The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Airman Brown said:
Or if you can buy out the loans at a discount, by pressuring the lenders, one way or another.Imnot Athletic said:Whats in the books is irrelevant in terms of the value that's placed on the business. Having less liabilities as a result of selling assets (on the books or otherwise) is a zero sum game, unless you realise more for the player than the other party thought, which could have been the case with Ezri I suppose.
Most likely scenario in removing the liabilities of the old directors is to either allow first charge on the assets of the business for any new loans (from Rolly or anyone else) or to allow the football business and the property business to be split, with only one of these sold.
But I agree the point is likely to be to get rid of the charge - we just can’t be sure why that is suddenly such a priority, if it is.
It has always been a priority for both buyers.
How do you pressurise the lenders? If they dont want to do a deal they just sit tight.1 -
For the final time mate, you don't know, you're just repeating what you've heard. Which is fine if you'd say that, but you don't.nth london addick said:
Nope the Aussies are not telling you the truthJamesSeed said:
It's not a FACT if it's just something you've been told, and you haven't seen proof yourself.nth london addick said:We will see the clock is ticking the deadline looming for this to be concluded
If the Aussies find investors then it won’t happen
If the club is sold and the ground and training ground is not sold with it then we will see
But the Aussies ascot 1327 today do not have the money available to buy us FACT
What is this deadline?
The Aussies are saying your post is 100% incorrect, it's not a third party saying it, so are you being used by someone? An ex director?
And it is a fact20 -
ThisJamesSeed said:
For the final time mate, you don't know, you're just repeating what you've heard. Which is fine if you'd say that, but you don't.nth london addick said:
Nope the Aussies are not telling you the truthJamesSeed said:
It's not a FACT if it's just something you've been told, and you haven't seen proof yourself.nth london addick said:We will see the clock is ticking the deadline looming for this to be concluded
If the Aussies find investors then it won’t happen
If the club is sold and the ground and training ground is not sold with it then we will see
But the Aussies ascot 1327 today do not have the money available to buy us FACT
What is this deadline?
The Aussies are saying your post is 100% incorrect, it's not a third party saying it, so are you being used by someone? An ex director?
And it is a fact3 -
Who is the former director?JamesSeed said:
But why are you assuming this rumour is true? The source is a highly disgruntled former director with a major axe to grind. The other source is a group who have already spend a million Pounds to just clear up legal issues. I'd stick with the latter unless there's proof that they've done something wrong.addick05 said:
Blimey mate, the tears were starting to well up as I read you post. You may well be bang on the nail here. The Aussies have to either piss or get off the pot; it's all or nothing, the club, the ground and the training ground cannot be separated.GlassHalfFull said:
Laid back, are they, Jim?JamesSeed said:
I think that’ll change. They’re pretty laid back for one thing.GlassHalfFull said:
Only a joint document would have been acceptable to all protagonists. Any fan-friendliness in the original draft has been thoroughly lawyered out in this frigid communication from the parallel universe wherein CAFC is presently marooned, slowly drifting ever more distant from us.JamesSeed said:
It was initially drawn up by a couple of the Aussie consortium, but I expect it was checked and/or modified by the Roland side, but then agreed by all parties (and their lawyers) before release.GlassHalfFull said:
The statement was not meant for the fans. We're just collateral damage. It was drawn up by the lawyers simply to reassure the football industry at large that CAFC is open for business as "normal", and this takeover malarkey is just some little local difficulty, soon to be resolved. Meanwhile the whole weary process continues at glacier speed, to the profound detriment of the club, the rage and frustration of the fans, and the customary enrichment of the briefs. IMHO.
We’ll see how fan friendly they are when they selectmea random fan for the board.
Well, waking up to find this latest alleged scenario - a true Weston - I have a message for Mr Muir and his mates. It's this. Walk away. Now.
Mr M, I like the cut of your jib. It's plain that, putting business to one side, you've found something in CAFC/CACT that appeals. I think the Addicks would suit you very well, and you us. But let's face facts. We're all being played, held to ransom by our feelings for this grand old club. The Owner will never understand that while there's a hole in his arse, except to use our loyalty as leverage for his own foul purposes.
Oh, you can summon up advisers, brokers, middlemen and bankers to fight your corner, but what you need is a real Negotiator. Someone who doesn't give a hoot, except to get a result. That's where you and we go wrong, see, because we all DO care. We care an awful lot. I'll bet that none of your mob has ever had to do business before with someone like you-know-who.
Well, as of now don't feel you need to speak for me. Call it a day. I've got 64 seasons of memories to keep me going. In that time there have been several Charltons but never one like this. Let the Owner wallow in the God-awful mess he's created, the monumental losses he's piled up - and growing every single week, of course - and instead of clearing off at least with your decent offer he'll have to kiss that good money goodbye as well. How d'yer like THEM eggs, Roly boy?
So let him keep The Valley and Sparrows Lane. What are they worth without us? Buttons. I'd rather see The Valley become another Mountsfield Park than continue like this. And give the players (and staff) their freedom, instead of having their careers blighted by this tin-eared despot and his hapless commissar. To matey they're not people, they're just contracts on legs.
So, just let the Owner stew. In the meantime you'll know where to find me and I guess thousands like me - just whistle and we'll be back, ok? Only, don't leave it too long.
I think I might join #TeamWIOTOS and keep away from all of the nonsense.0 -
It has always been a priority for both buyers.Airman Brown said:
Or if you can buy out the loans at a discount, by pressuring the lenders, one way or another.Imnot Athletic said:Whats in the books is irrelevant in terms of the value that's placed on the business. Having less liabilities as a result of selling assets (on the books or otherwise) is a zero sum game, unless you realise more for the player than the other party thought, which could have been the case with Ezri I suppose.
Most likely scenario in removing the liabilities of the old directors is to either allow first charge on the assets of the business for any new loans (from Rolly or anyone else) or to allow the football business and the property business to be split, with only one of these sold.
But I agree the point is likely to be to get rid of the charge - we just can’t be sure why that is suddenly such a priority, if it is.
How do you pressurise the lenders? If they dont want to do a deal they just sit tight.1 -
The only obvious weapon is bad publicity (see above). I agree it’s an empty threat. Doesn’t mean he won’t use it.Davidsmith said:
It has always been a priority for both buyers.Airman Brown said:
Or if you can buy out the loans at a discount, by pressuring the lenders, one way or another.Imnot Athletic said:Whats in the books is irrelevant in terms of the value that's placed on the business. Having less liabilities as a result of selling assets (on the books or otherwise) is a zero sum game, unless you realise more for the player than the other party thought, which could have been the case with Ezri I suppose.
Most likely scenario in removing the liabilities of the old directors is to either allow first charge on the assets of the business for any new loans (from Rolly or anyone else) or to allow the football business and the property business to be split, with only one of these sold.
But I agree the point is likely to be to get rid of the charge - we just can’t be sure why that is suddenly such a priority, if it is.
How do you pressurise the lenders? If they dont want to do a deal they just sit tight.
0 -
What bad publicity? Do you think they give a toss?Airman Brown said:
The only obvious weapon is bad publicity (see above). I agree it’s an empty threat. Doesn’t mean he won’t use it.Davidsmith said:
It has always been a priority for both buyers.Airman Brown said:
Or if you can buy out the loans at a discount, by pressuring the lenders, one way or another.Imnot Athletic said:Whats in the books is irrelevant in terms of the value that's placed on the business. Having less liabilities as a result of selling assets (on the books or otherwise) is a zero sum game, unless you realise more for the player than the other party thought, which could have been the case with Ezri I suppose.
Most likely scenario in removing the liabilities of the old directors is to either allow first charge on the assets of the business for any new loans (from Rolly or anyone else) or to allow the football business and the property business to be split, with only one of these sold.
But I agree the point is likely to be to get rid of the charge - we just can’t be sure why that is suddenly such a priority, if it is.
How do you pressurise the lenders? If they dont want to do a deal they just sit tight.
He is the one who bought the Club without understanding what those Loans were.
2 -
Anyone else enjoying the weather at the moment? It’s really hot today. Tan’s coming along nicely #TeamWIOTOS11
-
I really don't have a clue any more regarding all this malarkey. I wonder however if hidden in all this milieu are one of two quite heroic ex directors who won't get involved with anything that separates the club from the ground.
If am anywhere near right there are unsung heroes about.6 -
Oh for facts sake!8
- Sponsored links:
-
I think from previous comments on here it is fair to say there are 3 ,but if Roland pays them off in full there is nothing they can do to stop him. But he has had that option for a long while,and chosen not to.seth plum said:I really don't have a clue any more regarding all this malarkey. I wonder however if hidden in all this milieu are one of two quite heroic ex directors who won't get involved with anything that separates the club from the ground.
If am anywhere near right there are unsung heroes about.
It is in his power to get deal done,but he needs to clear those charges.0 -
It's all got a bit big willy syleee today, is it the weather?
2 -
It's not just today mate, it's been going on for a while now. I'm happy that people are sharing information, but the 'my info is better than your info' crap is boring. I wish people would just share on the understanding that they are passing on information given to them and therefore may have a bias one way or another, because there will be a bias. All this arguing between themselves over what is a fact and what is a lie and who is more credible is so juvenile.AppyAddick said:It's all got a bit big willy syleee today, is it the weather?
11 -
To get which deal done @Davidsmith? Australian or British (who you said you believe exist)?Davidsmith said:
I think from previous comments on here it is fair to say there are 3 ,but if Roland pays them off in full there is nothing they can do to stop him. But he has had that option for a long while,and chosen not to.seth plum said:I really don't have a clue any more regarding all this malarkey. I wonder however if hidden in all this milieu are one of two quite heroic ex directors who won't get involved with anything that separates the club from the ground.
If am anywhere near right there are unsung heroes about.
It is in his power to get deal done,but he needs to clear those charges.0 -
If Duchatelet offers to settle with the ex-directors, do we know if they are bound to accept?Davidsmith said:
I think from previous comments on here it is fair to say there are 3 ,but if Roland pays them off in full there is nothing they can do to stop him. But he has had that option for a long while,and chosen not to.seth plum said:I really don't have a clue any more regarding all this malarkey. I wonder however if hidden in all this milieu are one of two quite heroic ex directors who won't get involved with anything that separates the club from the ground.
If am anywhere near right there are unsung heroes about.
It is in his power to get deal done,but he needs to clear those charges.
1 -
I feel a poll is in order0
-
Exactly.Davidsmith said:
I think from previous comments on here it is fair to say there are 3 ,but if Roland pays them off in full there is nothing they can do to stop him. But he has had that option for a long while,and chosen not to.seth plum said:I really don't have a clue any more regarding all this malarkey. I wonder however if hidden in all this milieu are one of two quite heroic ex directors who won't get involved with anything that separates the club from the ground.
If am anywhere near right there are unsung heroes about.
It is in his power to get deal done,but he needs to clear those charges.
Not the Aussies, not the Ex Directors, just the #BelgianBastard.
Paying off three ex directors - probably what he's just received for Konsa and Lennon. Deal done. Sign on the dotted line.
Naff off to Limburg to buy a crate of duct tape.
0 -
I’ve got nothing to add to this ridiculous thread except this
43 -
I cant keep up with this, first Aussies now the Polish.Charltonparklane said:I feel a poll is in order
0 -
Davidsmith said:
If they do would it be viewed as for the best interest of the club and fans it is a pivotal time for this whole charde to come to a conclusionAirman Brown said:
Or if you can buy out the loans at a discount, by pressuring the lenders, one way or another.Imnot Athletic said:Whats in the books is irrelevant in terms of the value that's placed on the business. Having less liabilities as a result of selling assets (on the books or otherwise) is a zero sum game, unless you realise more for the player than the other party thought, which could have been the case with Ezri I suppose.
Most likely scenario in removing the liabilities of the old directors is to either allow first charge on the assets of the business for any new loans (from Rolly or anyone else) or to allow the football business and the property business to be split, with only one of these sold.
But I agree the point is likely to be to get rid of the charge - we just can’t be sure why that is suddenly such a priority, if it is.
It has always been a priority for both buyers.
How do you pressurise the lenders? If they dont want to do a deal they just sit tight.0 - Sponsored links:
-
5
-
With the temperature hitting 30 next week, this thread has all the potential for going as nasty as the Croatia v Argentina game last night0
-
Pot Noodle & Red Bull for tea tonight.
FACT5 -
0
-
BothScoham said:
To get which deal done @Davidsmith? Australian or British (who you said you believe exist)?Davidsmith said:
I think from previous comments on here it is fair to say there are 3 ,but if Roland pays them off in full there is nothing they can do to stop him. But he has had that option for a long while,and chosen not to.seth plum said:I really don't have a clue any more regarding all this malarkey. I wonder however if hidden in all this milieu are one of two quite heroic ex directors who won't get involved with anything that separates the club from the ground.
If am anywhere near right there are unsung heroes about.
It is in his power to get deal done,but he needs to clear those charges.1 -
Only if they are offered the full amount. otherwise its their choice to say yes or no.Big in Brasov said:
If Duchatelet offers to settle with the ex-directors, do we know if they are bound to accept?Davidsmith said:
I think from previous comments on here it is fair to say there are 3 ,but if Roland pays them off in full there is nothing they can do to stop him. But he has had that option for a long while,and chosen not to.seth plum said:I really don't have a clue any more regarding all this malarkey. I wonder however if hidden in all this milieu are one of two quite heroic ex directors who won't get involved with anything that separates the club from the ground.
If am anywhere near right there are unsung heroes about.
It is in his power to get deal done,but he needs to clear those charges.3 -
Prove its a fact then.nth london addick said:I only deal in facts nothing else
1 -
NLA with the greatest respect your posts are becoming positively schizophrenic.
You continually attack the Australians for not having the money but the message is simplistic at best.
You yourself have also outlined the insanity of the nature of the whole deal in terms of;
- the current perceived value of the club circa £40mn
- the likely funding costs of a 5yr plan circa £1mn per month i.e £60mn
before any capital outlay on infrastructure investment;
- potentially circa £2mn per year on player acquisition over a 5yr plan - £10mn
- on the training ground and academy circa £15mn
Add in 20% contingency and that is a not so cool £150mn+.
I have exaggerated the figures but no sane business will outlay a penny to buy any business unless the full funding requirement for the project is in place before you step through the door.
If you do then you face scrambling around for funding at the last minute. That is precisely what brings most projects to a grinding halt. It is why businesses fail.
This is about putting together the full working capital for the project. The Australian names in the frame are established major corporate businessmen. Your consistent disregard of their financial status in such a manner sounds increasingly paranoid. Who ultimately does such a dialogue serve?
Putting together a total package together with the guarantees re contingency funding is a very different proposition. You have to get this sort of package right from the outset otherwise you end up with precisely the same nonsense we had under Chappell. It means the crossing of a lot of t's and the dotting a lot of i's.
Overall at this point the Australians have absolutely nothing to lose. They can happily take what funds they have and look elsewhere. In terms of the overall concept they wish to pursue and the money spent they will have learned a great deal and ticked a lot of boxes.
You have dragged up the emotional aspect of The Valley and the training ground. As I have explained before they are a huge sunk cost. In the purest of business terms why spend that money on the ground, or on developing the incomplete training ground when you can obtain security of tenure through a long term lease.
It is a lease the current investor is reported as wanting to create. For him it is the Stayen model all over again.
For either party there is very unlikely to be any short term benefit in owning the Valley or the training ground in terms of any property development.
The only person currently losing money is the current investor. Rental income will offset his losses/ present a return on investment.
As it stands he is well able to afford the losses. He can minimise and cut his future operational losses at a stroke. He can largely mothball the entire operation for the benefit of his grandchildren when who knows what London land and property values will be. For all he cares about football, as many will continue to walk away from this mess, we can become Greenwich Borough Mark II.
None of it will be his fault because nobody listened to him.
Ultimately this is a shit storm of one mans making. It is one mans agenda. It is one mans ego.
So I for one will be extremely grateful if you stop attacking the one party who seems to be trying to offer a solution which will enable us to extract ourselves from the current very likely journey to footballing oblivion.
We are a current League 1 club, with a caretaker managerial and coaching staff now continuing by default, with no CEO, no CFO, no Board, a playing staff already diminished by departures with the apparently planned further restructuring involving 3 or 4 more players.
There will be no pre-season tour. There are currently limited friendlies. All against a background of largely fully functioning and fully operational competitors.
It begs the question why anyone of any known quality would want to join the current debacle.
I appreciate with the current investor there is the financial guarantee everyone will get paid.
In terms of the finances required to compete in this industry it is a major ask.
In terms of the finances required to compete in this industry while picking up the legacy of financial failure of the three prior administrations and the footballing performance of the last administration is a huge ask.
I suggest the coming weeks will present a tipping point for many. The current administration represent none of either my personal or professional values. I am desperately hoping the Australians do get to put the right package together to give us a chance to move forward.
People who are willing to even try to step into this space are few and far between. Those that are trying deserve considerably more respect than is being afforded by too many on here and elsewhere.
Are there any guarantees? None but as it stands every other bugger has walked away or is simply standing on the sidelines watching the game unfold or unravel as you deem it.
I wish the Australians well in their endeavours.
69 -
Am I right in thinking it's possible the ex-director loans are paid off to get the deal over the line, it doesn't necessarily mean it'll involve seperating the club from the ground and/or training ground?nth london addick said:If they do would it be viewed as for the best interest of the club and fans it is a pivotal time for this whole charde to come to a conclusion
If it got the deal done and RD 100% out then the majority would see it as a positive and worry about any new loans to RD later.1 -
Fantastic.
Was getting a bit miserable and wondering whether NLA may have this bang on.
Then Grapevine wades in with a, admittedly quite long, drop mic.
I am now happy again.
:-)15
