but you point this out to the admin and they laugh in your face : - (
Unfortunately I’m the least influential/powerful on the council. I live in constant fear my modding rights will be rescinded, so I continue my meek existence taking pelters on here from the members and too afraid to voice my opinions to my colleagues and superiors
I'm sure I remember someone insinuating that there were allegedly some issues around the legality of certain things when RD purchased the club, relating to the spivs. Does anyone recall this and as far as we know has that been resolved? I just can't think what would mean multiple groups of purchasers need to be so silent on everything
Yep, I've been thinking this for about a year or so now.
I've worked on enough deals professionally to know that if you've got two interested parties who have both got the money and both agreed a price (which is what we''be been told) then the deal will generally get done, UNLESS there's a steaming pile of something potentially toxic sitting somewhere.
If there is potentially such a smell then the first question that gets asked is "what's the statute of limitations on this?", Ie. if things all go tits up then what's the risk to us?
If that's the case then you might still go ahead with the deal if the vendor (Roland) gives you some sort of warranty and indemnity against historic liabilities, or you might just go ahead anyway and take the risk. Or you might hang on for a bit until it's too late for the potentially smelly stuff to cause any real issue.
I'm not suggesting that Roland has done anything materially wrong on his watch from a legal perspective (ruining our club doesn't count, unfortunately), but it seems like the previous owners may have been up to the necks in all sorts, and we know Roland didn't do any due diligence of his own and effectively bought the club blind.
To me this seems the only plausible reason why either of the two different potential buyers with the money lined up haven't done the deal, yet.
But I have no insider knowledge on any of this, just an educated guess.
But if I'm right then it suits nobody to go shouting the reasons why from the rooftops.
I have a fair idea of things that went on under the Spivs, as do a number of others. There may be more we don’t know, of course, but it’s hard to see why what is known would be a factor now.
I think White has been played but a lot of reporters do indulge in sensationalism, however small. As an example, and I don’t know if any of you listen to the LoveSport show last Thursday, Aaron Paul the presenter said, ‘we have news of the takeover coming up folks’. It was in response to that stupid tweet that guy put up saying done deal get down the valley on sat. Aaron is a top bloke and he’s someone who I think is very good at his job, but that little example gave me an insight into how some of them react, and I think Jim White falls firmly in that category. We’ve seen his antics on transfer deadline day.
I believe he has been genuine in his pursuit of the story of our club, but there’s a showman in him as well, playing up to the cameras
The main hope this month is if we don't get a new owner, no damage is done to our squad. We still have our major player plus a new LB and Cullen and Aribo fit by February.
Good work by Henry and co in the pursuit of truth.
Interesting F.F. it seems today, what I would like to pick up on is this sentence - "They want to restore the relationship with the fans, I have told them that one of the first things they need to tell the fans when they takeover is why it took so long" LDT" which was highlighted, LDT in part of that stated WHEN THEY TAKE OVER, now was that because his English is bad, or is there more to it and a slip of the tongue?
Interesting F.F. it seems today, what I would like to pick up on is this sentence - "They want to restore the relationship with the fans, I have told them that one of the first things they need to tell the fans when they takeover is why it took so long" LDT" which was highlighted, LDT in part of that stated WHEN THEY TAKE OVER, now was that because his English is bad, or is there more to it and a slip of the tongue?
Probably because the Brit bid is less likely. Whether it's due to them waiting for the Aussies to disappear, or they are waiting for a Brit to disentangle from another club or any other reason.
Me - did you quote a price of over £70m to a buyer at short notice.
LDT "I haven't signed an NDA" ( My personal view - OK English isn't his first language but this made no sense. If he hasn't signed an NDA he can comment)
Me - but did you tell a potential buyer the price was over £70m three hours before a meeting having previously agreed a lower price.
LDT "That is a rumour, i can't comment on rumours"
I pushed him on this a few times and he finally said that no, this hadn't happened but he, IMHO squirmed a bit and didn't deny it straight away despite saying he was aware of the "rumour". He did finally say it hadn't happened or anything similar had happened.
Good work. That is a lie.
Your credibility has already gone mate, so you can pack that in right now..
So the training ground tour happened as I tweeted, the Aussie money is American as I posted and DeTurck struggled with the £70m, which I knew he would. Pretty fair, I’d say.
DONE DEAL!
No need to be an asshole to one of the actual legitimate sources we have.
Are you sucking up to the Yanks already? It's arsehole
If different deals have been done with the interested parties and with the mention of different amounts agreed in different currencies could it be the case of them waiting for Sterling to plunge after Brexit so they get more bang for their buck as it were?
When NLA mentioned last night that the Brits may get a 'sweeter' deal if the Aussies dropped out I posted that it was like a Mexican standoff ...
However, when I read my post back it appeared that my cutting and pasting had gone awry so I edited it only to find the message looked even worse. On the advice of Homer Simpson If at first you don't succeed just give up I deleted the post and went to bed.
I awoke this morning to see the first signs of a Mexican takeover rumour and I feel that I may be to blame for this, please accept my apologies ... In short there are no Mexicans involved in this deal ... as far as I know.
When NLA mentioned last night that the Brits may get a 'sweeter' deal if the Aussies dropped out I posted that it was like a Mexican standoff ...
However, when I read my post back it appeared that my cutting and pasting had gone awry so I edited it only to find the message looked even worse. On the advice of Homer Simpson If at first you don't succeed just give up I deleted the post and went to bed.
I awoke this morning to see the first signs of a Mexican takeover rumour and I feel that I may be to blame for this, please accept my apologies ... In short there are no Mexicans involved in this deal ... as far as I know.
When NLA mentioned last night that the Brits may get a 'sweeter' deal if the Aussies dropped out I posted that it was like a Mexican standoff ...
However, when I read my post back it appeared that my cutting and pasting had gone awry so I edited it only to find the message looked even worse. On the advice of Homer Simpson If at first you don't succeed just give up I deleted the post and went to bed.
I awoke this morning to see the first signs of a Mexican takeover rumour and I feel that I may be to blame for this, please accept my apologies ... In short there are no Mexicans involved in this deal ... as far as I know.
Back tracking already on the Mexicans...you are just as bad as JW!
I would also like to thank Henry for his account of last night, but as it doesn't appear he failed to employ the rack or thumbscrews I feel he let us down.
I think what @Off_it suggests is plausible, however that implies the reason of delay is not the making of the bidders and some responsibility/ part responsibility of LVT’s employer.
If that was the case, would LVT be urging the bidder to reveal this reason if successful?
I think what @Off_it suggests is plausible, however that implies the reason of delay is not the making of the bidders and some responsibility/ part responsibility of LVT’s employer.
If that was the case, would LVT be urging the bidder to reveal this reason if successful?
Two reasons, to make it look like it is the buyers fault hoping to get an easier ride at meetings like last night or because he is also pissed off with RD and knows the old goat won't care if the sale is done.
Having read through all of this, and if (big if) we believe Duchatelet when he says it is not the asking price but the day to day costs, I think it could be that the Aussies have worked out how much it is going to cost them to run the club to their plan. They have to have a plan to make the club more successful or it makes no sense to buy us until they can cover the total cost of the whole plan. If that is true, it is positive as they would seem to be doing things properly.
It would explain the great emphasis on Duchatelet cutting costs although losing less money explains that too, and I presume the Aussies would have to appoint a CEO. This could be positive though as Duchatelet may be trying to show that the club can be run more efficiently whilst still bringing players in and competing. If this is what is happening, the Aussies can't be a million miles away or they would have dropped out.
I suspect the British bid is just there to put pressure on the Aussies, otherwise, why wouldn't we have heard any more about it!
I think what @Off_it suggests is plausible, however that implies the reason of delay is not the making of the bidders and some responsibility/ part responsibility of LVT’s employer.
If that was the case, would LVT be urging the bidder to reveal this reason if successful?
I'd go further and say @Off_it 's suggestion is the most plausible explanation I've read for the ridiculously protracted negotiations, especially given his M&A experience.
And if you place LdT's comment in that context, it makes sense to me. To paraphrase it "when this is over I hope the successful bidder will explain why it took so long, as then you will see that your narrative about it all being Roland's fault, was wide of the mark"
That is a most uncomfortable thought for us, and there is no reason not to think that there are Roland related factors in addition (his relationship with players' contracts remains my personal favourite suspicion, because of what we learnt from Standard), but in the lack of another insight which explains the delays, I'm giving Offie's suggestion a lot of weight.
Comments
I don’t think anyone’s saying the Aussies have no money.
Happy to have the Brits, but would be gutted to get Mike Ashley.
To yo-yo between the championship and the Premier for the next 10 years would be
shockinghold on a moment.I believe he has been genuine in his pursuit of the story of our club, but there’s a showman in him as well, playing up to the cameras
We still have our major player plus a new LB and Cullen and Aribo fit by February.
Good work by Henry and co in the pursuit of truth.
Whether it's due to them waiting for the Aussies to disappear, or they are waiting for a Brit to disentangle from another club or any other reason.
However, when I read my post back it appeared that my cutting and pasting had gone awry so I edited it only to find the message looked even worse. On the advice of Homer Simpson If at first you don't succeed just give up I deleted the post and went to bed.
I awoke this morning to see the first signs of a Mexican takeover rumour and I feel that I may be to blame for this, please accept my apologies ... In short there are no Mexicans involved in this deal ... as far as I know.
If that was the case, would LVT be urging the bidder to reveal this reason if successful?
He quite literally regurgitates what he said at the previous meeting each time.
No doubt if we were at the bottom end of the table people would be boycotting and having a say again on matchdays.
Having read through all of this, and if (big if) we believe Duchatelet when he says it is not the asking price but the day to day costs, I think it could be that the Aussies have worked out how much it is going to cost them to run the club to their plan. They have to have a plan to make the club more successful or it makes no sense to buy us until they can cover the total cost of the whole plan. If that is true, it is positive as they would seem to be doing things properly.
It would explain the great emphasis on Duchatelet cutting costs although losing less money explains that too, and I presume the Aussies would have to appoint a CEO. This could be positive though as Duchatelet may be trying to show that the club can be run more efficiently whilst still bringing players in and competing. If this is what is happening, the Aussies can't be a million miles away or they would have dropped out.
I suspect the British bid is just there to put pressure on the Aussies, otherwise, why wouldn't we have heard any more about it!
And if you place LdT's comment in that context, it makes sense to me. To paraphrase it "when this is over I hope the successful bidder will explain why it took so long, as then you will see that your narrative about it all being Roland's fault, was wide of the mark"
That is a most uncomfortable thought for us, and there is no reason not to think that there are Roland related factors in addition (his relationship with players' contracts remains my personal favourite suspicion, because of what we learnt from Standard), but in the lack of another insight which explains the delays, I'm giving Offie's suggestion a lot of weight.