Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Not enough spelling mistakes to be ColinWestCountryAddick said:
It's Colin under a different name. What do you expect?Rothko said:So WiWLB big reveal is a load of stuff on the thread/social media?
2 -
I think if there’s anyone you can trust on here it’s Henry. After Taylor signing today and that comment I can feel a hint of positivity coming back.2
-
3 down.......2 to go.
tick tock, tick tock.0 -
The sun might be shining tomorrow...hurrah.1
-
7 -
Will #TeamWIOTOS be rewarded soon?Henry Irving said:
Just getting positive vibes from people on the inside, things looking up on last few days.Curb_It said:
Why? Whats happened now? I cant keep up with this roller coaster.Henry Irving said:I'm feeling positive
WIOTOS
We'll find out WIOTOS1 -
Interesting. Because facts are facts. Not "wait and see if they're facts". That's conjecture.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Let’s wait and see.Chizz said:
This was quite a short comment, but posted in a manner that it's supposed to be taken as fact. So I am going to dissect it into small enough pieces that we can differentiate the facts fro the conjecture and assumption.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Those that were backing the consortium had to pull out due to the fact that they had interests at other clubs, this then meant once these two left the funds were no longer there.LargeAddick said:
so, if the Aussies failed the fit and proper person test how did it get there if they didn't have the funds? They had the funds then but because of it don't have the funds now.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:It appears that Red Henry and NLA are the main men to be in the know. Red Henry highlighted that Aussies failed the fit and proper test, NLA called it with the lack of funds, factor in Red Henry with the Arabs I know what posts are more reliable.
(I'm quite aware that this is adding very little to the sum of knowledge on the thread, but it's quietly satisfying to dispell some of the nonsense).
No. No-one has had to "pull out". The consortium can be reconfigured in a number of ways that allows all members of the consortium to continue to play a part. No individual has been banned from taking part.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:Those that were backing the consortium had to pull out
Conjecture. Might be true in one case or in more than one case. But not confirmed. And, incidentally, if it were confirmed, wouldn't we expect to hear announcements (confirmatins? denials?) from the clubs concerned?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:The fact that they had interests at other clubs.
Conjecture. There is no official indication that any member of the consortium is no longer included, retained or still in consulation.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:Once these two left...
Conjecture. In fact, worse than conjecture, since it appears to have been denied - perhaps @JamesSeed knows whether this has been publicly or or privately denied, ie that sufficient funding is (still) in place.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:The funds were no longer there.
In short, we don't know as fact any of these issues, presented as "fact". Interesting comment though.
So, thanks for confirming, in four words, that my post is right. Appreciate it.3 -
Ok well they share many of the same views, I apologise and stand correctedblackpool72 said:
WIWLB. Is a good mate of mine and he is Charlton through and through.WestCountryAddick said:
It's Colin under a different name. What do you expect?Rothko said:So WiWLB big reveal is a load of stuff on the thread/social media?
Colin he ain't.
1 -
The smell of positivity is back it seems. Certainly Henry is smelling it. I wonder if Friday is going to be significant ?1
-
And on what grounds are you basing my posts on speculation?Chizz said:
Interesting. Because facts are facts. Not "wait and see if they're facts". That's conjecture.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Let’s wait and see.Chizz said:
This was quite a short comment, but posted in a manner that it's supposed to be taken as fact. So I am going to dissect it into small enough pieces that we can differentiate the facts fro the conjecture and assumption.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Those that were backing the consortium had to pull out due to the fact that they had interests at other clubs, this then meant once these two left the funds were no longer there.LargeAddick said:
so, if the Aussies failed the fit and proper person test how did it get there if they didn't have the funds? They had the funds then but because of it don't have the funds now.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:It appears that Red Henry and NLA are the main men to be in the know. Red Henry highlighted that Aussies failed the fit and proper test, NLA called it with the lack of funds, factor in Red Henry with the Arabs I know what posts are more reliable.
(I'm quite aware that this is adding very little to the sum of knowledge on the thread, but it's quietly satisfying to dispell some of the nonsense).
No. No-one has had to "pull out". The consortium can be reconfigured in a number of ways that allows all members of the consortium to continue to play a part. No individual has been banned from taking part.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:Those that were backing the consortium had to pull out
Conjecture. Might be true in one case or in more than one case. But not confirmed. And, incidentally, if it were confirmed, wouldn't we expect to hear announcements (confirmatins? denials?) from the clubs concerned?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:The fact that they had interests at other clubs.
Conjecture. There is no official indication that any member of the consortium is no longer included, retained or still in consulation.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:Once these two left...
Conjecture. In fact, worse than conjecture, since it appears to have been denied - perhaps @JamesSeed knows whether this has been publicly or or privately denied, ie that sufficient funding is (still) in place.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:The funds were no longer there.
In short, we don't know as fact any of these issues, presented as "fact". Interesting comment though.
So, thanks for confirming, in four words, that my post is right. Appreciate it.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
On what grounds? On the grounds that none of it is demonstrable fact.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
And on what grounds are you basing my posts on speculation?Chizz said:
Interesting. Because facts are facts. Not "wait and see if they're facts". That's conjecture.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Let’s wait and see.Chizz said:
This was quite a short comment, but posted in a manner that it's supposed to be taken as fact. So I am going to dissect it into small enough pieces that we can differentiate the facts fro the conjecture and assumption.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Those that were backing the consortium had to pull out due to the fact that they had interests at other clubs, this then meant once these two left the funds were no longer there.LargeAddick said:
so, if the Aussies failed the fit and proper person test how did it get there if they didn't have the funds? They had the funds then but because of it don't have the funds now.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:It appears that Red Henry and NLA are the main men to be in the know. Red Henry highlighted that Aussies failed the fit and proper test, NLA called it with the lack of funds, factor in Red Henry with the Arabs I know what posts are more reliable.
(I'm quite aware that this is adding very little to the sum of knowledge on the thread, but it's quietly satisfying to dispell some of the nonsense).
No. No-one has had to "pull out". The consortium can be reconfigured in a number of ways that allows all members of the consortium to continue to play a part. No individual has been banned from taking part.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:Those that were backing the consortium had to pull out
Conjecture. Might be true in one case or in more than one case. But not confirmed. And, incidentally, if it were confirmed, wouldn't we expect to hear announcements (confirmatins? denials?) from the clubs concerned?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:The fact that they had interests at other clubs.
Conjecture. There is no official indication that any member of the consortium is no longer included, retained or still in consulation.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:Once these two left...
Conjecture. In fact, worse than conjecture, since it appears to have been denied - perhaps @JamesSeed knows whether this has been publicly or or privately denied, ie that sufficient funding is (still) in place.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:The funds were no longer there.
In short, we don't know as fact any of these issues, presented as "fact". Interesting comment though.
So, thanks for confirming, in four words, that my post is right. Appreciate it.
Let me be clear: there's nothing intrinsically wrong with speculation, per se. But it is distinct from fact.2 -
How do you know that they are not facts? Are you able to provide another version of events ?Chizz said:
On what grounds? On the grounds that none of it is demonstrable fact.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
And on what grounds are you basing my posts on speculation?Chizz said:
Interesting. Because facts are facts. Not "wait and see if they're facts". That's conjecture.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Let’s wait and see.Chizz said:
This was quite a short comment, but posted in a manner that it's supposed to be taken as fact. So I am going to dissect it into small enough pieces that we can differentiate the facts fro the conjecture and assumption.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Those that were backing the consortium had to pull out due to the fact that they had interests at other clubs, this then meant once these two left the funds were no longer there.LargeAddick said:
so, if the Aussies failed the fit and proper person test how did it get there if they didn't have the funds? They had the funds then but because of it don't have the funds now.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:It appears that Red Henry and NLA are the main men to be in the know. Red Henry highlighted that Aussies failed the fit and proper test, NLA called it with the lack of funds, factor in Red Henry with the Arabs I know what posts are more reliable.
(I'm quite aware that this is adding very little to the sum of knowledge on the thread, but it's quietly satisfying to dispell some of the nonsense).
No. No-one has had to "pull out". The consortium can be reconfigured in a number of ways that allows all members of the consortium to continue to play a part. No individual has been banned from taking part.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:Those that were backing the consortium had to pull out
Conjecture. Might be true in one case or in more than one case. But not confirmed. And, incidentally, if it were confirmed, wouldn't we expect to hear announcements (confirmatins? denials?) from the clubs concerned?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:The fact that they had interests at other clubs.
Conjecture. There is no official indication that any member of the consortium is no longer included, retained or still in consulation.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:Once these two left...
Conjecture. In fact, worse than conjecture, since it appears to have been denied - perhaps @JamesSeed knows whether this has been publicly or or privately denied, ie that sufficient funding is (still) in place.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:The funds were no longer there.
In short, we don't know as fact any of these issues, presented as "fact". Interesting comment though.
So, thanks for confirming, in four words, that my post is right. Appreciate it.
Let me be clear: there's nothing intrinsically wrong with speculation, per se. But it is distinct from fact.2 -
Is it significant that Saturday is the end of the Clubs financial year?1
-
Why do I, or anyone else for that matter bother.Arsenetatters said:
AdulthoodJamesSeed said:
If I didn't make silly replies where would I be.Arsenetatters said:
@JamesSeed with all due respect, if you don't want people to try and wind you up then don't make silly replies.JamesSeed said:
We can tell.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
I haven't posted on here for weeks. Calm down dear.JamesSeed said:
Well you keep replying to me or using @jamesseed with hostile comments about the Aussies. It's just a bit obvious.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
What are you on about targeting you ??JamesSeed said:
Did they really?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
They decided to up an offer to outbid the Arabs when they didn’t have finances in place? Secondly going to a match wearing scarfs and sitting in the directors box, Michael Knighton only topped that.JamesSeed said:
Is this the 5 minute argument, or the full half hour?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:All well and good blaming RD. The facts are the Aussies got into a bidding war and didn't have the funds. Laughable
I don't think anyone here is going to fall for that ;-)
You're trying to get a response on here. It's not worth it. We're over the argument phase.
Why are you targetting me for the wind up btw?0 -
He doesn't need to provide another version. That's not how facts work.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
How do you know that they are not facts? Are you able to provide another version of events ?Chizz said:
On what grounds? On the grounds that none of it is demonstrable fact.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
And on what grounds are you basing my posts on speculation?Chizz said:
Interesting. Because facts are facts. Not "wait and see if they're facts". That's conjecture.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Let’s wait and see.Chizz said:
This was quite a short comment, but posted in a manner that it's supposed to be taken as fact. So I am going to dissect it into small enough pieces that we can differentiate the facts fro the conjecture and assumption.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Those that were backing the consortium had to pull out due to the fact that they had interests at other clubs, this then meant once these two left the funds were no longer there.LargeAddick said:
so, if the Aussies failed the fit and proper person test how did it get there if they didn't have the funds? They had the funds then but because of it don't have the funds now.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:It appears that Red Henry and NLA are the main men to be in the know. Red Henry highlighted that Aussies failed the fit and proper test, NLA called it with the lack of funds, factor in Red Henry with the Arabs I know what posts are more reliable.
(I'm quite aware that this is adding very little to the sum of knowledge on the thread, but it's quietly satisfying to dispell some of the nonsense).
No. No-one has had to "pull out". The consortium can be reconfigured in a number of ways that allows all members of the consortium to continue to play a part. No individual has been banned from taking part.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:Those that were backing the consortium had to pull out
Conjecture. Might be true in one case or in more than one case. But not confirmed. And, incidentally, if it were confirmed, wouldn't we expect to hear announcements (confirmatins? denials?) from the clubs concerned?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:The fact that they had interests at other clubs.
Conjecture. There is no official indication that any member of the consortium is no longer included, retained or still in consulation.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:Once these two left...
Conjecture. In fact, worse than conjecture, since it appears to have been denied - perhaps @JamesSeed knows whether this has been publicly or or privately denied, ie that sufficient funding is (still) in place.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:The funds were no longer there.
In short, we don't know as fact any of these issues, presented as "fact". Interesting comment though.
So, thanks for confirming, in four words, that my post is right. Appreciate it.
Let me be clear: there's nothing intrinsically wrong with speculation, per se. But it is distinct from fact.3 -
OK this was the full half hour, after all. Now you have to pay.3
-
You do wonder. Perhaps why there's a deadline been mentioned. It's not a full deadline, it's a convenience deadline.LargeAddick said:Is it significant that Saturday is the end of the Clubs financial year?
Like Henners I've heard a tiny piece of positivity from inside the club. Perhaps they had a better day, after an awful day. Nothing more than that probably.
2 -
Maybe they have asked for another extension.JamesSeed said:
You do wonder. Perhaps why there's a deadline been mentioned. It's not a full deadline, it's a convenience deadline.LargeAddick said:Is it significant that Saturday is the end of the Clubs financial year?
Like Henners I've heard a tiny piece of positivity from inside the club. Perhaps they had a better day, after an awful day. Nothing more than that probably.0 -
January 2019?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Maybe they have asked for another extension.JamesSeed said:
You do wonder. Perhaps why there's a deadline been mentioned. It's not a full deadline, it's a convenience deadline.LargeAddick said:Is it significant that Saturday is the end of the Clubs financial year?
Like Henners I've heard a tiny piece of positivity from inside the club. Perhaps they had a better day, after an awful day. Nothing more than that probably.
3 -
They would never get planning permission.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Maybe they have asked for another extension.JamesSeed said:
You do wonder. Perhaps why there's a deadline been mentioned. It's not a full deadline, it's a convenience deadline.LargeAddick said:Is it significant that Saturday is the end of the Clubs financial year?
Like Henners I've heard a tiny piece of positivity from inside the club. Perhaps they had a better day, after an awful day. Nothing more than that probably.3 -
Sponsored links:
-
I heard it was when this thread hit 2000 pages. No wonder Henry appears so smug at the moment.ross1 said:
January 2019?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Maybe they have asked for another extension.JamesSeed said:
You do wonder. Perhaps why there's a deadline been mentioned. It's not a full deadline, it's a convenience deadline.LargeAddick said:Is it significant that Saturday is the end of the Clubs financial year?
Like Henners I've heard a tiny piece of positivity from inside the club. Perhaps they had a better day, after an awful day. Nothing more than that probably.0 -
If they don’t I will take back my bust.ross1 said:
January 2019?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Maybe they have asked for another extension.JamesSeed said:
You do wonder. Perhaps why there's a deadline been mentioned. It's not a full deadline, it's a convenience deadline.LargeAddick said:Is it significant that Saturday is the end of the Clubs financial year?
Like Henners I've heard a tiny piece of positivity from inside the club. Perhaps they had a better day, after an awful day. Nothing more than that probably.1 -
Downstairs toilet with a utility room to put the washing machine in, to cut down on noise and that...JamesSeed said:
You do wonder. Perhaps why there's a deadline been mentioned. It's not a full deadline, it's a convenience deadline.LargeAddick said:Is it significant that Saturday is the end of the Clubs financial year?
Like Henners I've heard a tiny piece of positivity from inside the club. Perhaps they had a better day, after an awful day. Nothing more than that probably.
Maybe they have asked for another extension.2 -
Beat me to itbobmunro said:
They would never get planning permission.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Maybe they have asked for another extension.JamesSeed said:
You do wonder. Perhaps why there's a deadline been mentioned. It's not a full deadline, it's a convenience deadline.LargeAddick said:Is it significant that Saturday is the end of the Clubs financial year?
Like Henners I've heard a tiny piece of positivity from inside the club. Perhaps they had a better day, after an awful day. Nothing more than that probably. 2 -
Oh dear, a troll. We quake in fear.WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
If they don’t I will take back my bust.ross1 said:
January 2019?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:
Maybe they havyou e asked for another extension.JamesSeed said:
You do wonder. Perhaps why there's a deadline been mentioned. It's not a full deadline, it's a convenience deadline.LargeAddick said:Is it significant that Saturday is the end of the Clubs financial year?
Like Henners I've heard a tiny piece of positivity from inside the club. Perhaps they had a better day, after an awful day. Nothing more than that probably.5 -
Thanks to @AFKABartram for the takeover bite sized thread. The latest installment was particularly well written.
Also, as someone who only passingly follows this thread to protect his own sanity, let me genuinely say thank you to everyone who has shared information about the takeover that has been divulged to them. In social sciences (and various disciplines, including criminology), there is something called "The Rashomon effect" which, simply put, means that the number of people viewing an event is the number of contradicting stories about an event that will later occur. I suspect that a lot of the differences in information we've seen here is down to that, down to the fact that you have various people (sources and posters) viewing the same events differently. Either way, thank you for taking the time to keep us informed.6 -
For anyone who isn't an Arrested Development fan:Atletico Addick said:
::In best Ron Howard voice:: "It didn't end up happening."2 -
Well? Anybody? This particular story is a load of bollocks. Isn't it?Addickted said:
Has this been confirmed by anybody?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So why else would The EFL knock them back, I wonder?bobmunro said:
Precisely.JamesSeed said:
These guys use lawyers so they’d know anyway.bobmunro said:
That is what I do not get.The Red Robin said:I find it astounding anyone in the Aussie consortium believed they'd get away with that if true / or didn't realise that rule existed.
If they thought they would get away with it, or didn't have the nouse (or seek advice) as to what the EFL fit and proper tests involved then I'm not sure they are any better than the chuckle brothers.
I believe neither is the case - it might be that the two investors had second thoughts but I cannot believe it was for having a significant interest in another English club.
1 -
Prediction thread updated http://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/comment/3242409#Comment_3242409
New alternative (rarer) JS book offered as a prize.
@Weegie Addick your time is running out ☹2 -
What does this mean?golfaddick said:3 down.......2 to go.
tick tock, tick tock.0
This discussion has been closed.
