I’m on honeymoon in Aruba and still check this thread once or twice a day. I think it’s an addiction
Bahama. Ooh I wanna take you to Bermuda. Bahama. Come on pretty mama.
The only Beach Boys hit not written by Brian Wilson
Apart from Why Do Fools Fall In Love (1964), Do You Wanna Dance and Barbara Ann (1965), Sloop John B (1966), Bluebirds Over The Mountain (1968), I Can Hear Music (1969), Cottonfields (1970), Long Promised Road (1971), California Saga: California (1973), Rock and Roll Music (1975), Peggy Sue (1978), Lady Linda (1979), Come Go With Me (1981), Getcha Back and It's getting Late (1985), She Believes In Love Again and California Dreaming (1986), Wipe Out (1987), Still Cruisin' (1989), Problem Child (1989), Hot Fun in the Summertime (1992), I Can Hear Music (1966).
Quite a few of those are cover versions. Did Gagey mean songs written by the Beach Boys, but not BW?
I dunno. But I am happy that the time it took to look them up meant we are ten minutes closer to the takeover...
the Saudi’s showed their money enough to put in a firm offer they reached his number and got gazzumped by people that apart from buying a scarf and getting cheap cheers like wwe wrestlers have done nothing
They then walked away as they were at their number
Not a fake number by fake people
No. The Saudi's clearly didn't have the money to run the club or they simply weren't actually interested in the club.
I am fairly certain our latest bid received was not the same amount as the Aussies bid, however it was also accepted.
If the Saudi's had either the money or the interest, they'd own us by now.
Why they reached their limit and like in all auctions you know when to stop especially when the Aussies wouldn’t stop and seeing as they are only using Monopoly money why should they
Shame you can’t wake up and smell the coffee.
When they buy us I will drink coffee for the first time in years
But my coffee ban is well and truly safe
nla....you seem to be enjoying yourself making us all the more depressed. How much longer are you planning to go on finding countless ways of telling us exactly the same thing over and over again?
I don't think NLA enjoys it at all, I think he's just doing the same as others itk, by relaying what he's been told. The only problem is, people only seem to like good news (whether they know it to be wholly accurate or not) and what NLA is relaying, isn't necessarily what the majority of fans want to hear. The majority want to hear things like "It's gonna be a tough 2 weeks, but it'll be worth it in the end".
It seems to me that if you so much as question the Aussies in anyway, you get laughed at or jumped on.
the Saudi’s showed their money enough to put in a firm offer they reached his number and got gazzumped by people that apart from buying a scarf and getting cheap cheers like wwe wrestlers have done nothing
They then walked away as they were at their number
Not a fake number by fake people
No. The Saudi's clearly didn't have the money to run the club or they simply weren't actually interested in the club.
I am fairly certain our latest bid received was not the same amount as the Aussies bid, however it was also accepted.
If the Saudi's had either the money or the interest, they'd own us by now.
Why they reached their limit and like in all auctions you know when to stop especially when the Aussies wouldn’t stop and seeing as they are only using Monopoly money why should they
Shame you can’t wake up and smell the coffee.
When they buy us I will drink coffee for the first time in years
But my coffee ban is well and truly safe
nla....you seem to be enjoying yourself making us all the more depressed. How much longer are you planning to go on finding countless ways of telling us exactly the same thing over and over again?
I don't think NLA enjoys it at all, I think he's just doing the same as others itk, by relaying what he's been told. The only problem is, people only seem to like good news (whether they know it to be wholly accurate or not) and what NLA is relaying, isn't necessarily what the majority of fans want to hear. The majority want to hear things like "It's gonna be a tough 2 weeks, but it'll be worth it in the end".
It seems to me that if you so much as question the Aussies in anyway, you get laughed at or jumped on.
Apologies if already posted but a really left-sided guess here and what if the hold up was the potential for a further windfall from the sale of lookman (15% of the profit between the sale figure and £7.5m charlton sold him for) ? The lookman sale doesn’t seem to be happening now so that might clear the last hurdle, if that were to be the case.
If there is a sell on clause for Ademola RD could make a deal with Everton to buy this out as was previously done with Darren Bent
Nothing to do with EFL addicted passed that info on weeks ago
It’s all down to money
I don’t believe they have the funds they agreed to pay that’s why they are delaying
It may be they have lowered the offer and RD is playing hard ball
Either way they either don’t have it or are unwilling to spend it
The other interested parties are miles away from getting close
Directors ain’t been paid off or even an agreement reached so it’s not about clear tittles
It’s just money money money money
Sorry to get on your case again, but as the Anti-Aussie- Influencer on here, you need to face some facts.
When Addickted "passed on that info" you chose to ignore it, even when we discussed it privately, because it blew a bloody great hole in your scenario. It meant that the EFL didn't agree with you that they don't have the funds. They submitted papers to show that they do, its part of the test.
You now at least have the grace to concede that as opposed to not having the money, it is equally likely that they simply don't want pay that ludicrous amount. I will leave it to you to ponder how very different those two scenarios are.
Nothing to do with EFL addicted passed that info on weeks ago
It’s all down to money
I don’t believe they have the funds they agreed to pay that’s why they are delaying
It may be they have lowered the offer and RD is playing hard ball
Either way they either don’t have it or are unwilling to spend it
The other interested parties are miles away from getting close
Directors ain’t been paid off or even an agreement reached so it’s not about clear tittles
It’s just money money money money
Sorry to get on your case again, but as the Anti-Aussie- Influencer on here, you need to face some facts.
When Addickted "passed on that info" you chose to ignore it, even when we discussed it privately, because it blew a bloody great hole in your scenario. It meant that the EFL didn't agree with you that they don't have the funds. They submitted papers to show that they do, its part of the test.
You now at least have the grace to concede that as opposed to not having the money, it is equally likely that they simply don't want pay that ludicrous amount. I will leave it to you to ponder how very different those two scenarios are.
No it never I never used the EFL as proof of my point
And Like it or not PA the aussies ain’t showing the colour of their money and that’s because they haven’t got it or refuse to spend it
The biggest shame here that is passing you by is that the Saudi’s had the offer in at the amour RD wanted and the Aussies went and out bid them
I trust the man on here implicitly who told us what the Saudi bid was
The Aussies not following through and letting this one slip gets my goat proper
However the directors loans had not been sorted so it’s not a clear title issue
The offer they made has not been followed through
There is a gap in their funding on the original offer I stick to what I was told and that’s they never had it in the first place
RD is to blame The value may be too high but because 2 bid to his value who’s to say the stupid cnut isn’t within his right to feel he got it spot on
The whole thing is a charade and no one coming out on top whilst we die slowly
Fuck RD Fuck Murray Fuck the Aussie bid Fuck EFL Fuck the Saudi bid for not coming back in
There’s a long long way to go before this is resolved
NLA, you’ve admitted your info comes from the Roland camp. What makes you so sure that their claim that the Aussies don’t have money is so correct? Could it just be that they are not willing to pay the ridiculous asking price? Now that we have two sources saying they passed the fit and proper EFL test that would very much suggest they do have the funds. Could it be your source (the Roland source) is possibly lying? Or a least have a agenda for spreading the rumour that they don’t hand the funds? He does have a habit of not telling the truth.
Nothing to do with EFL addicted passed that info on weeks ago
It’s all down to money
I don’t believe they have the funds they agreed to pay that’s why they are delaying
It may be they have lowered the offer and RD is playing hard ball
Either way they either don’t have it or are unwilling to spend it
The other interested parties are miles away from getting close
Directors ain’t been paid off or even an agreement reached so it’s not about clear tittles
It’s just money money money money
Sorry to get on your case again, but as the Anti-Aussie- Influencer on here, you need to face some facts.
When Addickted "passed on that info" you chose to ignore it, even when we discussed it privately, because it blew a bloody great hole in your scenario. It meant that the EFL didn't agree with you that they don't have the funds. They submitted papers to show that they do, its part of the test.
You now at least have the grace to concede that as opposed to not having the money, it is equally likely that they simply don't want pay that ludicrous amount. I will leave it to you to ponder how very different those two scenarios are.
Nothing to do with EFL addicted passed that info on weeks ago
It’s all down to money
I don’t believe they have the funds they agreed to pay that’s why they are delaying
It may be they have lowered the offer and RD is playing hard ball
Either way they either don’t have it or are unwilling to spend it
The other interested parties are miles away from getting close
Directors ain’t been paid off or even an agreement reached so it’s not about clear tittles
It’s just money money money money
Sorry to get on your case again, but as the Anti-Aussie- Influencer on here, you need to face some facts.
When Addickted "passed on that info" you chose to ignore it, even when we discussed it privately, because it blew a bloody great hole in your scenario. It meant that the EFL didn't agree with you that they don't have the funds. They submitted papers to show that they do, its part of the test.
You now at least have the grace to concede that as opposed to not having the money, it is equally likely that they simply don't want pay that ludicrous amount. I will leave it to you to ponder how very different those two scenarios are.
No it never I never used the EFL as proof of my point
And Like it or not PA the aussies ain’t showing the colour of their money and that’s because they haven’t got it or refuse to spend it
The biggest shame here that is passing you by is that the Saudi’s had the offer in at the amour RD wanted and the Aussies went and out bid them
I trust the man on here implicitly who told us what the Saudi bid was
The Aussies not following through and letting this one slip gets my goat proper
However the directors loans had not been sorted so it’s not a clear title issue
The offer they made has not been followed through
There is a gap in their funding on the original offer I stick to what I was told and that’s they never had it in the first place
RD is to blame The value may be too high but because 2 bid to his value who’s to say the stupid cnut isn’t within his right to feel he got it spot on
The whole thing is a charade and no one coming out on top whilst we die slowly
Fuck RD Fuck Murray Fuck the Aussie bid Fuck EFL Fuck the Saudi bid for not coming back in
There’s a long long way to go before this is resolved
NLA, you’ve admitted your info comes from the Roland camp. What makes you so sure that their claim that the Aussies don’t have money is so correct? Could it just be that they are not willing to pay the ridiculous asking price? Now that we have two sources saying they passed the fit and proper EFL test that would very much suggest they do have the funds. Could it be your source (the Roland source) is possibly lying? Or a least have a agenda for spreading the rumour that they don’t hand the funds? He does have a habit of not telling the truth.
I'm not saying you don't ask valid questions, the RD camp haven't been known for their honesty. But I think we can all agree that Roland wants to sell and both parties have said a price has been agreed. So realistically how many different factors could be holding up the deal? Of all the theories I find NLA's the most believable.
1) NLA is saying that The Aussies outbid the Saudies in the full knowledge that they were never going to pay that price but lower their offer to one which suited them once they were the only player in town. If true then scandalous imo.
2) James Seed is saying that on 18th May the Aussies had the money, the deal had been agreed with RD, but the final deal had to be signed off by all the members of the consortium. Which, because of the delay, has not happened. Begs the question why ?? Surely anyone getting involved must know the initial cost of buying the club & then the future outlay needed to fund their 5 year plan. Sounds like the original AFC deal......round up enough interest & go from there. Hardly what I would call "serious".
3) The Aussies must have had enough money at some point (18th May ?) to satisfy both RD and the EFL - FPP test passed also sometime after that. I'm assuming "enough money" to RD was £40m & to the EFL it was this plus 2 years funding.
If all of this is correct then as I've said a few times before I wish that Muir et al had never got involved. Not even the way to run a pub team.
I’m no expert on the EFL test but as an example if the Aussies has 4 members of a consortium worth a combined 1 billion then that is enough money to buy and run us. Doesn’t mean those investors want to stump up the cash and the EFL can’t later dispute the fact that owners don’t want to stump up cash.
I think that’s what NLA has hinted to, we know with Muirs involvement they have the cash but that doesn’t mean they want to stump it up, especially if a wealthy investor has had to pull out.
1) NLA is saying that The Aussies outbid the Saudies in the full knowledge that they were never going to pay that price but lower their offer to one which suited them once they were the only player in town. If true then scandalous imo.
2) James Seed is saying that on 18th May the Aussies had the money, the deal had been agreed with RD, but the final deal had to be signed off by all the members of the consortium. Which, because of the delay, has not happened. Begs the question why ?? Surely anyone getting involved must know the initial cost of buying the club & then the future outlay needed to fund their 5 year plan. Sounds like the original AFC deal......round up enough interest & go from there. Hardly what I would call "serious".
3) The Aussies must have had enough money at some point (18th May ?) to satisfy both RD and the EFL - FPP test passed also sometime after that. I'm assuming "enough money" to RD was £40m & to the EFL it was this plus 2 years funding.
If all of this is correct then as I've said a few times before I wish that Muir et al had never got involved. Not even the way to run a pub team.
Not sure you’ve read my recent posts properly. 2) is wrong. 3) is partly wrong. 1) is probably wrong info. There’s nothing to back it up, as far as I know.
1) NLA is saying that The Aussies outbid the Saudies in the full knowledge that they were never going to pay that price but lower their offer to one which suited them once they were the only player in town. If true then scandalous imo.
2) James Seed is saying that on 18th May the Aussies had the money, the deal had been agreed with RD, but the final deal had to be signed off by all the members of the consortium. Which, because of the delay, has not happened. Begs the question why ?? Surely anyone getting involved must know the initial cost of buying the club & then the future outlay needed to fund their 5 year plan. Sounds like the original AFC deal......round up enough interest & go from there. Hardly what I would call "serious".
3) The Aussies must have had enough money at some point (18th May ?) to satisfy both RD and the EFL - FPP test passed also sometime after that. I'm assuming "enough money" to RD was £40m & to the EFL it was this plus 2 years funding.
If all of this is correct then as I've said a few times before I wish that Muir et al had never got involved. Not even the way to run a pub team.
Not sure you’ve read my recent posts properly. 2) is wrong. 3) is partly wrong. 1) is probably wrong info. There’s nothing to back it up, as far as I now.
Have a plane to catch now.
1,2 and 3 are not wrong. They are wrong in your opinion. There is a distinction.
I’m fairly sure no one contributing on this thread knows the real truth, only the snippets of information they are provided with, and none of those are fully trustable.
1) NLA is saying that The Aussies outbid the Saudies in the full knowledge that they were never going to pay that price but lower their offer to one which suited them once they were the only player in town. If true then scandalous imo.
2) James Seed is saying that on 18th May the Aussies had the money, the deal had been agreed with RD, but the final deal had to be signed off by all the members of the consortium. Which, because of the delay, has not happened. Begs the question why ?? Surely anyone getting involved must know the initial cost of buying the club & then the future outlay needed to fund their 5 year plan. Sounds like the original AFC deal......round up enough interest & go from there. Hardly what I would call "serious".
3) The Aussies must have had enough money at some point (18th May ?) to satisfy both RD and the EFL - FPP test passed also sometime after that. I'm assuming "enough money" to RD was £40m & to the EFL it was this plus 2 years funding.
If all of this is correct then as I've said a few times before I wish that Muir et al had never got involved. Not even the way to run a pub team.
Not sure you’ve read my recent posts properly. 2) is wrong. 3) is partly wrong. 1) is probably wrong info. There’s nothing to back it up, as far as I now.
Have a plane to catch now.
1,2 and 3 are not wrong. They are wrong in your opinion. There is a distinction.
I’m fairly sure no one contributing on this thread knows the real truth, only the snippets of information they are provided with, and none of those are fully trustable.
100 %this. I don't for one minute believe that people claiming to be in the know are deliberately posting misinformation. But. The bottom line is that only Roland and his legal team truly know how close to a deal we are and they don't post on here.
And more importantly to me, I believed GM when he told me.
But a couple of the consortium thought Roland's price was too high. So we wait until another buyer comes along, or he lowers his price, or both. (My speculation here of course).
If your speculation is correct - it raises serious concerns.
We all know that a price of £40mn (or whatever) is a ridiculous over-valuation. But it seems that's what the Australians agreed to pay. (I'd suggest a more realistic price with ALL the Staprix debt written off and an acknowledgement of all the outstanding training ground work would be either something around £5-10mn with the status quo remaining on the ex-directors loans or £8-15mn with clean title.)
NONETHELESS, if £40mn is what the Australians agreed....well, a gentleman's word is his bond and all that....it does not bode well that they are might now be haggling as you suggest. The only conclusion one can reach is that this puts them firmly in one of three categories or possibly a mix of all three:
Option one - spivs - no better than Roland's predecessors; Option two - untrustworthy; or Option three - a bit dim.
We've recent and painful experience of all of those and I don't want to revisit them thanks very much.
Setting aside how obnoxious we perceive Roland to be for a minute, if any of us were him, would we not now to be telling the Aussies to swivel on it and start looking for a sale elsewhere with some more honourable counterparties?
That he apparently hasn't done that surely indicates that it's squeaky bum time for him. But I'm no longer feeling optimistic about what the Roland-free future holds.
1) NLA is saying that The Aussies outbid the Saudies in the full knowledge that they were never going to pay that price but lower their offer to one which suited them once they were the only player in town. If true then scandalous imo.
2) James Seed is saying that on 18th May the Aussies had the money, the deal had been agreed with RD, but the final deal had to be signed off by all the members of the consortium. Which, because of the delay, has not happened. Begs the question why ?? Surely anyone getting involved must know the initial cost of buying the club & then the future outlay needed to fund their 5 year plan. Sounds like the original AFC deal......round up enough interest & go from there. Hardly what I would call "serious".
3) The Aussies must have had enough money at some point (18th May ?) to satisfy both RD and the EFL - FPP test passed also sometime after that. I'm assuming "enough money" to RD was £40m & to the EFL it was this plus 2 years funding.
If all of this is correct then as I've said a few times before I wish that Muir et al had never got involved. Not even the way to run a pub team.
If ... if ... there is truth in 1), it is most certainly scandalous.
Nothing to do with EFL addicted passed that info on weeks ago
It’s all down to money
I don’t believe they have the funds they agreed to pay that’s why they are delaying
It may be they have lowered the offer and RD is playing hard ball
Either way they either don’t have it or are unwilling to spend it
The other interested parties are miles away from getting close
Directors ain’t been paid off or even an agreement reached so it’s not about clear tittles
It’s just money money money money
Sorry to get on your case again, but as the Anti-Aussie- Influencer on here, you need to face some facts.
When Addickted "passed on that info" you chose to ignore it, even when we discussed it privately, because it blew a bloody great hole in your scenario. It meant that the EFL didn't agree with you that they don't have the funds. They submitted papers to show that they do, its part of the test.
You now at least have the grace to concede that as opposed to not having the money, it is equally likely that they simply don't want pay that ludicrous amount. I will leave it to you to ponder how very different those two scenarios are.
Nothing to do with EFL addicted passed that info on weeks ago
It’s all down to money
I don’t believe they have the funds they agreed to pay that’s why they are delaying
It may be they have lowered the offer and RD is playing hard ball
Either way they either don’t have it or are unwilling to spend it
The other interested parties are miles away from getting close
Directors ain’t been paid off or even an agreement reached so it’s not about clear tittles
It’s just money money money money
Sorry to get on your case again, but as the Anti-Aussie- Influencer on here, you need to face some facts.
When Addickted "passed on that info" you chose to ignore it, even when we discussed it privately, because it blew a bloody great hole in your scenario. It meant that the EFL didn't agree with you that they don't have the funds. They submitted papers to show that they do, its part of the test.
You now at least have the grace to concede that as opposed to not having the money, it is equally likely that they simply don't want pay that ludicrous amount. I will leave it to you to ponder how very different those two scenarios are.
No it never I never used the EFL as proof of my point
And Like it or not PA the aussies ain’t showing the colour of their money and that’s because they haven’t got it or refuse to spend it
The biggest shame here that is passing you by is that the Saudi’s had the offer in at the amour RD wanted and the Aussies went and out bid them
I trust the man on here implicitly who told us what the Saudi bid was
The Aussies not following through and letting this one slip gets my goat proper
However the directors loans had not been sorted so it’s not a clear title issue
The offer they made has not been followed through
There is a gap in their funding on the original offer I stick to what I was told and that’s they never had it in the first place
RD is to blame The value may be too high but because 2 bid to his value who’s to say the stupid cnut isn’t within his right to feel he got it spot on
The whole thing is a charade and no one coming out on top whilst we die slowly
Fuck RD Fuck Murray Fuck the Aussie bid Fuck EFL Fuck the Saudi bid for not coming back in
There’s a long long way to go before this is resolved
NLA, you’ve admitted your info comes from the Roland camp. What makes you so sure that their claim that the Aussies don’t have money is so correct? Could it just be that they are not willing to pay the ridiculous asking price? Now that we have two sources saying they passed the fit and proper EFL test that would very much suggest they do have the funds. Could it be your source (the Roland source) is possibly lying? Or a least have a agenda for spreading the rumour that they don’t hand the funds? He does have a habit of not telling the truth.
I'm not saying you don't ask valid questions, the RD camp haven't been known for their honesty. But I think we can all agree that Roland wants to sell and both parties have said a price has been agreed. So realistically how many different factors could be holding up the deal? Of all the theories I find NLA's the most believable.
Red Henry said the Saudis got the price down to 40.1m he didn’t say if they were prepared to pay that. I think this is much simpler than others are making out. Roland is asking too much money for the club, most parties have walked away, the Aussies are hanging around hoping Roland shifts. Roland is the problem not the different parties trying to buy the club.
1) NLA is saying that The Aussies outbid the Saudies in the full knowledge that they were never going to pay that price but lower their offer to one which suited them once they were the only player in town. If true then scandalous imo.
2) James Seed is saying that on 18th May the Aussies had the money, the deal had been agreed with RD, but the final deal had to be signed off by all the members of the consortium. Which, because of the delay, has not happened. Begs the question why ?? Surely anyone getting involved must know the initial cost of buying the club & then the future outlay needed to fund their 5 year plan. Sounds like the original AFC deal......round up enough interest & go from there. Hardly what I would call "serious".
3) The Aussies must have had enough money at some point (18th May ?) to satisfy both RD and the EFL - FPP test passed also sometime after that. I'm assuming "enough money" to RD was £40m & to the EFL it was this plus 2 years funding.
If all of this is correct then as I've said a few times before I wish that Muir et al had never got involved. Not even the way to run a pub team.
Not sure you’ve read my recent posts properly. 2) is wrong. 3) is partly wrong. 1) is probably wrong info. There’s nothing to back it up, as far as I now.
Have a plane to catch now.
1,2 and 3 are not wrong. They are wrong in your opinion. There is a distinction.
No they are wrong actually, because he’s saying I said things that I didn’t say or imply. This applies to 2) and 3). Its no massive deal but I’d rather people didn’t think I implied something that I didn’t. In reference to 1) I said it is ‘probably wrong’. I then said ‘as far as I know’.
All of my info come directly from one of the consortium, so I don’t need to say ‘in my opinion’ all the time, that’d be a pain. The only issue is whether people think I’ve been lied to, and I certainly not going to write ‘unless they’re lying through their teeth’ every time I write a comment. Other people’s sources are less direct. No one is getting info from Roland. Lieven’s info we know isn’t necessarily reliable.
Your interventions are very selective imho. Don’t remember you intervening with NLA when he stated: ‘They have never had the money. Fact.’ Or many other statements presented as fact that are not from a direct source. You never told him that they were just opinions, or if you did I didn’t notice. ‘The Aussies have pulled out. Mic drop.’ ‘The Aussies are charlatans, which is because they’re from convict stock’. ‘They never had the dosh’.
It’s been relentless, but how many interventions from you? Zero. It’s not fair, and I think I’m going to cry.
If 1 is right it would be naughty but I wouldn't blame anybody for doing it. We have had previous interest from Saudis, Chinese and Scots, to name a few, they all stopped short of an official bid? The inflated asking price, maybe the Aussies thought that after DD etc Roly would see sense, fools, and there would be some downward negotiation.
Anyway I would love to be rich that losing a million a month is more palatable than having to agree to a lower selling price.
Isn’t the club wholly owned by Staprix and is in effect just one of its group of companies.
Isn’t there a tax benefit for Roland if one of his companies is losing money ? Is the monthly loss really something less once the final tax burden is taken into account ?
1) NLA is saying that The Aussies outbid the Saudies in the full knowledge that they were never going to pay that price but lower their offer to one which suited them once they were the only player in town. If true then scandalous imo.
2) James Seed is saying that on 18th May the Aussies had the money, the deal had been agreed with RD, but the final deal had to be signed off by all the members of the consortium. Which, because of the delay, has not happened. Begs the question why ?? Surely anyone getting involved must know the initial cost of buying the club & then the future outlay needed to fund their 5 year plan. Sounds like the original AFC deal......round up enough interest & go from there. Hardly what I would call "serious".
3) The Aussies must have had enough money at some point (18th May ?) to satisfy both RD and the EFL - FPP test passed also sometime after that. I'm assuming "enough money" to RD was £40m & to the EFL it was this plus 2 years funding.
If all of this is correct then as I've said a few times before I wish that Muir et al had never got involved. Not even the way to run a pub team.
Not sure you’ve read my recent posts properly. 2) is wrong. 3) is partly wrong. 1) is probably wrong info. There’s nothing to back it up, as far as I now.
Have a plane to catch now.
1,2 and 3 are not wrong. They are wrong in your opinion. There is a distinction.
No they are wrong actually, because he’s saying I said things that I didn’t say or imply. This applies to 2) and 3) In reference to 1) I said it is ‘probably wrong’. I then said ‘as far as I know’.
All of my info come directly from one of the consortium, so I don’t need to say ‘in my opinion’ all the time. The only issue is whether people think I’ve been lied to, and I certainly not going to write ‘unless they’re lying through their teeth’ every time I write a comment’. Other people’s sources are less direct. No one is getting info from Roland. Lieven’s info we know isn’t necessarily reliable.
Your interventions are very selective. Don’t remember you intervening with NLA when he stated: ‘They have never had the money. Fact.’ Or many other statements presented as fact that are not from a direct source. ‘The Aussies have pulled out. Mic drop.’ ‘The Aussies are charlatans, which is because they’re from convict stock’. ‘They never had the dosh’.
It’s been relentless, but how many interventions from you? Zero.
(Just my opinion mate)
And how many 'soon', 'two weeks', 'very close', 'next week or two', 'be patient, it will be worth it' has your mate spoken to you about?
None of them have been factual. Not one. Five year plan my arse.
It seem GM may actually not be ITK, or he's just stringing you along.
Comments
Probably more accurate to say the only Beach Boys hit Brian didn't play or sing on.
(Can't be bothered to check. Go Chizz, retent your anus
1) NLA is saying that The Aussies outbid the Saudies in the full knowledge that they were never going to pay that price but lower their offer to one which suited them once they were the only player in town. If true then scandalous imo.
2) James Seed is saying that on 18th May the Aussies had the money, the deal had been agreed with RD, but the final deal had to be signed off by all the members of the consortium. Which, because of the delay, has not happened. Begs the question why ?? Surely anyone getting involved must know the initial cost of buying the club & then the future outlay needed to fund their 5 year plan. Sounds like the original AFC deal......round up enough interest & go from there. Hardly what I would call "serious".
3) The Aussies must have had enough money at some point (18th May ?) to satisfy both RD and the EFL - FPP test passed also sometime after that. I'm assuming "enough money" to RD was £40m & to the EFL it was this plus 2 years funding.
If all of this is correct then as I've said a few times before I wish that Muir et al had never got involved. Not even the way to run a pub team.
I think that’s what NLA has hinted to, we know with Muirs involvement they have the cash but that doesn’t mean they want to stump it up, especially if a wealthy investor has had to pull out.
2) is wrong. 3) is partly wrong.
1) is probably wrong info. There’s nothing to back it up, as far as I know.
Have a plane to catch now.
I’m fairly sure no one contributing on this thread knows the real truth, only the snippets of information they are provided with, and none of those are fully trustable.
I don't for one minute believe that people claiming to be in the know are deliberately posting misinformation.
But.
The bottom line is that only Roland and his legal team truly know how close to a deal we are and they don't post on here.
We all know that a price of £40mn (or whatever) is a ridiculous over-valuation. But it seems that's what the Australians agreed to pay. (I'd suggest a more realistic price with ALL the Staprix debt written off and an acknowledgement of all the outstanding training ground work would be either something around £5-10mn with the status quo remaining on the ex-directors loans or £8-15mn with clean title.)
NONETHELESS, if £40mn is what the Australians agreed....well, a gentleman's word is his bond and all that....it does not bode well that they are might now be haggling as you suggest. The only conclusion one can reach is that this puts them firmly in one of three categories or possibly a mix of all three:
Option one - spivs - no better than Roland's predecessors;
Option two - untrustworthy; or
Option three - a bit dim.
We've recent and painful experience of all of those and I don't want to revisit them thanks very much.
Setting aside how obnoxious we perceive Roland to be for a minute, if any of us were him, would we not now to be telling the Aussies to swivel on it and start looking for a sale elsewhere with some more honourable counterparties?
That he apparently hasn't done that surely indicates that it's squeaky bum time for him. But I'm no longer feeling optimistic about what the Roland-free future holds.
This applies to 2) and 3). Its no massive deal but I’d rather people didn’t think I implied something that I didn’t.
In reference to 1) I said it is ‘probably wrong’. I then said ‘as far as I know’.
All of my info come directly from one of the consortium, so I don’t need to say ‘in my opinion’ all the time, that’d be a pain.
The only issue is whether people think I’ve been lied to, and I certainly not going to write ‘unless they’re lying through their teeth’ every time I write a comment. Other people’s sources are less direct. No one is getting info from Roland. Lieven’s info we know isn’t necessarily reliable.
Your interventions are very selective imho. Don’t remember you intervening with NLA when he stated: ‘They have never had the money. Fact.’ Or many other statements presented as fact that are not from a direct source. You never told him that they were just opinions, or if you did I didn’t notice.
‘The Aussies have pulled out. Mic drop.’
‘The Aussies are charlatans, which is because they’re from convict stock’.
‘They never had the dosh’.
It’s been relentless, but how many interventions from you? Zero. It’s not fair, and I think I’m going to cry.
(Just my opinion mate)
Anyway I would love to be rich that losing a million a month is more palatable than having to agree to a lower selling price.
Isn’t there a tax benefit for Roland if one of his companies is losing money ? Is the monthly loss really something less once the final tax burden is taken into account ?
I really don’t know.
None of them have been factual. Not one. Five year plan my arse.
It seem GM may actually not be ITK, or he's just stringing you along.