‘After speaking to two people from the Australian consortium hoping to buy the club, I am happy to withdraw my request for the return of my grandfather’s bust.’
The Aussies are as we speak preparing a statement, which they plan to release tomorrow.
They are NOT about to announce that the sale has been completed. But I believe it should be positive news. I certainly bloody hope so.
Funnily enough, bexley boy has said exactly the same regarding a statement!
Have you ever seen @JamesSeed and Bexley Boy in the same room?
‘After speaking to two people from the Australian consortium hoping to buy the club, I am happy to withdraw my request for the return of my grandfather’s bust.’
The Aussies are as we speak preparing a statement, which they plan to release tomorrow.
They are NOT about to announce that the sale has been completed. But I believe it should be positive news. I certainly bloody hope so.
Funnily enough, bexley boy has said exactly the same regarding a statement!
Have you ever seen @JamesSeed and Bexley Boy in the same room?
Apologies for the takeover delay. Andrew & I have been too busy debating which flavour of pot noodle is the best. Andrew likes a traditional beef and tomato but I'm more of a Bombay Bad Boy man.
Rich Crawley hasn't heard back from them. It's possibly going to be a national press release, so could be in the papers tomorrow, if it's embargoed. Hopefully today though.
(See what I did there?)
Is yesterday, tomorrow, today?
She’s got a model’s legs, but are they women’s, are they men’s ?
@PragueAddick I could not disagree more strongly. Average league 1 players are NOT the main, or significant, assets. In fact I would suggest that their contracts are actually a liability.
Lionel Messi is an asset, Jason Pearce and Nabby Sarr aren't. If I was buying the club I would only put a nominal value on the current players, or 99% of league 1 players.
If you were seriously rich the only assets you want are the ground, training ground and the golden share.
The advertising agency comparison works with a SMT, football management, academy staff, talent scouts etc who can add massive value. Although that is obviously not the case here.
Well, never mind the ad agency thing, it winds up a few people on here to mention the words. You are saying I think, that if you were buying the club, and you valued it at £40m in January, you would still pay that now, if RD had sold Konsa and then Bauer and Fosu too? I wouldn't .
And btw what is the "golden share" you have referred to more an once?
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
I have not said he will or wants to stop paying those bills. He wants to reduce the size of the bills and how much he has to pay out of his own pocket
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
I have not said he will or wants to stop paying those bills. He wants to reduce the size of the bills and how much he has to pay out of his own pocket
Then why bring administration into your initial post ?
When you're selling a house, or business for that matter, you don't start stripping it of the fixtures and fittings because you consider the process to be taking too long. I don't see this as any different meself
@PragueAddick I could not disagree more strongly. Average league 1 players are NOT the main, or significant, assets. In fact I would suggest that their contracts are actually a liability.
Lionel Messi is an asset, Jason Pearce and Nabby Sarr aren't. If I was buying the club I would only put a nominal value on the current players, or 99% of league 1 players.
If you were seriously rich the only assets you want are the ground, training ground and the golden share.
The advertising agency comparison works with a SMT, football management, academy staff, talent scouts etc who can add massive value. Although that is obviously not the case here.
Well, never mind the ad agency thing, it winds up a few people on here to mention the words. You are saying I think, that if you were buying the club, and you valued it at £40m in January, you would still pay that now, if RD had sold Konsa and then Bauer and Fosu too? I wouldn't .
And btw what is the "golden share" you have referred to more an once?
The golden share is effectively the place in the football league.
"The Football League is a company limited by shares. Every club in the Football League is entitled to an ownership share – the 'Golden Share'. The share gives clubs the right to play in the league and share in league incomes from TV and other commercial deals (from a pooled account at the end of the season)."
My point on not being hung up on the players is that none of them are irreplaceable for a relatively, compared to the £200 million investment, low cost.
I would wager you could buy a promotion capable league 1 team for approx 3 or 4 million, not including wages, that you would be paying anyway.
When you're selling a house, or business for that matter, you don't start stripping it of the fixtures and fittings because you consider the process to be taking too long. I don't see this as any different meself
Nice work!
It’s been a while since anyone put up a solid house selling analogy.
@PragueAddick I could not disagree more strongly. Average league 1 players are NOT the main, or significant, assets. In fact I would suggest that their contracts are actually a liability.
Lionel Messi is an asset, Jason Pearce and Nabby Sarr aren't. If I was buying the club I would only put a nominal value on the current players, or 99% of league 1 players.
If you were seriously rich the only assets you want are the ground, training ground and the golden share.
The advertising agency comparison works with a SMT, football management, academy staff, talent scouts etc who can add massive value. Although that is obviously not the case here.
Well, never mind the ad agency thing, it winds up a few people on here to mention the words. You are saying I think, that if you were buying the club, and you valued it at £40m in January, you would still pay that now, if RD had sold Konsa and then Bauer and Fosu too? I wouldn't .
And btw what is the "golden share" you have referred to more an once?
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
I have not said he will or wants to stop paying those bills. He wants to reduce the size of the bills and how much he has to pay out of his own pocket
Then why bring administration into your initial post ?
I was making the point that if RD stops funding the monthly costs out of his own pocket then the club has to start off loading players with big wages and those who command a fee in order to continue as a going concern.
When you're selling a house, or business for that matter, you don't start stripping it of the fixtures and fittings because you consider the process to be taking too long. I don't see this as any different meself
When we bought our house, we turned up to a third viewing, after having agreed terms, house was off the market, to find a relative of the owner digging up trees from the garden. Loving the return of the house analogies this week.
When you're selling a house, or business for that matter, you don't start stripping it of the fixtures and fittings because you consider the process to be taking too long. I don't see this as any different meself
Nice work!
It’s been a while before anyone put up a solid house selling analogy.
I was thinking more of the time when I sold my shop up next to Grove Park BR Station
When you're selling a house, or business for that matter, you don't start stripping it of the fixtures and fittings because you consider the process to be taking too long. I don't see this as any different meself
Nice work!
It’s been a while before anyone put up a solid house selling analogy.
When you're selling a house, or business for that matter, you don't start stripping it of the fixtures and fittings because you consider the process to be taking too long. I don't see this as any different meself
Nice work!
It’s been a while before anyone put up a solid house selling analogy.
I was thinking more of the time when I sold my shop up next to Grove Park BR Station
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
I have not said he will or wants to stop paying those bills. He wants to reduce the size of the bills and how much he has to pay out of his own pocket
Then why bring administration into your initial post ?
I was making the point that if RD stops funding the monthly costs out of his own pocket then the club has to start off loading players with big wages and those who command a fee in order to continue as a going concern.
I repeat. Why bring administration into things then.
When you're selling a house, or business for that matter, you don't start stripping it of the fixtures and fittings because you consider the process to be taking too long. I don't see this as any different meself
Nice work!
It’s been a while before anyone put up a solid house selling analogy.
I was thinking more of the time when I sold my shop up next to Grove Park BR Station
you used to have a shop? Never knew that.
Yer, next to Grove Park BR Station, and I would have started tuckin into the Mars bars after we done the stock take once we sold
Releasing the statement through the club is probably the only way Roland would let them do it due to a NDA. So chances are the statement has had to have been run by him and is heavily censored. Not expecting it to say anything at all...
Trouble is, we just don’t know. All we know is the spin / version that one side wants to leak out.
It could be the Aussies just can’t get the finance after having lost a couple of backers. It could equally be that after the recent sale of assets Roland still wants the same asking price for the club (but now with less assets), which the Aussies might think is taking the mick.
None of us know. It’s painful.
The stories about RD holding a fire sale aren’t coming from the Aussies at all.
So what are the Aussies saying about this @Airman Brown ?
Are they out?
Maybe. Several people have said they are out but not heard of them saying it directly to anyone yet.
Tbf haven’t heard officially that they were ever in.
If the Aussies issue a statement via the club that would seem to address your point conclusively, no?
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
I have not said he will or wants to stop paying those bills. He wants to reduce the size of the bills and how much he has to pay out of his own pocket
Then why bring administration into your initial post ?
I was making the point that if RD stops funding the monthly costs out of his own pocket then the club has to start off loading players with big wages and those who command a fee in order to continue as a going concern.
I repeat. Why bring administration into things then.
Errr...because that is what happens when a club stops paying its bills?
When you're selling a house, or business for that matter, you don't start stripping it of the fixtures and fittings because you consider the process to be taking too long. I don't see this as any different meself
Nice work!
It’s been a while before anyone put up a solid house selling analogy.
I was thinking more of the time when I sold my shop up next to Grove Park BR Station
you used to have a shop? Never knew that.
Yer, next to Grove Park BR Station, and I would have started tuckin into the Mars bars after we done the stock take once we sold
You held that back.
You had us all feeling sorry for you before about how old Swami knocked you for a few Bob.
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
The interesting thing is that RD is offering big discounts on players for cash.
Says who
Why else do you think Brentford got Konsa when other bigger clubs have been sniffing around?
But never offered the asking price or even a very near offfef from what I heard
It benefits RD that sale massively it’s asset stripping at the very least it’s criminal at best
But it also reduces the value of the club and its price
Which may just help those who ain’t showing the colour of their money yet
So back to my point before, what if after selling Konsa (for say £2m rising to a potential £3m, but with an inflated up front payment- my guess figures), the Aussies say ok, you’ve sold one our key value player assets, we want the deal price reduced by the amount you’ve just received up front as the squad value has been reduced, and RD says no, the price is not changing a penny. Who is in the wrong then?
Not,saying that is what has happened, but equally it could. As I said, we don’t really know
Even worse, as others have mentioned, they might value Konsa higher than Roly. So he sells for £3M but they want £4M off the asking price?
Still don't see how any potential buyer can complain about RD selling player assets and using the proceeds to keep the the club running as a going concern. The alternative is that Charlton stop playing all their wages and other bills for the next few months and then go into administration because of those unpaid wages and bills or start borrowing in order to pay these monthly costs and thus increasing the debt burden on the club which the new owners will inherit.
Why would RD stop paying those bills then ? That leads to possible admin and he losses more money. Therefore it is not “The alternative”.
I have not said he will or wants to stop paying those bills. He wants to reduce the size of the bills and how much he has to pay out of his own pocket
Then why bring administration into your initial post ?
I was making the point that if RD stops funding the monthly costs out of his own pocket then the club has to start off loading players with big wages and those who command a fee in order to continue as a going concern.
I repeat. Why bring administration into things then.
Errr...because that is what happens when a club stops paying its bills?
No shit Sherlock. However when confronted with the fact that it’s not in RD’s interest to do that, so a completely spurious point you have failed to bring up administration or its lack of relevance since.
It will be a bland, generic statement that we probably already know from the ITK crew
"Ongoing. Taking too long. Trying to agree a price. Roland wants too much. EFL pissed on plan B and would rather see us go to the wall than have additional investment from someone less likely to be a twat.
Comments
Cannot see the Bastard Belgian allowing to use the Clubs official channels, particularly as another alleged buyer is still in the picture.
Apologies for the takeover delay. Andrew & I have been too busy debating which flavour of pot noodle is the best. Andrew likes a traditional beef and tomato but I'm more of a Bombay Bad Boy man.
Yours,
Roland
And btw what is the "golden share" you have referred to more an once?
"The Football League is a company limited by shares. Every club in the Football League is entitled to an ownership share – the 'Golden Share'. The share gives clubs the right to play in the league and share in league incomes from TV and other commercial deals (from a pooled account at the end of the season)."
My point on not being hung up on the players is that none of them are irreplaceable for a relatively, compared to the £200 million investment, low cost.
I would wager you could buy a promotion capable league 1 team for approx 3 or 4 million, not including wages, that you would be paying anyway.
It’s been a while since anyone put up a solid house selling analogy.
Unless it is the full shebang.
You had us all feeling sorry for you before about how old Swami knocked you for a few Bob.
It will be a bland, generic statement that we probably already know from the ITK crew
"Ongoing. Taking too long. Trying to agree a price. Roland wants too much. EFL pissed on plan B and would rather see us go to the wall than have additional investment from someone less likely to be a twat.