I thought this was a message board for Charlton Supporters. How self important can you get? PS I won't be messaging you. Flouncing off of two Charlton Forums in two days.
What I’m really failing to comprehend is that if there truly is a second British consortium still in the running. What on Earth is stopping them from getting ahead of the Australian’s who have been falling short for reasons that are largely unclear for weeks and possibly months.
What I’m really failing to comprehend is that if there truly is a second British consortium still in the running. What on Earth is stopping them from getting ahead of the Australian’s who have been falling short for reasons that are largely unclear for weeks and possibly months.
because there isn't one.......or at least not one that is credible. RM doesn't want to lose his seat at the top table so is trying to cobble together some friends with money to help him out.
Good friends because it’s going to take upwards of £75 million to get up and running.
We've been wondering why Muir would be having any trouble putting the money together for this. What if HE is the one the EFL disallowed and the rest of the consortium are trying to put the money together to salvage the takeover?
When we hit 1000 pages can we have a 24 hr truce and a game of football before going back in our trenches and lobbing truths, half-truths, lies, and brickbats again ?
Something else to add to this, I was in a boozer in petts wood last night and spoke to Paul Elliott for a short while who was in there, he said he’s doing a lot of work down at Charlton and “watch next week” was his words.
Well I trust your not pulling our plonker J Block because when my son tried to get information out of Elliott at the Olympic stadium last month he laughed and said my lips are sealed.
Genuinely, I’m as sick of all this as everyone else, can tell you straight up I’m not lying.
Just a few more questions if you don't mine ,
What was Paul Elliott drinking ? Did he wink when he said 'watch next week ? Are you 100% sure it wasn't a dead ringer ? Did anyone else hear PE say these words ? Do you crave to be ITK ? Were you sober at the time ? Is your hearing 100 % ? Do you know Doucher ?
Thanks for you time J block, Answers in your own time or by midday today, Cheers mate.
If anyone wants to know anything can they put it in a message to me please.
To the trolls like Dick and Stu, this was because someone asked if Muir was still in Britain twice and I didn't see it, and then two people asked how I knew my contact, and again, I didn't see it. So I'd prefer it if people could message me, if that's ok with you. You can pop back to Nick on the other forum and tell him you had a pop at me though. I'm sure he'll be proud of you. Pathetic.
If anyone wants to know anything can they put it in a message to me please.
To the trolls like Dick and Stu, this was because someone asked if Muir was still in Britain twice and I didn't see it, and then two people asked how I knew my contact, and again, I didn't see it. So I'd prefer it if people could message me, if that's ok with you. You can pop back to Nick on the other forum and tell him you had a pop at me though. I'm sure he'll be proud of you. Pathetic.
Get over yourself ffs. Seriously, just because other people see things differently or disagree with you does not make them a troll.
You've been a Charlton fan 5 minutes and you're on here telling long term Charlton fans and posters every 5 minutes how to behave and think about our club.
If anyone wants to know anything can they put it in a message to me please.
To the trolls like Dick and Stu, this was because someone asked if Muir was still in Britain twice and I didn't see it, and then two people asked how I knew my contact, and again, I didn't see it. So I'd prefer it if people could message me, if that's ok with you. You can pop back to Nick on the other forum and tell him you had a pop at me though. I'm sure he'll be proud of you. Pathetic.
We've been wondering why Muir would be having any trouble putting the money together for this. What if HE is the one the EFL disallowed and the rest of the consortium are trying to put the money together to salvage the takeover?
Muir and others have plenty of money, they're not struggling to fund the takeover themselves - they don't want to. The investors have pooled their funds to spread the risk. Buying a 3rd division football club and taking it to the Premiership is a high risk strategy that has a good chance of failing. By getting a consortium in place the potential losses and gains are diluted - reducing the risk. I think Swansea did something similar very successfully and only declined when the consortium sold (though I might be wrong on that bit). They were certainly considered a very well run club for a number of years.
If what we are hearing about two investors being declined by the EFL is true, then I expect a number of conversations in the background are happening re whether the other investors will stump up more cash (and therefore increase their risk exposure), whether they can find new investors to replace the funding, or whether RD will lower the price and therefore reduce the risk to the same levels previously accepted. To do this RD may decide to invest further in Charlton and clear the first charge debts on the assets (£7mil) in order to lease the valley and training ground as a long term revenue stream to compensate for a lower sale price than he finds acceptable. This seems a logical step for both parties if they can't find the right funding and risk exposure, even if it is a truly unpalatable thought for us fans.
We've been wondering why Muir would be having any trouble putting the money together for this. What if HE is the one the EFL disallowed and the rest of the consortium are trying to put the money together to salvage the takeover?
Muir and others have plenty of money, they're not struggling to fund the takeover themselves - they don't want to. The investors have pooled their funds to spread the risk. Buying a 3rd division football club and taking it to the Premiership is a high risk strategy that has a good chance of failing. By getting a consortium in place the potential losses and gains are diluted - reducing the risk. I think Swansea did something similar very successfully and only declined when the consortium sold (though I might be wrong on that bit). They were certainly considered a very well run club for a number of years.
If what we are hearing about two investors being declined by the EFL is true, then I expect a number of conversations in the background are happening re whether the other investors will stump up more cash (and therefore increase their risk exposure), whether they can find new investors to replace the funding, or whether RD will lower the price and therefore reduce the risk to the same levels previously accepted. To do this RD may decide to invest further in Charlton and clear the first charge debts on the assets (£7mil) in order to lease the valley and training ground as a long term revenue stream to compensate for a lower sale price than he finds acceptable. This seems a logical step for both parties if they can't find the right funding and risk exposure, even if it is a truly unpalatable thought for us fans.
By Jove you have hit the nail right on the Swede
You have posted it in a much better way than I have tried to
We've been wondering why Muir would be having any trouble putting the money together for this. What if HE is the one the EFL disallowed and the rest of the consortium are trying to put the money together to salvage the takeover?
Muir and others have plenty of money, they're not struggling to fund the takeover themselves - they don't want to. The investors have pooled their funds to spread the risk. Buying a 3rd division football club and taking it to the Premiership is a high risk strategy that has a good chance of failing. By getting a consortium in place the potential losses and gains are diluted - reducing the risk. I think Swansea did something similar very successfully and only declined when the consortium sold (though I might be wrong on that bit). They were certainly considered a very well run club for a number of years.
If what we are hearing about two investors being declined by the EFL is true, then I expect a number of conversations in the background are happening re whether the other investors will stump up more cash (and therefore increase their risk exposure), whether they can find new investors to replace the funding, or whether RD will lower the price and therefore reduce the risk to the same levels previously accepted. To do this RD may decide to invest further in Charlton and clear the first charge debts on the assets (£7mil) in order to lease the valley and training ground as a long term revenue stream to compensate for a lower sale price than he finds acceptable. This seems a logical step for both parties if they can't find the right funding and risk exposure, even if it is a truly unpalatable thought for us fans.
By Jove you have hit the nail right on the Swede
You have posted it in a much better way than I have tried to
Doff my cap to you
Don't be so tight on the 'likes' then D, give him one
We've been wondering why Muir would be having any trouble putting the money together for this. What if HE is the one the EFL disallowed and the rest of the consortium are trying to put the money together to salvage the takeover?
Muir and others have plenty of money, they're not struggling to fund the takeover themselves - they don't want to. The investors have pooled their funds to spread the risk. Buying a 3rd division football club and taking it to the Premiership is a high risk strategy that has a good chance of failing. By getting a consortium in place the potential losses and gains are diluted - reducing the risk. I think Swansea did something similar very successfully and only declined when the consortium sold (though I might be wrong on that bit). They were certainly considered a very well run club for a number of years.
If what we are hearing about two investors being declined by the EFL is true, then I expect a number of conversations in the background are happening re whether the other investors will stump up more cash (and therefore increase their risk exposure), whether they can find new investors to replace the funding, or whether RD will lower the price and therefore reduce the risk to the same levels previously accepted. To do this RD may decide to invest further in Charlton and clear the first charge debts on the assets (£7mil) in order to lease the valley and training ground as a long term revenue stream to compensate for a lower sale price than he finds acceptable. This seems a logical step for both parties if they can't find the right funding and risk exposure, even if it is a truly unpalatable thought for us fans.
By Jove you have hit the nail right on the Swede
You have posted it in a much better way than I have tried to
Doff my cap to you
Don't be so tight on the 'likes' then D, give him one
Done I was hoping big rob from France would give it a promote
Except on Sundays Dinner was earlier then you had a sunday tea with tinned salmon sandwiches, cockles, prawns, winkles and whelks and a homemade sponge cake.
We've been wondering why Muir would be having any trouble putting the money together for this. What if HE is the one the EFL disallowed and the rest of the consortium are trying to put the money together to salvage the takeover?
Muir and others have plenty of money, they're not struggling to fund the takeover themselves - they don't want to. The investors have pooled their funds to spread the risk. Buying a 3rd division football club and taking it to the Premiership is a high risk strategy that has a good chance of failing. By getting a consortium in place the potential losses and gains are diluted - reducing the risk. I think Swansea did something similar very successfully and only declined when the consortium sold (though I might be wrong on that bit). They were certainly considered a very well run club for a number of years.
If what we are hearing about two investors being declined by the EFL is true, then I expect a number of conversations in the background are happening re whether the other investors will stump up more cash (and therefore increase their risk exposure), whether they can find new investors to replace the funding, or whether RD will lower the price and therefore reduce the risk to the same levels previously accepted. To do this RD may decide to invest further in Charlton and clear the first charge debts on the assets (£7mil) in order to lease the valley and training ground as a long term revenue stream to compensate for a lower sale price than he finds acceptable. This seems a logical step for both parties if they can't find the right funding and risk exposure, even if it is a truly unpalatable thought for us fans.
By Jove you have hit the nail right on the Swede
You have posted it in a much better way than I have tried to
Doff my cap to you
Don't be so tight on the 'likes' then D, give him one
Done I was hoping big rob from France would give it a promote
No time for that at the moment, he's on tenterhooks mate with all the other Mods waiting for this thread to hit 1000 and the subsequent meltdown of the site
We've been wondering why Muir would be having any trouble putting the money together for this. What if HE is the one the EFL disallowed and the rest of the consortium are trying to put the money together to salvage the takeover?
Muir and others have plenty of money, they're not struggling to fund the takeover themselves - they don't want to. The investors have pooled their funds to spread the risk. Buying a 3rd division football club and taking it to the Premiership is a high risk strategy that has a good chance of failing. By getting a consortium in place the potential losses and gains are diluted - reducing the risk. I think Swansea did something similar very successfully and only declined when the consortium sold (though I might be wrong on that bit). They were certainly considered a very well run club for a number of years.
If what we are hearing about two investors being declined by the EFL is true, then I expect a number of conversations in the background are happening re whether the other investors will stump up more cash (and therefore increase their risk exposure), whether they can find new investors to replace the funding, or whether RD will lower the price and therefore reduce the risk to the same levels previously accepted. To do this RD may decide to invest further in Charlton and clear the first charge debts on the assets (£7mil) in order to lease the valley and training ground as a long term revenue stream to compensate for a lower sale price than he finds acceptable. This seems a logical step for both parties if they can't find the right funding and risk exposure, even if it is a truly unpalatable thought for us fans.
By Jove you have hit the nail right on the Swede
You have posted it in a much better way than I have tried to
Doff my cap to you
Don't be so tight on the 'likes' then D, give him one
Done I was hoping big rob from France would give it a promote
No time for that at the moment, he's on tenterhooks mate with all the other Mods waiting for this thread to hit 1000 and the subsequent meltdown of the site
I hope the takerover happens or collapses on pg 999
We've been wondering why Muir would be having any trouble putting the money together for this. What if HE is the one the EFL disallowed and the rest of the consortium are trying to put the money together to salvage the takeover?
Muir and others have plenty of money, they're not struggling to fund the takeover themselves - they don't want to. The investors have pooled their funds to spread the risk. Buying a 3rd division football club and taking it to the Premiership is a high risk strategy that has a good chance of failing. By getting a consortium in place the potential losses and gains are diluted - reducing the risk. I think Swansea did something similar very successfully and only declined when the consortium sold (though I might be wrong on that bit). They were certainly considered a very well run club for a number of years.
If what we are hearing about two investors being declined by the EFL is true, then I expect a number of conversations in the background are happening re whether the other investors will stump up more cash (and therefore increase their risk exposure), whether they can find new investors to replace the funding, or whether RD will lower the price and therefore reduce the risk to the same levels previously accepted. To do this RD may decide to invest further in Charlton and clear the first charge debts on the assets (£7mil) in order to lease the valley and training ground as a long term revenue stream to compensate for a lower sale price than he finds acceptable. This seems a logical step for both parties if they can't find the right funding and risk exposure, even if it is a truly unpalatable thought for us fans.
By Jove you have hit the nail right on the Swede
You have posted it in a much better way than I have tried to
Doff my cap to you
Don't be so tight on the 'likes' then D, give him one
Done I was hoping big rob from France would give it a promote
And if its any consolation, I looked up the definition of "Binary" A collection of Wheelie Bins is commonly known as a "Binary" We are on this earth to learn!!
We've been wondering why Muir would be having any trouble putting the money together for this. What if HE is the one the EFL disallowed and the rest of the consortium are trying to put the money together to salvage the takeover?
Muir and others have plenty of money, they're not struggling to fund the takeover themselves - they don't want to. The investors have pooled their funds to spread the risk. Buying a 3rd division football club and taking it to the Premiership is a high risk strategy that has a good chance of failing. By getting a consortium in place the potential losses and gains are diluted - reducing the risk. I think Swansea did something similar very successfully and only declined when the consortium sold (though I might be wrong on that bit). They were certainly considered a very well run club for a number of years.
If what we are hearing about two investors being declined by the EFL is true, then I expect a number of conversations in the background are happening re whether the other investors will stump up more cash (and therefore increase their risk exposure), whether they can find new investors to replace the funding, or whether RD will lower the price and therefore reduce the risk to the same levels previously accepted. To do this RD may decide to invest further in Charlton and clear the first charge debts on the assets (£7mil) in order to lease the valley and training ground as a long term revenue stream to compensate for a lower sale price than he finds acceptable. This seems a logical step for both parties if they can't find the right funding and risk exposure, even if it is a truly unpalatable thought for us fans.
By Jove you have hit the nail right on the Swede
You have posted it in a much better way than I have tried to
Doff my cap to you
Don't be so tight on the 'likes' then D, give him one
Done I was hoping big rob from France would give it a promote
And if its any consolation, I looked up the definition of "Binary" A collection of Wheelie Bins is commonly known as a "Binary" We are on this earth to learn!!
Nah, not having that I'm calling your bluff: A Binary is a bin with lots of aeration holes in it to release its pungent smells.
If anyone wants to know anything can they put it in a message to me please.
To the trolls like Dick and Stu, this was because someone asked if Muir was still in Britain twice and I didn't see it, and then two people asked how I knew my contact, and again, I didn't see it. So I'd prefer it if people could message me, if that's ok with you. You can pop back to Nick on the other forum and tell him you had a pop at me though. I'm sure he'll be proud of you. Pathetic.
Get over yourself ffs. Seriously, just because other people see things differently or disagree with you does not make them a troll.
You've been a Charlton fan 5 minutes and you're on here telling long term Charlton fans and posters every 5 minutes how to behave and think about our club.
Seriously wind your ego in.
Yes and you’re just another troll. It’s always the same people. I don’t give a flying f what you think of me. It’s always the same shit propogsted by your leader Nick Gray. Just F off back to your sad little forum. And your middle name isn’t Charlton, unlike mine.
Comments
You've been a Charlton fan 5 minutes and you're on here telling long term Charlton fans and posters every 5 minutes how to behave and think about our club.
Seriously wind your ego in.
Some random tweet sparks a load of teeth nashing and stropping.
Sort yourselves out
If what we are hearing about two investors being declined by the EFL is true, then I expect a number of conversations in the background are happening re whether the other investors will stump up more cash (and therefore increase their risk exposure), whether they can find new investors to replace the funding, or whether RD will lower the price and therefore reduce the risk to the same levels previously accepted. To do this RD may decide to invest further in Charlton and clear the first charge debts on the assets (£7mil) in order to lease the valley and training ground as a long term revenue stream to compensate for a lower sale price than he finds acceptable. This seems a logical step for both parties if they can't find the right funding and risk exposure, even if it is a truly unpalatable thought for us fans.
You have posted it in a much better way than I have tried to
Doff my cap to you
Dinner was earlier then you had a sunday tea with tinned salmon sandwiches, cockles, prawns, winkles and whelks and a homemade sponge cake.
A collection of Wheelie Bins is commonly known as a "Binary"
We are on this earth to learn!!
It’s always the same shit propogsted by your leader Nick Gray. Just F off back to your sad little forum. And your middle name isn’t Charlton, unlike mine.