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

The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)

1112111221124112611272265

Comments

  • JamesSeed said:


    PopIcon said:

    @JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?

    If they actually buy the club of course.
    .
  • Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:


    PopIcon said:

    @JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?

    @PopIcon

    1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.

    2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.

    3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.

    4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.

    5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.

    6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.

    Of course there are negatives too.

    It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.

    I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
    If they actually buy the club of course.
    So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?

    I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.

    If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?

    The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.

    At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.

    So do I.
    Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!

    http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php
  • JamesSeed said:

    .

    Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:


    PopIcon said:

    @JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?

    @PopIcon

    1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.

    2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.

    3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.

    4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.

    5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.

    6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.

    Of course there are negatives too.

    It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.

    I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
    If they actually buy the club of course.
    So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?

    I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.

    If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?

    The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.

    At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.

    So do I.
    I may have this wrong, but it seems to me that Jim is getting information from Murphy who is dancing around the NDA and is unable to say certain things. I don't think Jim is willingly not passing on information, it seems to me that he is passing on what he is able to and is also speculating a little in the posts. I think it's his speculation that gets people confused. I'm not sure why. The posts are always pretty clear to me as to which parts are genuine info and which parts are speculation.

    If he IS getting more information that he isn't allowed to share, if he shares it, there's a good chance all information will dry up completely, so pushing him to reveal more isn't exactly useful.
    I’m actually not holding anything back.

    I certainly wouldn’t share if I was in his shoes. For example, I imagine his investors are promised anonymity if they want it, as part of the deal. He’s not going to break that for anybody @Redrobo certainly not me.

    He’s not passing anything about the sale on to me other than what I post here. I wish people would believe me when I say that. I’m NOT teasing you with bits of info and holding key things back.

    I don’t 100% believe any of the info that has leaked out, because it doesn’t come directly from Lieven or Gerard who are conducting the negotiations. The couple of times I have believed ‘leaks’ they been denied (correctly) by GM. That’s not to say @DOUCHER ‘s info is wrong, I just don’t know that it isn’t.

    I know there’s a grouper people who don’t believe anything they read on this thread. I wouldn’t either if I was in their plaice.
    Surely if the takeover happens they won't be able to stay anonymous unless it's small amounts? I know Cash did, but I'm not sure that was entirely above board
  • JamesSeed said:

    shirty5 said:

    Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:


    PopIcon said:

    @JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?

    @PopIcon

    1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.

    2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.

    3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.

    4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.

    5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.

    6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.

    Of course there are negatives too.

    It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.

    I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
    If they actually buy the club of course.
    So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?

    I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.

    If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?

    The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.

    At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.

    So do I.
    Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!

    http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php
    I’m sure he’ll really appreciate that
    I'm sure he will
  • JamesSeed said:

    shirty5 said:

    Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:


    PopIcon said:

    @JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?

    @PopIcon

    1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.

    2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.

    3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.

    4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.

    5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.

    6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.

    Of course there are negatives too.

    It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.

    I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
    If they actually buy the club of course.
    So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?

    I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.

    If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?

    The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.

    At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.

    So do I.
    Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!

    http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php
    I’m sure he’ll really appreciate that
    It was his decision to come to The Valley and his decision to have his email address on a public website, I don't think he can have too many complaints.
    True I suppose.
    And he can always ignore them if he wants to. Even at our beer meeting he mentioned getting loads and said he was sorry he couldn’t answer them during sale process.
  • edited July 2018
    Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:

    .

    Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:


    PopIcon said:

    @JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?

    @PopIcon

    1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.

    2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.

    3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.

    4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.

    5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.

    6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.

    Of course there are negatives too.

    It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.

    I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
    If they actually buy the club of course.
    So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?

    I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.

    If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?

    The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.

    At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.

    So do I.

    Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:


    PopIcon said:

    @JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?

    @PopIcon

    1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.

    2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.

    3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.

    4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.

    5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.

    6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.

    Of course there are negatives too.

    It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.

    I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
    If they actually buy the club of course.
    So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?

    I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.

    If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?

    The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.

    At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.

    So do I.
    No one knows, they just think they do or word their comments carefully so as not to be challenged.
    If you ask them direct questions, they tend to disappear for the rest of the day.
    Blimey. I don’t get the anger Red, calm down.

    You’ve read an awful lot into some simple statements.

    “Just tell us exactly what you have been told” !?

    I have done, that’s the point.

    And above I’ve answered a question someone asked, so I gave my opinion.

    Stop ranting (please?)

    When I speculated the delay was nothing to do withRoland, ex Directors or loans, you made a point of highlighting that bit and said “not so”. But if you know for a fact that this is not the case, you must know something you have not shared.
    Not every comment I’ve made is based on something he told me. I have a couple of other sources who send me info because I’ve shared my GM info.
    I don’t remember that ‘not so’, or the context, and the only thing I heard from GM about pre May 18th delays was they they were from issues dating from before the Duchâtelet era.

    I’m not holding anything back about the negotiations, trust me.
  • edited July 2018

    JamesSeed said:

    .

    Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:


    PopIcon said:

    @JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?

    @PopIcon

    1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.

    2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.

    3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.

    4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.

    5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.

    6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.

    Of course there are negatives too.

    It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.

    I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
    If they actually buy the club of course.
    So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?

    I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.

    If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?

    The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.

    At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.

    So do I.
    I may have this wrong, but it seems to me that Jim is getting information from Murphy who is dancing around the NDA and is unable to say certain things. I don't think Jim is willingly not passing on information, it seems to me that he is passing on what he is able to and is also speculating a little in the posts. I think it's his speculation that gets people confused. I'm not sure why. The posts are always pretty clear to me as to which parts are genuine info and which parts are speculation.

    If he IS getting more information that he isn't allowed to share, if he shares it, there's a good chance all information will dry up completely, so pushing him to reveal more isn't exactly useful.
    I’m actually not holding anything back.

    I certainly wouldn’t share if I was in his shoes. For example, I imagine his investors are promised anonymity if they want it, as part of the deal. He’s not going to break that for anybody @Redrobo certainly not me.

    He’s not passing anything about the sale on to me other than what I post here. I wish people would believe me when I say that. I’m NOT teasing you with bits of info and holding key things back.

    I don’t 100% believe any of the info that has leaked out, because it doesn’t come directly from Lieven or Gerard who are conducting the negotiations. The couple of times I have believed ‘leaks’ they been denied (correctly) by GM. That’s not to say @DOUCHER ‘s info is wrong, I just don’t know that it isn’t.

    I know there’s a grouper people who don’t believe anything they read on this thread. I wouldn’t either if I was in their plaice.
    Surely if the takeover happens they won't be able to stay anonymous unless it's small amounts? I know Cash did, but I'm not sure that was entirely above board
    Probably not, I wouldn’t know for sure though.
    The anonymity could just last during the sale process, in case it isn’t completed successfully?
    There are lots of business folk who know about this sort of thing on here, so hopefully one of them will comment.
  • Sponsored links:


  • JamesSeed said:

    Redrobo said:

    The way that the comment has been phrased to James suggests to me it is they the Australians that have the difficulties, not Roland. Not the ex directors. Not loans.

    So what is it that the Australians will find difficult to do in two weeks?

    We have been told that the consortium needs to be less complicated. Who decided this and why?

    There also seems to be the suggestion that two of the consortium did not pass fit and proper. Is this what will mean a difficult two weeks to resolve?

    Maybe the two go together. By re-organising the consortium they can then meet the requirements of fit and proper and yet keep the consortium together.

    Not so.
    24th July
  • SID said:

    I wonder whether all you pun specialists try them out on your other halves first before you submit them just to check how hilarious they are. Of course for anyone wanting to catch up on probably the most important period of our clubs history since the homecoming, they're not funny at all and you come across as a bunch of wankers.

    There should be a separate thread for the fish puns and wading through that crap is no different to an Inbox full of spam mail.
  • edited July 2018
    Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:

    Redrobo said:

    The way that the comment has been phrased to James suggests to me it is they the Australians that have the difficulties, not Roland. Not the ex directors. Not loans.

    So what is it that the Australians will find difficult to do in two weeks?

    We have been told that the consortium needs to be less complicated. Who decided this and why?

    There also seems to be the suggestion that two of the consortium did not pass fit and proper. Is this what will mean a difficult two weeks to resolve?

    Maybe the two go together. By re-organising the consortium they can then meet the requirements of fit and proper and yet keep the consortium together.

    Not so.
    24th July
    Ah I do remember.

    I posted that GM said ‘there may be a couple of difficult weeks ahead’

    You replied:

    The way that the comment has been phrased to James suggests to me it is they the Australians that have the difficulties, not Roland. Not the ex directors. Not loans.’

    My ‘not so’ was a rebuttal of your point that the comment was ‘phrased in a way ... that suggests it is the Australians are having the difficulties, not Roland. Not the ex directors. Not loans.’

    ‘There may be a couple of difficult weeks ahead’, means that there may be a couple of difficult weeks ahead. Just that. It doesn’t imply anything that you suggest at all. It could be difficult for any number of reasons, including or excluding those that you mentioned.

    I think you’re over analysing this.
  • Thank you James. I now understand what you meant.
  • shirty5 said:

    Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:


    PopIcon said:

    @JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?

    @PopIcon

    1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.

    2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.

    3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.

    4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.

    5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.

    6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.

    Of course there are negatives too.

    It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.

    I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
    If they actually buy the club of course.
    So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?

    I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.

    If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?

    The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.

    At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.

    So do I.
    Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!

    http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php
    And you think he'll sing?
  • Redrobo said:

    Thank you James. I now understand what you meant.

    Thanks. How rare to clear up a misunderstanding!
  • Ferryman said:

    shirty5 said:

    Redrobo said:

    JamesSeed said:


    PopIcon said:

    @JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?

    @PopIcon

    1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.

    2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.

    3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.

    4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.

    5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.

    6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.

    Of course there are negatives too.

    It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.

    I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
    If they actually buy the club of course.
    So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?

    I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.

    If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?

    The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.

    At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.

    So do I.
    Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!

    http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php
    And you think he'll sing?
    If you don't ask, you don't get
  • Im coming to the conclusion that the aussies are trying to replace an investor and not having much luck,they've had enough time for negotiations months in fact,if RD was messing the Aussies about still they would of pulled the plug by now surely,and if it wasnt the Aussies fault im sure there would be leaks as to what the hold up is.
  • Sponsored links:


  • They're waiting for Usmanov to get a buyer for his Arsenal shares lol
  • Im coming to the conclusion that the aussies are trying to replace an investor and not having much luck,they've had enough time for negotiations months in fact,if RD was messing the Aussies about still they would of pulled the plug by now surely,and if it wasnt the Aussies fault im sure there would be leaks as to what the hold up is.

    Round and round we go.

    The statement by the club said they were satisfied that the funds were in place.

    Tried hard but I fail to see what the club would get out of lying about that.

    Perhaps an investor has pulled out
  • They're waiting for Usmanov to get a buyer for his Arsenal shares lol

    Very unlikely but ..... the story about Usmanov selling his stake surfaced last October, about the time Muir's name was revealed. The story re-surfaced in mid May, about the time the Aussies thought they had a deal. It then resurfaced once more about 3 weeks ago at a noteable stage in the takeover guessing game .... Of course, it may just be a coincidence.
  • edited July 2018
    Not happening.

    Im coming to the conclusion that the aussies are trying to replace an investor and not having much luck,they've had enough time for negotiations months in fact,if RD was messing the Aussies about still they would of pulled the plug by now surely,and if it wasnt the Aussies fault im sure there would be leaks as to what the hold up is.

    Round and round we go.

    The statement by the club said they were satisfied that the funds were in place.

    Tried hard but I fail to see what the club would get out of lying about that.

    Not necessarily. They said they were confident the group had the funds. No mention of them being in place.
    And here's the thing, after my little conversation with Murphy I was told that there were different levels of investement and it appeared to me that there was a cap on the lower level at least and this was around the £4 million mark.
    Now I'm assuming there maybe a similar cap on the upper level investment. The top level investors seem to be unwilling to break that cap for whatever reason.
    So what I'm saying is the group clearly have the capital to get this over the line but because of their self made rules they are not willing, or maybe even allowed, to plug the gap individually.
    I suspect Roland is hoping one of them will break rank and give him what he wants.
  • Angeldust has said the project is as good as dead in the water.

    Colin/Bexley claiming it's still onbut the next two weeks will be interesting. Something about personal issues kicking in for some of them and a massive call to make. Keith Harris is helping them next week.

    He's also saying things can change very quickly, which nicely covers all possible outcomes.

    Basically both saying what they have been for the last month or so.
  • Scoham said:

    Angeldust has said the project is as good as dead in the water.

    Colin/Bexley claiming it's still onbut the next two weeks will be interesting. Something about personal issues kicking in for some of them and a massive call to make. Keith Harris is helping them next week.

    He's also saying things can change very quickly, which nicely covers all possible outcomes.

    Basically both saying what they have been for the last month or so.

    The Deputy Chairman of Everton Football club is helping them!? Is that allowed?
  • Sounds like a break up on the X Factor. 'Sorry, you're gonna have to drop Brucey - he's good on the barbie but that ain't gonna pay Igor's medical expenses' 'You may have to be a bit more Britpop' - who knows??? I don't.
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!