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.
None of them are factual? What are you talking about? They are just reply to my oft repeated question 'is the deal off?' which I've been asked repeatedly to put to him by people on here, and on Twitter. None of them have said 'the deal will be completed next week' or whatever. They've all been of the 'we're still in it' variety. Bland, but truthful and harmless, unlike your unecessarily rude post. Plenty of people are happy to read them as well. Sure you're an anti-Aussie cheerleader, I get that, and don't have a problem with it, but no need to be so vitriolic.
Roll your neck in.
The rude and vitriolic postings seem to be coming from you to anybody that dares question the validity of this so called Australian consortium. Even you have to admit, that despite the continuous good news they leak out, mainly via you, it actually appears to be poppycock. They are no nearer purchasing the club than they were a year ago.
Have you actually sat back and asked why that is?
I repeat my question that you chose to ignore in both your responses to my post, do you think GM is just stringing you along?
Seeing as you don’t seem to be able to post with out being obnoxious you can, in the words of the great Fanny, ‘Go boil yer ‘ead’.
Gents, can we all try to remember that we are all Charlton fans, please. We can disagree without being insulting and others can hold opposing views without us being insulted.
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.
My money is on NLA.
I don't know NLA personally, or James Seed or Airman or Doucher or Red Henry or Colin or anyone ITK. I just read the posts and NLA has stuck to his guns even when his posts have been pilloried. He has also been the most accurate, and this version of events ties in with what is transpiring at CAFC. So it'll do for me.
How can it be accurate? He said consistently the Aussie’s don’t have the funds but now we have two sources claiming the Aussies have passed the fit and proper EFL test. That means they do have the funds. Last night he changed his tune to ‘don’t have the funds or not willing to pay the price’.Remember his source is coming from the Roland camp. Would you trust Roland? All this Aussie bashing is mighty suspicious.
RD has the money to pass the fit and proper test also
You need to re read the posts go back to October when I first said
The Aussies don’t have the funds (they never then )
From December I said they don’t have the funds and are trying to get more
Me saying that they may not be willing to spend it is because the fee they agreed remember the agreed part it’s very important
They have not followed through on
I said there two reasons
They don’t have it
They don’t want to spend it
What other reasons are there if the the Club The Aussies the EFL all belive that it’s in place
It’s not directors loans that part hasn’t been addressed and is not being addressed
It’s because the Aussie bid has stalled they are unwilling to pay the amount they agreed
Was this a deliberate negotiation tactic or is it they thought they could raise the money and they can’t
The EFL can check the accounts that the consortium members have and that will show they have the required funds but that don’t mean they will use it or are willing to use it
Reading all the posters that are questioning whether they want the Aussies now because they’re being, or have always been, devious:
I 100% believe that they did NOT set out to bid high, with the intention of later on reducing their bid. I’d be shocked if that was the case.
I’m quite sure GM expected the purchase to be done and dusted the week after our meeting. He wouldn’t have be so sure if he was planning to low ball Roland.
Whether they screwed up after that I don’t know. Whether new consortium members were needed I don’t know. I don’t know when, or even if, they decided his price was too high.
But they didn’t walk. Not yet anyway.
This is a question I asked elsewhere on this thread, but, in your (humble or otherwise!) opinion (or knowledge), was it a closed bid with a deadline (ala TV rights/train franchise), or an on-going 'war'... i.e. Aussies offer, say, 30M; Saudies 32M; Aussies come back with £34M etc etc etc... Roland playing one off against the other?
Was there any hint at all (and I appreciate you might be out of the loop here) of RD questionning where the money came from? By that I mean that, if I sell my car for 5k, I don't care where the money comes from; if it's a husband/wife chipping in with the help of the mother-in-law or whatever, or some bloke who's got 5k lying around. I don't care what happens to the car after it's sold either. In other words, was the Aussie 'bid' sound?
I think a lot of people are looking for clues here as to why the Aussies (or, indeed, the Saudies; or anyone for that matter), would want to punt £40.5M on CAFC.
Muir has pedigree as an entrepreneur, and the last thing I'd expect him to be is a fool or to throw money down the drain, nor to expect other people (i.e. other investors) to. Clearly he's not prepared to stump up the cash himself to be 51% shareholder. If he's not prepared to take that risk, it's not a very good advertisment for the other investers he's trying to attract.
I can only conclude that there's something seriously wrong with the Aussie bid: indeed any bid that values the club at £40M+.
Sorry Mark, I don’t know anything about the bid or the bidding process. The point about Muir having pedigree as an entrepreneur answers your next point about him wanting to spread the risk. I imagine he thinks buying 51% is too great a risk. Perhaps that isn’t a a good advertisement to other investors, I don’t know. Maybe it’s a good example to other investors?
I wouldn’t know if there’s something seriously wrong with the Aussie bid. Maybe there is. Maybe some of them were happy with the high bid and others persuaded them to see sense. I really don’t know. I don’t see it as that big a deal myself, but I know others do. If they’re trying to screw Roland I’d see that as a bonus.
Shame to see the division at the moment, whether it’s about the boycott, the protests or now the takeover. And yes I’ve been targeted by the same handful of people on here for some time. Bit pathetic really. The brown nose fella in particular. Water off a duck’s back now.
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.
None of them are factual? What are you talking about? They are just reply to my oft repeated question 'is the deal off?' which I've been asked repeatedly to put to him by people on here, and on Twitter. None of them have said 'the deal will be completed next week' or whatever. They've all been of the 'we're still in it' variety. Bland, but truthful and harmless, unlike your unecessarily rude post. Plenty of people are happy to read them as well. Sure you're an anti-Aussie cheerleader, I get that, and don't have a problem with it, but no need to be so vitriolic.
Roll your neck in.
The rude and vitriolic postings seem to be coming from you to anybody that dares question the validity of this so called Australian consortium. Even you have to admit, that despite the continuous good news they leak out, mainly via you, it actually appears to be poppycock. They are no nearer purchasing the club than they were a year ago.
Have you actually sat back and asked why that is?
I repeat my question that you chose to ignore in both your responses to my post, do you think GM is just stringing you along?
Seeing as you don’t seem to be able to post with out being obnoxious you can, in the words of the great Fanny, ‘Go boil yer ‘ead’.
Thanks, although I’m not getting much of any use at the moment. I have no problem with someone like @Addickted because he’s motivated by his love for the club and obviously seriously thinks the Aussies would be bad for us. I disagree of course, but I can see where he’s coming from. The couple who always pop up if someone criticises me are just bottom feeders.
One day, the clouds of Duchatelet doom will part and the vibrant rays will shine down over the Valley and when they do I imagine this song to be playing, with NLA and James Seed leading the choir. Oh happy day indeed.
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.
None of them are factual? What are you talking about? They are just reply to my oft repeated question 'is the deal off?' which I've been asked repeatedly to put to him by people on here, and on Twitter. None of them have said 'the deal will be completed next week' or whatever. They've all been of the 'we're still in it' variety. Bland, but truthful and harmless, unlike your unecessarily rude post. Plenty of people are happy to read them as well. Sure you're an anti-Aussie cheerleader, I get that, and don't have a problem with it, but no need to be so vitriolic.
Roll your neck in.
The rude and vitriolic postings seem to be coming from you to anybody that dares question the validity of this so called Australian consortium. Even you have to admit, that despite the continuous good news they leak out, mainly via you, it actually appears to be poppycock. They are no nearer purchasing the club than they were a year ago.
Have you actually sat back and asked why that is?
I repeat my question that you chose to ignore in both your responses to my post, do you think GM is just stringing you along?
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.
None of them are factual? What are you talking about? They are just reply to my oft repeated question 'is the deal off?' which I've been asked repeatedly to put to him by people on here, and on Twitter. None of them have said 'the deal will be completed next week' or whatever. They've all been of the 'we're still in it' variety. Bland, but truthful and harmless, unlike your unecessarily rude post. Plenty of people are happy to read them as well. Sure you're an anti-Aussie cheerleader, I get that, and don't have a problem with it, but no need to be so vitriolic.
Roll your neck in.
The rude and vitriolic postings seem to be coming from you to anybody that dares question the validity of this so called Australian consortium. Even you have to admit, that despite the continuous good news they leak out, mainly via you, it actually appears to be poppycock. They are no nearer purchasing the club than they were a year ago.
Have you actually sat back and asked why that is?
I repeat my question that you chose to ignore in both your responses to my post, do you think GM is just stringing you along?
I would not disagree with your first paragraph.
No church today Elfs ?
Yes mate, I missed the 10.30 service as I was as drunk as a skunk yesterday and was only released from the Arundel cop shop this morning.
Thanks, although I’m not getting much of any use at the moment. I have no problem with someone like @Addickted because he’s motivated by his love for the club and obviously seriously thinks the Aussies would be bad for us. I disagree of course, but I can see where he’s coming from. The couple who always pop up if someone criticises me are just bottom feeders.
Where have I said I think the Aussies would be bad for us?
My beef is with their procrastination and their inability to communicate with some seriously frustrated fans other than through some cosy chats with you.
Not knocking you for at least attempting to get some information out of them, but if they are that serious, why are you having to rely on contacting them, rather than vice versa. A quick call to say - "don't worry Jimbo, we're still in the game and the hold up is because of some gnarled old tosser in Belgium".
Hence my question about them stringing you along - which I notice you still haven't deemed to answer.
In the absence of Richard Murray, Roland Duchatelet and as we currently don’t have any Senior Management by way of Chairman, CEO and CFO who exactly was extending official hospitality to the Chairman and Directors of Fleetwood yesterday ?
Perhaps CARD should write to Fleetwood Chairman or CEO offering the apologies of the club on behalf of all Charlton fans who are embarrassed by such disrespectful behaviour.
Edit : perhaps a letter to the local Fleetwood newspaper so that the fans get to see it.
Thanks, although I’m not getting much of any use at the moment. I have no problem with someone like @Addickted because he’s motivated by his love for the club and obviously seriously thinks the Aussies would be bad for us. I disagree of course, but I can see where he’s coming from. The couple who always pop up if someone criticises me are just bottom feeders.
Where have I said I think the Aussies would be bad for us?
My beef is with their procrastination and their inability to communicate with some seriously frustrated fans other than through some cosy chats with you.
Not knocking you for at least attempting to get some information out of them, but if they are that serious, why are you having to rely on contacting them, rather than vice versa. A quick call to say - "don't worry Jimbo, we're still in the game and the hold up is because of some gnarled old tosser in Belgium".
Hence my question about them stringing you along - which I notice you still haven't deemed to answer.
Murray & the Aussies have a lot in common - they’ve both gone missing
Thanks, although I’m not getting much of any use at the moment. I have no problem with someone like @Addickted because he’s motivated by his love for the club and obviously seriously thinks the Aussies would be bad for us. I disagree of course, but I can see where he’s coming from. The couple who always pop up if someone criticises me are just bottom feeders.
Where have I said I think the Aussies would be bad for us?
My beef is with their procrastination and their inability to communicate with some seriously frustrated fans other than through some cosy chats with you.
Not knocking you for at least attempting to get some information out of them, but if they are that serious, why are you having to rely on contacting them, rather than vice versa. A quick call to say - "don't worry Jimbo, we're still in the game and the hold up is because of some gnarled old tosser in Belgium".
Hence my question about them stringing you along - which I notice you still haven't deemed to answer.
Ok fair enough - tbh I thought it was more of a rhetorical question. Sorry. So in May Gerard told me the basics about what they wanted to do, but couldn’t tell me any of the nuts and bolts stuff that everyone wants to know about. He said it was ok to share. (Only one cosy chat). Then he regretted that decision, but accepted he’d said it was ok. Since then nothing other than ‘it’s still on’, or ‘not true’, or the ‘tough couple of weeks’. But only because I asked. I got stick for that last one because nothing happened after two weeks, although I’m not sure he said anything would. (Oh and a call asking me not to make my personal protest at that particular time, a call instigated by Paul Elliott.)
Maybe they monitor social media and decided to say nothing more. Maybe the lawyers have told them to say nothing at all, because of the NDA, or for some other reason. Maybe he’s embarrassed about the delay (but I doubt that personally).
I know nothing about the recent delays. I just know the early ones were to do with legal stuff. Yes it would be much better if there hadn’t been any. It’s all got so unpleasant since the end of May.
And yes I wish they’d release some info, and I can only speculate as to why they won’t at the moment. Most likely is the lawyers advice I’d say.
So I hope that answers the stringing along question. I’m totally irrelevant.
My take is that were they out, they would certainly have said so by now....what is there to gain by keeping us all in suspense if they know they’ve pulled the plug....none whatever. There’s certainly something afoot.....good or bad.....who knows but as things stand I’m betting they are still in the hunt in some way or another.
I hesitate to step into such an entrenched space but we are moving into some real flights of fantasy largely based on 3rd hand information, speculation and subjective conjecture.
I can but embellish my comments of 22Jul.
There is one party responsible for the current fiasco. The responsibility starts and stops with the clubs beneficial owner
We have seen from the nature of the man his rudderless infrastructure, divisive culture, alienation of thousands, and catastrophic failure to empower the football clubhouse all but destroy any vestige of a competitive senior professional football organisation.
After this appalling stewardship any new people will need to put considerably more than £40mn at risk to restore this club to any industry credibility,
Yet some wish to vilify a group who appear to be prepared to pay an exorbitant fee for the man to just go away and then take on that very challenge. It is beyond bizarre.
NLA I respect your contacts and much of your opinion but your comments re the Australians now no longer stand scrutiny.
You assert there is/was no problem with the Owners & Directors Test the primary purpose of which is to determine if the financial suitability of an ownership is sufficient to ensure the club is able to fulfill its obligations to the EFL, its competitions and other members.
Why then do you think the EFL would clear the Australian bid if they did not evidence the ability to a) acquire the club b) fund operations going forward?
Whether the EFL criteria is ever valid is always debatable but with the court revelations re Jiminez, Cash and a BVI family trust nobody was going to just nod this transaction through.
Any interested party is free to bid what they are prepared to pay. The object of the exercise is to win the bid. Had the Australians met the full EFL criteria at the outset I suspect the deal would have been done. Hence the over confident appearance of consortium members on match days.
That the EFL requirements may have had any number of stipulations requiring certain parties to complete time consuming divestment of other interests or provide legal clarifications will have caused delays. The time lapse will have meant key timelines were missed and subsequent club trading will have moved the goalposts.
Perversely the delayed EFL sanction in certifying the Australians has changed the dynamic of the deal. It strengthened the Australian negotiating position.
Thus a takeover involving multiple issues has evolved into a protracted transaction. Such transactions do not move in a straight line. They are an ever changing iterative process. The value of every trading entity is ever changing. The value of "the club" today is not what it was when negotiations began.
It is too quiet but the Australians apart from announcing they have walked away are legally prevented from a public position or platform in this matter. Any attempt to talk to any interested party be they fans or ex directors, unless approved by the club will breach the NDA, with prejudice.
Without a legal standing such dialogue would be totally inappropriate in terms of directly interfering with the vendors financial & trading position.
No matter who is involved please register the possible scale of finance involved. With contingency & margins project finance of £120-150mn is not excessive.
Acquisition £35-40mn (a grossly inflated price), 5yrs Working capital £60-75mn, Facilities infrastructure (Training ground/ Academy) £10-15mn, Playing infrastructure (Signings) £15-20mn
To deliver a 5yr plan you secure the full funding before stepping through the door. Chasing finance mid term to deliver any project is fraught with problems. Lack of working capital is precisely why Chappell, Murray, Slater & Jimenez failed and why the training ground work has stalled.
The delay is hugely frustrating but like it or not in truth the now EFL certified Australians need do absolutely nothing. They are established in pole position.
For now they need only respond to developments. It is a risk but they appear confident nobody will match their offer. With the inflated price, the club modus operandi and the current turmoil who could argue with such confidence?
Operationally there is now no burning need for any buyer to close any deal before the end of October. No one can meaningfully impact this or any other clubs fortunes until the January window.
In the meantime M.Duchatellet will continue to incur losses. The turmoil of this week revealing his scorched earth policies will reinforce their negotiating position.
I do accept the Australians may have changed their position.
If their indicative pricing referenced clear title such condition will be met by the purchase of the corporate entity owning club assets. There is a different issue. Due diligence will have identified the terms of any encumbrances to such title and the powers granted to ex directors in respect of club assets.
At a recent Fans Forum we are advised despite EFL sanction further paperwork may be required and ex director loans are not a problem. Executives rarely flat out lie but they often however revel in half truths. Though ex directors loans may not be seen as a problem their debentures may.
Due diligence is a reflective & ongoing process and certain investors may have chosen to revisit the impact of these debentures. Logically why would any investors, prepared to fund perhaps over £100mn, cede control of assets to a group whose outstanding liability is circa £7mn?
Yet the debentures are not their problem. The Australians have no authority to act
Duchatelet needed to address them on acquiring the club. Indeed such oversight may have positioned his rushed acquisition ahead of other interested parties. The debentures remain his problem to resolve.
Ultimately the overall debt/ price may indeed still be a bridge too far.
That the Australians still seem interested in trying to cross that bridge is hardly a matter of condemnation bordering on hysteria.
In all of this there is one overriding fact. Absolutely none of it is exclusive.
At any time any other party be they Saudi, British or anything else could have stepped in. To argue the Australians are somehow responsible for any aspect of our current situation is utter nonsense.
Those in charge of the business are responsible for how the business is run whether it is for sale or not. Pursuing an indiscriminate scorched earth policy in such circumstances undermines the very business you are trying to sell.
This continued campaign of distraction and deflection serves only to excuse a failed administration. It is a deflection which defines this administration. Be it other clubs, the EFL, the industry culture, the Royal Mail, multiple coaches, the fans, college students, social media, the media, the fans again, CARD, WAR, ROT, the players or the staff everybody else is to blame.
Today it is the turn of the Australians. Tomorrow it will be somebody else.
The idea if the Australians walked the price would drop is speculative nonsense. If it does drop who would likely be best positioned to move? The Australians.
The current situation is damaging but only because of the way the club is being run. It is for this ownership to manage - no one else. Not for the first time Duchatelet appears to be simply making it up as he goes along.
Yesterday saw no owner, no CEO, no CFO, no COO, no Director, no senior management, no permanent senior football management, a senior squad still not fit for purpose, in a stadium in reality nearly 4/5ths empty, with a divided fan base.
It is clear the Australians have a lot to answer for........yea right
James, I wouldn't say nothing happened in those two weeks. The window slammed shut without us losing players. Given he knows you are a fan, he perhaps expected departures would be tough for fans. Didn't the cost savings happen subsequently? The e.mail certainly did.
The thing to remember with RD is that this is really about control, not cash.
He has more money than God. As we know he and his family lead very thrifty lives, frugal even, so the money itself is just a way of keeping score. If money is lost in a particular area, then that means it's a certain game he is losing. The money itself can be replaced, but what must be addressed is the blow to his pride, to his power, to his prestige, to the uncharted depths, as a self-made man, of his self-esteem.
That must make doing business with him especially difficult. Many businessmen "did not get where they are today" without being ruthless, arrogant, obstinate and on occasion mendacious. Doing a deal with Roland must be a nightmare even for the toughest opponent. The likeliest reason even to continue negotiating is that these hotshots refuse to be bested by a farmer.
Also, it cannot be easy working for Roland - leaving other considerations aside for a moment (please) he was prepared for the inexperienced and floundering KM to go through four years of hell, all to serve his (and admittedly her) failing agenda. RD's current satrap LdT is amiable enough on the surface but as a cost accountant he doubtless has a housebrick for a heart. After this week's FF revelations were swiftly contradicted by separate sources at the EFL, the naughty boy has now been summoned to the headmaster's office. Didn't take long!!
No, our ultimately successful buyer/s must find a way to gain their precious prize whilst still allowing RD an apparent win, or at least the chance to save face. Good luck with that - just make it soon, very soon!!
Comments
The point about Muir having pedigree as an entrepreneur answers your next point about him wanting to spread the risk. I imagine he thinks buying 51% is too great a risk. Perhaps that isn’t a a good advertisement to other investors, I don’t know. Maybe it’s a good example to other investors?
I wouldn’t know if there’s something seriously wrong with the Aussie bid. Maybe there is.
Maybe some of them were happy with the high bid and others persuaded them to see sense. I really don’t know. I don’t see it as that big a deal myself, but I know others do. If they’re trying to screw Roland I’d see that as a bonus.
Shame to see the division at the moment, whether it’s about the boycott, the protests or now the takeover.
And yes I’ve been targeted by the same handful of people on here for some time. Bit pathetic really. The brown nose fella in particular. Water off a duck’s back now.
Don't matter who's wrong or right
Our club's future will be bright
When it's on the official site
I have no problem with someone like @Addickted because he’s motivated by his love for the club and obviously seriously thinks the Aussies would be bad for us. I disagree of course, but I can see where he’s coming from.
The couple who always pop up if someone criticises me are just bottom feeders.
'Ooh it's a corner,
ooh it's a corner;
ooh it's a corner……..ad infinitum
I'm off to the 19.00 service to repent my sins.
My beef is with their procrastination and their inability to communicate with some seriously frustrated fans other than through some cosy chats with you.
Not knocking you for at least attempting to get some information out of them, but if they are that serious, why are you having to rely on contacting them, rather than vice versa. A quick call to say - "don't worry Jimbo, we're still in the game and the hold up is because of some gnarled old tosser in Belgium".
Hence my question about them stringing you along - which I notice you still haven't deemed to answer.
Perhaps CARD should write to Fleetwood Chairman or CEO offering the apologies of the club on behalf of all Charlton fans who are embarrassed by such disrespectful behaviour.
Edit : perhaps a letter to the local Fleetwood newspaper so that the fans get to see it.
So in May Gerard told me the basics about what they wanted to do, but couldn’t tell me any of the nuts and bolts stuff that everyone wants to know about. He said it was ok to share. (Only one cosy chat).
Then he regretted that decision, but accepted he’d said it was ok.
Since then nothing other than ‘it’s still on’, or ‘not true’, or the ‘tough couple of weeks’. But only because I asked.
I got stick for that last one because nothing happened after two weeks, although I’m not sure he said anything would.
(Oh and a call asking me not to make my personal protest at that particular time, a call instigated by Paul Elliott.)
Maybe they monitor social media and decided to say nothing more.
Maybe the lawyers have told them to say nothing at all, because of the NDA, or for some other reason.
Maybe he’s embarrassed about the delay (but I doubt that personally).
I know nothing about the recent delays. I just know the early ones were to do with legal stuff. Yes it would be much better if there hadn’t been any. It’s all got so unpleasant since the end of May.
And yes I wish they’d release some info, and I can only speculate as to why they won’t at the moment. Most likely is the lawyers advice I’d say.
So I hope that answers the stringing along question. I’m totally irrelevant.
Brommmmmmmmmmmmmmm
There’s certainly something afoot.....good or bad.....who knows but as things stand I’m betting they are still in the hunt in some way or another.
I can but embellish my comments of 22Jul.
There is one party responsible for the current fiasco. The responsibility starts and stops with the clubs beneficial owner
We have seen from the nature of the man his rudderless infrastructure, divisive culture, alienation of thousands, and catastrophic failure to empower the football clubhouse all but destroy any vestige of a competitive senior professional football organisation.
After this appalling stewardship any new people will need to put considerably more than £40mn at risk to restore this club to any industry credibility,
Yet some wish to vilify a group who appear to be prepared to pay an exorbitant fee for the man to just go away and then take on that very challenge. It is beyond bizarre.
NLA I respect your contacts and much of your opinion but your comments re the Australians now no longer stand scrutiny.
You assert there is/was no problem with the Owners & Directors Test the primary purpose of which is to determine if the financial suitability of an ownership is sufficient to ensure the club is able to fulfill its obligations to the EFL, its competitions and other members.
Why then do you think the EFL would clear the Australian bid if they did not evidence the ability to a) acquire the club b) fund operations going forward?
Whether the EFL criteria is ever valid is always debatable but with the court revelations re Jiminez, Cash and a BVI family trust nobody was going to just nod this transaction through.
Any interested party is free to bid what they are prepared to pay. The object of the exercise is to win the bid. Had the Australians met the full EFL criteria at the outset I suspect the deal would have been done. Hence the over confident appearance of consortium members on match days.
That the EFL requirements may have had any number of stipulations requiring certain parties to complete time consuming divestment of other interests or provide legal clarifications will have caused delays. The time lapse will have meant key timelines were missed and subsequent club trading will have moved the goalposts.
Perversely the delayed EFL sanction in certifying the Australians has changed the dynamic of the deal. It strengthened the Australian negotiating position.
Thus a takeover involving multiple issues has evolved into a protracted transaction. Such transactions do not move in a straight line. They are an ever changing iterative process. The value of every trading entity is ever changing. The value of "the club" today is not what it was when negotiations began.
It is too quiet but the Australians apart from announcing they have walked away are legally prevented from a public position or platform in this matter. Any attempt to talk to any interested party be they fans or ex directors, unless approved by the club will breach the NDA, with prejudice.
Without a legal standing such dialogue would be totally inappropriate in terms of directly interfering with the vendors financial & trading position.
No matter who is involved please register the possible scale of finance involved. With contingency & margins project finance of £120-150mn is not excessive.
Acquisition £35-40mn (a grossly inflated price), 5yrs Working capital £60-75mn, Facilities infrastructure (Training ground/ Academy) £10-15mn, Playing infrastructure (Signings) £15-20mn
To deliver a 5yr plan you secure the full funding before stepping through the door. Chasing finance mid term to deliver any project is fraught with problems. Lack of working capital is precisely why Chappell, Murray, Slater & Jimenez failed and why the training ground work has stalled.
The delay is hugely frustrating but like it or not in truth the now EFL certified Australians need do absolutely nothing. They are established in pole position.
For now they need only respond to developments. It is a risk but they appear confident nobody will match their offer. With the inflated price, the club modus operandi and the current turmoil who could argue with such confidence?
Operationally there is now no burning need for any buyer to close any deal before the end of October. No one can meaningfully impact this or any other clubs fortunes until the January window.
In the meantime M.Duchatellet will continue to incur losses. The turmoil of this week revealing his scorched earth policies will reinforce their negotiating position.
I do accept the Australians may have changed their position.
If their indicative pricing referenced clear title such condition will be met by the purchase of the corporate entity owning club assets. There is a different issue. Due diligence will have identified the terms of any encumbrances to such title and the powers granted to ex directors in respect of club assets.
At a recent Fans Forum we are advised despite EFL sanction further paperwork may be required and ex director loans are not a problem. Executives rarely flat out lie but they often however revel in half truths. Though ex directors loans may not be seen as a problem their debentures may.
Due diligence is a reflective & ongoing process and certain investors may have chosen to revisit the impact of these debentures. Logically why would any investors, prepared to fund perhaps over £100mn, cede control of assets to a group whose outstanding liability is circa £7mn?
Yet the debentures are not their problem. The Australians have no authority to act
Duchatelet needed to address them on acquiring the club. Indeed such oversight may have positioned his rushed acquisition ahead of other interested parties. The debentures remain his problem to resolve.
Ultimately the overall debt/ price may indeed still be a bridge too far.
That the Australians still seem interested in trying to cross that bridge is hardly a matter of condemnation bordering on hysteria.
In all of this there is one overriding fact. Absolutely none of it is exclusive.
At any time any other party be they Saudi, British or anything else could have stepped in. To argue the Australians are somehow responsible for any aspect of our current situation is utter nonsense.
Those in charge of the business are responsible for how the business is run whether it is for sale or not. Pursuing an indiscriminate scorched earth policy in such circumstances undermines the very business you are trying to sell.
This continued campaign of distraction and deflection serves only to excuse a failed administration. It is a deflection which defines this administration. Be it other clubs, the EFL, the industry culture, the Royal Mail, multiple coaches, the fans, college students, social media, the media, the fans again, CARD, WAR, ROT, the players or the staff everybody else is to blame.
Today it is the turn of the Australians. Tomorrow it will be somebody else.
The idea if the Australians walked the price would drop is speculative nonsense. If it does drop who would likely be best positioned to move? The Australians.
The current situation is damaging but only because of the way the club is being run. It is for this ownership to manage - no one else. Not for the first time Duchatelet appears to be simply making it up as he goes along.
Yesterday saw no owner, no CEO, no CFO, no COO, no Director, no senior management, no permanent senior football management, a senior squad still not fit for purpose, in a stadium in reality nearly 4/5ths empty, with a divided fan base.
It is clear the Australians have a lot to answer for........yea right
The thing to remember with RD is that this is really about control, not cash.
He has more money than God. As we know he and his family lead very thrifty lives, frugal even, so the money itself is just a way of keeping score. If money is lost in a particular area, then that means it's a certain game he is losing. The money itself can be replaced, but what must be addressed is the blow to his pride, to his power, to his prestige, to the uncharted depths, as a self-made man, of his self-esteem.
That must make doing business with him especially difficult. Many businessmen "did not get where they are today" without being ruthless, arrogant, obstinate and on occasion mendacious. Doing a deal with Roland must be a nightmare even for the toughest opponent. The likeliest reason even to continue negotiating is that these hotshots refuse to be bested by a farmer.
Also, it cannot be easy working for Roland - leaving other considerations aside for a moment (please) he was prepared for the inexperienced and floundering KM to go through four years of hell, all to serve his (and admittedly her) failing agenda. RD's current satrap LdT is amiable enough on the surface but as a cost accountant he doubtless has a housebrick for a heart. After this week's FF revelations were swiftly contradicted by separate sources at the EFL, the naughty boy has now been summoned to the headmaster's office. Didn't take long!!
No, our ultimately successful buyer/s must find a way to gain their precious prize whilst still allowing RD an apparent win, or at least the chance to save face. Good luck with that - just make it soon, very soon!!