Given the differing interpretations people have arrived at as a result of the latest Richard Murray statement, i.e. are there still 2 potential purchasing parties remaining in the process, or was "parties" simply referring to one bidder and RD (my interpretation)), perhaps @Ollywozere could arrange for some kind of clarification to be issued by the club?
Two purchasing parties remain in the process
Is that what RM told you then? If so what's your take on it?
Given the differing interpretations people have arrived at as a result of the latest Richard Murray statement, i.e. are there still 2 potential purchasing parties remaining in the process, or was "parties" simply referring to one bidder and RD (my interpretation)), perhaps @Ollywozere could arrange for some kind of clarification to be issued by the club?
Two purchasing parties remain in the process
Olly speaks!
First time since Meire took her thumb off his head.
Given the differing interpretations people have arrived at as a result of the latest Richard Murray statement, i.e. are there still 2 potential purchasing parties remaining in the process, or was "parties" simply referring to one bidder and RD (my interpretation)), perhaps @Ollywozere could arrange for some kind of clarification to be issued by the club?
Two purchasing parties remain in the process
Proves being an idiot like me doesn't mean you are wrong, even though you are confused.
Charlton Athletic Director Richard Murray has said that a price for a takeover of the club has been agreed with two separate parties and that the deal is now with the lawyers.
Following the news that the club was for sale, Murray updated fan representatives on January 20th where he said: “My opinion, and this is only an opinion of what might happen, I would say the most likely month is February.”
He updated fans again earlier this month where he referenced because of a non-disclosure agreement he has signed, he can’t reveal the names and certain information of the parties involved in takeover talks.
With February drawing to a close he said today: “I said in January that negotiations with two parties on the takeover were continuing well and I hoped a deal would be concluded in February of this year. Although the takeover has not yet been completed, the good news is the terms of the deal, including the price, have now been agreed between the parties and we are now just waiting for their respective lawyers to finalise the sale and purchase agreement.
"You can never tell how long lawyers will take but I’ve been informed it should be within the next few weeks. Once the new ownership has been legally achieved, we will inform everyone via our official channels.”
How can anyone say they have agreed a deal with two parties? You can negotiate terms, but there has to be final winner. They certainly can't state it's simply down to lawyers to conclude the sale.
He hasn't said that at all. What he said is that there were negotiations with two parties at the time he made the statement. Now the parties actually involved i.e the buyer and the seller have reached agreement on price and all that is awaited is the lawyers finalising the purchase and sale agreements. Despite the use of the word parties twice and quite incorrectly we will only be sold to one purchaser.
I have to say that it is by any measure a poorly worded statement but I believe we are nearing the end. Anyone who has ever bought a house however will know how long it can take the lawyers to finalise a purchase - hence the ridiculous time lag between exchange of contracts and completion when actually all the paperwork is already in place and merely needs printing.
Seems to suggest otherwise? I have experienced contract negotiations done like this but not for a business sale.
Given the differing interpretations people have arrived at as a result of the latest Richard Murray statement, i.e. are there still 2 potential purchasing parties remaining in the process, or was "parties" simply referring to one bidder and RD (my interpretation)), perhaps @Ollywozere could arrange for some kind of clarification to be issued by the club?
Two purchasing parties remain in the process
Is that what RM told you then? If so what's your take on it?
I’m guessing that instead of getting f**ked by the one owner, ie Roland, we’re going for a ménage à trois and going to get ruined even more by two owners at the same time.
Roland's lawyer has just been interviewed on European TV and clearly, she is as surprised as the rest of us that the incompetent buffoon has agreed a deal with two parties:
Given the differing interpretations people have arrived at as a result of the latest Richard Murray statement, i.e. are there still 2 potential purchasing parties remaining in the process, or was "parties" simply referring to one bidder and RD (my interpretation)), perhaps @Ollywozere could arrange for some kind of clarification to be issued by the club?
So, given that confirmation, RM is stating that two sets of lawyers working for two separate bidders are working with RD's lawyers to finalise a sale and purchase agreement. Unusual?!
The original legal source info was correct. The same source said last week that what happened was that a serious party which had previously withdrawn had come back to the table and that was why things didn’t get finalised as expected.
Given the hint above (second serious party come back to the table) is that second party involved with the Scottish Muir maybe?
Muir or Muir?
I'd hope for some mega rich blokes but that doesn't happen to us...
I've been provided with some additional information by another poster on CL who I believe is very clearly ITK but it wasn't one of the usual suspects (Airman, RedHenry or even Doucher!). However, I have promised to keep my mouth shut so out of respect I will not divulge further.
What I will say is that I don't think the bidder has anything to do with either of the two Muir's.
Based on the info you've been given, are you optimistic about our future?
Charlton Athletic Director Richard Murray has said that a price for a takeover of the club has been agreed with two separate parties and that the deal is now with the lawyers.
Following the news that the club was for sale, Murray updated fan representatives on January 20th where he said: “My opinion, and this is only an opinion of what might happen, I would say the most likely month is February.”
He updated fans again earlier this month where he referenced because of a non-disclosure agreement he has signed, he can’t reveal the names and certain information of the parties involved in takeover talks.
With February drawing to a close he said today: “I said in January that negotiations with two parties on the takeover were continuing well and I hoped a deal would be concluded in February of this year. Although the takeover has not yet been completed, the good news is the terms of the deal, including the price, have now been agreed between the parties and we are now just waiting for their respective lawyers to finalise the sale and purchase agreement.
"You can never tell how long lawyers will take but I’ve been informed it should be within the next few weeks. Once the new ownership has been legally achieved, we will inform everyone via our official channels.”
How can anyone say they have agreed a deal with two parties? You can negotiate terms, but there has to be final winner. They certainly can't state it's simply down to lawyers to conclude the sale.
He hasn't said that at all. What he said is that there were negotiations with two parties at the time he made the statement. Now the parties actually involved i.e the buyer and the seller have reached agreement on price and all that is awaited is the lawyers finalising the purchase and sale agreements. Despite the use of the word parties twice and quite incorrectly we will only be sold to one purchaser.
I have to say that it is by any measure a poorly worded statement but I believe we are nearing the end. Anyone who has ever bought a house however will know how long it can take the lawyers to finalise a purchase - hence the ridiculous time lag between exchange of contracts and completion when actually all the paperwork is already in place and merely needs printing.
Seems to suggest otherwise? I have experienced contract negotiations done like this but not for a business sale.
You may well be right, I have never seen a business sale conducted like this either but we have to remember what kind of "visionary" we are dealing with. I still think the interpretation above is the only one that makes sense but in RD's brave new demented world I suppose anything is possible.
The original legal source info was correct. The same source said last week that what happened was that a serious party which had previously withdrawn had come back to the table and that was why things didn’t get finalised as expected.
Given the hint above (second serious party come back to the table) is that second party involved with the Scottish Muir maybe?
Muir or Muir?
I'd hope for some mega rich blokes but that doesn't happen to us...
I've been provided with some additional information by another poster on CL who I believe is very clearly ITK but it wasn't one of the usual suspects (Airman, RedHenry or even Doucher!). However, I have promised to keep my mouth shut so out of respect I will not divulge further.
What I will say is that I don't think the bidder has anything to do with either of the two Muir's.
Based on the info you've been given, are you optimistic about our future?
Given the differing interpretations people have arrived at as a result of the latest Richard Murray statement, i.e. are there still 2 potential purchasing parties remaining in the process, or was "parties" simply referring to one bidder and RD (my interpretation)), perhaps @Ollywozere could arrange for some kind of clarification to be issued by the club?
So, given that confirmation, RM is stating that two sets of lawyers working for two separate bidders are working with RD's lawyers to finalise a sale and purchase agreement. Unusual?!
Does this mean two parties joining together to buy the club or two parties in a 'race to the line' ?!
Without reading comments any further than @charente addick 's, I would respectfully say that Tom R has confused the issue with the contradicting words used in the first paragraph and the 4th ....
Comments
Talking of tits. Anyone got any Kerry Katona videos to calm me down?
Johnny Nash.
Buyer 2:"me too"
Roland: DONE AND DONE
So, given that confirmation, RM is stating that two sets of lawyers working for two separate bidders are working with RD's lawyers to finalise a sale and purchase agreement. Unusual?!
Are you optimistic about our future?
As if we need any further confusion !
So how much upfront, how much on promotion etc.