Whilst I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt given the individual they are trying to purchase the club from, there is no doubt in my mind that Muir's appearance at the home play off game draped in a scarf was somewhat presumptive. I am sure that in hindsight he and his colleagues regret that.
Is it that different from this? Would it have been different if he hadn't worn a Charlton scarf?
Every time I see a photo of Keohane he looks paler than before. I reckon he's a vampire.
This is what I can't understand. If the total of money owed the directors is 7 million that is a small amount when you think of the cost of buying the club.
Why not come to an agreement where Roland and the buyers pay half each.
That's 3.5 million each and if that is what is causing the hold up ups fuckin pathetic tbh.
That's £3,500,000.00 each - that's in no way a small amount.
It is absolutely a small amount when you think of the cost of buying a club.
It is quite a lot to be fair, even as a % of the purchase price of the club.
Whilst I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt given the individual they are trying to purchase the club from, there is no doubt in my mind that Muir's appearance at the home play off game draped in a scarf was somewhat presumptive. I am sure that in hindsight he and his colleagues regret that.
Is it that different from this? Would it have been different if he hadn't worn a Charlton scarf?
Every time I see a photo of Keohane he looks paler than before. I reckon he's a vampire.
I don’t get this “£7m is not a lot of money”. It is. It is also a considerable increase in price.
Speculation that it may cost £200m to get into the Prem is simply not valid. It may not be the only objective, or the only way they believe it could be achieved.
Estimates at todays prices. Assumes our threadbare squad won't go up 18/19 and consolidation if we do next season. Ignores pay-offs for duds. Obviously swop Y5 for Y3 is a gamblè, but one I doubt an astute consortium would make. LB could turn out to be a magician but he promised promotion if we made play-offs so I doubt it. Incalculables, training ground and player sales.
There's no way the Aussies didn't know about the multiple ownerships rules. From what we know there were 2 issues raised by the EFL, we don't know if that was with one investor or with 2 investors. We do know from James Seed that one investor stepped out as a result and has now been replaced.
The most likely reason being that they knew about the issue, but thought it would be resolved before the fit and proper tests were completed. It wasn't resolved, and isn't going to be resolved imminently, so they stepped away from the deal. That fits all the facts we know and makes logical sense. Of course there are lots of other possibilities, but them not know about that rule seems by far the least likely, yet people keep saying it and using as some sort of stick to beat the Aussies with.
Pretty sure, but didn't hear this from GM, but from another source. I agree with Airman that it's the directors loans issue that is holding things up.
If the directors loans are holding things up, would they consider rolling over the loans to the Aussies, if the Aussies bid is credible to reach the Premiership (easy for me to propose I know, over what is a large sum of not my money). If the Aussies plan is solid then there may be a better chance to get their money back than with Duchatelet ?
Or is Duchatelet trying to pay them off, so he can do his own rolling on money owed with keeping hold of the ground ?
(Apologies if this has been covered in the last 200 pages of this sometimes difficult to follow thread : puns / fighting / out & out BS with the occasional relevant bit of news).
As above but AB also said the Aussies want clear title and no debts or words to that effect I believe
Thanks @razil. What’s the big deal for the Aussies in clear title if they are trying to spend only the required amount ? Surely the Directors would be easier to deal with. Wouldn’t be worth it to seal the deal & no longer have to deal with Duchatelet ?
Because that would cost them £7M over and above what they have offered, and it is Rolands debt not theirs.
If they agreed for that to be rolled on, with agreement with the Directors, then they would not have to spend £7million. What’s the big deal with clean title ?
Would you not want a clean break from this shit show? Can imagine they were open minded coming into the process but with RD (it seems) constantly moving the goal posts, I can imagine they just want rid and a blank canvass to create there own legacy & not having to deal with the leftovers of RDs legacy.
Thanks @king addick & @RedChaser. I can follow what you saying @king addick. Is it enough to break the whole deal though ?
I also find it difficult to understand how the issue of the directors loans would not have been picked up in due diligence. Its not like its a secret. This takeover thing & Aussie interest has been going on for nearly as long as an elephant's pregnancy.
Regading rolling on of the loans. Some of the Directors may be a bit more annoying, but surely they would not be able to have any particular say in the running of the team going forward ? Murray had a nominal title but had no specific influence on things, I could see. I can still remember the conscending look of Duchatelet & incredulous look Meire gave Murray in the beginning when Murray was blathering on about Charlton not having to sell any of the young players.
Also understand your point.
RD may have buried the loans or made a promise he would pay them off only to then change is mind in petulance?
All speculation on my part of course but through interviews and actions, it's not hard to get the measure of the man.
Amazing how many Charlton fans think £3.5 - £7M is not a lot of money. CL should have got a consortium together to buy the club.
I have no idea if this really is the hold up or not and if it is, what caused it. I can imagine a scenario where the Aussies made an offer of £X for the club with clean title and RD was daft enough to think that would all go to him and has now found out that actually to get clean title will cost him £7M of the £40M so is scrabbling around trying to do deals with the ex-Directors. It would follow the business sense he has shown to date throughout his ownership of our club.
If that scenario was broadly accurate and I was the Aussies, no way would I be backing down. It’s his problem and he should deal with it, especially if The Aussies are already paying a full price. The cost of a 5 year plan is irrelevant, that is high risk gambling money for the reward of the PL. The £7M is just an unecessary additional upfront burden or watering down of an IRR if we made it back to the PL.
For me, this all sits on RD’s doorstep, his problem. Making cuts will just reduce his monthly black hole, not cure it and there is no one of value left to sell so unless he thinks he can trouser cash from a Nick Pope sell on, that £7M he needs to pay off the former directors will soon be gone just maintaining us if he does not sell.
Let’s hope it is over soon, Murphy and Muir comes across as decent people to me but also not the sort of people who have got where they have got by being had over / overpaying and clearly not for lax diligence.
I don’t get this “£7m is not a lot of money”. It is. It is also a considerable increase in price.
Speculation that it may cost £200m to get into the Prem is simply not valid. It may not be the only objective, or the only way they believe it could be achieved.
Estimates at todays prices. Assumes our threadbare squad won't go up 18/19 and consolidation if we do next season. Ignores pay-offs for duds. Obviously swop Y5 for Y3 is a gamblè, but one I doubt an astute consortium would make. LB could turn out to be a magician but he promised promotion if we made play-offs so I doubt it. Incalculables, training ground and player sales.
Not bothered now if the deal falls through. Let Roland try and do his worse and if over the next month his cutting back on everything will have a think about backing the season ticket. Then be joining the thousands of doing the aways but not the homes.
There's no way the Aussies didn't know about the multiple ownerships rules. From what we know there were 2 issues raised by the EFL, we don't know if that was with one investor or with 2 investors. We do know from James Seed that one investor stepped out as a result and has now been replaced.
The most likely reason being that they knew about the issue, but thought it would be resolved before the fit and proper tests were completed. It wasn't resolved, and isn't going to be resolved imminently, so they stepped away from the deal. That fits all the facts we know and makes logical sense. Of course there are lots of other possibilities, but them not know about that rule seems by far the least likely, yet people keep saying it and using as some sort of stick to beat the Aussies with.
Pretty sure, but didn't hear this from GM, but from another source. I agree with Airman that it's the directors loans issue that is holding things up.
This seems madness and I struggle to believe this is an issue with serious businessmen. They are only repayable in the Prem where they will be tbe equivalent of change down the back of the sofa. Meanwhile we face another two years in L1 due to weak squad and only 40 days to re-enforce, which I am sure is not in their 5 year plan.
I guess it depends on what was offered. Using the £40m that has been banded about, if they were offered the club in full, all sold, for that sum the Aussies would fairly assume that they would own the club and there would be no charges left on it. If they got to the exchange of contracts stage and they are told they are paying £40m and there is a £7m debt still to pay that will quite rightly piss them off and lead to some renegotiation.
As an accountant, charges on property assets would be top of my DD and would/could be done before any approach is made for £1 at Land Registry. Again £7m is a drop in the ocean compared to the £150m+ needed to finance the 5 year plan and need not be paid until Prem. This is a red addock herring
Not if all investors were promised clear title as a precondition of investing.
Bottom line is people wouldn't have been getting worked up about the takeover til xmas - or this summer - had Meire not decided to jump ship - if the Aussies hadn't been leaking info for the last 18 months and getting everybody's hopes up prematurely. Nothing happening in October and certainly apparent a full DD had not been undertaken - price agreed in February, further DD and now a reduction in the offer by the Aussies - that's my take on it and now we have a stand off but hopefully they will resolve it soon
I'm not sure they have been have they? I didn't even realise I knew one of them until mid May!
There's no way the Aussies didn't know about the multiple ownerships rules. From what we know there were 2 issues raised by the EFL, we don't know if that was with one investor or with 2 investors. We do know from James Seed that one investor stepped out as a result and has now been replaced.
The most likely reason being that they knew about the issue, but thought it would be resolved before the fit and proper tests were completed. It wasn't resolved, and isn't going to be resolved imminently, so they stepped away from the deal. That fits all the facts we know and makes logical sense. Of course there are lots of other possibilities, but them not know about that rule seems by far the least likely, yet people keep saying it and using as some sort of stick to beat the Aussies with.
Pretty sure, but didn't hear this from GM, but from another source. I agree with Airman that it's the directors loans issue that is holding things up.
If the directors loans are holding things up, would they consider rolling over the loans to the Aussies, if the Aussies bid is credible to reach the Premiership (easy for me to propose I know, over what is a large sum of not my money). If the Aussies plan is solid then there may be a better chance to get their money back than with Duchatelet ?
Or is Duchatelet trying to pay them off, so he can do his own rolling on money owed with keeping hold of the ground ?
(Apologies if this has been covered in the last 200 pages of this sometimes difficult to follow thread : puns / fighting / out & out BS with the occasional relevant bit of news).
As above but AB also said the Aussies want clear title and no debts or words to that effect I believe
Thanks @razil. What’s the big deal for the Aussies in clear title if they are trying to spend only the required amount ? Surely the Directors would be easier to deal with. Wouldn’t be worth it to seal the deal & no longer have to deal with Duchatelet ?
Because that would cost them £7M over and above what they have offered, and it is Rolands debt not theirs.
I think everyone accepts that, but why has such a large hidden "cost", only come to light now and not at any time in the last 10 odd months?
Its been common knowledge for years. What seems to be the issue is RD still not being able to pay down the loans and offer the buyers clear title.
Questions should be aimed at him. Like, "if you've agreed a price to sell something you don't fully own, when are you going to sort out the mess"?
I know that!, but why has it only come up now and not at any time previously?
My guess is that RD has only just started to find a cheap route out of his £7m hole.
I reckon it went like this...
Aussies and RD agreed a price. Aussies lost an investor at the EFL hurdle. RD then started his fire sale. The Aussies then reduced their offer commensurate with the amount of asset lost by the sale. RD then approached the friendly directors to see if he could pay them down at a discount.
My guess is that RD intended to pay down the loans in full, before the sale. So it's only since the fire sale that they've become an issue.
I think it's inconceivable that the loans have only just been brought to the attention of the Aussies. And in the tiniest possibility that's the case, I would blame RD entirely for it: after all he's known about them since AFTER he bought the club.
There's no way the Aussies didn't know about the multiple ownerships rules. From what we know there were 2 issues raised by the EFL, we don't know if that was with one investor or with 2 investors. We do know from James Seed that one investor stepped out as a result and has now been replaced.
The most likely reason being that they knew about the issue, but thought it would be resolved before the fit and proper tests were completed. It wasn't resolved, and isn't going to be resolved imminently, so they stepped away from the deal. That fits all the facts we know and makes logical sense. Of course there are lots of other possibilities, but them not know about that rule seems by far the least likely, yet people keep saying it and using as some sort of stick to beat the Aussies with.
Pretty sure, but didn't hear this from GM, but from another source. I agree with Airman that it's the directors loans issue that is holding things up.
If the directors loans are holding things up, would they consider rolling over the loans to the Aussies, if the Aussies bid is credible to reach the Premiership (easy for me to propose I know, over what is a large sum of not my money). If the Aussies plan is solid then there may be a better chance to get their money back than with Duchatelet ?
Or is Duchatelet trying to pay them off, so he can do his own rolling on money owed with keeping hold of the ground ?
(Apologies if this has been covered in the last 200 pages of this sometimes difficult to follow thread : puns / fighting / out & out BS with the occasional relevant bit of news).
As above but AB also said the Aussies want clear title and no debts or words to that effect I believe
Thanks @razil. What’s the big deal for the Aussies in clear title if they are trying to spend only the required amount ? Surely the Directors would be easier to deal with. Wouldn’t be worth it to seal the deal & no longer have to deal with Duchatelet ?
Because that would cost them £7M over and above what they have offered, and it is Rolands debt not theirs.
I think everyone accepts that, but why has such a large hidden "cost", only come to light now and not at any time in the last 10 odd months?
Its been common knowledge for years. What seems to be the issue is RD still not being able to pay down the loans and offer the buyers clear title.
Questions should be aimed at him. Like, "if you've agreed a price to sell something you don't fully own, when are you going to sort out the mess"?
I know that!, but why has it only come up now and not at any time previously?
My guess is that RD has only just started to find a cheap route out if his £7m hole.
I reckon it went like this...
Aussies and RD agreed a price. Aussies lost an investor at the EFL hurdle. RD then started his fire sale. The Aussies then reduced their offer commensurate with the amount of asset lost by the sale. RD then approached the friendly directors to see if he could pay them down at a discount.
My guess is that RD intended to pay down the loans in full, before the sale. So it's only since the fire sale that they've become an issue.
I think it's inconceivable that the loans have only just been brought to the attention of the Aussies. And in the tiniest possibility that's the case, I would blame RD entirely for it: after all he's known about them since AFTER he bought the club.
There's no way due diligence wouldn't have shown the loans so the Aussies would have known about it since then if not before (as publicly available information). I think it's more likely that the heads of agreement were for clean and clear title at x price and RD thought he'd pay down the ex directors for a fraction of the debt but that hasn't happened/been agreed. Post Konsa sale if I was the Aussies regardless of his book value i'd have been reducing my offer accordingly (and Lennon although that wouldn't move the dial much ).
There's no way the Aussies didn't know about the multiple ownerships rules. From what we know there were 2 issues raised by the EFL, we don't know if that was with one investor or with 2 investors. We do know from James Seed that one investor stepped out as a result and has now been replaced.
The most likely reason being that they knew about the issue, but thought it would be resolved before the fit and proper tests were completed. It wasn't resolved, and isn't going to be resolved imminently, so they stepped away from the deal. That fits all the facts we know and makes logical sense. Of course there are lots of other possibilities, but them not know about that rule seems by far the least likely, yet people keep saying it and using as some sort of stick to beat the Aussies with.
Pretty sure, but didn't hear this from GM, but from another source. I agree with Airman that it's the directors loans issue that is holding things up.
If the directors loans are holding things up, would they consider rolling over the loans to the Aussies, if the Aussies bid is credible to reach the Premiership (easy for me to propose I know, over what is a large sum of not my money). If the Aussies plan is solid then there may be a better chance to get their money back than with Duchatelet ?
Or is Duchatelet trying to pay them off, so he can do his own rolling on money owed with keeping hold of the ground ?
(Apologies if this has been covered in the last 200 pages of this sometimes difficult to follow thread : puns / fighting / out & out BS with the occasional relevant bit of news).
As above but AB also said the Aussies want clear title and no debts or words to that effect I believe
Thanks @razil. What’s the big deal for the Aussies in clear title if they are trying to spend only the required amount ? Surely the Directors would be easier to deal with. Wouldn’t be worth it to seal the deal & no longer have to deal with Duchatelet ?
Because that would cost them £7M over and above what they have offered, and it is Rolands debt not theirs.
I think everyone accepts that, but why has such a large hidden "cost", only come to light now and not at any time in the last 10 odd months?
Its been common knowledge for years. What seems to be the issue is RD still not being able to pay down the loans and offer the buyers clear title.
Questions should be aimed at him. Like, "if you've agreed a price to sell something you don't fully own, when are you going to sort out the mess"?
I know that!, but why has it only come up now and not at any time previously?
My guess is that RD has only just started to find a cheap route out if his £7m hole.
I reckon it went like this...
Aussies and RD agreed a price. Aussies lost an investor at the EFL hurdle. RD then started his fire sale. The Aussies then reduced their offer commensurate with the amount of asset lost by the sale. RD then approached the friendly directors to see if he could pay them down at a discount.
My guess is that RD intended to pay down the loans in full, before the sale. So it's only since the fire sale that they've become an issue.
I think it's inconceivable that the loans have only just been brought to the attention of the Aussies. And in the tiniest possibility that's the case, I would blame RD entirely for it: after all he's known about them since AFTER he bought the club.
There's no way due diligence wouldn't have shown the loans so the Aussies would have known about it since then if not before (as publicly available information). I think it's more likely that the heads of agreement were for clean and clear title at x price and RD thought he'd pay down the ex directors for a fraction of the debt but that hasn't happened/been agreed. Post Konsa sale if I was the Aussies regardless of his book value i'd have been reducing my offer accordingly (and Lennon although that wouldn't move the dial much ).
There's no way the Aussies didn't know about the multiple ownerships rules. From what we know there were 2 issues raised by the EFL, we don't know if that was with one investor or with 2 investors. We do know from James Seed that one investor stepped out as a result and has now been replaced.
The most likely reason being that they knew about the issue, but thought it would be resolved before the fit and proper tests were completed. It wasn't resolved, and isn't going to be resolved imminently, so they stepped away from the deal. That fits all the facts we know and makes logical sense. Of course there are lots of other possibilities, but them not know about that rule seems by far the least likely, yet people keep saying it and using as some sort of stick to beat the Aussies with.
Pretty sure, but didn't hear this from GM, but from another source. I agree with Airman that it's the directors loans issue that is holding things up.
This seems madness and I struggle to believe this is an issue with serious businessmen. They are only repayable in the Prem where they will be tbe equivalent of change down the back of the sofa. Meanwhile we face another two years in L1 due to weak squad and only 40 days to re-enforce, which I am sure is not in their 5 year plan.
There's no way the Aussies didn't know about the multiple ownerships rules. From what we know there were 2 issues raised by the EFL, we don't know if that was with one investor or with 2 investors. We do know from James Seed that one investor stepped out as a result and has now been replaced.
The most likely reason being that they knew about the issue, but thought it would be resolved before the fit and proper tests were completed. It wasn't resolved, and isn't going to be resolved imminently, so they stepped away from the deal. That fits all the facts we know and makes logical sense. Of course there are lots of other possibilities, but them not know about that rule seems by far the least likely, yet people keep saying it and using as some sort of stick to beat the Aussies with.
Pretty sure, but didn't hear this from GM, but from another source. I agree with Airman that it's the directors loans issue that is holding things up.
This seems madness and I struggle to believe this is an issue with serious businessmen. They are only repayable in the Prem where they will be tbe equivalent of change down the back of the sofa. Meanwhile we face another two years in L1 due to weak squad and only 40 days to re-enforce, which I am sure is not in their 5 year plan.
Don’t know what serious businessmen you have met mate.
The idea of buying something already at top whack with a requirement to pay people around 20% extra on the asking price should I invest 3 times the price over 5 years and as a result hit my targets, most of the serious business people I know would piss themselves laughing.
Whilst I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt given the individual they are trying to purchase the club from, there is no doubt in my mind that Muir's appearance at the home play off game draped in a scarf was somewhat presumptive. I am sure that in hindsight he and his colleagues regret that.
Is it that different from this? Would it have been different if he hadn't worn a Charlton scarf?
Every time I see a photo of Keohane he looks paler than before. I reckon he's a vampire.
Whilst I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt given the individual they are trying to purchase the club from, there is no doubt in my mind that Muir's appearance at the home play off game draped in a scarf was somewhat presumptive. I am sure that in hindsight he and his colleagues regret that.
Is it that different from this? Would it have been different if he hadn't worn a Charlton scarf?
Every time I see a photo of Keohane he looks paler than before. I reckon he's a vampire.
Anyone got a stake?
Watch it...the albino panda has police contacts (was going to say friends but having had a chat with them have to say that they hate him as much as the next person)
Whilst I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt given the individual they are trying to purchase the club from, there is no doubt in my mind that Muir's appearance at the home play off game draped in a scarf was somewhat presumptive. I am sure that in hindsight he and his colleagues regret that.
Is it that different from this? Would it have been different if he hadn't worn a Charlton scarf?
Every time I see a photo of Keohane he looks paler than before. I reckon he's a vampire.
Whilst I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt given the individual they are trying to purchase the club from, there is no doubt in my mind that Muir's appearance at the home play off game draped in a scarf was somewhat presumptive. I am sure that in hindsight he and his colleagues regret that.
Is it that different from this? Would it have been different if he hadn't worn a Charlton scarf?
Every time I see a photo of Keohane he looks paler than before. I reckon he's a vampire.
Anyone got a stake?
Watch it...the albino panda has police contacts (was going to say friends but having had a chat with them have to say that they hate him as much as the next person)
Don’t worry - big bollox will probably include chips (14) and a peppercorn sauce.
If only he were that clever. Steak £5, bun £1 extra, each chip 20p, basic additions go to sparrows lane development. peppercorn sauce £2 extra, goes towards funding development team breakfasts.
I don't understand why this has become an issue now. Surely when they agreed a general price and did due diligence ages ago, the agreed purchase price between the Aussies and RD would either have kept the directors as a future payment, or would have been after they had been paid off? A £7m cost isn't something which would have been overlooked, or which wouldn't have been considered months ago.
To be honest, the odds on us getting into the PL are still relatively small, the Championship is full of clubs spending horrendous sums of money to reach the promised land, if I was one of the directors I wouldn't have been counting on getting my money paid anytime soon...
Just catching up - did we meet the arbitrary deadline?
Yes, comfortably.
Oh thank god. What’s our next one? Takeover completed
Before the Belgian tax year ends Before the st Truiden elections Before the end of the World Cup Before the start of the season Before they introduce a nationwide hosepipe ban Before Megan leaves love island Before Prince Phillip passes away Before the next geological age
I don't understand why this has become an issue now. Surely when they agreed a general price and did due diligence ages ago, the agreed purchase price between the Aussies and RD would either have kept the directors as a future payment, or would have been after they had been paid off? A £7m cost isn't something which would have been overlooked, or which wouldn't have been considered months ago.
To be honest, the odds on us getting into the PL are still relatively small, the Championship is full of clubs spending horrendous sums of money to reach the promised land, if I was one of the directors I wouldn't have been counting on getting my money paid anytime soon...
Can we not be bankrolled? You never know what is around the corner.
If the stories are true about clear title costing RD several million he was not expecting, which he wants the Aussies to pay, he should think twice... the next offer might be well lower than the Aussie offer. I don't for one second believe the so-called English buyers in line will pony up, otherwise why didn't they do this a month ago when there was still bidding? I think its the Aussies or no one. And if we are in L2 after this season, the club will be essentially worth £1 plus maybe a 66% haircut on debt. Max.
5 down.......and unless all parties want to work over the weekend.....its all out.
Now of course, a deadlines only a deadline if you're serious. We are supposed to be leaving the EU on the 29th March 2019 but now there is a "transation period" which is going to last until at least 2021.
And it was only to "show me the money" in any case......so that's ok then. Real deadline is "middle of July" or "2 weeks after "show me the money" happens".....whichever is sooner/later. Does that mean if "show me the money" happens next week then completion day is then 2 weeks after that ?? who knows...??
All I do know us that as every day passess the more the team is affected......by the fact no new players are coming in.....that its likely that more players will leave with RD needing to fund overheads etc.......that the players themselves get fecked off with not knowing what going on........and lastly because us fans are getting more hacked off & likely not go to home games come August..
Just when you think you hit rock bottom, the rug is pulled from under you & you fall further.
Whilst I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt given the individual they are trying to purchase the club from, there is no doubt in my mind that Muir's appearance at the home play off game draped in a scarf was somewhat presumptive. I am sure that in hindsight he and his colleagues regret that.
Is it that different from this? Would it have been different if he hadn't worn a Charlton scarf?
Every time I see a photo of Keohane he looks paler than before. I reckon he's a vampire.
Whilst I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt given the individual they are trying to purchase the club from, there is no doubt in my mind that Muir's appearance at the home play off game draped in a scarf was somewhat presumptive. I am sure that in hindsight he and his colleagues regret that.
Is it that different from this? Would it have been different if he hadn't worn a Charlton scarf?
Every time I see a photo of Keohane he looks paler than before. I reckon he's a vampire.
Anyone got a stake?
Watch it...the albino panda has police contacts (was going to say friends but having had a chat with them have to say that they hate him as much as the next person)
It was a spelling mistake, officer, I meant steak of course
Comments
Y2 L1 Costs £14m Tfrs £3m
Y3 Ch Costs £15m Tfrs £10m
Y4 Ch Costs £18m Tfrs £20m
Y5 Ch Costs £25m Tfrs £33m
Y6 Pr Bingo! £150m plus £7m payoff
Estimates at todays prices. Assumes our threadbare squad won't go up 18/19 and consolidation if we do next season. Ignores pay-offs for duds. Obviously swop Y5 for Y3 is a gamblè, but one I doubt an astute consortium would make. LB could turn out to be a magician but he promised promotion if we made play-offs so I doubt it. Incalculables, training ground and player sales.
RD may have buried the loans or made a promise he would pay them off only to then change is mind in petulance?
All speculation on my part of course but through interviews and actions, it's not hard to get the measure of the man.
I have no idea if this really is the hold up or not and if it is, what caused it. I can imagine a scenario where the Aussies made an offer of £X for the club with clean title and RD was daft enough to think that would all go to him and has now found out that actually to get clean title will cost him £7M of the £40M so is scrabbling around trying to do deals with the ex-Directors. It would follow the business sense he has shown to date throughout his ownership of our club.
If that scenario was broadly accurate and I was the Aussies, no way would I be backing down. It’s his problem and he should deal with it, especially if The Aussies are already paying a full price. The cost of a 5 year plan is irrelevant, that is high risk gambling money for the reward of the PL. The £7M is just an unecessary additional upfront burden or watering down of an IRR if we made it back to the PL.
For me, this all sits on RD’s doorstep, his problem. Making cuts will just reduce his monthly black hole, not cure it and there is no one of value left to sell so unless he thinks he can trouser cash from a Nick Pope sell on, that £7M he needs to pay off the former directors will soon be gone just maintaining us if he does not sell.
Let’s hope it is over soon, Murphy and Muir comes across as decent people to me but also not the sort of people who have got where they have got by being had over / overpaying and clearly not for lax diligence.
Let Roland try and do his worse and if over the next month his cutting back on everything will have a think about backing the season ticket.
Then be joining the thousands of doing the aways but not the homes.
I reckon it went like this...
Aussies and RD agreed a price. Aussies lost an investor at the EFL hurdle. RD then started his fire sale. The Aussies then reduced their offer commensurate with the amount of asset lost by the sale. RD then approached the friendly directors to see if he could pay them down at a discount.
My guess is that RD intended to pay down the loans in full, before the sale. So it's only since the fire sale that they've become an issue.
I think it's inconceivable that the loans have only just been brought to the attention of the Aussies. And in the tiniest possibility that's the case, I would blame RD entirely for it: after all he's known about them since AFTER he bought the club.
The idea of buying something already at top whack with a requirement to pay people around 20% extra on the asking price should I invest 3 times the price over 5 years and as a result hit my targets, most of the serious business people I know would piss themselves laughing.
To be honest, the odds on us getting into the PL are still relatively small, the Championship is full of clubs spending horrendous sums of money to reach the promised land, if I was one of the directors I wouldn't have been counting on getting my money paid anytime soon...
Before the Belgian tax year endsBefore the st Truiden elections
Before the end of the World Cup
Before the start of the season
Before they introduce a nationwide hosepipe ban
Before Megan leaves love island
Before Prince Phillip passes away
Before the next geological age
However, I would not wager against you.
Now of course, a deadlines only a deadline if you're serious. We are supposed to be leaving the EU on the 29th March 2019 but now there is a "transation period" which is going to last until at least 2021.
And it was only to "show me the money" in any case......so that's ok then. Real deadline is "middle of July" or "2 weeks after "show me the money" happens".....whichever is sooner/later. Does that mean if "show me the money" happens next week then completion day is then 2 weeks after that ?? who knows...??
All I do know us that as every day passess the more the team is affected......by the fact no new players are coming in.....that its likely that more players will leave with RD needing to fund overheads etc.......that the players themselves get fecked off with not knowing what going on........and lastly because us fans are getting more hacked off & likely not go to home games come August..
Just when you think you hit rock bottom, the rug is pulled from under you & you fall further.