Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Bollox. The loans were to the holding company with a repayment on reaching the Prem (Baton?) or else Murray would have his money now. Staprix bought Baton and are now selling it. RM gets his money when we are in the Prem unless someone stupidy repays him earlier. This is not a hurdle to the Ozzies. £7m to their £150m business plan or Prem gravy train is change at the back of the sofa.Davidsmith said:
All three, price has never included Directors Loans from Roland's perspective, but buyers want the charges removed and so that is a reduction in price to Roland,thus stalemate.Henry Irving said:
So it's all about the price?Davidsmith said:This deal has always been about the price, Roland never understood the Ex Directors loans needed clearing if he was going to find a real buyer.
Until he pays them off no buyer with a Business brain will buy the Club.
Aussies as has been mentioned before do not have funds.
Over to you Roland.
Or it's the director's loans?
Or it that the Aussies don't have the funds?
Which one @Davidsmith ?
Aussies apparently from multiple sources are cash short .0 -
I don't like the idea of the Aussies, something ain't right.10
-
I agree that something isn't right but not convinced it's the Aussies.Redhenry said:I don't like the idea of the Aussies, something ain't right.
It might be them but if so why did all the other parties walk away?
And who does all this briefing against the Aussies suit?
Only Roland and Murray.16 -
Why have others walked away and they are still here? I don't have any inside info but it just smells wrong.2
-
How exactly does it benefit RD or RM? RD wants out; they are in play as potential buyers as per website.Henry Irving said:
I agree that something isn't right but not convinced it's the Aussies.Redhenry said:I don't like the idea of the Aussies, something ain't right.
It might be them but if so why did all the other parties walk away?
And who does all this briefing against the Aussies suit?
Only Roland and Murray.
Losses mount every day.
No benefit for RD in discrediting them and losing a sale.
1 -
Agreed, the we've had 5 months of losses since the January transfer window closed which RD has had to cover.valleynick66 said:
How exactly does it benefit RD or RM? RD wants out; they are in play as potential buyers as per website.Henry Irving said:
I agree that something isn't right but not convinced it's the Aussies.Redhenry said:I don't like the idea of the Aussies, something ain't right.
It might be them but if so why did all the other parties walk away?
And who does all this briefing against the Aussies suit?
Only Roland and Murray.
Losses mount every day.
No benefit for RD in discrediting them and losing a sale.
I doubt RD cares who buys us, he just wants the best price possible and the earliest date1 -
Possible reasons others have walked away because:Redhenry said:Why have others walked away and they are still here? I don't have any inside info but it just smells wrong.
the price was too high for them.
they felt it was too much for what was on offer
Delays by Roland caused them to move on.
Roland wanted to retain ownership of the Valley
The training ground was vastly over valued as as almost finished rather than just started.
DD turn up uncertainties from the Spivs era which buyers weren't happy with.
Buyers wanted clear ownership and the old directors bonds muddied that.
They didnt have any money
Charlton's league one status wasn't what they wanted
It's all CARD's fault.
1 -
You make the false assumption that RD is "rational." Arguments such as "this is costing him money!" or "he has no alternatives!" just are meaningless to him. After all, he bought without doing DD.valleynick66 said:
How exactly does it benefit RD or RM? RD wants out; they are in play as potential buyers as per website.
Losses mount every day.
No benefit for RD in discrediting them and losing a sale.1 -
No assumption. I just don’t see what the perceived benefit is for him in discrediting the Aussies.NapaAddick said:
You make the false assumption that RD is "rational." Arguments such as "this is costing him money!" or "he has no alternatives!" just are meaningless to him. After all, he bought without doing DD.valleynick66 said:
How exactly does it benefit RD or RM? RD wants out; they are in play as potential buyers as per website.
Losses mount every day.
No benefit for RD in discrediting them and losing a sale.
The post I replied to implied there is advantage to him. If so what ?0 -
It shifts the blame for the delay/failure away from him.valleynick66 said:
No assumption. I just don’t see what the perceived benefit is for him in discrediting the Aussies.NapaAddick said:
You make the false assumption that RD is "rational." Arguments such as "this is costing him money!" or "he has no alternatives!" just are meaningless to him. After all, he bought without doing DD.valleynick66 said:
How exactly does it benefit RD or RM? RD wants out; they are in play as potential buyers as per website.
Losses mount every day.
No benefit for RD in discrediting them and losing a sale.
The post I replied to implied there is advantage to him. If so what ?
We know he doesn't "do failure" and he doesn't want, imho, to take the blame for his rushed DD, his huge losses or unreasonable price.
So it's an easy one to blame the Aussies.
Financially he'd be better off cutting his losses but his pride won't let him.2 -
Sponsored links:
-
You forgot Brexit.Henry Irving said:
Possible reasons others have walked away because:Redhenry said:Why have others walked away and they are still here? I don't have any inside info but it just smells wrong.
the price was too high for them.
they felt it was too much for what was on offer
Delays by Roland caused them to move on.
Roland wanted to retain ownership of the Valley
The training ground was vastly over valued as as almost finished rather than just started.
DD turn up uncertainties from the Spivs era which buyers weren't happy with.
Buyers wanted clear ownership and the old directors bonds muddied that.
They didnt have any money
Charlton's league one status wasn't what they wanted
It's all CARD's fault.0 -
Love brexit0
-
England have reached the semis, I am cooking a BBQ, I am possibly more than slightly drunk, for tonight at least I will forget about worrying about an illusive takeover.5
-
Not acceptable. This thread runs 24/7 you need to check in hourly like everybody else!cfgs said:England have reached the semis, I am cooking a BBQ, I am possibly more than slightly drunk, for tonight at least I will forget about worrying about an illusive takeover.
10 -
This has gone on for so long that I have absolutely no idea what to say.
Except.
Just sell the club and FUCK OFF7 -
You're on MY list you vinegar pisser!
1 -
So RD who cares not about supporters and their views now needs to question the deal in its entirety by suggesting the Aussies have no funds to complete the deal ?Henry Irving said:
It shifts the blame for the delay/failure away from him.valleynick66 said:
No assumption. I just don’t see what the perceived benefit is for him in discrediting the Aussies.NapaAddick said:
You make the false assumption that RD is "rational." Arguments such as "this is costing him money!" or "he has no alternatives!" just are meaningless to him. After all, he bought without doing DD.valleynick66 said:
How exactly does it benefit RD or RM? RD wants out; they are in play as potential buyers as per website.
Losses mount every day.
No benefit for RD in discrediting them and losing a sale.
The post I replied to implied there is advantage to him. If so what ?
We know he doesn't "do failure" and he doesn't want, imho, to take the blame for his rushed DD, his huge losses or unreasonable price.
So it's an easy one to blame the Aussies.
Financially he'd be better off cutting his losses but his pride won't let him.
I still don't see why he would put this message out just to account for the delay. His interest surely is limiting losses not about what 'we' think about the time taken to conclude the deal.
Likewise what's your rationale for RM being behind a suggestion the Aussie deal has no funding in place ?0 -
Maybe he's the British interest and wants a clear run at it.valleynick66 said:
So RD who cares not about supporters and their views now needs to question the deal in its entirety by suggesting the Aussies have no funds to complete the deal ?Henry Irving said:
It shifts the blame for the delay/failure away from him.valleynick66 said:
No assumption. I just don’t see what the perceived benefit is for him in discrediting the Aussies.NapaAddick said:
You make the false assumption that RD is "rational." Arguments such as "this is costing him money!" or "he has no alternatives!" just are meaningless to him. After all, he bought without doing DD.valleynick66 said:
How exactly does it benefit RD or RM? RD wants out; they are in play as potential buyers as per website.
Losses mount every day.
No benefit for RD in discrediting them and losing a sale.
The post I replied to implied there is advantage to him. If so what ?
We know he doesn't "do failure" and he doesn't want, imho, to take the blame for his rushed DD, his huge losses or unreasonable price.
So it's an easy one to blame the Aussies.
Financially he'd be better off cutting his losses but his pride won't let him.
I still don't see why he would put this message out just to account for the delay. His interest surely is limiting losses not about what 'we' think about the time taken to conclude the deal.
Likewise what's your rationale for RM being behind a suggestion the Aussie deal has no funding in place ?5 -
But went on record and said otherwise ?Henry Irving said:
Maybe he's the British interest and wants a clear run at it.valleynick66 said:
So RD who cares not about supporters and their views now needs to question the deal in its entirety by suggesting the Aussies have no funds to complete the deal ?Henry Irving said:
It shifts the blame for the delay/failure away from him.valleynick66 said:
No assumption. I just don’t see what the perceived benefit is for him in discrediting the Aussies.NapaAddick said:
You make the false assumption that RD is "rational." Arguments such as "this is costing him money!" or "he has no alternatives!" just are meaningless to him. After all, he bought without doing DD.valleynick66 said:
How exactly does it benefit RD or RM? RD wants out; they are in play as potential buyers as per website.
Losses mount every day.
No benefit for RD in discrediting them and losing a sale.
The post I replied to implied there is advantage to him. If so what ?
We know he doesn't "do failure" and he doesn't want, imho, to take the blame for his rushed DD, his huge losses or unreasonable price.
So it's an easy one to blame the Aussies.
Financially he'd be better off cutting his losses but his pride won't let him.
I still don't see why he would put this message out just to account for the delay. His interest surely is limiting losses not about what 'we' think about the time taken to conclude the deal.
Likewise what's your rationale for RM being behind a suggestion the Aussie deal has no funding in place ?
Also still doesn’t account for RD putting out messages.
Genuinely I don’t see why he RD would do that when he wants out.0 -
Does anyone know why 56 DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP has a charge on the club? Seem to be a small fry family business.1
-
Sponsored links:
-
Where has this come from ? Never seen this mentioned.harveys_gardener said:Does anyone know why 56 DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP has a charge on the club? Seem to be a small fry family business.
0 -
Isn’t that just one of the ex Directors, Bob Whitehand or whatever his name is.2
-
They can sell Baton, Holdings but Charges still there , not a hurdle to Aussies so why have they not done it? Why have they never spoken to Ex Directors?harveys_gardener said:
Bollox. The loans were to the holding company with a repayment on reaching the Prem (Baton?) or else Murray would have his money now. Staprix bought Baton and are now selling it. RM gets his money when we are in the Prem unless someone stupidy repays him earlier. This is not a hurdle to the Ozzies. £7m to their £150m business plan or Prem gravy train is change at the back of the sofa.Davidsmith said:
All three, price has never included Directors Loans from Roland's perspective, but buyers want the charges removed and so that is a reduction in price to Roland,thus stalemate.Henry Irving said:
So it's all about the price?Davidsmith said:This deal has always been about the price, Roland never understood the Ex Directors loans needed clearing if he was going to find a real buyer.
Until he pays them off no buyer with a Business brain will buy the Club.
Aussies as has been mentioned before do not have funds.
Over to you Roland.
Or it's the director's loans?
Or it that the Aussies don't have the funds?
Which one @Davidsmith ?
Aussies apparently from multiple sources are cash short .
So i suggest Bollox is not my problem.
1 -
Whitehands husband and wife. Were they old investors?1
-
Make your mind up.Davidsmith said:
They can sell Baton, Holdings but Charges still there , not a hurdle to Aussies so why have they not done it? Why have they never spoken to Ex Directors?harveys_gardener said:
Bollox. The loans were to the holding company with a repayment on reaching the Prem (Baton?) or else Murray would have his money now. Staprix bought Baton and are now selling it. RM gets his money when we are in the Prem unless someone stupidy repays him earlier. This is not a hurdle to the Ozzies. £7m to their £150m business plan or Prem gravy train is change at the back of the sofa.Davidsmith said:
All three, price has never included Directors Loans from Roland's perspective, but buyers want the charges removed and so that is a reduction in price to Roland,thus stalemate.Henry Irving said:
So it's all about the price?Davidsmith said:This deal has always been about the price, Roland never understood the Ex Directors loans needed clearing if he was going to find a real buyer.
Until he pays them off no buyer with a Business brain will buy the Club.
Aussies as has been mentioned before do not have funds.
Over to you Roland.
Or it's the director's loans?
Or it that the Aussies don't have the funds?
Which one @Davidsmith ?
Aussies apparently from multiple sources are cash short .
So i suggest Bollox is not my problem.
First it was Duchatelet who wouldn't pay it off but know your asking why the Aussies haven't paid it.
As usual you pose more questions than you give answers.0 -
I'm not claiming to have a great business mind, but I've been saying it a while, if these are the same outfit who were sniffing round for more investment in the City to even make the initial offer, it should ring alarm bells imo.Redhenry said:Why have others walked away and they are still here? I don't have any inside info but it just smells wrong.
I think the Aussies have thought they've had the upper hand all along and basically went along with everything to get to the point where RD was so desperate to offload, that He would agree to a couple of small concessions to get the deal over the line, the £7 million charge being one, but they never took into account what a greedy stubborn old goat he is. Whoever was responsible for paying this £7 million off shoulda / woulda been agreed months ago, surely. So why is it a sticking point now, when the deal is supposedly so close? Someone ain't being honest and I personally don't think its all RD meself.
Queue the LOLs from the sheeple on here who won't have nothing bad said about the Aussies, but look at the bigger picture ffs, even if the deal goes through on Monday, there's still a couple of quite large question marks over certain things that have gone on over the last few months.
3 -
There’s nothing dodgy going on, not from the Aussie side anyway. If there’s a niff in the air, and I suspect there is, it’s coming from a different direction.Redhenry said:Why have others walked away and they are still here? I don't have any inside info but it just smells wrong.
1 -
No i dont , keep up , Roland not paying so buyer has to, whats hard to understand about that. Aussies, Spacemen, Saudis who the hell ever, have you got it now?Henry Irving said:
Make your mind up.Davidsmith said:
They can sell Baton, Holdings but Charges still there , not a hurdle to Aussies so why have they not done it? Why have they never spoken to Ex Directors?harveys_gardener said:
Bollox. The loans were to the holding company with a repayment on reaching the Prem (Baton?) or else Murray would have his money now. Staprix bought Baton and are now selling it. RM gets his money when we are in the Prem unless someone stupidy repays him earlier. This is not a hurdle to the Ozzies. £7m to their £150m business plan or Prem gravy train is change at the back of the sofa.Davidsmith said:
All three, price has never included Directors Loans from Roland's perspective, but buyers want the charges removed and so that is a reduction in price to Roland,thus stalemate.Henry Irving said:
So it's all about the price?Davidsmith said:This deal has always been about the price, Roland never understood the Ex Directors loans needed clearing if he was going to find a real buyer.
Until he pays them off no buyer with a Business brain will buy the Club.
Aussies as has been mentioned before do not have funds.
Over to you Roland.
Or it's the director's loans?
Or it that the Aussies don't have the funds?
Which one @Davidsmith ?
Aussies apparently from multiple sources are cash short .
So i suggest Bollox is not my problem.
First it was Duchatelet who wouldn't pay it off but know your asking why the Aussies haven't paid it.
As usual you pose more questions than you give answers.
I am not posting anymore as its likeceducating children. Bye abuse me at your will Henry.8 -
Sheeple? Bit harsh. To say something bad about the Aussies you need to have some evidence that they’ve done something wrong. If we find out something bad about the Aussies I’m sure opinions will shift. You’ve speculated a lot here, but I’m not sure what it’s based on, is all.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
I'm not claiming to have a great business mind, but I've been saying it a while, if these are the same outfit who were sniffing round for more investment in the City to even make the initial offer, it should ring alarm bells imo.Redhenry said:Why have others walked away and they are still here? I don't have any inside info but it just smells wrong.
I think the Aussies have thought they've had the upper hand all along and basically went along with everything to get to the point where RD was so desperate to offload, that He would agree to a couple of small concessions to get the deal over the line, the £7 million charge being one, but they never took into account what a greedy stubborn old goat he is. Whoever was responsible for paying this £7 million off shoulda / woulda been agreed months ago, surely. So why is it a sticking point now, when the deal is supposedly so close? Someone ain't being honest and I personally don't think its all RD meself.
Queue the LOLs from the sheeple on here who won't have nothing bad said about the Aussies, but look at the bigger picture ffs, even if the deal goes through on Monday, there's still a couple of quite large question marks over certain things that have gone on over the last few months.
What are these question marks? There’s been lots of speculation about them bidding high, or bidding low, or paying off directors or not paying off directors, when the truth is no one knows what’s going on in the negotiations because they’re between Gerard Murphy and Roland’s money man, and neither are saying a word. If you’re implying something shady is going on, I’d like to see your evidence of that!
GM has said zero to me since our beer, except to deny rumours put out by agitators.
So what is your evidence, or where are you hearing these rumours?1
This discussion has been closed.
