I think we should start protesting again, throwing crap on the pitch get games delayed etc, get the club in the media again. This season looks a write off before it has even started so lets put pressure on the old twat now before everyone has given up and no one can be asked anymore.
You can discount it if you like, but it doesn’t make RM an imaginary person, nor what he said a view confined to a forum, as you told Covered End.
As to whether a deal was actually agreed in February, that was the view of the club’s own lawyers and it was certainly coming from other sources than CAFC.
It’s entirely possible that the price was agreed in Feb, but the question is, why were the Aussies only happy to submit everything to the EFL just before 18th May? Were they still dealing with issues from the pre Roland era up til then? Were the directors’ loans known about in February? We’re they known about by May 18th? There were certainly no issues with the funding or the make up of the consortium as of May 18th.
And if as has been rumoured RM was trying to set up a rival bid throughout the process, (and may still be doing so), why has he been allowed anywhere near the sale process, when there’s a clear conflict of interest?
On 18th May I was one of a small group who spoke with Duchâtelet face-to-face.
We discussed with him many things, including the takeover. He told us the Australians were having funding difficulties at that time. He also said he'd tried to arrange things so he could keep the real estate and have a lease deal with the Aussies. He said that 3 ex-directors (including RM), had agreed to this but 4 ex-directors did not agree.
Duchâtelet and his associates all have a history of telling lies whenever it serves them to do so. So perhaps we should take what he says with a big pinch of salt. However, if Duchâtelet was being honest on this occassion, it tells us there were issues of funding and the Aussies must have known about the ex-director loans at that time.
On that very date (18th May) GM told me unequivocally that they were buying the club, and the ground and Sparrow's Lane. He also said that everything was done, papers were with the EFL and they were expecting the sale to be completed by the end of the next week, so no issues with funding (at that time at least).
No wisecracks required about how the club wasn't sold etc, we all know that, but given the choice of believing Roland and believing GM, well it isn't even a choice. So I don't think Duchâtelet was being honest on that occasion.
To be fair both were wrong so we shouldn’t have believed either!
Were they wrong about the fact they want to buy club and grounds? No.
Were they wrong about completing in May? Yes. Were they lying? No.
From my point of view the anti Roland campaign has worked. Like all "anti campaigns" that are successful we now need to work on the pro Charlton campaign.
Sell the soul of the club to potential buys, the aussies and others, make a real point of difference. I am sure card, and others, could run a possitive campaign just as effectively as the negative one.
Although history says its easier to get people to protest about something than it is to support something.
So why Prague in your opinion has it not happened mate?
That's why I firmly believe that ROT makes eminent sense. He thinks he can take his time until he gets the wedge he thinks he deserves. He might think again if a left field local election campaign casts an unwelcome spotlight on his activities in Sint Truiden and as a result get plastered across Belgium.
Exactly.
And that's why ROT needs help. So far our campaign has niggled Roland enough to get the chief of staff of police involved.
But ROT has a serious message about Roland and his very 'questionable' activities in St Truiden during his time with the Council. Spreading the word of this in St Truiden will put the pressure on in a big way.
I can't say it enough- ROT needs people to commit to coming out to Belgium to help with the campaign to make this work. It's an opportunity that shouldn't be missed.
Am a paid up member of ROT and have had no communication for a while. Not trying to dig anyone out.
You can discount it if you like, but it doesn’t make RM an imaginary person, nor what he said a view confined to a forum, as you told Covered End.
As to whether a deal was actually agreed in February, that was the view of the club’s own lawyers and it was certainly coming from other sources than CAFC.
It’s entirely possible that the price was agreed in Feb, but the question is, why were the Aussies only happy to submit everything to the EFL just before 18th May? Were they still dealing with issues from the pre Roland era up til then? Were the directors’ loans known about in February? We’re they known about by May 18th? There were certainly no issues with the funding or the make up of the consortium as of May 18th.
And if as has been rumoured RM was trying to set up a rival bid throughout the process, (and may still be doing so), why has he been allowed anywhere near the sale process, when there’s a clear conflict of interest?
On 18th May I was one of a small group who spoke with Duchâtelet face-to-face.
We discussed with him many things, including the takeover. He told us the Australians were having funding difficulties at that time. He also said he'd tried to arrange things so he could keep the real estate and have a lease deal with the Aussies. He said that 3 ex-directors (including RM), had agreed to this but 4 ex-directors did not agree.
Duchâtelet and his associates all have a history of telling lies whenever it serves them to do so. So perhaps we should take what he says with a big pinch of salt. However, if Duchâtelet was being honest on this occassion, it tells us there were issues of funding and the Aussies must have known about the ex-director loans at that time.
On that very date (18th May) GM told me unequivocally that they were buying the club, and the ground and Sparrow's Lane. He also said that everything was done, papers were with the EFL and they were expecting the sale to be completed by the end of the next week, so no issues with funding (at that time at least).
No wisecracks required about how the club wasn't sold etc, we all know that, but given the choice of believing Roland and believing GM, well it isn't even a choice. So I don't think Duchâtelet was being honest on that occasion.
To be fair both were wrong so we shouldn’t have believed either!
Were they wrong about the fact they want to buy club and grounds? No.
Were they wrong about completing in May? Yes. Were they lying? No.
Ok, we think we know Duchatelet wants to sell because a) he has said so to ROT members, b ) he has clearly been going through a sale process with multiple bidders c) he has also come out in public to say he is done with football.
We think he is asking for a lot of money, we know he doesn’t like to lose financially. Remember ‘Roland doesn’t do failure’?
The reason there aren’t many bidders up for the price and the sale hasn’t gone through is entirely because ‘Roland doesn’t do failure’.
So for those people who think that continued protests in Belgium, in particular keeping the ROT campaign going, is a waste of time, I disagree.
Unfortunately, and agreeing with the OP, everyone thinks that the club will be sold soon, maybe next week or the week after. Main problem with this is that we have thought that since February, count them, five months of rumour and conjecture and increasing apathy towards protests.
Really short endow to keep the pressure on Duchatelet through ROT.
Ask yourself this, if the sale falls through and We have another season of this, could you have done anything more to help stop that?
You can discount it if you like, but it doesn’t make RM an imaginary person, nor what he said a view confined to a forum, as you told Covered End.
As to whether a deal was actually agreed in February, that was the view of the club’s own lawyers and it was certainly coming from other sources than CAFC.
It’s entirely possible that the price was agreed in Feb, but the question is, why were the Aussies only happy to submit everything to the EFL just before 18th May? Were they still dealing with issues from the pre Roland era up til then? Were the directors’ loans known about in February? We’re they known about by May 18th? There were certainly no issues with the funding or the make up of the consortium as of May 18th.
And if as has been rumoured RM was trying to set up a rival bid throughout the process, (and may still be doing so), why has he been allowed anywhere near the sale process, when there’s a clear conflict of interest?
On 18th May I was one of a small group who spoke with Duchâtelet face-to-face.
We discussed with him many things, including the takeover. He told us the Australians were having funding difficulties at that time. He also said he'd tried to arrange things so he could keep the real estate and have a lease deal with the Aussies. He said that 3 ex-directors (including RM), had agreed to this but 4 ex-directors did not agree.
Duchâtelet and his associates all have a history of telling lies whenever it serves them to do so. So perhaps we should take what he says with a big pinch of salt. However, if Duchâtelet was being honest on this occassion, it tells us there were issues of funding and the Aussies must have known about the ex-director loans at that time.
On that very date (18th May) GM told me unequivocally that they were buying the club, and the ground and Sparrow's Lane. He also said that everything was done, papers were with the EFL and they were expecting the sale to be completed by the end of the next week, so no issues with funding (at that time at least).
No wisecracks required about how the club wasn't sold etc, we all know that, but given the choice of believing Roland and believing GM, well it isn't even a choice. So I don't think Duchâtelet was being honest on that occasion.
To be fair both were wrong so we shouldn’t have believed either!
Were they wrong about the fact they want to buy club and grounds? No.
Were they wrong about completing in May? Yes. Were they lying? No.
I rest my case.
Calm down for goodness sake.
This is the problem with the internet demonstrated in one post. I was chuckling away merrily writing that!
Comments
Were they wrong about completing in May? Yes. Were they lying? No.
I rest my case.
Sell the soul of the club to potential buys, the aussies and others, make a real point of difference. I am sure card, and others, could run a possitive campaign just as effectively as the negative one.
Although history says its easier to get people to protest about something than it is to support something.
We think he is asking for a lot of money, we know he doesn’t like to lose financially. Remember ‘Roland doesn’t do failure’?
The reason there aren’t many bidders up for the price and the sale hasn’t gone through is entirely because ‘Roland doesn’t do failure’.
So for those people who think that continued protests in Belgium, in particular keeping the ROT campaign going, is a waste of time, I disagree.
Unfortunately, and agreeing with the OP, everyone thinks that the club will be sold soon, maybe next week or the week after. Main problem with this is that we have thought that since February, count them, five months of rumour and conjecture and increasing apathy towards protests.
Really short endow to keep the pressure on Duchatelet through ROT.
Ask yourself this, if the sale falls through and We have another season of this, could you have done anything more to help stop that?
I know I am giving all I can. What about you?