Fair point, Ibborg, none of us have a crystal ball.
As far as I can see, members of Team Oz, such as Muir, appear to have integrity and good judgement based on what they have done in their careers so far - and this is all that we can, and should, judge them on. So, when looking at RD's record with our club, it is unarguable (unless you are a member of one of the other sites, it appears) that RD has been a disaster for our club with a reverse Midas touch. Therefore, it is fair to speculate that he will continue to be one. As such, I want him gone.
But when it comes to RD or an alternative, I will go for the alternative every time.
So, as Blackpool so succinctly puts it: 'Roland, just sell the club and....' you can guess the rest.
Fair point but I have to agree with Ibborg. Just because Roland is such a shit owner doesn’t mean we should just swap him for anybody. Of course even if the replacement is marginally better then it’s progress, but that’s not saying anything because we are nearly at rock bottom.
All well and good wanting Roland out but no real point if the successors are nearly as bad. I would personally prefer to wait and have the right people in then still be in a shit position.
How will we know when it’s the “right people”? What will we do to stop others in the meantime?
Well a good start would be to give a second look at and ask questions of people who. -
- Don't know / ignore the rules of not owning shares or having interests in more than one football club.
- Get to the point of completion before talking about who is liable for a debt the is equal to nearly 20% of the reported sale price.
How do you know they didn't know/ignored EFL rules?
If they have made an offer for clean title of the football club, maybe they were expecting Roland to have settled the outstanding charges before the point of completion.
This is just an opinion by the way, you seem to be more in th know than me.
They're both opinions mate and we're both entitled to have them, but don't you think that things like charges on the Club is something that a consortium worth half its salt shoulda picked up on the the opening stages of negotiations? We know what owners are like, who aren't very thorough and don't pick up on such things, we've already got one
Rob, if I was buying Charlton why on earth would I not expect to get a clean title on the business and its property I was buying! No way can this issue be put at the Aussies door imo. Sorry mate but your barking up the wrong tree.
So why is everyone slagging RD off for suposing it werent his debt when he took over?
Sorry mate you've lost me, he bought the club without doing proper and thorough DD. His problem he needs to sort it if he wants to sell the club or am I being unreasonable?
I totally agree that it's his problem, but I've not said anything to the contrary. But it ain't helping our cause much is it
Nothing you or I can do about it, all will be revealed in due course hopefully but for now I'm not inclined to diss our apparent only lifeline.
I just can't understand that mentality of potentially moving the problem down the line, IF we even survive to a another take over, should these turn out to be cack like RD.
That's why I'm asking the questions.....
Well it looks as if the Australians are attempting to do as you suggest, and stop moving the problem down the line, by buying the club with clean title.
The poxy charges will be the least of our worries if they turn out to be like RD
I'm going to stick my neck out, they won't be, if I'm right you can put me and the misses up for a week in summer at your French gaff. If I'm wrong you can come and stay with me oop north for a week in the winter, deal? .
Can I book the second week in August at the French gaff?
Okay Jim, I'll take your word for it mate and I won't question anything else about the super consortium, who have shown nothing but exemplary behaviour during the last 12 odd months of trying to buy the Club, with the millions they have at their disposal. Look forward to you giving the nod to say it's a done deal and more details on the 5 year plan of not bringing Aussie players over even they already said they were intending to do so.
Just for the record; I don't see the charges as being the potential problem going forward. The question I'm asking and have been talking about is what led to them being overlooked or not sorted earlier by this mob and their representatives.
They have not been overlooked by the Aussies. It isn’t their problem to sort. Roland didn’t do due diligence and didn’t know about the loans until well after the deal was completed. That is his fault and his problem to sort out. Is it really that difficult to understand?
I am not a wealthy businessman but before spending £1m on DD, I would spend 100 pence at Land Registry looking at charges on assets. Even if I didn't it would be top of the list for my team. I wouldn't spend £1m then ask if RD owns everything outright. Thus the £7m isn't the issue.
Okay Jim, I'll take your word for it mate and I won't question anything else about the super consortium, who have shown nothing but exemplary behaviour during the last 12 odd months of trying to buy the Club, with the millions they have at their disposal. Look forward to you giving the nod to say it's a done deal and more details on the 5 year plan of not bringing Aussie players over even they already said they were intending to do so.
Okay Jim, I'll take your word for it mate and I won't question anything else about the super consortium, who have shown nothing but exemplary behaviour during the last 12 odd months of trying to buy the Club, with the millions they have at their disposal. Look forward to you giving the nod to say it's a done deal and more details on the 5 year plan of not bringing Aussie players over even they already said they were intending to do so.
Okay Jim, I'll take your word for it mate and I won't question anything else about the super consortium, who have shown nothing but exemplary behaviour during the last 12 odd months of trying to buy the Club, with the millions they have at their disposal. Look forward to you giving the nod to say it's a done deal and more details on the 5 year plan of not bringing Aussie players over even they already said they were intending to do so.
Just for the record; I don't see the charges as being the potential problem going forward. The question I'm asking and have been talking about is what led to them being overlooked or not sorted earlier by this mob and their representatives.
They have not been overlooked by the Aussies. It isn’t their problem to sort. Roland didn’t do due diligence and didn’t know about the loans until well after the deal was completed. That is his fault and his problem to sort out. Is it really that difficult to understand?
I've totally understood that from the very beginning mate and I really can't make MY point any clearer, but I will try, one more time - leaving the charges out of it for the moment, (they are just one point that this debate seems to have focused on) the whole take-over has been beset with problems from the start and while I completely accept that RD is responsible for some or most of them, there has still been problems reportedly emanating from the Golden Consortium's camp that I don't think should be ignored. IF, however, we're now saying that those problem as reported by Airman - NLA - Dave Smith etc. never existed, then I must've skipped those pages where that was explained and I stand corrected; we really do have a well connected, coherent band of multi-millionaires who will own the Club, to take Us on the great things.
Okay Jim, I'll take your word for it mate and I won't question anything else about the super consortium, who have shown nothing but exemplary behaviour during the last 12 odd months of trying to buy the Club, with the millions they have at their disposal. Look forward to you giving the nod to say it's a done deal and more details on the 5 year plan of not bringing Aussie players over even they already said they were intending to do so.
Okay Jim, I'll take your word for it mate and I won't question anything else about the super consortium, who have shown nothing but exemplary behaviour during the last 12 odd months of trying to buy the Club, with the millions they have at their disposal. Look forward to you giving the nod to say it's a done deal and more details on the 5 year plan of not bringing Aussie players over even they already said they were intending to do so.
I am not a wealthy businessman but before spending £1m on DD, I would spend 100 pence at Land Registry looking at charges on assets. Even if I didn't it would be top of the list for my team. I wouldn't spend £1m then ask if RD owns everything outright. Thus the £7m isn't the issue.
Exactly my point, but shall we move on from that now maybe
I am not a wealthy businessman but before spending £1m on DD, I would spend 100 pence at Land Registry looking at charges on assets. Even if I didn't it would be top of the list for my team. I wouldn't spend £1m then ask if RD owns everything outright. Thus the £7m isn't the issue.
So would I and I'd hope it was but as has been put forward before on here maybe the goalposts moved on the sale price which could have been for several reasons
Whatever, if they are not prepared to pay off the debentures and I wouldn't have agreed to that in the first place, then that's their call. It doesn't make them dodgy or unfit to be owners does it, it says to me they want value for money and the club they looked at way back when, is not worth that today as it's assets (staff on and off the pitch), have been watered down and it's league standing is still third tier.
I am not a wealthy businessman but before spending £1m on DD, I would spend 100 pence at Land Registry looking at charges on assets. Even if I didn't it would be top of the list for my team. I wouldn't spend £1m then ask if RD owns everything outright. Thus the £7m isn't the issue.
Exactly my point, but shall we move on from that now maybe
I agree but despite posting similar several times, we still get pages and pages of bollx trotted out that directors loans are holding up a deal.
I am not a wealthy businessman but before spending £1m on DD, I would spend 100 pence at Land Registry looking at charges on assets. Even if I didn't it would be top of the list for my team. I wouldn't spend £1m then ask if RD owns everything outright. Thus the £7m isn't the issue.
Exactly my point, but shall we move on from that now maybe
I agree but despite posting similar several times, we still get pages and pages of bollx trotted out that directors loans are holding up a deal.
I despair I really do! You're either being obdurate or a WUM and I'm leaning towards the latter.
I am not a wealthy businessman but before spending £1m on DD, I would spend 100 pence at Land Registry looking at charges on assets. Even if I didn't it would be top of the list for my team. I wouldn't spend £1m then ask if RD owns everything outright. Thus the £7m isn't the issue.
So would I and I'd hope it was but as has been put forward before on here maybe the goalposts moved on the sale price which could have been for several reasons
Whatever, if they are not prepared to pay off the debentures and I wouldn't have agreed to that in the first place, then that's their call. It doesn't make them dodgy or unfit to be owners does it, it says to me they want value for money and the club they looked at way back when, is not worth that today as it's assets (staff on and off the pitch), have been watered down and it's league standing is still third tier.
Can I reiterate, the debentures are only repayable in the Prem when £7m will be change down the back of the sofa. MOVE ON!!!
I am not a wealthy businessman but before spending £1m on DD, I would spend 100 pence at Land Registry looking at charges on assets. Even if I didn't it would be top of the list for my team. I wouldn't spend £1m then ask if RD owns everything outright. Thus the £7m isn't the issue.
So would I and I'd hope it was but as has been put forward before on here maybe the goalposts moved on the sale price which could have been for several reasons
Whatever, if they are not prepared to pay off the debentures and I wouldn't have agreed to that in the first place, then that's their call. It doesn't make them dodgy or unfit to be owners does it, it says to me they want value for money and the club they looked at way back when, is not worth that today as it's assets (staff on and off the pitch), have been watered down and it's league standing is still third tier.
No it doesn't and I've not seen anyone say that it does. The issue has been that it weren't picked up earlier, but the answer to that now seems to be that it actually was picked up by the Aussies and it is now RD who has moved the goal posts later on.
Like I just said, there's absolutely no flies on this mob and it goes to show that things really can be too good and true at the same time.
I am not a wealthy businessman but before spending £1m on DD, I would spend 100 pence at Land Registry looking at charges on assets. Even if I didn't it would be top of the list for my team. I wouldn't spend £1m then ask if RD owns everything outright. Thus the £7m isn't the issue.
So would I and I'd hope it was but as has been put forward before on here maybe the goalposts moved on the sale price which could have been for several reasons
Whatever, if they are not prepared to pay off the debentures and I wouldn't have agreed to that in the first place, then that's their call. It doesn't make them dodgy or unfit to be owners does it, it says to me they want value for money and the club they looked at way back when, is not worth that today as it's assets (staff on and off the pitch), have been watered down and it's league standing is still third tier.
Can I reiterate, the debentures are only repayable in the Prem when £7m will be change down the back of the sofa. MOVE ON!!!
I am not a wealthy businessman but before spending £1m on DD, I would spend 100 pence at Land Registry looking at charges on assets. Even if I didn't it would be top of the list for my team. I wouldn't spend £1m then ask if RD owns everything outright. Thus the £7m isn't the issue.
Exactly my point, but shall we move on from that now maybe
I agree but despite posting similar several times, we still get pages and pages of bollx trotted out that directors loans are holding up a deal.
I despair I really do! You're either being obdurate or a WUM and I'm leaning towards the latter.
I think you hit the nail on the head there redchaser.
I am not a wealthy businessman but before spending £1m on DD, I would spend 100 pence at Land Registry looking at charges on assets. Even if I didn't it would be top of the list for my team. I wouldn't spend £1m then ask if RD owns everything outright. Thus the £7m isn't the issue.
So would I and I'd hope it was but as has been put forward before on here maybe the goalposts moved on the sale price which could have been for several reasons
Whatever, if they are not prepared to pay off the debentures and I wouldn't have agreed to that in the first place, then that's their call. It doesn't make them dodgy or unfit to be owners does it, it says to me they want value for money and the club they looked at way back when, is not worth that today as it's assets (staff on and off the pitch), have been watered down and it's league standing is still third tier.
Can I reiterate, the debentures are only repayable in the Prem when £7m will be change down the back of the sofa. MOVE ON!!!
Do me a favour Land cannot change hands with prior charges on it. If your house has a mortgage outstanding on it could you sell it without your Bank / Building society wanting repayment or a rearrangement of facilities? Answer = NO
@i_b_b_o_r_g they def existed mate they may now have been sorted I have not asked nor spoken about it .
The charges are an ongoing issue and have been for months
I am gutted @Davidsmith has been chased off from here as he always posted very reliable snipets and imo yesterday his posts were disected to read in a totally different way to how he posted them
What I don’t get is if RD wants out and the Aussies want in why a compromise between the two can’t be sort
@i_b_b_o_r_g they def existed mate they may now have been sorted I have not asked nor spoken about it .
The charges are an ongoing issue and have been for months
I am gutted @Davidsmith has been chased off from here as he always posted very reliable snipets and imo yesterday his posts were disected to read in a totally different way to how he posted them
What I don’t get is if RD wants out and the Aussies want in why a compromise between the two can’t be sort
I know they did mate, not digging anyone out, just trying to make the point that everything that has been said in the previous 1000 odd pages of this thread has now been forgotten about and if you remind anyone of what has been said, or pose a question regarding what has been, you're either not very bright or a WUM
@i_b_b_o_r_g they def existed mate they may now have been sorted I have not asked nor spoken about it .
The charges are an ongoing issue and have been for months
I am gutted @Davidsmith has been chased off from here as he always posted very reliable snipets and imo yesterday his posts were disected to read in a totally different way to how he posted them
What I don’t get is if RD wants out and the Aussies want in why a compromise between the two can’t be sort
I know they did mate, not digging anyone out, just trying to make the point that everything that has been said in the previous 1000 odd pages of this thread has now been forgotten about and if you remind anyone of what has been said, or pose a question regarding what has been, you're either not very bright or a WUM
Let’s just go fishing in your neck of the woods I wi drive over we are closer to Russia from yours sink some World Cup beers and fuck off to Moscow when we get back it still won’t be sorted and we can get to the bottom of it then
Perhaps we should just wait and see what happens. There's nothing any of us can do to influence proceedings, so why not take a break from the arguments and have a breather, before it all gets nasty again. Semi final on Wednesday. Fingers crossed.
I have it on good authority that one of the consortium is Aussie businessman Edward K**g who is a huge bloke. The sticking point is that an anagram of Roland Duchatelet is 'cheat round tall Ted' and Muir wants Roly to change his name by deedpoll as it omens bad luck.
Comments
Caviezel?
Whatever, if they are not prepared to pay off the debentures and I wouldn't have agreed to that in the first place, then that's their call. It doesn't make them dodgy or unfit to be owners does it, it says to me they want value for money and the club they looked at way back when, is not worth that today as it's assets (staff on and off the pitch), have been watered down and it's league standing is still third tier.
1. Debentures to former board members
2. Ownership issues held over from previous owners recently uncovered that may or may not cost money?
Is this correct?
Like I just said, there's absolutely no flies on this mob and it goes to show that things really can be too good and true at the same time.
The charges are an ongoing issue and have been for months
I am gutted @Davidsmith has been chased off from here as he always posted very reliable snipets and imo yesterday his posts were disected to read in a totally different way to how he posted them
What I don’t get is if RD wants out and the Aussies want in why a compromise between the two can’t be sort
#itscominghomequickerthananaussietakeover
Semi final on Wednesday. Fingers crossed.