Has anyone else got the feeling that this is all gonna be a massive anti-climax. This consortium don't seem very dynamic do they
No they’re terrible aren’t they
Why give that response..?
"This consortium don't seem very dynamic"sums up the feelings of many fans right now.
Certainly not the way I feel, I’m glad they’re still in the hunt. As someone who buys and sells stuff almost every day I cannot imagine how complicated a deal of this nature must be.
Could see it as "persistent, calm, attention to detail, ensuring they are getting it right, having a plan and funding in place before jumping in, not put off by Roland's spoiling tactics, want Charlton, not just any old club".
Too many cooks spoil the broth v Many hands make light work
Roland is a proven terrible owner v We don't know how the Aussies will be as owners as yet
I personally wouldn't mind a consortium, but one that is proactive and one that can at least point out that they, or identify that their fellow members are not eligible to get involved in the first place
RD hasn’t reached agreement with the former directors. If the Aussies insist on clean title, which I’m assured they are, the deal can’t be closed until he does.
RD hasn’t reached agreement with the former directors. If the Aussies insist on clean title, which I’m assured they are, the deal can’t be closed until he does.
RD hasn’t reached agreement with the former directors. If the Aussies insist on clean title, which I’m assured they are, the deal can’t be closed until he does.
RD hasn’t reached agreement with the former directors. If the Aussies insist on clean title, which I’m assured they are, the deal can’t be closed until he does.
Is the likely result of this that RD will extend the fire sale in order to make the up-front cash required to pay off the ex directors in full?
RD hasn’t reached agreement with the former directors. If the Aussies insist on clean title, which I’m assured they are, the deal can’t be closed until he does.
But i thought he was trying to pay off the directors so that he could lease the Valley & Sparrows Lane to the Aussies? So the Aussies want the friendly debt paid off prior to taking over?
RD hasn’t reached agreement with the former directors. If the Aussies insist on clean title, which I’m assured they are, the deal can’t be closed until he does.
Is this the only (substantive) thing holding it up at the moment do you know?
RD hasn’t reached agreement with the former directors. If the Aussies insist on clean title, which I’m assured they are, the deal can’t be closed until he does.
So is the deal with former directors, if made (and let's hope so if it's stopping completion), going to confirm the lease of ground and training ground scenario?
RD hasn’t reached agreement with the former directors. If the Aussies insist on clean title, which I’m assured they are, the deal can’t be closed until he does.
You’d think he’d clear this charge just to get this deal done. Nothing makes sense anymore
RD hasn’t reached agreement with the former directors. If the Aussies insist on clean title, which I’m assured they are, the deal can’t be closed until he does.
You’d think he’d clear this charge just to get this deal done. Nothing makes sense anymore
RD hasn’t reached agreement with the former directors. If the Aussies insist on clean title, which I’m assured they are, the deal can’t be closed until he does.
You’d think he’d clear this charge just to get this deal done. Nothing makes sense anymore
Comments
However, I felt a huge surge of positivity after the Shrewsbury play off game, at the sight of members of the AFL consortium wearing Charlton gear.
This was compounded by many of those same people at the away leg.
But now? All that positivity has gone. I don't know what to think. And I feel a little betrayed.
(just to get the binary back on track)
Would anyone prefer Roland still to be in charge of the whole club, simply because the Aussies are acting diligently instead of just quickly?
Who has a preference for continued Roland ownership, over and above a consortium with plans, finance and ambition?
I've edited it out. @Henry Irving
VLADIMIR: That's what you think.