As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.
An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.
I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
I confirmed yesterday that the ex-banker in the Standard is the same party as the one discussed in the Voice. We went to print before the Standard came out, and before I received a tip-off about the story, so the publication sequence is slightly confusing. It’s why the Standard story isn’t referenced.
I don’t know why they told the Standard £30m, but I am very confident of what I’ve written.
Has he offered more then?
I believe De Turck is playing games when he says the club hasn’t received an “offer” of £35m, because he and RD haven’t enabled the talks to progress to the point where a firm bid can be made.
I am told it was made clear to them the party was willing and able to pay £35m and take on the £7m directors’ loans, subject to seeing the DD. RD/LDT haven’t engaged fully at those numbers and they have quoted £65m.
Which begs the question, if there is a 30 million disparity, How were we ever 48 hours away from a done deal ?
That’s got nothing to do with this party. It’s obvious now that the Aussies (and the British group) agreed a price they couldn’t deliver.
Given that the contract was submitted to the EFL in May, which Shaun Harvey has confirmed, you can’t argue that the principals didn’t believe a deal was very close - they were simply wrong.
So does that mean the Aussie agreed to 65 million before realising they couldn't get enough dosh together or that Duchatelet has put the price up since ?
Does the ex banker know how much was agreed with the Aussies before his 35 million bid ?
Normally in negotiations whether you buying a house, carpet or football club you start off with 30% difference and compromise on 5 to 10%. This is the opposite.
David White is an Ex director and said he has never met the owner, so unlike Richard Murray isn't in the inner loop.
Bob Whitehand is an ex PLC vice Chairman and isn't in the inner loop.
White and Whitehand can have their opinions BUT only Murray and LDT are in the inner loop and they are struggling to understand the ramblings of Duchatelet.
At least the standard story is pro active in trying to get Roland to reveal WTF or how much he wants.
There was me thinking that once Katrien Meire left we had about a year left of RD tenure.
He has. More than £30 mill.
I believe it was the seller that pushed this out there. Not the other way round.
Surely that can’t be right. There is allegedly a BID of £30 million.
He definitely rejected £35m last week.
Says who?
Can't say who, but it's someone closely connected to one of the bidders.
As you only have one contact...
Well that was true at one time. But it’s weird how many people suddenly want to swap/share info when you have a primary source.
Jimmy, as you have by far the best DNA on CL it's good that you're in the outer loop.
Having the best DNA doesn't stop one talking a load of old boll0cks unfortunately.
I confirmed yesterday that the ex-banker in the Standard is the same party as the one discussed in the Voice. We went to print before the Standard came out, and before I received a tip-off about the story, so the publication sequence is slightly confusing. It’s why the Standard story isn’t referenced.
I don’t know why they told the Standard £30m, but I am very confident of what I’ve written.
Has he offered more then?
I believe De Turck is playing games when he says the club hasn’t received an “offer” of £35m, because he and RD haven’t enabled the talks to progress to the point where a firm bid can be made.
I am told it was made clear to them the party was willing and able to pay £35m and take on the £7m directors’ loans, subject to seeing the DD. RD/LDT haven’t engaged fully at those numbers and they have quoted £65m - although that wouldn’t all have to be up front. The party won’t pay that.
It is amazing to me that anyone is prepared to offer RD the equivalent of £42m for the club.
It is even more amazing that RD isn't engaging at that price, and seems to be seeking £65m. Which he will never, ever get.
Now that the would-be buyer has broken cover and we have some numbers, it would be great if the EFL (who have offered to "help" Duchatelet find a buyer) could put some pressure on him to at least negotiate seriously around that number.
As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.
An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.
I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
I guess you are one of those that do give their £25 plus to Roly at 1500hrs and then moan later about the guy - unbelievable 😎
I've given up trying to work out what's going on with the takeover.
Still baffled by the Aussie consortium, who with their changing members have been trying to nail down a deal for well over a year now. Has ANYONE ever spent so long unsuccessfully pursuing a football club, they must be gluttons for punishment...
Exactly and some on here said he is not driven by money! Of course he is when it's to preserve his ego, the deluded old fool wants every penny of his monumental cock up back.
This. He's invested/lent £65M and he wants it back. It's quite simple.
Exactly and some on here said he is not driven by money! Of course he is when it's to preserve his ego, the deluded old fool wants every penny of his monumental cock up back.
This. He's invested/lent £65M and he wants it back. It's quite simple.
I agree.
The land valuation is just his way of justifying it.
Elsewhere Swansea are about to bring in Trevor Birch as Chairman. Never a good sign, he's the man you bring in when you need to make savings...
Another "failed" American investment really, yes it brought in extra funding in the short term, but at the expense of the ownership partnership which had got them success and unity.
Well if 65 million is what his after then we are screwed. No one will pay that even if we do get promoted! Feeling despondent!
If we get promoted, Roland will want nearer £90M.
I get the feeling that if the owner received a bid of £90m he would be convinced that there is someone out there who would match his imagination with a bid of £120m.
The only way to see him gone is to outlive him. All you youngsters are going to be ok. It's us old blokes that are screwed . Shitweasel will probably outlive us all.
The only way to see him gone is to outlive him. All you youngsters are going to be ok. It's us old blokes that are screwed . Shitweasel will probably outlive us all.
Doesn't rhyme and is missing a line. Two out of nine.
So, same as it ever was. Shitweasel wants any prospective buyer to compensate him for the losses that he has made due to his own bad decisions.
He wants too much for the club and will not get it. Furthermore, he and his cronies are lying about the amount that he has been asking for the club.....which suggests that, to some extent at least, even he knows he is living in an alternative reality.
So, it looks like we will be Shitweaseled until the deluded old *$?*!! carks it. The question we should all be focusing on now should be 'what happens then?'.
As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.
An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.
I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
I guess you are one of those that do give their £25 plus to Roly at 1500hrs and then moan later about the guy - unbelievable 😎
For me what is unbelievable is that you claim to be a Charlton fan who sees boycotting as taking some sort of moral high ground. A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”
As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.
An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.
I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
I guess you are one of those that do give their £25 plus to Roly at 1500hrs and then moan later about the guy - unbelievable 😎
For me what is unbelievable is that you claim to be a Charlton fan who sees boycotting as taking some sort of moral high ground. A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”
As others have said the discussion of attending or boycotting is beyond tiresome.
However, Taxi_Lad makes an interesting observation , when he notes that Peter Gage refers to Charlton as they, instead of we, as you would when you are referring to your opponent.
Unfortunately, after all those years away it looks like the love is going/has gone, which has always been my logic for continuing to attend and support my team.
The only way to see him gone is to outlive him. All you youngsters are going to be ok. It's us old blokes that are screwed . Shitweasel will probably outlive us all.
As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.
An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.
I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
I guess you are one of those that do give their £25 plus to Roly at 1500hrs and then moan later about the guy - unbelievable 😎
As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.
An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.
I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
I guess you are one of those that do give their £25 plus to Roly at 1500hrs and then moan later about the guy - unbelievable 😎
For me what is unbelievable is that you claim to be a Charlton fan who sees boycotting as taking some sort of moral high ground. A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”
As others have said the discussion of attending or boycotting is beyond tiresome.
However, Taxi_Lad makes an interesting observation , when he notes that Peter Gage refers to Charlton as they, instead of we, as you would when you are referring to your opponent.
Unfortunately, after all those years away it looks like the love is going/has gone, which has always been my logic for continuing to attend and support my team.
I think both you and @Taxi_Lad should appreciate that @PeterGage and his son are very much still addickted, regardless of his moral high ground about attending home games.
Peter was not only heavily involved and 'colourful' in the initial protests against Duchatalet but he does still attend many away games.
As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.
An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.
I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
I guess you are one of those that do give their £25 plus to Roly at 1500hrs and then moan later about the guy - unbelievable 😎
For me what is unbelievable is that you claim to be a Charlton fan who sees boycotting as taking some sort of moral high ground. A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”
As others have said the discussion of attending or boycotting is beyond tiresome.
However, Taxi_Lad makes an interesting observation , when he notes that Peter Gage refers to Charlton as they, instead of we, as you would when you are referring to your opponent.
Unfortunately, after all those years away it looks like the love is going/has gone, which has always been my logic for continuing to attend and support my team.
I think both you and @Taxi_Lad should appreciate that @PeterGage and his son are very much still addickted, regardless of his moral high ground about attending home games.
Peter was not only heavily involved and 'colourful' in the initial protests against Duchatalet but he does still attend many away games.
Good to know Peter still goes to aways. I know he was the fancy dress donkey. Peculiar that he refers to Charlton as they. Anyway ......
As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.
An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.
I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
I guess you are one of those that do give their £25 plus to Roly at 1500hrs and then moan later about the guy - unbelievable 😎
For me what is unbelievable is that you claim to be a Charlton fan who sees boycotting as taking some sort of moral high ground. A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”
As others have said the discussion of attending or boycotting is beyond tiresome.
However, Taxi_Lad makes an interesting observation , when he notes that Peter Gage refers to Charlton as they, instead of we, as you would when you are referring to your opponent.
Unfortunately, after all those years away it looks like the love is going/has gone, which has always been my logic for continuing to attend and support my team.
I think both you and @Taxi_Lad should appreciate that @PeterGage and his son are very much still addickted, regardless of his moral high ground about attending home games.
Peter was not only heavily involved and 'colourful' in the initial protests against Duchatalet but he does still attend many away games.
Good to know Peter still goes to aways. I know he was the fancy dress donkey. Peculiar that he refers to Charlton as they. Anyway ......
Well, the Duchatelet regime isn’t exactly ‘us’, I suppose. I despair of what’s being done to the club I’ve supported for more than 50 years. I’m not sure I’m even boycotting any more. I just don’t want to go. I’d never have believed that could happen.
Comments
Does the ex banker know how much was agreed with the Aussies before his 35 million bid ?
Normally in negotiations whether you buying a house, carpet or football club you start off with 30% difference and compromise on 5 to 10%. This is the opposite.
This is so unique and weird.
Having the best DNA doesn't stop one talking a load of old boll0cks unfortunately.
It is even more amazing that RD isn't engaging at that price, and seems to be seeking £65m. Which he will never, ever get.
Now that the would-be buyer has broken cover and we have some numbers, it would be great if the EFL (who have offered to "help" Duchatelet find a buyer) could put some pressure on him to at least negotiate seriously around that number.
Still baffled by the Aussie consortium, who with their changing members have been trying to nail down a deal for well over a year now. Has ANYONE ever spent so long unsuccessfully pursuing a football club, they must be gluttons for punishment...
It's quite simple.
I agree.
The land valuation is just his way of justifying it.
Elsewhere Swansea are about to bring in Trevor Birch as Chairman. Never a good sign, he's the man you bring in when you need to make savings...
Another "failed" American investment really, yes it brought in extra funding in the short term, but at the expense of the ownership partnership which had got them success and unity.
All you youngsters are going to be ok.
It's us old blokes that are screwed .
Shitweasel will probably outlive us all.
He wants too much for the club and will not get it. Furthermore, he and his cronies are lying about the amount that he has been asking for the club.....which suggests that, to some extent at least, even he knows he is living in an alternative reality.
So, it looks like we will be Shitweaseled until the deluded old *$?*!! carks it. The question we should all be focusing on now should be 'what happens then?'.
A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”
However, Taxi_Lad makes an interesting observation , when he notes that Peter Gage refers to Charlton as they, instead of we, as you would when you are referring to your opponent.
Unfortunately, after all those years away it looks like the love is going/has gone, which has always been my logic for continuing to attend and support my team.
Peter was not only heavily involved and 'colourful' in the initial protests against Duchatalet but he does still attend many away games.
Peculiar that he refers to Charlton as they. Anyway ......