    Great question about where it will leave peoples views on slater and TJ


    NSS asked me this last week, that if there was a take over and it turned out to be a very good financial deal for cafc

    Its taken a while for me to digest and consider but

    Then they should and would be held in terms of achievements whilst in role succesful and instrumental in helping rebuild the club from its lowest point

    Its a bit of bitter\sweet

    But like HI says I will believe it when its on the OS

    Just one further comment that may already have been made - the Daily Smail article is the first that I have read that specifically refers to KC as a backer. For a man who shuns publicity I wonder what he is thinking???

    Hadn't realised that.


    Not so. Cash's name was linked to Slater and us in January 2011 by the Guardian when the takeover occurred


    http://www.charltonlife.com/discussion/38886/kevin-cash
  • JonnyK said:

    Great question about where it will leave peoples views on slater and TJ


    NSS asked me this last week, that if there was a take over and it turned out to be a very good financial deal for cafc

    Its taken a while for me to digest and consider but

    Then they should and would be held in terms of achievements whilst in role succesful and instrumental in helping rebuild the club from its lowest point

    Its a bit of bitter\sweet

    But like HI says I will believe it when its on the OS

    Just one further comment that may already have been made - the Daily Smail article is the first that I have read that specifically refers to KC as a backer. For a man who shuns publicity I wonder what he is thinking???

    Hadn't realised that.


    Not so. Cash's name was linked to Slater and us in January 2011 by the Guardian when the takeover occurred


    http://www.charltonlife.com/discussion/38886/kevin-cash
    I would still be interested to have an insight into whether he made a right old mess when he read his DM whilst eating his corn flakes this morning ;-)))
  • My guess is that Kevin Cash might be questioning the judgement of whoever leaked the, what increasingly looks like an incorrect, story to the SLP.

    That put the heat under what was just a few whispers on the internet and lead to a story naming the publicity shy Mr Cash, who has strong links with Mr Slater, in a national newspaper.

    It may also have damaged the chances of the Harris deal being completed but that is just a guess. If so Mr Cash will be even less happy.
  • JonnyK said:

    Just one further comment that may already have been made - the Daily Smail article is the first that I have read that specifically refers to KC as a backer. For a man who shuns publicity I wonder what he is thinking???

    Yeah that caught my attention as well. It's something we all understand to be the case but had never actually read in print anywhere.

    Totally unrelated of course but it instantly reminded me of the published news article after the conclusion of the recent Jiminez vs Wise court case which included a quoted comment from big Tone himself....to my mind the first direct quote from him i've seen/read/heard. He purposely/categorically says chaff all to us supporters with regards to anything about the club but certainly had something to say on the steps of the court house after losing.

  • I think the cover of tomorrow's programme clearly proves beyond all reasonable doubt that we are leaving the Valley.

    image
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited November 2013
    What a great idea that cover is. Will we have the formations on the back and alphabetical shirt numbers?
  • edited November 2013

    Hmm no public response to this 'story' so here's my take

    1. If this is the only bid on the table, I cannot for the life of me imagine why the club sellers would leak to the press.
    2. There might be a second bid; certainly info I have points to a different potential buyer from a different part of the world; and looks like Reams had similar info (even though I am sure his guessing game with the company name was a blind alley)
    3. Even if there is a second bid, I still don't know why the seller would play a highly dangerous game in the press, one he cannot control
    4. That leads me to be worried that someone else is leaking to the press. The question is why, and I don't find ready answers which are good for CAFC
    5. The Mail identified Harris , the SLP did not, but it knew the name. Looks to me like the leaker approached the Mail separately.

    Overall , just my take, I don't like these particular leaks, not sure they are designed to help a bid go through. And I think any deal is far from done, and may well not be with these people.

    Just speculation - but I think the little evidence that has always been available points to Slater being Cash's employee, on board to mind his investment - rather than an independent 'joint owner' (with Jimenez) or funder of the club. While it's also likely that Jimenez is fronting other 'investments' (like little Dennis's in the golf club) and 'loans' that need to be paid back.

    Which could mean that Jimenez and Slater may have rather different interests in a sale (price/terms etc) and be disagreeing among themselves - and leaking?

  • edited November 2013
    Think that's a fair assessment based on:

    1. The known known
    2. The known unknown
    3. The unknown unknown
  • Where have the Germans gone then ?

    Sodded off with their tails between their legs when the yanks got involved......Again ;-)

    Is that what you think ? We will see
  • edited November 2013
    If I owned the ALLEY CAF, I'd offer free set breakfast 4 with 2 slices and a strong tea to the editor of that programme



    oit edit your own posts rasssssssssssppppppp
  • Nice picture on the programme btw
  • cafc1263 said:

    Where have the Germans gone then ?

    Sodded off with their tails between their legs when the yanks got involved......Again ;-)

    Is that what you think ? We will see
    I think he was just making a little WW2 joke

  • Whoever believes anything they read in a newspaper anyway
  • micks1950 said:

    Hmm no public response to this 'story' so here's my take

    1. If this is the only bid on the table, I cannot for the life of me imagine why the club sellers would leak to the press.
    2. There might be a second bid; certainly info I have points to a different potential buyer from a different part of the world; and looks like Reams had similar info (even though I am sure his guessing game with the company name was a blind alley)
    3. Even if there is a second bid, I still don't know why the seller would play a highly dangerous game in the press, one he cannot control
    4. That leads me to be worried that someone else is leaking to the press. The question is why, and I don't find ready answers which are good for CAFC
    5. The Mail identified Harris , the SLP did not, but it knew the name. Looks to me like the leaker approached the Mail separately.

    Overall , just my take, I don't like these particular leaks, not sure they are designed to help a bid go through. And I think any deal is far from done, and may well not be with these people.

    Just speculation - but I think the little evidence that has always been available points to Slater being Cash's employee, on board to mind his investment - rather than an independent 'joint owner' (with Jimenez) or funder of the club. While it's also likely that Jimenez is fronting other 'investments' (like little Dennis's in the golf club) and 'loans' that need to be paid back.

    Which could mean that Jimenez and Slater may have rather different interests in a sale (price/terms etc) and be disagreeing among themselves - and leaking?

    That's an interesting angle, and is as good as any other.

    I was also just reminding myself about what happened in 2010. The Sainsbury deal got leaked into the media. On top of that, people on here were getting briefings, many anonymous, all of them negative to that deal. The Jiminez Slater bid was virtually unknown to us plebs until the deal was done.

  • I want to say that I understand there remain forces out there who can veto a takeover from whatever direction. They are not the current majority regime but previous people, and the Royal bank of Scotland.
  • Sponsored links:


  • In an airport and no time to read 35 pages. Is the takeover a FACT yet?
  • edited November 2013
    kimbo said:

    In an airport and no time to read 35 pages. Is the takeover a FACT yet?

    Nope! The usual speculation to get us all excited...
  • No word from the club still...
  • Promising news for us and Powell is that Harris kept 76ers head coach Doug Collins on after he took over and kept faith with him through some poor runs. He resigned earlier this year but is still involved there as an adviser.

    This sounds good.
  • No word from the club still...

    Don't expect there to be one either until/if the deal is done

  • I think the cover of tomorrow's programme clearly proves beyond all reasonable doubt that we are leaving the Valley.

    image

    Actually that's the design for our new stadium on the peninsula - should keep those who don't like change a bit happier.
  • I think they will also keep the pitch. Paddy is to be given a new wheelbarrow to cart it all down the Woolwich Road. Things are looking up!
  • redsek said:

    I think the cover of tomorrow's programme clearly proves beyond all reasonable doubt that we are leaving the Valley.


    image

    Actually that's the design for our new stadium on the peninsula - should keep those who don't like change a bit happier.
    I see. If you move it, they will come.

This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!