Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Take over a club and try to appoint a club legend as manager V Taking over a club and sacking a club legend.cafcfan1990 said:
I think they were trying to get the fans on board from the outset. Not criticising that as it’s the thing to do when you have a club in crisis.Leeds_Addick said:
This is great not just because of the obvious but because it suggests they have a good understanding of us and aren't trying to force their ideas straight from the off.Airman Brown said:
https://www.londonnewsonline.co.uk/digital-editions/The Red Robin said:@Airman Brown saying on Twitter that SCP was the Aussies first choice as manager.
What could possibly go wrong from there ?
3 -
Curbs, ahh Curbs, don't do this to me.The Red Robin said:If they can't get Powell, go get Curbs.
0 -
It's called not knowing your facts.ShootersHillGuru said:
Not quite sure how you arrive at that.msomerton said:If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.
6 -
Huh!msomerton said:If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.
Best ever season points wise would do me again!
0 -
Any idea what the final price for the club was?0
-
I'll vouch for that..........Redmidland said:
Bet you I'm a lot older!!!Redhenry said:
My Birthday as well @RedmidlandRedmidland said:If its Monday, then what a birthday present that'll be for me!!!! I'll have a lot more to celebrate than just another year!!! "Go on make my (birth) day"
1 -
People seem to be getting too het up over the phrase 'looking for investment'. That doesn't necessarily mean that the people involved don't have money - they wouldn't get through the opening conversation if they had nothing - but it means that they are trying to get more. If anything that indicates an understanding that progressing through the leagues is getting more and more expensive, which is something that our esteemed owner has never agreed with.
Roland is loaded. That hasn't helped us because he won't spend. Slater and Jimenez had little but secured investment through wealthier means. Unfortunately they screwed that up by allegedly misleading Cash and then a further investor, for which TJ is currently being sued. Jimenez should not be looked at as an example of standard practice with outside investment any more than Roland should be looked at as an example of all Belgians; these people are weird, narcissistic fools whose egos made them think they could succeed in football. It's just unfortunate they were both drawn to our club.
All this doesn't mean that new owners running the club via outside investment are going to be good, we'll have to see once the takeover is actually confirmed, but a group interested in progressing an agenda of sporting success running the club intelligently, with an agreed aim of the investors getting their money back and then some if the Premier League target is met is a pretty god way to be going about things. Beats having our duct tape aficionado friend in charge anyway.24 -
Ten jars of vegemite, 2 cases of Fosters and twenty packets of TimTams.The Red Robin said:Any idea what the final price for the club was?
5 -
Strewth!! Thats not enough of the amber nectar to even get your throat wet!!LargeAddick said:
Ten jars of vegemite, 2 cases of Fosters and twenty packets of TimTams.The Red Robin said:Any idea what the final price for the club was?
0 -
For the first time in ages I'm enjoying reading this thread. It really feels like it's nearly over.
Im picturing myself walking into the Valley knowing that RD has gone and there's some ambition in the club again.
We have reached such a low ebb, but we came back before and we can do it again. SCP in charge would have been an absolute dream, but you can't have everything. I'm actually excited about the club again and it's a great feeling.8 - Sponsored links:
-
We have far more potential than Southend especially with new owners.
Come home SCP!!!3 -
Yup, me too. Just saw Network at The National. Point reinforced.SDAddick said:
I'm obviously way late to the game on this, but I don't want Saudi money.2 -
There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?Henry Irving said:
@msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?msomerton said:If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.
We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus0 -
Can see why he's accepted their offer now. Certainly more enticing than my revised bid which included two multipacks of Curly Wurlies.LargeAddick said:
Ten jars of vegemite, 2 cases of Fosters and twenty packets of TimTams.The Red Robin said:Any idea what the final price for the club was?
0 -
Was there? Where is the evidence for that?JamesSeed said:
There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?Henry Irving said:
@msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?msomerton said:If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.
We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus1 -
Well one thing is clear these Australians must have cash as they have never approached Ex Directors about their Loans ,if they intend to raise financing any Bank/Finance House would require those First Charges removed.Henry Irving said:
Was there? Where is the evidence for that?JamesSeed said:
There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?Henry Irving said:
@msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?msomerton said:If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.
We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus
They have supposedly been around a long time,initially looking for funding,so ask yourselves why have they never discussed those Loans,they need to be paid off before anyone is going to lend them funds, not even an overdraft for day to day cash flow.
This all smells a little too good to be true, why would anyone pay £40/£50mn for Charlton and ignore all the assets,what downside protection do they have if it all goes wrong?
Don't we want a buyer to clear all the debt? Isn't that a statement that they have real money and mean to take us forward.
This story is not over yet I am guessing.3 -
So RD has found one final way to get back at us by dragging his feet & ending our chances of a return of SCP.
Never mind though, the main thing is that it appears we will soon be free of our insane owner.
I am just enjoying the feeling of being positive about our club again, looking forward to tomorrow's game more then any game since probably the infamous quarter final trip to Bramall Lane.3 -
11
-
That’s only true if they were raising money against the club’s assets - not if they are raising money against assets they already own.Davidsmith said:
Well one thing is clear these Australians must have cash as they have never approached Ex Directors about their Loans ,if they intend to raise financing any Bank/Finance House would require those First Charges removed.Henry Irving said:
Was there? Where is the evidence for that?JamesSeed said:
There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?Henry Irving said:
@msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?msomerton said:If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.
We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus
They have supposedly been around a long time,initially looking for funding,so ask yourselves why have they never discussed those Loans,they need to be paid off before anyone is going to lend them funds, not even an overdraft for day to day cash flow.
This all smells a little too good to be true, why would anyone pay £40/£50mn for Charlton and ignore all the assets,what downside protection do they have if it all goes wrong?
Don't we want a buyer to clear all the debt? Isn't that a statement that they have real money and mean to take us forward.
This story is not over yet I am guessing.
I’m not sure that they have any more or less leverage buying out the ex-directors before a takeover if it’s not seen as a deal-breaker. Ultimately they can buy out the debt at 100 percent whenever they wish and as the last two ownerships have shown it doesn’t prevent them running the club in the meantime.
You could approach the ex-directors and say “we’ll give you 70 percent” now but unless the likely alternative is nothing now (because no takeover) I’m not sure what additional leverage there is. It will still be a good offer in a month and a year’s time.
If you also assume that Murray (and possibly Maurice Hatter) has been squared you’re down to fractions of £3.4m being in play.0 -
I wonder if she saw it coming ?i_b_b_o_r_g said:
...sorry, just been informed that Doris Stokes has passed over (must've missed that thread!)i_b_b_o_r_g said:...and if they can't get CP or Curbs, get Doris Stokes on the bench to converse with Jimmy Seed.
FFS
So, if they cant get CP or Curbs, or Doris Stokes, get Russell Grant on the bench to converse with Jimmy Seed.0 - Sponsored links:
-
True they can borrow against other assets, but why borrow against sound assets to invest in what is a risky project?Airman Brown said:
That’s only true if they were raising money against the club’s assets - not if they are raising money against assets they already own.Davidsmith said:
Well one thing is clear these Australians must have cash as they have never approached Ex Directors about their Loans ,if they intend to raise financing any Bank/Finance House would require those First Charges removed.Henry Irving said:
Was there? Where is the evidence for that?JamesSeed said:
There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?Henry Irving said:
@msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?msomerton said:If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.
We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus
They have supposedly been around a long time,initially looking for funding,so ask yourselves why have they never discussed those Loans,they need to be paid off before anyone is going to lend them funds, not even an overdraft for day to day cash flow.
This all smells a little too good to be true, why would anyone pay £40/£50mn for Charlton and ignore all the assets,what downside protection do they have if it all goes wrong?
Don't we want a buyer to clear all the debt? Isn't that a statement that they have real money and mean to take us forward.
This story is not over yet I am guessing.
I’m not sure that they have any more or less leverage buying out the ex-directors before a takeover if it’s not seen as a deal-breaker. Ultimately they can buy out the debt at 100 percent whenever they wish and as the last two ownerships have shown it doesn’t prevent them running the club in the meantime.
You could approach the ex-directors and say “we’ll give you 70 percent” now but unless the likely alternative is nothing now (because no takeover) I’m not sure what additional leverage there is. It will still be a good offer in a month and a year’s time.
Wouldn't you just clear the decks on Charlton giving great message to supporters and allow yourself to do what you want regarding Stadium/Training ground etc.
Also how do you then put money into the Club?,as unsecured Debt or Equity? That scenario hasn't helped Roland to sell the Club, as buyers have been put off by his unsecured debt demands and not getting first charge without paying another £7mn.
Same scenario left Slater and Co struggling to find a buyer willing to buy on Subordinated basis until Roland came along and never read terms of Loans and got himself all tied up when it came to finding a buyer.
Anyone with that kind of money and a Business brain would clear those charges, it is their strongest negotiating tool with Roland, as he is negotiating on Subordinated basis, he is selling his House with a Mortgage attached,who buys houses and takes on sellers debts?
2 -
Yes, it was called defrauding a friendGarrymanilow said:
Roland is loaded. That hasn't helped us because he won't spend. Slater and Jimenez had little but secured investment through wealthier means.
1 -
Does anyone think if Bowyer does well he’ll get the job full time or will the Aussies not consider him at all?1
-
Would certainly have to start quick and look convincing in the win.CharltonByBlood said:Does anyone think if Bowyer does well he’ll get the job full time or will the Aussies not consider him at all?
Part of me thinks that the Australian link to Harry Kewell is just cause he is Australian though.2 -
As others have said, it's unlikely they could get a new manager in before easter. Therefore you'd assume Bowyer has a 3 game audition. Win 2 or more of those 3 and they'd be crazy to replace him, so would be best served keeping him on until the end of the season and then replacing in the summer if he doesn't impress sufficiently.
If Bowyer can't turn things around in those 3 games then there's no reason not to bring in a new manager now.1 -
He will probably only get one game in charge, if the takeover goes through next week. IF, Harry Kewell takes over as manager I would imagine he will keep Bowyer - team mates at Leeds and worked together at Watford.CharltonByBlood said:Does anyone think if Bowyer does well he’ll get the job full time or will the Aussies not consider him at all?
2 -
Bowyer and JJ have to give the owners something to think about!1
-
Fair points, but who is lending against the club's assets, how much and on what terms? If the book value of the assets (land) is £20m and you have to buy back loans of £7m (with no current interest charges) first, I am not sure there is a lot of room for manoeuvre anyway.Davidsmith said:
True they can borrow against other assets, but why borrow against sound assets to invest in what is a risky project?Airman Brown said:
That’s only true if they were raising money against the club’s assets - not if they are raising money against assets they already own.Davidsmith said:
Well one thing is clear these Australians must have cash as they have never approached Ex Directors about their Loans ,if they intend to raise financing any Bank/Finance House would require those First Charges removed.Henry Irving said:
Was there? Where is the evidence for that?JamesSeed said:
There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?Henry Irving said:
@msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?msomerton said:If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.
We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus
They have supposedly been around a long time,initially looking for funding,so ask yourselves why have they never discussed those Loans,they need to be paid off before anyone is going to lend them funds, not even an overdraft for day to day cash flow.
This all smells a little too good to be true, why would anyone pay £40/£50mn for Charlton and ignore all the assets,what downside protection do they have if it all goes wrong?
Don't we want a buyer to clear all the debt? Isn't that a statement that they have real money and mean to take us forward.
This story is not over yet I am guessing.
I’m not sure that they have any more or less leverage buying out the ex-directors before a takeover if it’s not seen as a deal-breaker. Ultimately they can buy out the debt at 100 percent whenever they wish and as the last two ownerships have shown it doesn’t prevent them running the club in the meantime.
You could approach the ex-directors and say “we’ll give you 70 percent” now but unless the likely alternative is nothing now (because no takeover) I’m not sure what additional leverage there is. It will still be a good offer in a month and a year’s time.
Wouldn't you just clear the decks on Charlton giving great message to supporters and allow yourself to do what you want regarding Stadium/Training ground etc.
Also how do you then put money into the Club?,as unsecured Debt or Equity? That scenario hasn't helped Roland to sell the Club, as buyers have been put off by his unsecured debt demands and not getting first charge without paying another £7mn.
Same scenario left Slater and Co struggling to find a buyer willing to buy on Subordinated basis until Roland came along and never read terms of Loans and got himself all tied up when it came to finding a buyer.
Anyone with that kind of money and a Business brain would clear those charges, it is their strongest negotiating tool with Roland, as he is negotiating on Subordinated basis, he is selling his House with a Mortgage attached,who buys houses and takes on sellers debts?
0 -
I’m looking forward to Harry bringing his other half to The Valley .
1 -
It's a no from me.3
This discussion has been closed.
