If the Aussies outbid the Saudis (which I don't believe) and the Saudis found out they had been outbid, they could only have acquired that information from the seller. (Why would the Aussies tell the Saudis?)
So, in that light, perhaps there are two alternative reasons the Saudis chose to back away.
1. The oft-promulgated posit is that they walked away because they had been outbid by a financially unbeatable consortium. A group of Saudi businessmen, we are asked to believe, found that a bid for the club was trumped by another party, with whom they were financially unable to compete. And they reacted by disappearing, licking their wounds. And we are asked to accept this as a plausible explanation and to cast a shadow over the Aussies.
2. The unexplored version of this is a bit different. The Saudis bid for the club. Roland solicited a counter bid from another party (the Aussies). Roland went back to the Saudis to seek another counter. At which time the Saudis, expecting a deal to be completed with due respect and professionalism, walked away. Roland disclosed privileged information (ie the other party's bid) and the Saudis decided against dealing with a business leader unable or unwilling to adhere to non-disclosure requirements.
I don't know if either of these is true. And I don't honestly think either is true. But, if pushed, I would say that 1 is less plausible than 2.
We've been fed a story that is intended to put the Aussies in a bad light. I still don't buy it.
FWIW in my experience of dealing with saudis (more than most, less than some) @Chizz's option 2 is very much the more likely. In my experience, if they want something they'll buy it, but they are strong believers that people buy from people, if they feel slighted, in anyway, they will walk. For example they would want to deal with the top guy, and if RD wasn't available, especially due to a sense of superiority, to discuss a deal face to face or they felt he was trying to play one off against another, they would walk. Once trust goes, you won't see them again.
That being said, not every Saudi is using two step escalators and gold toilets, some are wealthy and connected, but not with game changing football money. Perhaps they did have a number and walked when they reached it, but if that's the case what is to say they'd be better or worse than anyone else.
My further experience in dealing with saudis is that they don't really do consortiums, so I'd suggest it was more likely one man or one family at the most.
Anyway, I fail to see how anyone has enough info on the Aussies to judge them yet, positive or negative.
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
I am sorry but while I abhor the human rights of the Arabs, they do know how to run a football club. So being an exceedingly shallow football supporter, the Aussies can fuck off and bring on the Saudis with their real money.
I am sorry but while I abhor the human rights of the Arabs, they do know how to run a football club. So being an exceedingly shallow football supporter, the Aussies can fuck off and bring on the Saudis with their real money.
Watch the Man City documentary on Prime, you'll love it.
I am sorry but while I abhor the human rights of the Arabs, they do know how to run a football club. So being an exceedingly shallow football supporter, the Aussies can fuck off and bring on the Saudis with their real money.
Point of order. Many Arab states have poor human rights records but it's the states not the race but I know what you meant.
Great post as usual @Grapevine49 but I take issue with one thing you said and which has been said by many and that is that The Aussies may as well hold fire as they can do nothing to change things until the January transfer window. The one thing they can do is remove the cancer that is RD..... lift that dark cloud! That itself should start the healing process, create a feel good vibe, install executive personnel where required and start work on rebuilding the fanbase. The return of a number of fans i would hope, would transmit a better environment for the team and together with returning injured players, we could find ourselves in a much better position come January. This in turn would enable us to attract the better players in the transfer window. I could go on about the benefits of completing the takeover asap as against waiting, but will just state that imo the season will be a write off (or worse) if they leave it too much longer
I have some questions about "The Saudis". I do not wish to put pressure on @Redhenry to answer them, i am just not aware of anyone else claiming to be ITK about them. These are all questions, to which answers we know, if applied to the Aussies (or at least Andrew Muir)
1. Who are they, what is their existing business? 2. Why do they want to buy an English football club? 3. When did they first express interest in CAFC? 4. Have they submitted to an ODT? When? And did they pass?
Just think they ought to receive at least some of the "scrutiny" if that isn't too polite a word for some of the shit being thrown here, as the Aussies are under.
I have some questions about "The Saudis". I do not wish to put pressure on @Redhenry to answer them, i am just not aware of anyone else claiming to be ITK about them. These are all questions, to which answers we know, if applied to the Aussies (or at least Andrew Muir)
1. Who are they, what is their existing business? 2. Why do they want to buy an English football club? 3. When did they first express interest in CAFC? 4. Have they submitted to an ODT? When? And did they pass?
Just think they ought to receive at least some of the "scrutiny" if that isn't too polite a word for some of the shit being thrown here, as the Aussies are under.
Why's it got to be "Team Aussie" vrs "Team Saudi"?
A few of us have questioned the Aussies from around the time it was mentioned (rightly or wrongly) that they were touting round the City for more dough. If the same was mentioned with another bidder, I'm pretty sure people would be asking the same questions.
I think there's also been more asked about the Aussie's because someone on here has been in direct contact with them and at the moment, only a couple of posters have reported anything in relation to other bidders and no one has claimed to be in direct contact with any of them but, if they were. I reckon your questions would have been posed a long time back
I have some questions about "The Saudis". I do not wish to put pressure on @Redhenry to answer them, i am just not aware of anyone else claiming to be ITK about them. These are all questions, to which answers we know, if applied to the Aussies (or at least Andrew Muir)
1. Who are they, what is their existing business? 2. Why do they want to buy an English football club? 3. When did they first express interest in CAFC? 4. Have they submitted to an ODT? When? And did they pass?
Just think they ought to receive at least some of the "scrutiny" if that isn't too polite a word for some of the shit being thrown here, as the Aussies are under.
Why's it got to be "Team Aussie" vrs "Team Saudi"?
A few of us have questioned the Aussies from around the time it was mentioned (rightly or wrongly) that they were touting round the City for more dough. If the same was mentioned with another bidder, I'm pretty sure people would be asking the same questions.
I think there's also been more asked about the Aussie's because someone on here has been in direct contact with them and at the moment, only a couple of posters have reported anything in relation to other bidders and no one has claimed to be in direct contact with any of them but, if they were. I reckon your questions would have been posed a long time back
I asked some straight questions, the answers to which would be very helpful to all who are actually trying to work out what is going on. It would appear you cannot assist me with them. But thank you for posting.
I have some questions about "The Saudis". I do not wish to put pressure on @Redhenry to answer them, i am just not aware of anyone else claiming to be ITK about them. These are all questions, to which answers we know, if applied to the Aussies (or at least Andrew Muir)
1. Who are they, what is their existing business? 2. Why do they want to buy an English football club? 3. When did they first express interest in CAFC? 4. Have they submitted to an ODT? When? And did they pass?
Just think they ought to receive at least some of the "scrutiny" if that isn't too polite a word for some of the shit being thrown here, as the Aussies are under.
Why's it got to be "Team Aussie" vrs "Team Saudi"?
A few of us have questioned the Aussies from around the time it was mentioned (rightly or wrongly) that they were touting round the City for more dough. If the same was mentioned with another bidder, I'm pretty sure people would be asking the same questions.
I think there's also been more asked about the Aussie's because someone on here has been in direct contact with them and at the moment, only a couple of posters have reported anything in relation to other bidders and no one has claimed to be in direct contact with any of them but, if they were. I reckon your questions would have been posed a long time back
I asked some straight questions, the answers to which would be very helpful to all who are actually trying to work out what is going on. It would appear you cannot assist me with them. But thank you for posting.
I have some questions about "The Saudis". I do not wish to put pressure on @Redhenry to answer them, i am just not aware of anyone else claiming to be ITK about them. These are all questions, to which answers we know, if applied to the Aussies (or at least Andrew Muir)
1. Who are they, what is their existing business? 2. Why do they want to buy an English football club? 3. When did they first express interest in CAFC? 4. Have they submitted to an ODT? When? And did they pass?
Just think they ought to receive at least some of the "scrutiny" if that isn't too polite a word for some of the shit being thrown here, as the Aussies are under.
Why's it got to be "Team Aussie" vrs "Team Saudi"?
A few of us have questioned the Aussies from around the time it was mentioned (rightly or wrongly) that they were touting round the City for more dough. If the same was mentioned with another bidder, I'm pretty sure people would be asking the same questions.
I think there's also been more asked about the Aussie's because someone on here has been in direct contact with them and at the moment, only a couple of posters have reported anything in relation to other bidders and no one has claimed to be in direct contact with any of them but, if they were. I reckon your questions would have been posed a long time back
Appears with a microphone in hand "This is now a triple threat. Team Aussie vs Team Saudi vs.... Team WIOTOS"
I have some questions about "The Saudis". I do not wish to put pressure on @Redhenry to answer them, i am just not aware of anyone else claiming to be ITK about them. These are all questions, to which answers we know, if applied to the Aussies (or at least Andrew Muir)
1. Who are they, what is their existing business? 2. Why do they want to buy an English football club? 3. When did they first express interest in CAFC? 4. Have they submitted to an ODT? When? And did they pass?
Just think they ought to receive at least some of the "scrutiny" if that isn't too polite a word for some of the shit being thrown here, as the Aussies are under.
Why's it got to be "Team Aussie" vrs "Team Saudi"?
A few of us have questioned the Aussies from around the time it was mentioned (rightly or wrongly) that they were touting round the City for more dough. If the same was mentioned with another bidder, I'm pretty sure people would be asking the same questions.
I think there's also been more asked about the Aussie's because someone on here has been in direct contact with them and at the moment, only a couple of posters have reported anything in relation to other bidders and no one has claimed to be in direct contact with any of them but, if they were. I reckon your questions would have been posed a long time back
Appears with a microphone in hand "This is now a triple threat. Team Aussie vs Team Saudi vs.... Team WIOTOS"
vrs "Team All You Eggs in 1 Basket and Be Happy With the 1st Buyer To Come Along"
I have some questions about "The Saudis". I do not wish to put pressure on @Redhenry to answer them, i am just not aware of anyone else claiming to be ITK about them. These are all questions, to which answers we know, if applied to the Aussies (or at least Andrew Muir)
1. Who are they, what is their existing business? 2. Why do they want to buy an English football club? 3. When did they first express interest in CAFC? 4. Have they submitted to an ODT? When? And did they pass?
Just think they ought to receive at least some of the "scrutiny" if that isn't too polite a word for some of the shit being thrown here, as the Aussies are under.
Why's it got to be "Team Aussie" vrs "Team Saudi"?
A few of us have questioned the Aussies from around the time it was mentioned (rightly or wrongly) that they were touting round the City for more dough. If the same was mentioned with another bidder, I'm pretty sure people would be asking the same questions.
I think there's also been more asked about the Aussie's because someone on here has been in direct contact with them and at the moment, only a couple of posters have reported anything in relation to other bidders and no one has claimed to be in direct contact with any of them but, if they were. I reckon your questions would have been posed a long time back
Appears with a microphone in hand "This is now a triple threat. Team Aussie vs Team Saudi vs.... Team WIOTOS"
Team WIOTOS? I didn't know we'd put a bid in unless it's the Bromley mob .
£10m difference between RD and the Aussies .... that couldn't possibly be £7m former directors and £3m EK15, could it?
Excellent article in the Mail. Some thoughtful, accurate and in-depth reporting in the past few days. Not bad for a stale old story out of Sarf London. Hopefully the Sint-Truiden mission will deservedly garner similar interest in Belgium.
He would rather see the club die, than take 40mil, or anything under "his" price... and unfortunately 20 mil or 40 mil doesn't mean anything to him, which is even more absurd, he KNOWS we will be literally rejoicing in the streets when he leaves, and this is the ONE thing he doesn't want to happen, so if he can dismantle the club to the point where it is such a wreck it's unsalvageable then he will twist the knife as much as he can.
He doesn't want us to rise phoenix like out of the ashes, that would further demonstrate his incompetence. When someone genuinely doesn't care it is very hard to instigate action, as their is no emotion to play on.
So, he will keep having chats and meeting interested parties, and pricing CAFC out of the proceedings again and again and soon, if not this year then next, we will get relegated in front of 5k crowds like the 70s and then he'll probably sell the club for 5 mill, thinking he has had the last laugh...
And then we might start going forward again, and we may also get a Cacther in the Rye moment when some Charlton fan can't handle what's gone on and the bloke will regret ever setting for in SE7.
He would rather see the club die, than take 40mil, or anything under "his" price... and unfortunately 20 mil or 40 mil doesn't mean anything to him, which is even more absurd, he KNOWS we will be literally rejoicing in the streets when he leaves, and this is the ONE thing he doesn't want to happen, so if he can dismantle the club to the point where it is such a wreck it's unsalvageable then he will twist the knife as much as he can.
He doesn't want us to rise phoenix like out of the ashes, that would further demonstrate his incompetence. When someone genuinely doesn't care it is very hard to instigate action, as their is no emotion to play on.
So, he will keep having chats and meeting interested parties, and pricing CAFC out of the proceedings again and again and soon, if not this year then next, we will get relegated in front of 5k crowds like the 70s and then he'll probably sell the club for 5 mill, thinking he has had the last laugh...
And then we might start going forward again, and we may also get a Cacther in the Rye moment when some Charlton fan can't handle what's gone on and the bloke will regret ever setting for in SE7.
Sends shivers down my spine thinking that might be his end game.....who knows, it can’t be discounted that’s for sure and we’d be stupid to sit back and think otherwise. Just what his exit plan is no one knows.......so we simply have to plan for all eventualities, as unpalatable and illogical as some may seem.
I come on here from time to time only ever to see what @JamesSeed has posted. After all this time he seems to have been the only one with any factual news. Am surprised at those having a pop , if we didn’t have his information we wouldn’t be getting anything at all.
If and when the Aussies are on board, and RD has gone, I think we should name a stand after him.
I have some questions about "The Saudis". I do not wish to put pressure on @Redhenry to answer them, i am just not aware of anyone else claiming to be ITK about them. These are all questions, to which answers we know, if applied to the Aussies (or at least Andrew Muir)
1. Who are they, what is their existing business? 2. Why do they want to buy an English football club? 3. When did they first express interest in CAFC? 4. Have they submitted to an ODT? When? And did they pass?
Just think they ought to receive at least some of the "scrutiny" if that isn't too polite a word for some of the shit being thrown here, as the Aussies are under.
Wasn't the Saudi bid rumoured to involve the crown Prince? I'm sure @Redhenry has alluded to that on here.
Comments
So, in that light, perhaps there are two alternative reasons the Saudis chose to back away.
1. The oft-promulgated posit is that they walked away because they had been outbid by a financially unbeatable consortium. A group of Saudi businessmen, we are asked to believe, found that a bid for the club was trumped by another party, with whom they were financially unable to compete. And they reacted by disappearing, licking their wounds. And we are asked to accept this as a plausible explanation and to cast a shadow over the Aussies.
2. The unexplored version of this is a bit different. The Saudis bid for the club. Roland solicited a counter bid from another party (the Aussies). Roland went back to the Saudis to seek another counter. At which time the Saudis, expecting a deal to be completed with due respect and professionalism, walked away. Roland disclosed privileged information (ie the other party's bid) and the Saudis decided against dealing with a business leader unable or unwilling to adhere to non-disclosure requirements.
I don't know if either of these is true. And I don't honestly think either is true. But, if pushed, I would say that 1 is less plausible than 2.
We've been fed a story that is intended to put the Aussies in a bad light. I still don't buy it.
That being said, not every Saudi is using two step escalators and gold toilets, some are wealthy and connected, but not with game changing football money. Perhaps they did have a number and walked when they reached it, but if that's the case what is to say they'd be better or worse than anyone else.
My further experience in dealing with saudis is that they don't really do consortiums, so I'd suggest it was more likely one man or one family at the most.
Anyway, I fail to see how anyone has enough info on the Aussies to judge them yet, positive or negative.
The one thing they can do is remove the cancer that is RD..... lift that dark cloud! That itself should start the healing process, create a feel good vibe, install executive personnel where required and start work on rebuilding the fanbase. The return of a number of fans i would hope, would transmit a better environment for the team and together with returning injured players, we could find ourselves in a much better position come January. This in turn would enable us to attract the better players in the transfer window.
I could go on about the benefits of completing the takeover asap as against waiting, but will just state that imo the season will be a write off (or worse) if they leave it too much longer
1. Who are they, what is their existing business?
2. Why do they want to buy an English football club?
3. When did they first express interest in CAFC?
4. Have they submitted to an ODT? When? And did they pass?
Just think they ought to receive at least some of the "scrutiny" if that isn't too polite a word for some of the shit being thrown here, as the Aussies are under.
A few of us have questioned the Aussies from around the time it was mentioned (rightly or wrongly) that they were touting round the City for more dough. If the same was mentioned with another bidder, I'm pretty sure people would be asking the same questions.
I think there's also been more asked about the Aussie's because someone on here has been in direct contact with them and at the moment, only a couple of posters have reported anything in relation to other bidders and no one has claimed to be in direct contact with any of them but, if they were. I reckon your questions would have been posed a long time back
£10m difference between RD and the Aussies .... that couldn't possibly be £7m former directors and £3m EK15, could it?
Excellent article in the Mail. Some thoughtful, accurate and in-depth reporting in the past few days. Not bad for a stale old story out of Sarf London. Hopefully the Sint-Truiden mission will deservedly garner similar interest in Belgium.
He doesn't want us to rise phoenix like out of the ashes, that would further demonstrate his incompetence. When someone genuinely doesn't care it is very hard to instigate action, as their is no emotion to play on.
So, he will keep having chats and meeting interested parties, and pricing CAFC out of the proceedings again and again and soon, if not this year then next, we will get relegated in front of 5k crowds like the 70s and then he'll probably sell the club for 5 mill, thinking he has had the last laugh...
And then we might start going forward again, and we may also get a Cacther in the Rye moment when some Charlton fan can't handle what's gone on and the bloke will regret ever setting for in SE7.
If and when the Aussies are on board, and RD has gone, I think we should name a stand after him.
Also I wonder how they got the history about the sword and Watt Tyler. : - )
On a less important note asking price £35m offer £25m.
Well that explains a hell of a lot if true.
It's almost as if LDV and the regime was lying but What about the joint statement from the Aussies and the Belgians?
#teamWOITOS
#BromleyContingent