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

The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)

1115911601162116411652262

Comments

  • Off_it said:

    Fuck me, is this what it's come to - people arguing about whether the old fucker is asset stripping or not?

    The font of all knowledge that is Wikipedia (I know) says this:

    Asset stripping is a term used to refer to the practice of selling off a company's assets in order to improve returns for equity investors. With a lower level of assets, it is maintained, the business is rendered financially less stable or viable.

    Certainly sounds like it to me. Reducing liabilities = improving returns for equity investors, and we only have one of those.

    But either way, it matters not. There is quite clearly only one person to blame for the current 4+ year shitfest we are enduring and to suggest there is even a morsel of blame falling elsewhere, quite frankly, comes across as pie in the sky heatwave induced jibbering bollocks.

    I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this

    If it turns out that the Aussies made false bids in order to secure the club without having the funds in place that imo is nothing to do with the situation we have with RD but is well worthy of discussion debate and criticism
  • Off_it said:

    Fuck me, is this what it's come to - people arguing about whether the old fucker is asset stripping or not?

    The font of all knowledge that is Wikipedia (I know) says this:

    Asset stripping is a term used to refer to the practice of selling off a company's assets in order to improve returns for equity investors. With a lower level of assets, it is maintained, the business is rendered financially less stable or viable.

    Certainly sounds like it to me. Reducing liabilities = improving returns for equity investors, and we only have one of those.

    But either way, it matters not. There is quite clearly only one person to blame for the current 4+ year shitfest we are enduring and to suggest there is even a morsel of blame falling elsewhere, quite frankly, comes across as pie in the sky heatwave induced jibbering bollocks.

    I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this

    Oh really?

    I honestly can't be bothered to go back and find the posts, so let's just agree I must've imagined all the mudslinging in all directions then.

    Carry on.
  • It’s like my crypto currency investments. I know I’m doing my arse, I’m bored with it and i’m only going to lose more money by not selling but I’m hanging on in there as I refuse to sell until I get my investment back. The difference is I need the money, duchbag don’t!

    but there comes a time when you either sell at a loss & recoup something or accept that you've lost it all & walk away.

    As it stands, RD is losing money as every month passes, and the longer he leaves it his "commodity" is worth less & less. We sure ain't worth £40m now as the season starts (injured players/no investment in new players /no young talent to sell), will be worth less in a weeks time when the transfer window ends ( new owner can't invest for 4 months) and will be worth a lot less in League 2.

    As it stands the Aussies are also losing money as they now need to spend more than they would have had to do 3 months ago to make us competitive as players have been sold & other now injured (yes, players might have got injured under their watch, but we will never know & we do know 100% now that JFC needs replacing).

    shit for brains the lot of them.
  • CAFCDAZ said:

    I think your right and at the same time he will sell anything and anyone that has value to fund the day to day losses

    Asset stripping is not asset stripping if it’s covering running costs

    It feels like it is to us as fans but he is running it as a business and the sales are cash flow

    It sucks but I don’t see anything to fault in your post

    asset stripping is asset stripping. if i told you i had a ferrari for 100k then decided to take all of the interior ans engine out before you turn up to buy, how can i ask for the same money if its basically a lump of metal with a flash horse badge?
    We know how much his monthly losses are all he is doing is selling to cover the running costs it’s not asset stripping
    He is the owner, it's his responsibility to cover the monthly losses. The fact is, if he removes saleable assets from the club, he cannot expect to receive the same price for the business as he expected a few months prior to removing those assets. Part of the valuation of a business is based on it's assets. If those assets are removed/sold, then the value decreases.

    Scoham said:

    CAFCDAZ said:

    I think your right and at the same time he will sell anything and anyone that has value to fund the day to day losses

    Asset stripping is not asset stripping if it’s covering running costs

    It feels like it is to us as fans but he is running it as a business and the sales are cash flow

    It sucks but I don’t see anything to fault in your post

    asset stripping is asset stripping. if i told you i had a ferrari for 100k then decided to take all of the interior ans engine out before you turn up to buy, how can i ask for the same money if its basically a lump of metal with a flash horse badge?
    We know how much his monthly losses are all he is doing is selling to cover the running costs it’s not asset stripping
    He could have reduced his running costs by selling at a reasonable price months ago. Now he is still running at a loss with a rapidly depreciating commodity
    And this is where it is both baffling and worrying.

    Baffling as surely Dushitelet does not want to lose the increasing millions he seemingly is.

    Worrying that he seems to be able to afford to lose this money.

    Sad times.
    That’s always been the biggest fear I had he is rich enough to say screw you I don’t care

    Like was said yesterday sell the club for 10 mil less or lose 10 mil over the season what’s the difference to him
    If he waits another year couldn’t he end up losing £10m on running the club AND sell for £10m less?

    Yep he could but he doesn’t seem to give two shits about that does he
    And this is what doesn't make sense. If he had sold in January for a few million less than he wanted he would not have needed to cover the losses for the past 6-7 months. If the £1m a month figure is anywhere near accurate he could have taken £5m off the asking price and still been in pocket compared to now.

    He stands to lose even more money the longer this goes on. Duchatelet is not a stupid man, but why does he constantly seem to give the impression he is.
  • Roland Duchatelet is to blame for our plight

    When it’s confirmed it’s all off then the Aussies will be accountable for assisting in the death toll

    They cost us the Saudi bid that would’ve been extremely beneficial

    RD was never going to accept a bid that was less money just because it would be good for cafc

    He would not accept a lower occdr because of future CAFC benefit but should maybe have done for his own benefit. People accept second best bids many times in business for the certainty the buyer offers. If the Aussies fail to complete it will be another shit decision by RD to back the wrong horse

  • Scoham said:

    CAFCDAZ said:

    I think your right and at the same time he will sell anything and anyone that has value to fund the day to day losses

    Asset stripping is not asset stripping if it’s covering running costs

    It feels like it is to us as fans but he is running it as a business and the sales are cash flow

    It sucks but I don’t see anything to fault in your post

    asset stripping is asset stripping. if i told you i had a ferrari for 100k then decided to take all of the interior ans engine out before you turn up to buy, how can i ask for the same money if its basically a lump of metal with a flash horse badge?
    We know how much his monthly losses are all he is doing is selling to cover the running costs it’s not asset stripping
    He could have reduced his running costs by selling at a reasonable price months ago. Now he is still running at a loss with a rapidly depreciating commodity
    And this is where it is both baffling and worrying.

    Baffling as surely Dushitelet does not want to lose the increasing millions he seemingly is.

    Worrying that he seems to be able to afford to lose this money.

    Sad times.
    That’s always been the biggest fear I had he is rich enough to say screw you I don’t care

    Like was said yesterday sell the club for 10 mil less or lose 10 mil over the season what’s the difference to him
    If he waits another year couldn’t he end up losing £10m on running the club AND sell for £10m less?

    Yep he could but he doesn’t seem to give two shits about that does he
    I don't think that's true for a moment.

    Rich men get rich by being careful with their money. And Rich men don't like losing money.

  • Scoham said:

    CAFCDAZ said:

    I think your right and at the same time he will sell anything and anyone that has value to fund the day to day losses

    Asset stripping is not asset stripping if it’s covering running costs

    It feels like it is to us as fans but he is running it as a business and the sales are cash flow

    It sucks but I don’t see anything to fault in your post

    asset stripping is asset stripping. if i told you i had a ferrari for 100k then decided to take all of the interior ans engine out before you turn up to buy, how can i ask for the same money if its basically a lump of metal with a flash horse badge?
    We know how much his monthly losses are all he is doing is selling to cover the running costs it’s not asset stripping
    He could have reduced his running costs by selling at a reasonable price months ago. Now he is still running at a loss with a rapidly depreciating commodity
    And this is where it is both baffling and worrying.

    Baffling as surely Dushitelet does not want to lose the increasing millions he seemingly is.

    Worrying that he seems to be able to afford to lose this money.

    Sad times.
    That’s always been the biggest fear I had he is rich enough to say screw you I don’t care

    Like was said yesterday sell the club for 10 mil less or lose 10 mil over the season what’s the difference to him
    If he waits another year couldn’t he end up losing £10m on running the club AND sell for £10m less?

    Yep he could but he doesn’t seem to give two shits about that does he
    I don't think that's true for a moment.

    Rich men get rich by being careful with their money. And Rich men don't like losing money.

    Then why has he run our club the way he has , unless we are all missing something
  • Off_it said:

    Fuck me, is this what it's come to - people arguing about whether the old fucker is asset stripping or not?

    The font of all knowledge that is Wikipedia (I know) says this:

    Asset stripping is a term used to refer to the practice of selling off a company's assets in order to improve returns for equity investors. With a lower level of assets, it is maintained, the business is rendered financially less stable or viable.

    Certainly sounds like it to me. Reducing liabilities = improving returns for equity investors, and we only have one of those.

    But either way, it matters not. There is quite clearly only one person to blame for the current 4+ year shitfest we are enduring and to suggest there is even a morsel of blame falling elsewhere, quite frankly, comes across as pie in the sky heatwave induced jibbering bollocks.

    I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this

    If it turns out that the Aussies made false bids in order to secure the club without having the funds in place that imo is nothing to do with the situation we have with RD but is well worthy of discussion debate and criticism
    WTF????

  • Sponsored links:


  • Scoham said:

    CAFCDAZ said:

    I think your right and at the same time he will sell anything and anyone that has value to fund the day to day losses

    Asset stripping is not asset stripping if it’s covering running costs

    It feels like it is to us as fans but he is running it as a business and the sales are cash flow

    It sucks but I don’t see anything to fault in your post

    asset stripping is asset stripping. if i told you i had a ferrari for 100k then decided to take all of the interior ans engine out before you turn up to buy, how can i ask for the same money if its basically a lump of metal with a flash horse badge?
    We know how much his monthly losses are all he is doing is selling to cover the running costs it’s not asset stripping
    He could have reduced his running costs by selling at a reasonable price months ago. Now he is still running at a loss with a rapidly depreciating commodity
    And this is where it is both baffling and worrying.

    Baffling as surely Dushitelet does not want to lose the increasing millions he seemingly is.

    Worrying that he seems to be able to afford to lose this money.

    Sad times.
    That’s always been the biggest fear I had he is rich enough to say screw you I don’t care

    Like was said yesterday sell the club for 10 mil less or lose 10 mil over the season what’s the difference to him
    If he waits another year couldn’t he end up losing £10m on running the club AND sell for £10m less?

    Yep he could but he doesn’t seem to give two shits about that does he
    I don't think that's true for a moment.

    Rich men get rich by being careful with their money. And Rich men don't like losing money.

    Then why has he run our club the way he has , unless we are all missing something
    He's a stubborn idiot too
    No one, apart from Roland himself, missed that
  • Off_it said:

    Fuck me, is this what it's come to - people arguing about whether the old fucker is asset stripping or not?

    The font of all knowledge that is Wikipedia (I know) says this:

    Asset stripping is a term used to refer to the practice of selling off a company's assets in order to improve returns for equity investors. With a lower level of assets, it is maintained, the business is rendered financially less stable or viable.

    Certainly sounds like it to me. Reducing liabilities = improving returns for equity investors, and we only have one of those.

    But either way, it matters not. There is quite clearly only one person to blame for the current 4+ year shitfest we are enduring and to suggest there is even a morsel of blame falling elsewhere, quite frankly, comes across as pie in the sky heatwave induced jibbering bollocks.

    I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this

    If it turns out that the Aussies made false bids in order to secure the club without having the funds in place that imo is nothing to do with the situation we have with RD but is well worthy of discussion debate and criticism
    WTF????

    They don’t have the money so why out bid people who do there are questions that need to be asked

    And they have never had the money
  • CAFCDAZ said:

    I think your right and at the same time he will sell anything and anyone that has value to fund the day to day losses

    Asset stripping is not asset stripping if it’s covering running costs

    It feels like it is to us as fans but he is running it as a business and the sales are cash flow

    It sucks but I don’t see anything to fault in your post

    asset stripping is asset stripping. if i told you i had a ferrari for 100k then decided to take all of the interior ans engine out before you turn up to buy, how can i ask for the same money if its basically a lump of metal with a flash horse badge?
    We know how much his monthly losses are all he is doing is selling to cover the running costs it’s not asset stripping
    He is the owner, it's his responsibility to cover the monthly losses. The fact is, if he removes saleable assets from the club, he cannot expect to receive the same price for the business as he expected a few months prior to removing those assets. Part of the valuation of a business is based on it's assets. If those assets are removed/sold, then the value decreases.

    Scoham said:

    CAFCDAZ said:

    I think your right and at the same time he will sell anything and anyone that has value to fund the day to day losses

    Asset stripping is not asset stripping if it’s covering running costs

    It feels like it is to us as fans but he is running it as a business and the sales are cash flow

    It sucks but I don’t see anything to fault in your post

    asset stripping is asset stripping. if i told you i had a ferrari for 100k then decided to take all of the interior ans engine out before you turn up to buy, how can i ask for the same money if its basically a lump of metal with a flash horse badge?
    We know how much his monthly losses are all he is doing is selling to cover the running costs it’s not asset stripping
    He could have reduced his running costs by selling at a reasonable price months ago. Now he is still running at a loss with a rapidly depreciating commodity
    And this is where it is both baffling and worrying.

    Baffling as surely Dushitelet does not want to lose the increasing millions he seemingly is.

    Worrying that he seems to be able to afford to lose this money.

    Sad times.
    That’s always been the biggest fear I had he is rich enough to say screw you I don’t care

    Like was said yesterday sell the club for 10 mil less or lose 10 mil over the season what’s the difference to him
    If he waits another year couldn’t he end up losing £10m on running the club AND sell for £10m less?

    Yep he could but he doesn’t seem to give two shits about that does he
    And this is what doesn't make sense. If he had sold in January for a few million less than he wanted he would not have needed to cover the losses for the past 6-7 months. If the £1m a month figure is anywhere near accurate he could have taken £5m off the asking price and still been in pocket compared to now.

    He stands to lose even more money the longer this goes on. Duchatelet is not a stupid man, but why does he constantly seem to give the impression he is.
    If the Aussies didn't have the money in January he didn't have a buyer.
  • Scoham said:

    CAFCDAZ said:

    I think your right and at the same time he will sell anything and anyone that has value to fund the day to day losses

    Asset stripping is not asset stripping if it’s covering running costs

    It feels like it is to us as fans but he is running it as a business and the sales are cash flow

    It sucks but I don’t see anything to fault in your post

    asset stripping is asset stripping. if i told you i had a ferrari for 100k then decided to take all of the interior ans engine out before you turn up to buy, how can i ask for the same money if its basically a lump of metal with a flash horse badge?
    We know how much his monthly losses are all he is doing is selling to cover the running costs it’s not asset stripping
    He could have reduced his running costs by selling at a reasonable price months ago. Now he is still running at a loss with a rapidly depreciating commodity
    And this is where it is both baffling and worrying.

    Baffling as surely Dushitelet does not want to lose the increasing millions he seemingly is.

    Worrying that he seems to be able to afford to lose this money.

    Sad times.
    That’s always been the biggest fear I had he is rich enough to say screw you I don’t care

    Like was said yesterday sell the club for 10 mil less or lose 10 mil over the season what’s the difference to him
    If he waits another year couldn’t he end up losing £10m on running the club AND sell for £10m less?

    Yep he could but he doesn’t seem to give two shits about that does he
    The clue is in his name.

  • Is there nothing in what John Solako said on love sport radio? He seemed pretty convinced that whoever he was talking to has crazy amounts of money and huge ideas to push the club forward, be it moving to the Peninsula. Seemed to want to speak to them again soon regarding this amazing business plan they had for us. Although, he did seem to be quite clueless as to how bad the state of Charlton currently is and has been for the last few years.
  • Off_it said:

    Fuck me, is this what it's come to - people arguing about whether the old fucker is asset stripping or not?

    The font of all knowledge that is Wikipedia (I know) says this:

    Asset stripping is a term used to refer to the practice of selling off a company's assets in order to improve returns for equity investors. With a lower level of assets, it is maintained, the business is rendered financially less stable or viable.

    Certainly sounds like it to me. Reducing liabilities = improving returns for equity investors, and we only have one of those.

    But either way, it matters not. There is quite clearly only one person to blame for the current 4+ year shitfest we are enduring and to suggest there is even a morsel of blame falling elsewhere, quite frankly, comes across as pie in the sky heatwave induced jibbering bollocks.

    I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this

    If it turns out that the Aussies made false bids in order to secure the club without having the funds in place that imo is nothing to do with the situation we have with RD but is well worthy of discussion debate and criticism
    WTF????

    They don’t have the money so why out bid people who do there are questions that need to be asked

    And they have never had the money
    Not according to the Club who said in their statement that the Aussies had the funds. Do you have proof to the contrary?
    A year ago their website stated they were seeking investors.

    The SLP reported this week they are seeking investors.

    They tried to drop the price at the last minute, hoping RD would accept as he had no other options.

    All 3 facts have been well reported in tbe press, 2+2+2 is not 7.
  • Off_it said:

    Fuck me, is this what it's come to - people arguing about whether the old fucker is asset stripping or not?

    The font of all knowledge that is Wikipedia (I know) says this:

    Asset stripping is a term used to refer to the practice of selling off a company's assets in order to improve returns for equity investors. With a lower level of assets, it is maintained, the business is rendered financially less stable or viable.

    Certainly sounds like it to me. Reducing liabilities = improving returns for equity investors, and we only have one of those.

    But either way, it matters not. There is quite clearly only one person to blame for the current 4+ year shitfest we are enduring and to suggest there is even a morsel of blame falling elsewhere, quite frankly, comes across as pie in the sky heatwave induced jibbering bollocks.

    I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this

    If it turns out that the Aussies made false bids in order to secure the club without having the funds in place that imo is nothing to do with the situation we have with RD but is well worthy of discussion debate and criticism
    WTF????

    They don’t have the money so why out bid people who do there are questions that need to be asked

    And they have never had the money

    So you say. Without ever having presented a shred of evidence or even a hint of what source you might have for this assertion.
    That's simply not true, sources have been named on this very thread.
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited August 2018
    It feels like the whole thing is off and we're further away than we've been for some time now.

    Surely time to sink this thread and have separate threads for did the Aussies ever have the funds etc and maybe resurrect this thread when genuine takeover rumours surface?
  • edited August 2018

    Off_it said:

    Fuck me, is this what it's come to - people arguing about whether the old fucker is asset stripping or not?

    The font of all knowledge that is Wikipedia (I know) says this:

    Asset stripping is a term used to refer to the practice of selling off a company's assets in order to improve returns for equity investors. With a lower level of assets, it is maintained, the business is rendered financially less stable or viable.

    Certainly sounds like it to me. Reducing liabilities = improving returns for equity investors, and we only have one of those.

    But either way, it matters not. There is quite clearly only one person to blame for the current 4+ year shitfest we are enduring and to suggest there is even a morsel of blame falling elsewhere, quite frankly, comes across as pie in the sky heatwave induced jibbering bollocks.

    I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this

    If it turns out that the Aussies made false bids in order to secure the club without having the funds in place that imo is nothing to do with the situation we have with RD but is well worthy of discussion debate and criticism
    WTF????

    They don’t have the money so why out bid people who do there are questions that need to be asked

    And they have never had the money
    I like reading your posts but find it hard to understand what you are saying. Please help everyone by using full stops and commas!
  • The man is a walking ego. Simple as that. He owns football clubs because he can. When they "Don't work" he leaves. Clearly, his understanding of Football/Value is zero, and this is what is ultimately holding things up. He has no concept of finance in football and thats why we may end up stuck with him. He's deluded.
  • Blucher said:

    A very good article in The Independent - https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/football-league/charlton-athletic-takeover-latest-update-football-league-preview-league-one-a8475686.html

    Hopefully, our guys will ensure that this finds it’s way into the Belgian press.

    A truly shocking revelation about halving Joe Aribo’s contract offer:

    “Now, the only sellable young player left is 22-year-old midfielder Joe Aribo. The club is not doing a good job of keeping him. Charlton offered Aribo a new contract at the start of the summer, changed their minds, and offered him half as much money instead. Other players have gone through the same process. Aribo has Duchatelet has relied in the past on selling academy players to stem Charlton’s losses: they got £3.5m for Joe Gomez in 2015, £8m that could rise to £11m for Ademola Lookman in 2017. Now, the only sellable young player left is 22-year-old midfielder Joe Aribo. The club is not doing a good job of keeping him. Charlton offered Aribo a new contract at the start of the summer, changed their minds, and offered him half as much money instead. Other players have gone through the same process. Aribo has just one year left now and if Charlton were offered close to £1m – Southampton and Derby County are interested – they would sell.“

    I think we need to assemble on Blackheath Common next Saturday - Wat Tyler style - and march to the Valley with pitchforks and flaming torches.

    If any championship scouts were watching that game yesterday, i feel pretty confident they'd think 1m was well worth the risk. Could well be a bargain in todays market.

    I don't expect him to have a career at the very top level but i think a few clubs would see him as being worth a gamble.

    If the contract offer thing is true (and with RD i'm quite sure it is) then who would blame him for fucking off. I won't be at all surprised if he's sold this week.
  • edited August 2018

    Blucher said:

    A very good article in The Independent - https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/football-league/charlton-athletic-takeover-latest-update-football-league-preview-league-one-a8475686.html

    Hopefully, our guys will ensure that this finds it’s way into the Belgian press.

    A truly shocking revelation about halving Joe Aribo’s contract offer:

    “Now, the only sellable young player left is 22-year-old midfielder Joe Aribo. The club is not doing a good job of keeping him. Charlton offered Aribo a new contract at the start of the summer, changed their minds, and offered him half as much money instead. Other players have gone through the same process. Aribo has Duchatelet has relied in the past on selling academy players to stem Charlton’s losses: they got £3.5m for Joe Gomez in 2015, £8m that could rise to £11m for Ademola Lookman in 2017. Now, the only sellable young player left is 22-year-old midfielder Joe Aribo. The club is not doing a good job of keeping him. Charlton offered Aribo a new contract at the start of the summer, changed their minds, and offered him half as much money instead. Other players have gone through the same process. Aribo has just one year left now and if Charlton were offered close to £1m – Southampton and Derby County are interested – they would sell.“

    I think we need to assemble on Blackheath Common next Saturday - Wat Tyler style - and march to the Valley with pitchforks and flaming torches.

    If any championship scouts were watching that game yesterday, i feel pretty confident they'd think 1m was well worth the risk. Could well be a bargain in todays market.

    I don't expect him to have a career at the very top level but i think a few clubs would see him as being worth a gamble.

    If the contract offer thing is true (and with RD i'm quite sure it is) then who would blame him for fucking off. I won't be at all surprised if he's sold this week.
    Some of the flicks and tricks from him yesterday made me think he was playing for a move and as you say, who could blame him.
  • Off_it said:

    Fuck me, is this what it's come to - people arguing about whether the old fucker is asset stripping or not?

    The font of all knowledge that is Wikipedia (I know) says this:

    Asset stripping is a term used to refer to the practice of selling off a company's assets in order to improve returns for equity investors. With a lower level of assets, it is maintained, the business is rendered financially less stable or viable.

    Certainly sounds like it to me. Reducing liabilities = improving returns for equity investors, and we only have one of those.

    But either way, it matters not. There is quite clearly only one person to blame for the current 4+ year shitfest we are enduring and to suggest there is even a morsel of blame falling elsewhere, quite frankly, comes across as pie in the sky heatwave induced jibbering bollocks.

    I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this

    If it turns out that the Aussies made false bids in order to secure the club without having the funds in place that imo is nothing to do with the situation we have with RD but is well worthy of discussion debate and criticism
    WTF????

    They don’t have the money so why out bid people who do there are questions that need to be asked

    And they have never had the money

    So you say. Without ever having presented a shred of evidence or even a hint of what source you might have for this assertion.
    That's simply not true, sources have been named on this very thread.
    I genuinely cannot recall anything that could remotely be described as "evidence" presented here by anyone, let alone NLA Since there is no confirmation of the price RD is asking, it would be a tad tough to provide any reliable evidence that any party " "doesn't have" the money, as opposed to being unwilling to pay it.

    If you re read my post carefully you may also detect that NLA and I know each other well enough to have cordial and civil private conversations, but unfortunately even those did not yield the concrete basis for his assertions nor any clue to why he feels his sources are authoritative. I was genuinely interested to become better informed, but he was unable to assist me.
  • Off_it said:

    Fuck me, is this what it's come to - people arguing about whether the old fucker is asset stripping or not?

    The font of all knowledge that is Wikipedia (I know) says this:

    Asset stripping is a term used to refer to the practice of selling off a company's assets in order to improve returns for equity investors. With a lower level of assets, it is maintained, the business is rendered financially less stable or viable.

    Certainly sounds like it to me. Reducing liabilities = improving returns for equity investors, and we only have one of those.

    But either way, it matters not. There is quite clearly only one person to blame for the current 4+ year shitfest we are enduring and to suggest there is even a morsel of blame falling elsewhere, quite frankly, comes across as pie in the sky heatwave induced jibbering bollocks.

    I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this

    If it turns out that the Aussies made false bids in order to secure the club without having the funds in place that imo is nothing to do with the situation we have with RD but is well worthy of discussion debate and criticism
    WTF????

    They don’t have the money so why out bid people who do there are questions that need to be asked

    And they have never had the money
    Your continually saying they (Muir) don’t have the money is therefore somewhat inaccurate........they most certainly DO have the money but are they prepared to stump up with it.......it would seem that for one reason or another they aren’t.
    It’s a mute point I know, but for the sake of clarity you must understand that when you continue to say they don’t have the money it’s somewhat misleading.
    Think you mean 'moot' point mate as opposed to 'mute'.
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!