Also, if its a big deal for the EFL to say to new owners that you must have enough money to cover costs for next 2 years then why doesn't that apply to RD now ?? We are in a worse position with RD than with new owners but they let him carry on. Should there not be an annual inspection to make sure you still have enough money to run your club (I have one done on me by the FCA every year to make sure I'm fit & proper....even down to my assets & liabilities & I don't earn enough to be VAT registered). Its all right to say "but he does have money - he's financed us before" but he's plainly not doing so now & simply asset stripping to pay monthly running costs - in any other business that would soon lead to closure
I'm afraid RD can pretty much do as he pleases. He could sell the whole team if he choses to do so and play the Academy youngsters in the first team provided they were of age.
Fuck me, is this what it's come to - people arguing about whether the old fucker is asset stripping or not?
The font of all knowledge that is Wikipedia (I know) says this:
Asset stripping is a term used to refer to the practice of selling off a company's assets in order to improve returns for equity investors. With a lower level of assets, it is maintained, the business is rendered financially less stable or viable.
Certainly sounds like it to me. Reducing liabilities = improving returns for equity investors, and we only have one of those.
But either way, it matters not. There is quite clearly only one person to blame for the current 4+ year shitfest we are enduring and to suggest there is even a morsel of blame falling elsewhere, quite frankly, comes across as pie in the sky heatwave induced jibbering bollocks.
I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this
If it turns out that the Aussies made false bids in order to secure the club without having the funds in place that imo is nothing to do with the situation we have with RD but is well worthy of discussion debate and criticism
WTF????
They don’t have the money so why out bid people who do there are questions that need to be asked
And they have never had the money
So you say. Without ever having presented a shred of evidence or even a hint of what source you might have for this assertion. Not even in private. No answer to the proposition that no sane businessman "has the money" when that fuckwit is asking for money that has no rational business basis.
And then you write
"I don’t think anyone anywhere has suggested there is anyone to blame than RD for all of this "
I have a lot of respect for you, as you know, and I also know you have good contacts, but unless you can stand this shit up, you are not doing us any favours. We need to get this poison out of our club, rather than poison the ground for the new owners.
I have to apologise to @nth london addick to the extent that I asserted he did not share with me privately his sources, he did tell me a fair bit back in June, and quite reasonably he would not have wanted to say more in public. But those sources have not been used elsewhere to the best of my knowledge. They were the result of coincidences that sometimes happen.
That said, I'm still concerned that he is making suppositions about the state of play rather than being able to be sure enough to assert that "the Aussies don't have the money" and that's the subject of a further private discussion.
Separately, to ward off the rather tiresome insinuations I see surfacing here again, I would like to mention that neither I nor any of my close Charlton buddies have had any private conversation with Richard Murray since early January.
I think you are overlooking this, although accept you would dispute that being a private conversation since there was a report. However, Murray is just one source for information among many. It's not nearly good enough to think the multiple stories out there are mainly or wholly sourced from him. I really don't see why De Turck would hold a meeting so he can tells lies to the FF, for example. As per the credit card payments disclosure, he appears more naive than calculating.
Yes. I am talking about private conversations which you know he liked to have with various people as a way of "getting messages out there". In happier times, you would have been one of the recipients, right. You have subsequently become concerned that I in particular were being too easily swayed by continuing such conversations long after you had decided that his words could not be trusted. There was that time you posted a foto of me in the Directors Box for the Forest evening match...All of which is OK, btw, I respect your concern, although I regret that you saw my actions as gullible rather than, as I would see it, as a result of having a slightly different view of the business world and how it works.
Which brings me on to your de Turck point. I was not there, and I freely admit to being at odds, in a cordial way, with the two CAST guys who were there, on this. Now, I would not be disputing this, were it not for what I regard as the highly credible source of @Addickted who has now 3 times confirmed that he understands the ODT test has been completed, and that some weeks ago. We all need to make a determined effort to get to the bottom of this flat out contradiction on a very fundamental issue.
But you still ask, why would de Turck lie? My answer is, for exactly the same reason that Richard Murray has been saying what he has to us in the last months. You would call them "lies" too. However RM has explained it this way. He is the non-exec chairman. He therefore reports to the shareholders. That means, to RD. Rightly or wrongly he has felt it necessary to behave as a loyal employee. Mr de Turck is in the same boat, even more so, as he is a long standing CFO of one of RD's companies who has obviously been asked to see this through as part of his employed role. If Duchatelet tells him to try to and pin the blame on the EFL, because that would put pressure on the Aussies, he will do as instructed. Further, regardless of the actual status, I think the EFL will be less than impressed that Mr de Turck said this. They are absolutely paranoid at present about secrecy of ongoing deals due to problems in the Sunderland process. I would have thought it might also be a breach of signed NDAs too. If I was him, I would have said nothing, citing NDAs. Mr de Turck is the CFO of a micro-electronics firm. He may not be overly familiar with the current politics of English football. But he is a loyal employee.
Jeez.......I thought we'd done this hundreds of pages ago.
10 investors (my guess) all putting in £4m each. Put in FPP papers and 2 get knocked back. Now need to find an additional 2 investors with £4m each to replace them. Not finding it easy & now Harris is involved (maybe via RD as he's had enough already).
Would be easier if the remaining 8 (my guess) upped their stake to £5m each. Would also be much easier if Muir just upped his stake (chicken feed to him) & got the deal over the line but I understand if he wants everyone to be equal.......although he could do this & then find more investors & re-arrange % at a later date.
All pure guesswork of course but all plausible. Fits in with NLA's "don't have the money". Back in May they most probably did as I doubt they would have gone to the EFL if not, but now they don't. Also back in May we were more of an attractive propostion (play-offs) than we are now (and getting worse)......hence why finding it hard to find people daft enough to part with £4m (my figures).
As I've said before.....as every day passes the Aussies are making it harder for themselves & not endearing themselves to (some) fans. If it to do with money (either finding investors or paying ex-directors) then just buy the fecking club now & sort out the issues later. The money they are dicking about over is not insurmountable. If not then just walk. We are in a worse mess now because they are still hangng around - RD believes it will all go through v soon so is not running us properly (no CEO, selling players to fund costs etc). If there were no buyers around he would do things differently.
Golfie, yes ages ago. But remember, they raised, or are raising (?), enough to buy the club and run it in such a way that it could be promoted to the PL in 5 years. It’s never been about raising £40m, it’s been about raising (guess alert) £150-200m.
I believe that to satisfy EFL regulations any buyer has to have funds in place to cover running costs for 2 years (I could be wrong there). Not enough funds to get to the PL in five years!! The latter would be around £150m, the former significantly less than that but more than the purchase price of course.
Quite - but funds to run the club for two years would be closer to £15-£20m, because the EFL isn't entitled to assume it would be in a higher division or chasing promotion from this one.
@PragueAddick go and ask the person who wrote the SLP article
The club has said many things all from the mouth of a liar or multiple liars
I have said on here where I got told the aussies had no money
It was laughed at because it came from the RD side
GM told James seed there was still two that needed to sign off
Now the fact the Aussies are again still being reported to be searching for investors and the deal is in real jeopardy and Keith harris is actively working on resolving
There are still those that wish to believe a statement from known liars
Richard Murray could tell me that today is sunday and my name is darren
I would still check the calendar and my driving licence
This whole dirty sorry saga has been going on here since October 2017 we are two months from a year
Instead of asking me where the evidence is to substantiate my claim that they don’t have it or have never had it
The real question should be prove that they have
When their own side is taking about still looking for investors 10 months later
I think my proof has been substantiated
Roland has screwed this great club to the floor by its balls and will continue to do so
Two possibly 3 parties have tickled his ego valuation enough for him to believe he is right
His valuation however absurd you or I may think it is people are looking and biting his hook
Something never sat right with me about the Aussie bid and I will be honest and happy to be proved wrong about them and we will only know should they have somehow found the funds since harris let out his snitbit
So from here on in it’s not me having to justify my posts mine have been proven right
It’s for the Aussies to put up or shut up stay or walk simple as
But all the time they are hanging around without completing it’s a black cloud not a silver lines one
Do you or do you not concede that Andrew Muir has the wherewithal to purchase the club if he so wished.....either as an individual or by raising his stake in the consortium?
I have answered that question so many times on here
One of their investors has a personal wealth to buy us on his own but chooses not too
We are not talking about Andrew Muir as a single entity we are talking about a consortium he is part of and right now we don’t know if he alone is holding is 10% 50% 85% of that consortium
I thought he has stated that he wants it to be a consortium of equals i.e. equal financial input from each investor?
Which is in need of further investigation then because if he only wants the same as for example 10 others then this consortium is doomed to fail
Sorry, that doesn’t make sense.
What do you mean ‘wants the same’?
There could be five investors all putting in £30m.
There could be 30 putting in a mil
Comments like that don't help.
But that’s the whole point we do not know just how many or how few we do not know their intentions at all
All we know is that in more than a yr they haven’t raised the relevant funds to invest according to their own deal broker
So it could well be as complex as 30 loan investors
Highly doubtful but still possible
There’s got to be more to the failure to complete so far other than Director loans there just has to be
And harris has now publicly stated what that issue is
Its dragging on because no one is willing to pay £47mn, that's the agreed price of £40mn and then add the Directors Loans. That's assuming the Australians had their complete syndicate together for the £40mn in the first place or since. The debate goes on but the price remains ridiculously the same, keeping buyers away.
I think all of us agree that his valuation is high and above what most think is reasonable
But we do know that the 40 mil has been bid by two parties
One Saudi one aussie
The 7mil I refuse to believe was unknown by RD or those bidding
I also think that it’s the easiest part to work through
The biggest indicator is harris quotes in SLP Friday
There are no quotes from Harris in the SLP and nothing to suggest that Rich has spoken to him. I'm not saying the story is wrong, but it's unlikely to have come direct from Harris in my opinion.
I have to apologise to @nth london addick to the extent that I asserted he did not share with me privately his sources, he did tell me a fair bit back in June, and quite reasonably he would not have wanted to say more in public. But those sources have not been used elsewhere to the best of my knowledge. They were the result of coincidences that sometimes happen.
That said, I'm still concerned that he is making suppositions about the state of play rather than being able to be sure enough to assert that "the Aussies don't have the money" and that's the subject of a further private discussion.
Separately, to ward off the rather tiresome insinuations I see surfacing here again, I would like to mention that neither I nor any of my close Charlton buddies have had any private conversation with Richard Murray since early January.
I think you are overlooking this, although accept you would dispute that being a private conversation since there was a report. However, Murray is just one source for information among many. It's not nearly good enough to think the multiple stories out there are mainly or wholly sourced from him. I really don't see why De Turck would hold a meeting so he can tells lies to the FF, for example. As per the credit card payments disclosure, he appears more naive than calculating.
Taken from the above meeting between Richard Murray and the Trust in June.
"Richard reiterated what he told us back in January - that he is not party to the details of the negotiations. He was however able to tell us that the two parties (one Australian; one British) who were negotiating with Roland Duchatelet in January are still in negotiations."
So if we believe Murray the deal had not been concluded in June and they were still negotiating.
February: "Although the takeover has not yet been completed, the good news is the terms of the deal, including the price, have now been agreed between the parties and we are now just waiting for their respective lawyers to finalise the sale and purchase agreement."
@PragueAddick go and ask the person who wrote the SLP article
The club has said many things all from the mouth of a liar or multiple liars
I have said on here where I got told the aussies had no money
It was laughed at because it came from the RD side
GM told James seed there was still two that needed to sign off
Now the fact the Aussies are again still being reported to be searching for investors and the deal is in real jeopardy and Keith harris is actively working on resolving
There are still those that wish to believe a statement from known liars
Richard Murray could tell me that today is sunday and my name is darren
I would still check the calendar and my driving licence
This whole dirty sorry saga has been going on here since October 2017 we are two months from a year
Instead of asking me where the evidence is to substantiate my claim that they don’t have it or have never had it
The real question should be prove that they have
When their own side is taking about still looking for investors 10 months later
I think my proof has been substantiated
Roland has screwed this great club to the floor by its balls and will continue to do so
Two possibly 3 parties have tickled his ego valuation enough for him to believe he is right
His valuation however absurd you or I may think it is people are looking and biting his hook
Something never sat right with me about the Aussie bid and I will be honest and happy to be proved wrong about them and we will only know should they have somehow found the funds since harris let out his snitbit
So from here on in it’s not me having to justify my posts mine have been proven right
It’s for the Aussies to put up or shut up stay or walk simple as
But all the time they are hanging around without completing it’s a black cloud not a silver lines one
Do you or do you not concede that Andrew Muir has the wherewithal to purchase the club if he so wished.....either as an individual or by raising his stake in the consortium?
I have answered that question so many times on here
One of their investors has a personal wealth to buy us on his own but chooses not too
We are not talking about Andrew Muir as a single entity we are talking about a consortium he is part of and right now we don’t know if he alone is holding is 10% 50% 85% of that consortium
I thought he has stated that he wants it to be a consortium of equals i.e. equal financial input from each investor?
Which is in need of further investigation then because if he only wants the same as for example 10 others then this consortium is doomed to fail
Sorry, that doesn’t make sense.
What do you mean ‘wants the same’?
There could be five investors all putting in £30m.
There could be 30 putting in a mil
Comments like that don't help.
But that’s the whole point we do not know just how many or how few we do not know their intentions at all
All we know is that in more than a yr they haven’t raised the relevant funds to invest according to their own deal broker
So it could well be as complex as 30 loan investors
Highly doubtful but still possible
There’s got to be more to the failure to complete so far other than Director loans there just has to be
And harris has now publicly stated what that issue is
Its dragging on because no one is willing to pay £47mn, that's the agreed price of £40mn and then add the Directors Loans. That's assuming the Australians had their complete syndicate together for the £40mn in the first place or since. The debate goes on but the price remains ridiculously the same, keeping buyers away.
I think all of us agree that his valuation is high and above what most think is reasonable
But we do know that the 40 mil has been bid by two parties
One Saudi one aussie
The 7mil I refuse to believe was unknown by RD or those bidding
I also think that it’s the easiest part to work through
The biggest indicator is harris quotes in SLP Friday
There are no quotes from Harris in the SLP and nothing to suggest that Rich has spoken to him. I'm not saying the story is wrong, but it's unlikely to have come direct from Harris in my opinion.
I forgot to ask NLA this...what is Harris supposed to have said, can you remind us? Ta.
I have to apologise to @nth london addick to the extent that I asserted he did not share with me privately his sources, he did tell me a fair bit back in June, and quite reasonably he would not have wanted to say more in public. But those sources have not been used elsewhere to the best of my knowledge. They were the result of coincidences that sometimes happen.
That said, I'm still concerned that he is making suppositions about the state of play rather than being able to be sure enough to assert that "the Aussies don't have the money" and that's the subject of a further private discussion.
Separately, to ward off the rather tiresome insinuations I see surfacing here again, I would like to mention that neither I nor any of my close Charlton buddies have had any private conversation with Richard Murray since early January.
I think you are overlooking this, although accept you would dispute that being a private conversation since there was a report. However, Murray is just one source for information among many. It's not nearly good enough to think the multiple stories out there are mainly or wholly sourced from him. I really don't see why De Turck would hold a meeting so he can tells lies to the FF, for example. As per the credit card payments disclosure, he appears more naive than calculating.
Taken from the above meeting between Richard Murray and the Trust in June.
"Richard reiterated what he told us back in January - that he is not party to the details of the negotiations. He was however able to tell us that the two parties (one Australian; one British) who were negotiating with Roland Duchatelet in January are still in negotiations."
So if we believe Murray the deal had not been concluded in June and they were still negotiating.
February: "Although the takeover has not yet been completed, the good news is the terms of the deal, including the price, have now been agreed between the parties and we are now just waiting for their respective lawyers to finalise the sale and purchase agreement."
@PragueAddick go and ask the person who wrote the SLP article
The club has said many things all from the mouth of a liar or multiple liars
I have said on here where I got told the aussies had no money
It was laughed at because it came from the RD side
GM told James seed there was still two that needed to sign off
Now the fact the Aussies are again still being reported to be searching for investors and the deal is in real jeopardy and Keith harris is actively working on resolving
There are still those that wish to believe a statement from known liars
Richard Murray could tell me that today is sunday and my name is darren
I would still check the calendar and my driving licence
This whole dirty sorry saga has been going on here since October 2017 we are two months from a year
Instead of asking me where the evidence is to substantiate my claim that they don’t have it or have never had it
The real question should be prove that they have
When their own side is taking about still looking for investors 10 months later
I think my proof has been substantiated
Roland has screwed this great club to the floor by its balls and will continue to do so
Two possibly 3 parties have tickled his ego valuation enough for him to believe he is right
His valuation however absurd you or I may think it is people are looking and biting his hook
Something never sat right with me about the Aussie bid and I will be honest and happy to be proved wrong about them and we will only know should they have somehow found the funds since harris let out his snitbit
So from here on in it’s not me having to justify my posts mine have been proven right
It’s for the Aussies to put up or shut up stay or walk simple as
But all the time they are hanging around without completing it’s a black cloud not a silver lines one
Do you or do you not concede that Andrew Muir has the wherewithal to purchase the club if he so wished.....either as an individual or by raising his stake in the consortium?
I have answered that question so many times on here
One of their investors has a personal wealth to buy us on his own but chooses not too
We are not talking about Andrew Muir as a single entity we are talking about a consortium he is part of and right now we don’t know if he alone is holding is 10% 50% 85% of that consortium
I thought he has stated that he wants it to be a consortium of equals i.e. equal financial input from each investor?
Which is in need of further investigation then because if he only wants the same as for example 10 others then this consortium is doomed to fail
Sorry, that doesn’t make sense.
What do you mean ‘wants the same’?
There could be five investors all putting in £30m.
There could be 30 putting in a mil
Comments like that don't help.
But that’s the whole point we do not know just how many or how few we do not know their intentions at all
All we know is that in more than a yr they haven’t raised the relevant funds to invest according to their own deal broker
So it could well be as complex as 30 loan investors
Highly doubtful but still possible
There’s got to be more to the failure to complete so far other than Director loans there just has to be
And harris has now publicly stated what that issue is
Its dragging on because no one is willing to pay £47mn, that's the agreed price of £40mn and then add the Directors Loans. That's assuming the Australians had their complete syndicate together for the £40mn in the first place or since. The debate goes on but the price remains ridiculously the same, keeping buyers away.
I think all of us agree that his valuation is high and above what most think is reasonable
But we do know that the 40 mil has been bid by two parties
One Saudi one aussie
The 7mil I refuse to believe was unknown by RD or those bidding
I also think that it’s the easiest part to work through
The biggest indicator is harris quotes in SLP Friday
There are no quotes from Harris in the SLP and nothing to suggest that Rich has spoken to him. I'm not saying the story is wrong, but it's unlikely to have come direct from Harris in my opinion.
I forgot to ask NLA this...what is Harris supposed to have said, can you remind us? Ta.
Below is a link to the full article.
As you will see Harris is referred to but nothing in it is attributed to him:
So the fact(?) The Aussies do not have the money came from RDs side and is known to posters on here but RD still chose their bid over a Saudi Princes a little lower. Sorry, I don't buy it.
@PragueAddick go and ask the person who wrote the SLP article
The club has said many things all from the mouth of a liar or multiple liars
I have said on here where I got told the aussies had no money
It was laughed at because it came from the RD side
GM told James seed there was still two that needed to sign off
Now the fact the Aussies are again still being reported to be searching for investors and the deal is in real jeopardy and Keith harris is actively working on resolving
There are still those that wish to believe a statement from known liars
Richard Murray could tell me that today is sunday and my name is darren
I would still check the calendar and my driving licence
This whole dirty sorry saga has been going on here since October 2017 we are two months from a year
Instead of asking me where the evidence is to substantiate my claim that they don’t have it or have never had it
The real question should be prove that they have
When their own side is taking about still looking for investors 10 months later
I think my proof has been substantiated
Roland has screwed this great club to the floor by its balls and will continue to do so
Two possibly 3 parties have tickled his ego valuation enough for him to believe he is right
His valuation however absurd you or I may think it is people are looking and biting his hook
Something never sat right with me about the Aussie bid and I will be honest and happy to be proved wrong about them and we will only know should they have somehow found the funds since harris let out his snitbit
So from here on in it’s not me having to justify my posts mine have been proven right
It’s for the Aussies to put up or shut up stay or walk simple as
But all the time they are hanging around without completing it’s a black cloud not a silver lines one
Do you or do you not concede that Andrew Muir has the wherewithal to purchase the club if he so wished.....either as an individual or by raising his stake in the consortium?
I have answered that question so many times on here
One of their investors has a personal wealth to buy us on his own but chooses not too
We are not talking about Andrew Muir as a single entity we are talking about a consortium he is part of and right now we don’t know if he alone is holding is 10% 50% 85% of that consortium
I thought he has stated that he wants it to be a consortium of equals i.e. equal financial input from each investor?
Which is in need of further investigation then because if he only wants the same as for example 10 others then this consortium is doomed to fail
Sorry, that doesn’t make sense.
What do you mean ‘wants the same’?
There could be five investors all putting in £30m.
There could be 30 putting in a mil
Comments like that don't help.
But that’s the whole point we do not know just how many or how few we do not know their intentions at all
All we know is that in more than a yr they haven’t raised the relevant funds to invest according to their own deal broker
So it could well be as complex as 30 loan investors
Highly doubtful but still possible
There’s got to be more to the failure to complete so far other than Director loans there just has to be
And harris has now publicly stated what that issue is
Its dragging on because no one is willing to pay £47mn, that's the agreed price of £40mn and then add the Directors Loans. That's assuming the Australians had their complete syndicate together for the £40mn in the first place or since. The debate goes on but the price remains ridiculously the same, keeping buyers away.
I think all of us agree that his valuation is high and above what most think is reasonable
But we do know that the 40 mil has been bid by two parties
One Saudi one aussie
The 7mil I refuse to believe was unknown by RD or those bidding
I also think that it’s the easiest part to work through
The biggest indicator is harris quotes in SLP Friday
There are no quotes from Harris in the SLP and nothing to suggest that Rich has spoken to him. I'm not saying the story is wrong, but it's unlikely to have come direct from Harris in my opinion.
I forgot to ask NLA this...what is Harris supposed to have said, can you remind us? Ta.
Below is a link to the full article.
As you will see Harris is referred to but nothing in it is attributed to him:
There is also no mention of Harris working for the Australians. The way I read it is that he has been asked to find interested parties.
The quote I am referring to is: "Harris was tasked with finding other investors to push the takeover through and it is unclear if he has achieved that.", which seems to be pointing to his original brief with RD, not extra subscribers to the consortium.
@PragueAddick go and ask the person who wrote the SLP article
The club has said many things all from the mouth of a liar or multiple liars
I have said on here where I got told the aussies had no money
It was laughed at because it came from the RD side
GM told James seed there was still two that needed to sign off
Now the fact the Aussies are again still being reported to be searching for investors and the deal is in real jeopardy and Keith harris is actively working on resolving
There are still those that wish to believe a statement from known liars
Richard Murray could tell me that today is sunday and my name is darren
I would still check the calendar and my driving licence
This whole dirty sorry saga has been going on here since October 2017 we are two months from a year
Instead of asking me where the evidence is to substantiate my claim that they don’t have it or have never had it
The real question should be prove that they have
When their own side is taking about still looking for investors 10 months later
I think my proof has been substantiated
Roland has screwed this great club to the floor by its balls and will continue to do so
Two possibly 3 parties have tickled his ego valuation enough for him to believe he is right
His valuation however absurd you or I may think it is people are looking and biting his hook
Something never sat right with me about the Aussie bid and I will be honest and happy to be proved wrong about them and we will only know should they have somehow found the funds since harris let out his snitbit
So from here on in it’s not me having to justify my posts mine have been proven right
It’s for the Aussies to put up or shut up stay or walk simple as
But all the time they are hanging around without completing it’s a black cloud not a silver lines one
Do you or do you not concede that Andrew Muir has the wherewithal to purchase the club if he so wished.....either as an individual or by raising his stake in the consortium?
I have answered that question so many times on here
One of their investors has a personal wealth to buy us on his own but chooses not too
We are not talking about Andrew Muir as a single entity we are talking about a consortium he is part of and right now we don’t know if he alone is holding is 10% 50% 85% of that consortium
I thought he has stated that he wants it to be a consortium of equals i.e. equal financial input from each investor?
Which is in need of further investigation then because if he only wants the same as for example 10 others then this consortium is doomed to fail
Sorry, that doesn’t make sense.
What do you mean ‘wants the same’?
There could be five investors all putting in £30m.
There could be 30 putting in a mil
Comments like that don't help.
But that’s the whole point we do not know just how many or how few we do not know their intentions at all
All we know is that in more than a yr they haven’t raised the relevant funds to invest according to their own deal broker
So it could well be as complex as 30 loan investors
Highly doubtful but still possible
There’s got to be more to the failure to complete so far other than Director loans there just has to be
And harris has now publicly stated what that issue is
Its dragging on because no one is willing to pay £47mn, that's the agreed price of £40mn and then add the Directors Loans. That's assuming the Australians had their complete syndicate together for the £40mn in the first place or since. The debate goes on but the price remains ridiculously the same, keeping buyers away.
I think all of us agree that his valuation is high and above what most think is reasonable
But we do know that the 40 mil has been bid by two parties
One Saudi one aussie
The 7mil I refuse to believe was unknown by RD or those bidding
I also think that it’s the easiest part to work through
The biggest indicator is harris quotes in SLP Friday
There are no quotes from Harris in the SLP and nothing to suggest that Rich has spoken to him. I'm not saying the story is wrong, but it's unlikely to have come direct from Harris in my opinion.
I forgot to ask NLA this...what is Harris supposed to have said, can you remind us? Ta.
Below is a link to the full article.
As you will see Harris is referred to but nothing in it is attributed to him:
So my immediate question for Richard Cawley is, were you aware of Mr de Turck's explanation at the FF only a week previously, and if so how does this version of the situation square with that one? In timing terms alone I am struggling to square the two versions of the status.
(which is not to dig out RC who does his best on limited resources and with us fnas very much in mind)
I have to apologise to @nth london addick to the extent that I asserted he did not share with me privately his sources, he did tell me a fair bit back in June, and quite reasonably he would not have wanted to say more in public. But those sources have not been used elsewhere to the best of my knowledge. They were the result of coincidences that sometimes happen.
That said, I'm still concerned that he is making suppositions about the state of play rather than being able to be sure enough to assert that "the Aussies don't have the money" and that's the subject of a further private discussion.
Separately, to ward off the rather tiresome insinuations I see surfacing here again, I would like to mention that neither I nor any of my close Charlton buddies have had any private conversation with Richard Murray since early January.
I think you are overlooking this, although accept you would dispute that being a private conversation since there was a report. However, Murray is just one source for information among many. It's not nearly good enough to think the multiple stories out there are mainly or wholly sourced from him. I really don't see why De Turck would hold a meeting so he can tells lies to the FF, for example. As per the credit card payments disclosure, he appears more naive than calculating.
Yes. I am talking about private conversations which you know he liked to have with various people as a way of "getting messages out there". In happier times, you would have been one of the recipients, right. You have subsequently become concerned that I in particular were being too easily swayed by continuing such conversations long after you had decided that his words could not be trusted. There was that time you posted a foto of me in the Directors Box for the Forest evening match...All of which is OK, btw, I respect your concern, although I regret that you saw my actions as gullible rather than, as I would see it, as a result of having a slightly different view of the business world and how it works.
Which brings me on to your de Turck point. I was not there, and I freely admit to being at odds, in a cordial way, with the two CAST guys who were there, on this. Now, I would not be disputing this, were it not for what I regard as the highly credible source of @Addickted who has now 3 times confirmed that he understands the ODT test has been completed, and that some weeks ago. We all need to make a determined effort to get to the bottom of this flat out contradiction on a very fundamental issue.
But you still ask, why would de Turck lie? My answer is, for exactly the same reason that Richard Murray has been saying what he has to us in the last months. You would call them "lies" too. However RM has explained it this way. He is the non-exec chairman. He therefore reports to the shareholders. That means, to RD. Rightly or wrongly he has felt it necessary to behave as a loyal employee. Mr de Turck is in the same boat, even more so, as he is a long standing CFO of one of RD's companies who has obviously been asked to see this through as part of his employed role. If Duchatelet tells him to try to and pin the blame on the EFL, because that would put pressure on the Aussies, he will do as instructed. Further, regardless of the actual status, I think the EFL will be less than impressed that Mr de Turck said this. They are absolutely paranoid at present about secrecy of ongoing deals due to problems in the Sunderland process. I would have thought it might also be a breach of signed NDAs too. If I was him, I would have said nothing, citing NDAs. Mr de Turck is the CFO of a micro-electronics firm. He may not be overly familiar with the current politics of English football. But he is a loyal employee.
Not the same thing. I was the Charlton reporter on the local paper when I used to speak to Murray about stories, whether on or off the record. What he is doing now is tapping up various supporters to get them into position with a bit of flattery/hospitality, including various posters on here and at least one one obvious one elsewhere. It's the same technique he used to spread stories about Varney, to avoid being held accountable for them.
It's total bollocks to argue that Murray reports to "shareholders". He isn't an executive director, isn't paid and could resign at any point with no financial impact on him or anyone else. He is an entirely free agent. He isn't the bloody chairman, either, and hasn't been for two years. The reason he doesn't is because he is desperate to salvage his reputation. He is the losing gambler who has seen his early winnings disappear and just can't leave the table. And he has zero respect - nil - from multiple people who were his co-directors for years and presumably have a more complete "view of the business world and how it works" at Charlton than you possibly could.
Your De Turck answer does not stand up because if had any professional integrity at all he would simply refuse to have the meeting before he would go there and lie. It wasn't as if fans were demanding to meet HIM. Do you really imagine that Duchatelet was remotely interested in whether he did meet them or not? To what end?
@PragueAddick go and ask the person who wrote the SLP article
The club has said many things all from the mouth of a liar or multiple liars
I have said on here where I got told the aussies had no money
It was laughed at because it came from the RD side
GM told James seed there was still two that needed to sign off
Now the fact the Aussies are again still being reported to be searching for investors and the deal is in real jeopardy and Keith harris is actively working on resolving
There are still those that wish to believe a statement from known liars
Richard Murray could tell me that today is sunday and my name is darren
I would still check the calendar and my driving licence
This whole dirty sorry saga has been going on here since October 2017 we are two months from a year
Instead of asking me where the evidence is to substantiate my claim that they don’t have it or have never had it
The real question should be prove that they have
When their own side is taking about still looking for investors 10 months later
I think my proof has been substantiated
Roland has screwed this great club to the floor by its balls and will continue to do so
Two possibly 3 parties have tickled his ego valuation enough for him to believe he is right
His valuation however absurd you or I may think it is people are looking and biting his hook
Something never sat right with me about the Aussie bid and I will be honest and happy to be proved wrong about them and we will only know should they have somehow found the funds since harris let out his snitbit
So from here on in it’s not me having to justify my posts mine have been proven right
It’s for the Aussies to put up or shut up stay or walk simple as
But all the time they are hanging around without completing it’s a black cloud not a silver lines one
Do you or do you not concede that Andrew Muir has the wherewithal to purchase the club if he so wished.....either as an individual or by raising his stake in the consortium?
I have answered that question so many times on here
One of their investors has a personal wealth to buy us on his own but chooses not too
We are not talking about Andrew Muir as a single entity we are talking about a consortium he is part of and right now we don’t know if he alone is holding is 10% 50% 85% of that consortium
I thought he has stated that he wants it to be a consortium of equals i.e. equal financial input from each investor?
Which is in need of further investigation then because if he only wants the same as for example 10 others then this consortium is doomed to fail
Sorry, that doesn’t make sense.
What do you mean ‘wants the same’?
There could be five investors all putting in £30m.
There could be 30 putting in a mil
Comments like that don't help.
But that’s the whole point we do not know just how many or how few we do not know their intentions at all
All we know is that in more than a yr they haven’t raised the relevant funds to invest according to their own deal broker
So it could well be as complex as 30 loan investors
Highly doubtful but still possible
There’s got to be more to the failure to complete so far other than Director loans there just has to be
And harris has now publicly stated what that issue is
Its dragging on because no one is willing to pay £47mn, that's the agreed price of £40mn and then add the Directors Loans. That's assuming the Australians had their complete syndicate together for the £40mn in the first place or since. The debate goes on but the price remains ridiculously the same, keeping buyers away.
I think all of us agree that his valuation is high and above what most think is reasonable
But we do know that the 40 mil has been bid by two parties
One Saudi one aussie
The 7mil I refuse to believe was unknown by RD or those bidding
I also think that it’s the easiest part to work through
The biggest indicator is harris quotes in SLP Friday
There are no quotes from Harris in the SLP and nothing to suggest that Rich has spoken to him. I'm not saying the story is wrong, but it's unlikely to have come direct from Harris in my opinion.
I forgot to ask NLA this...what is Harris supposed to have said, can you remind us? Ta.
Below is a link to the full article.
As you will see Harris is referred to but nothing in it is attributed to him:
So my immediate question for Richard Cawley is, were you aware of Mr de Turck's explanation at the FF only a week previously, and if so how does this version of the situation square with that one? In timing terms alone I am struggling to square the two versions of the status.
(which is not to dig out RC who does his best on limited resources and with us fnas very much in mind)
In fact on July 12th, more than three weeks previously.
@PragueAddick go and ask the person who wrote the SLP article
The club has said many things all from the mouth of a liar or multiple liars
I have said on here where I got told the aussies had no money
It was laughed at because it came from the RD side
GM told James seed there was still two that needed to sign off
Now the fact the Aussies are again still being reported to be searching for investors and the deal is in real jeopardy and Keith harris is actively working on resolving
There are still those that wish to believe a statement from known liars
Richard Murray could tell me that today is sunday and my name is darren
I would still check the calendar and my driving licence
This whole dirty sorry saga has been going on here since October 2017 we are two months from a year
Instead of asking me where the evidence is to substantiate my claim that they don’t have it or have never had it
The real question should be prove that they have
When their own side is taking about still looking for investors 10 months later
I think my proof has been substantiated
Roland has screwed this great club to the floor by its balls and will continue to do so
Two possibly 3 parties have tickled his ego valuation enough for him to believe he is right
His valuation however absurd you or I may think it is people are looking and biting his hook
Something never sat right with me about the Aussie bid and I will be honest and happy to be proved wrong about them and we will only know should they have somehow found the funds since harris let out his snitbit
So from here on in it’s not me having to justify my posts mine have been proven right
It’s for the Aussies to put up or shut up stay or walk simple as
But all the time they are hanging around without completing it’s a black cloud not a silver lines one
Do you or do you not concede that Andrew Muir has the wherewithal to purchase the club if he so wished.....either as an individual or by raising his stake in the consortium?
I have answered that question so many times on here
One of their investors has a personal wealth to buy us on his own but chooses not too
We are not talking about Andrew Muir as a single entity we are talking about a consortium he is part of and right now we don’t know if he alone is holding is 10% 50% 85% of that consortium
I thought he has stated that he wants it to be a consortium of equals i.e. equal financial input from each investor?
Which is in need of further investigation then because if he only wants the same as for example 10 others then this consortium is doomed to fail
Sorry, that doesn’t make sense.
What do you mean ‘wants the same’?
There could be five investors all putting in £30m.
There could be 30 putting in a mil
Comments like that don't help.
But that’s the whole point we do not know just how many or how few we do not know their intentions at all
All we know is that in more than a yr they haven’t raised the relevant funds to invest according to their own deal broker
So it could well be as complex as 30 loan investors
Highly doubtful but still possible
There’s got to be more to the failure to complete so far other than Director loans there just has to be
And harris has now publicly stated what that issue is
Its dragging on because no one is willing to pay £47mn, that's the agreed price of £40mn and then add the Directors Loans. That's assuming the Australians had their complete syndicate together for the £40mn in the first place or since. The debate goes on but the price remains ridiculously the same, keeping buyers away.
I think all of us agree that his valuation is high and above what most think is reasonable
But we do know that the 40 mil has been bid by two parties
One Saudi one aussie
The 7mil I refuse to believe was unknown by RD or those bidding
I also think that it’s the easiest part to work through
The biggest indicator is harris quotes in SLP Friday
There are no quotes from Harris in the SLP and nothing to suggest that Rich has spoken to him. I'm not saying the story is wrong, but it's unlikely to have come direct from Harris in my opinion.
I forgot to ask NLA this...what is Harris supposed to have said, can you remind us? Ta.
Below is a link to the full article.
As you will see Harris is referred to but nothing in it is attributed to him:
So my immediate question for Richard Cawley is, were you aware of Mr de Turck's explanation at the FF only a week previously, and if so how does this version of the situation square with that one? In timing terms alone I am struggling to square the two versions of the status.
(which is not to dig out RC who does his best on limited resources and with us fnas very much in mind)
In fact on July 12th, more than three weeks previously.
OK so how do you square the two versions of the reasons for the hold up?
@PragueAddick go and ask the person who wrote the SLP article
The club has said many things all from the mouth of a liar or multiple liars
I have said on here where I got told the aussies had no money
It was laughed at because it came from the RD side
GM told James seed there was still two that needed to sign off
Now the fact the Aussies are again still being reported to be searching for investors and the deal is in real jeopardy and Keith harris is actively working on resolving
There are still those that wish to believe a statement from known liars
Richard Murray could tell me that today is sunday and my name is darren
I would still check the calendar and my driving licence
This whole dirty sorry saga has been going on here since October 2017 we are two months from a year
Instead of asking me where the evidence is to substantiate my claim that they don’t have it or have never had it
The real question should be prove that they have
When their own side is taking about still looking for investors 10 months later
I think my proof has been substantiated
Roland has screwed this great club to the floor by its balls and will continue to do so
Two possibly 3 parties have tickled his ego valuation enough for him to believe he is right
His valuation however absurd you or I may think it is people are looking and biting his hook
Something never sat right with me about the Aussie bid and I will be honest and happy to be proved wrong about them and we will only know should they have somehow found the funds since harris let out his snitbit
So from here on in it’s not me having to justify my posts mine have been proven right
It’s for the Aussies to put up or shut up stay or walk simple as
But all the time they are hanging around without completing it’s a black cloud not a silver lines one
Do you or do you not concede that Andrew Muir has the wherewithal to purchase the club if he so wished.....either as an individual or by raising his stake in the consortium?
I have answered that question so many times on here
One of their investors has a personal wealth to buy us on his own but chooses not too
We are not talking about Andrew Muir as a single entity we are talking about a consortium he is part of and right now we don’t know if he alone is holding is 10% 50% 85% of that consortium
I thought he has stated that he wants it to be a consortium of equals i.e. equal financial input from each investor?
Which is in need of further investigation then because if he only wants the same as for example 10 others then this consortium is doomed to fail
Sorry, that doesn’t make sense.
What do you mean ‘wants the same’?
There could be five investors all putting in £30m.
There could be 30 putting in a mil
Comments like that don't help.
But that’s the whole point we do not know just how many or how few we do not know their intentions at all
All we know is that in more than a yr they haven’t raised the relevant funds to invest according to their own deal broker
So it could well be as complex as 30 loan investors
Highly doubtful but still possible
There’s got to be more to the failure to complete so far other than Director loans there just has to be
And harris has now publicly stated what that issue is
Its dragging on because no one is willing to pay £47mn, that's the agreed price of £40mn and then add the Directors Loans. That's assuming the Australians had their complete syndicate together for the £40mn in the first place or since. The debate goes on but the price remains ridiculously the same, keeping buyers away.
I think all of us agree that his valuation is high and above what most think is reasonable
But we do know that the 40 mil has been bid by two parties
One Saudi one aussie
The 7mil I refuse to believe was unknown by RD or those bidding
I also think that it’s the easiest part to work through
The biggest indicator is harris quotes in SLP Friday
There are no quotes from Harris in the SLP and nothing to suggest that Rich has spoken to him. I'm not saying the story is wrong, but it's unlikely to have come direct from Harris in my opinion.
I forgot to ask NLA this...what is Harris supposed to have said, can you remind us? Ta.
Below is a link to the full article.
As you will see Harris is referred to but nothing in it is attributed to him:
So my immediate question for Richard Cawley is, were you aware of Mr de Turck's explanation at the FF only a week previously, and if so how does this version of the situation square with that one? In timing terms alone I am struggling to square the two versions of the status.
(which is not to dig out RC who does his best on limited resources and with us fnas very much in mind)
In fact on July 12th, more than three weeks previously.
OK so how do you square the two versions of the reasons for the hold up?
I don't, but one is on the record and the other isn't. I trust Rich, but I think both you and NLA are simply choosing to believe the version that fits your argument and not because it's a more credible source of itself.
Jeez.......I thought we'd done this hundreds of pages ago.
10 investors (my guess) all putting in £4m each. Put in FPP papers and 2 get knocked back. Now need to find an additional 2 investors with £4m each to replace them. Not finding it easy & now Harris is involved (maybe via RD as he's had enough already).
Would be easier if the remaining 8 (my guess) upped their stake to £5m each. Would also be much easier if Muir just upped his stake (chicken feed to him) & got the deal over the line but I understand if he wants everyone to be equal.......although he could do this & then find more investors & re-arrange % at a later date.
All pure guesswork of course but all plausible. Fits in with NLA's "don't have the money". Back in May they most probably did as I doubt they would have gone to the EFL if not, but now they don't. Also back in May we were more of an attractive propostion (play-offs) than we are now (and getting worse)......hence why finding it hard to find people daft enough to part with £4m (my figures).
As I've said before.....as every day passes the Aussies are making it harder for themselves & not endearing themselves to (some) fans. If it to do with money (either finding investors or paying ex-directors) then just buy the fecking club now & sort out the issues later. The money they are dicking about over is not insurmountable. If not then just walk. We are in a worse mess now because they are still hangng around - RD believes it will all go through v soon so is not running us properly (no CEO, selling players to fund costs etc). If there were no buyers around he would do things differently.
Golfie, yes ages ago. But remember, they raised, or are raising (?), enough to buy the club and run it in such a way that it could be promoted to the PL in 5 years. It’s never been about raising £40m, it’s been about raising (guess alert) £150-200m.
Sorry......I was trying to keep it simple. Same premise as above but substitue £4m each to £10m each. £100m now - £40m to buy the club & £60m to cover running costs & players purchases for 3-5 years. I think £150-£200m is rather excessive. Does new Sunderland owner have this amount of money ?? How is he funding them going forward (genuine question - saw brief interview with him yesterday but don't know any figures)
I think £60m is well light. RD was losing £1m per month, so £60m over 5 years and nothing for transfers. I did post an estimated budget a few months back which made £200m seem modest.
Could the Aussies switch attention back to Coventry City or one of the other four clubs they employed Deloitte to conduct a feasibility study into? There must be cheaper clubs available and easier owners to deal with.
@PragueAddick go and ask the person who wrote the SLP article
The club has said many things all from the mouth of a liar or multiple liars
I have said on here where I got told the aussies had no money
It was laughed at because it came from the RD side
GM told James seed there was still two that needed to sign off
Now the fact the Aussies are again still being reported to be searching for investors and the deal is in real jeopardy and Keith harris is actively working on resolving
There are still those that wish to believe a statement from known liars
Richard Murray could tell me that today is sunday and my name is darren
I would still check the calendar and my driving licence
This whole dirty sorry saga has been going on here since October 2017 we are two months from a year
Instead of asking me where the evidence is to substantiate my claim that they don’t have it or have never had it
The real question should be prove that they have
When their own side is taking about still looking for investors 10 months later
I think my proof has been substantiated
Roland has screwed this great club to the floor by its balls and will continue to do so
Two possibly 3 parties have tickled his ego valuation enough for him to believe he is right
His valuation however absurd you or I may think it is people are looking and biting his hook
Something never sat right with me about the Aussie bid and I will be honest and happy to be proved wrong about them and we will only know should they have somehow found the funds since harris let out his snitbit
So from here on in it’s not me having to justify my posts mine have been proven right
It’s for the Aussies to put up or shut up stay or walk simple as
But all the time they are hanging around without completing it’s a black cloud not a silver lines one
Do you or do you not concede that Andrew Muir has the wherewithal to purchase the club if he so wished.....either as an individual or by raising his stake in the consortium?
I have answered that question so many times on here
One of their investors has a personal wealth to buy us on his own but chooses not too
We are not talking about Andrew Muir as a single entity we are talking about a consortium he is part of and right now we don’t know if he alone is holding is 10% 50% 85% of that consortium
I thought he has stated that he wants it to be a consortium of equals i.e. equal financial input from each investor?
Which is in need of further investigation then because if he only wants the same as for example 10 others then this consortium is doomed to fail
Sorry, that doesn’t make sense.
What do you mean ‘wants the same’?
There could be five investors all putting in £30m.
There could be 30 putting in a mil
Comments like that don't help.
But that’s the whole point we do not know just how many or how few we do not know their intentions at all
All we know is that in more than a yr they haven’t raised the relevant funds to invest according to their own deal broker
So it could well be as complex as 30 loan investors
Highly doubtful but still possible
There’s got to be more to the failure to complete so far other than Director loans there just has to be
And harris has now publicly stated what that issue is
Its dragging on because no one is willing to pay £47mn, that's the agreed price of £40mn and then add the Directors Loans. That's assuming the Australians had their complete syndicate together for the £40mn in the first place or since. The debate goes on but the price remains ridiculously the same, keeping buyers away.
I think all of us agree that his valuation is high and above what most think is reasonable
But we do know that the 40 mil has been bid by two parties
One Saudi one aussie
The 7mil I refuse to believe was unknown by RD or those bidding
I also think that it’s the easiest part to work through
The biggest indicator is harris quotes in SLP Friday
There are no quotes from Harris in the SLP and nothing to suggest that Rich has spoken to him. I'm not saying the story is wrong, but it's unlikely to have come direct from Harris in my opinion.
I forgot to ask NLA this...what is Harris supposed to have said, can you remind us? Ta.
Below is a link to the full article.
As you will see Harris is referred to but nothing in it is attributed to him:
So my immediate question for Richard Cawley is, were you aware of Mr de Turck's explanation at the FF only a week previously, and if so how does this version of the situation square with that one? In timing terms alone I am struggling to square the two versions of the status.
(which is not to dig out RC who does his best on limited resources and with us fnas very much in mind)
In fact on July 12th, more than three weeks previously.
OK so how do you square the two versions of the reasons for the hold up?
I don't, but one is on the record and the other isn't. I trust Rich, but I think both you and NLA are simply choosing to believe the version that fits your argument and not because it's a more credible source of itself.
You may choose to believe that. However that implies that both I and @nth london addick are more interested in being "right" on Charlton Life than in establishing the facts of the matter. I do not believe that is NLA's motivation, and leave others to judge if they think it is mine. That is disappointing. I believe all three of us fundamentally and equally care about seeing RD replaced with better owners, and that as soon as possible.
PS. What are you saying is not on the record? de Turck's statement?? That is the version I refer to, not the EFL source thing, which maybe you refer to)
Jeez.......I thought we'd done this hundreds of pages ago.
10 investors (my guess) all putting in £4m each. Put in FPP papers and 2 get knocked back. Now need to find an additional 2 investors with £4m each to replace them. Not finding it easy & now Harris is involved (maybe via RD as he's had enough already).
Would be easier if the remaining 8 (my guess) upped their stake to £5m each. Would also be much easier if Muir just upped his stake (chicken feed to him) & got the deal over the line but I understand if he wants everyone to be equal.......although he could do this & then find more investors & re-arrange % at a later date.
All pure guesswork of course but all plausible. Fits in with NLA's "don't have the money". Back in May they most probably did as I doubt they would have gone to the EFL if not, but now they don't. Also back in May we were more of an attractive propostion (play-offs) than we are now (and getting worse)......hence why finding it hard to find people daft enough to part with £4m (my figures).
As I've said before.....as every day passes the Aussies are making it harder for themselves & not endearing themselves to (some) fans. If it to do with money (either finding investors or paying ex-directors) then just buy the fecking club now & sort out the issues later. The money they are dicking about over is not insurmountable. If not then just walk. We are in a worse mess now because they are still hangng around - RD believes it will all go through v soon so is not running us properly (no CEO, selling players to fund costs etc). If there were no buyers around he would do things differently.
Golfie, yes ages ago. But remember, they raised, or are raising (?), enough to buy the club and run it in such a way that it could be promoted to the PL in 5 years. It’s never been about raising £40m, it’s been about raising (guess alert) £150-200m.
Sorry......I was trying to keep it simple. Same premise as above but substitue £4m each to £10m each. £100m now - £40m to buy the club & £60m to cover running costs & players purchases for 3-5 years. I think £150-£200m is rather excessive. Does new Sunderland owner have this amount of money ?? How is he funding them going forward (genuine question - saw brief interview with him yesterday but don't know any figures)
I think £60m is well light. RD was losing £1m per month, so £60m over 5 years and nothing for transfers. I did post an estimated budget a few months back which made £200m seem modest.
I must be on a different planet then as I hear yesterday that Accrington's budget this season is £750k !!!! I know they have just been promoted but I doubt whether 20 other clubs in this division have anything like £12m a year to run their club. At this stage I'm not bothered about 5 years time - I'm not that bothered about the Premier League tbh - The Championship would suit me fine. What I am bothered about is this season (and next) because if this shitshow is not sorted soon then we could well find ourselves in league 2 next season !!!
@PragueAddick go and ask the person who wrote the SLP article
The club has said many things all from the mouth of a liar or multiple liars
I have said on here where I got told the aussies had no money
It was laughed at because it came from the RD side
GM told James seed there was still two that needed to sign off
Now the fact the Aussies are again still being reported to be searching for investors and the deal is in real jeopardy and Keith harris is actively working on resolving
There are still those that wish to believe a statement from known liars
Richard Murray could tell me that today is sunday and my name is darren
I would still check the calendar and my driving licence
This whole dirty sorry saga has been going on here since October 2017 we are two months from a year
Instead of asking me where the evidence is to substantiate my claim that they don’t have it or have never had it
The real question should be prove that they have
When their own side is taking about still looking for investors 10 months later
I think my proof has been substantiated
Roland has screwed this great club to the floor by its balls and will continue to do so
Two possibly 3 parties have tickled his ego valuation enough for him to believe he is right
His valuation however absurd you or I may think it is people are looking and biting his hook
Something never sat right with me about the Aussie bid and I will be honest and happy to be proved wrong about them and we will only know should they have somehow found the funds since harris let out his snitbit
So from here on in it’s not me having to justify my posts mine have been proven right
It’s for the Aussies to put up or shut up stay or walk simple as
But all the time they are hanging around without completing it’s a black cloud not a silver lines one
Do you or do you not concede that Andrew Muir has the wherewithal to purchase the club if he so wished.....either as an individual or by raising his stake in the consortium?
I have answered that question so many times on here
One of their investors has a personal wealth to buy us on his own but chooses not too
We are not talking about Andrew Muir as a single entity we are talking about a consortium he is part of and right now we don’t know if he alone is holding is 10% 50% 85% of that consortium
I thought he has stated that he wants it to be a consortium of equals i.e. equal financial input from each investor?
Which is in need of further investigation then because if he only wants the same as for example 10 others then this consortium is doomed to fail
Sorry, that doesn’t make sense.
What do you mean ‘wants the same’?
There could be five investors all putting in £30m.
There could be 30 putting in a mil
Comments like that don't help.
But that’s the whole point we do not know just how many or how few we do not know their intentions at all
All we know is that in more than a yr they haven’t raised the relevant funds to invest according to their own deal broker
So it could well be as complex as 30 loan investors
Highly doubtful but still possible
There’s got to be more to the failure to complete so far other than Director loans there just has to be
And harris has now publicly stated what that issue is
Its dragging on because no one is willing to pay £47mn, that's the agreed price of £40mn and then add the Directors Loans. That's assuming the Australians had their complete syndicate together for the £40mn in the first place or since. The debate goes on but the price remains ridiculously the same, keeping buyers away.
I think all of us agree that his valuation is high and above what most think is reasonable
But we do know that the 40 mil has been bid by two parties
One Saudi one aussie
The 7mil I refuse to believe was unknown by RD or those bidding
I also think that it’s the easiest part to work through
The biggest indicator is harris quotes in SLP Friday
There are no quotes from Harris in the SLP and nothing to suggest that Rich has spoken to him. I'm not saying the story is wrong, but it's unlikely to have come direct from Harris in my opinion.
I forgot to ask NLA this...what is Harris supposed to have said, can you remind us? Ta.
Below is a link to the full article.
As you will see Harris is referred to but nothing in it is attributed to him:
So my immediate question for Richard Cawley is, were you aware of Mr de Turck's explanation at the FF only a week previously, and if so how does this version of the situation square with that one? In timing terms alone I am struggling to square the two versions of the status.
(which is not to dig out RC who does his best on limited resources and with us fnas very much in mind)
In fact on July 12th, more than three weeks previously.
OK so how do you square the two versions of the reasons for the hold up?
I don't, but one is on the record and the other isn't. I trust Rich, but I think both you and NLA are simply choosing to believe the version that fits your argument and not because it's a more credible source of itself.
You may choose to believe that. However that implies that both I and @nth london addick are more interested in being "right" on Charlton Life than in establishing the facts of the matter. I do not believe that is NLA's motivation, and leave others to judge if they think it is mine. That is disappointing. I believe all three of us fundamentally and equally care about seeing RD replaced with better owners, and that as soon as possible.
PS. What are you saying is not on the record? de Turck's statement?? That is the version I refer to, not the EFL source thing, which maybe you refer to)
I think we all believe what we want to believe and are inclined to credit or discredit sources according to what suits us, me included. NLA even referred to Harris's quotes and what he'd said, when he's said nothing.
A good example is you not accepting the interpretation of your CAST colleagues who were in the room with De Turck, because it doesn't fit your preferred narrative. We even have people picking their own preferred Murray statement, when they are contradictory.
De Turck's statement from the FF is what's on the record. Clearly, Harris isn't. Neither are the EFL.
Could the Aussies switch attention back to Coventry City or one of the other four clubs they employed Deloitte to conduct a feasibility study into? There must be cheaper clubs available and easier owners to deal with.
Jeez.......I thought we'd done this hundreds of pages ago.
10 investors (my guess) all putting in £4m each. Put in FPP papers and 2 get knocked back. Now need to find an additional 2 investors with £4m each to replace them. Not finding it easy & now Harris is involved (maybe via RD as he's had enough already).
Would be easier if the remaining 8 (my guess) upped their stake to £5m each. Would also be much easier if Muir just upped his stake (chicken feed to him) & got the deal over the line but I understand if he wants everyone to be equal.......although he could do this & then find more investors & re-arrange % at a later date.
All pure guesswork of course but all plausible. Fits in with NLA's "don't have the money". Back in May they most probably did as I doubt they would have gone to the EFL if not, but now they don't. Also back in May we were more of an attractive propostion (play-offs) than we are now (and getting worse)......hence why finding it hard to find people daft enough to part with £4m (my figures).
As I've said before.....as every day passes the Aussies are making it harder for themselves & not endearing themselves to (some) fans. If it to do with money (either finding investors or paying ex-directors) then just buy the fecking club now & sort out the issues later. The money they are dicking about over is not insurmountable. If not then just walk. We are in a worse mess now because they are still hangng around - RD believes it will all go through v soon so is not running us properly (no CEO, selling players to fund costs etc). If there were no buyers around he would do things differently.
Golfie, yes ages ago. But remember, they raised, or are raising (?), enough to buy the club and run it in such a way that it could be promoted to the PL in 5 years. It’s never been about raising £40m, it’s been about raising (guess alert) £150-200m.
Sorry......I was trying to keep it simple. Same premise as above but substitue £4m each to £10m each. £100m now - £40m to buy the club & £60m to cover running costs & players purchases for 3-5 years. I think £150-£200m is rather excessive. Does new Sunderland owner have this amount of money ?? How is he funding them going forward (genuine question - saw brief interview with him yesterday but don't know any figures)
I think £60m is well light. RD was losing £1m per month, so £60m over 5 years and nothing for transfers. I did post an estimated budget a few months back which made £200m seem modest.
I must be on a different planet then as I hear yesterday that Accrington's budget this season is £750k !!!! I know they have just been promoted but I doubt whether 20 other clubs in this division have anything like £12m a year to run their club. At this stage I'm not bothered about 5 years time - I'm not that bothered about the Premier League tbh - The Championship would suit me fine. What I am bothered about is this season (and next) because if this shitshow is not sorted soon then we could well find ourselves in league 2 next season !!!
Not sure Accrington is a fair comparison. They were non league not so long ago and only get crowds of about 2k. We're probably paying Vetokele more than half their team combined.
A better one would be what Sheffield united's budget was when they were stuck in this league for a few seasons.
We’re likely to get relegated, and yet we’re back to my source is better then your source.
We are not about to get relegated. Get a grip.
If he sells a couple more first teamers and doesn't replace them (properly replace them) we are in trdouble as the atmosphere at the club would drag us down.
We’re likely to get relegated, and yet we’re back to my source is better then your source.
We are not about to get relegated. Get a grip.
If he sells a couple more first teamers and doesn't replace them (properly replace them) we are in trdouble as the atmosphere at the club would drag us down.
I believe we will bring in a couple more players this window. Nowhere near enough for a promotion push but mid table should be achievable. But obviously the fact that we are even discussing relegation to league two sums up what a total cnut Roland is.
Comments
He could sell the whole team if he choses to do so and play the Academy youngsters in the first team provided they were of age.
Which brings me on to your de Turck point. I was not there, and I freely admit to being at odds, in a cordial way, with the two CAST guys who were there, on this. Now, I would not be disputing this, were it not for what I regard as the highly credible source of @Addickted who has now 3 times confirmed that he understands the ODT test has been completed, and that some weeks ago. We all need to make a determined effort to get to the bottom of this flat out contradiction on a very fundamental issue.
But you still ask, why would de Turck lie? My answer is, for exactly the same reason that Richard Murray has been saying what he has to us in the last months. You would call them "lies" too. However RM has explained it this way. He is the non-exec chairman. He therefore reports to the shareholders. That means, to RD. Rightly or wrongly he has felt it necessary to behave as a loyal employee. Mr de Turck is in the same boat, even more so, as he is a long standing CFO of one of RD's companies who has obviously been asked to see this through as part of his employed role. If Duchatelet tells him to try to and pin the blame on the EFL, because that would put pressure on the Aussies, he will do as instructed. Further, regardless of the actual status, I think the EFL will be less than impressed that Mr de Turck said this. They are absolutely paranoid at present about secrecy of ongoing deals due to problems in the Sunderland process. I would have thought it might also be a breach of signed NDAs too. If I was him, I would have said nothing, citing NDAs. Mr de Turck is the CFO of a micro-electronics firm. He may not be overly familiar with the current politics of English football. But he is a loyal employee.
https://www.cafc.co.uk/news/view/5a96be566a1b3/richard-murray-provides-a-takeover-update-for-fans-as-february-draws-to-a-close
However, by June this was no longer the case, because 2 parties Australian and English were still negotiating.
As you will see Harris is referred to but nothing in it is attributed to him:
https://www.londonnewsonline.co.uk/charlton-athletics-takeover-talks-hanging-in-the-balance/
The quote I am referring to is: "Harris was tasked with finding other investors to push the takeover through and it is unclear if he has achieved that.", which seems to be pointing to his original brief with RD, not extra subscribers to the consortium.
(which is not to dig out RC who does his best on limited resources and with us fnas very much in mind)
It's total bollocks to argue that Murray reports to "shareholders". He isn't an executive director, isn't paid and could resign at any point with no financial impact on him or anyone else. He is an entirely free agent. He isn't the bloody chairman, either, and hasn't been for two years. The reason he doesn't is because he is desperate to salvage his reputation. He is the losing gambler who has seen his early winnings disappear and just can't leave the table. And he has zero respect - nil - from multiple people who were his co-directors for years and presumably have a more complete "view of the business world and how it works" at Charlton than you possibly could.
Your De Turck answer does not stand up because if had any professional integrity at all he would simply refuse to have the meeting before he would go there and lie. It wasn't as if fans were demanding to meet HIM. Do you really imagine that Duchatelet was remotely interested in whether he did meet them or not? To what end?
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/revealed-colourful-past-australian-interested-13019385
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-city-being-looked-australian-12965708
PS. What are you saying is not on the record? de Turck's statement?? That is the version I refer to, not the EFL source thing, which maybe you refer to)
There is no way I'm even attempting a summary of all this.
WIOTOS
A good example is you not accepting the interpretation of your CAST colleagues who were in the room with De Turck, because it doesn't fit your preferred narrative. We even have people picking their own preferred Murray statement, when they are contradictory.
De Turck's statement from the FF is what's on the record. Clearly, Harris isn't. Neither are the EFL.
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/coventry-city-gary-hoffman-consortium-13045999
A better one would be what Sheffield united's budget was when they were stuck in this league for a few seasons.
Get a grip.
Nowhere near enough for a promotion push but mid table should be achievable.
But obviously the fact that we are even discussing relegation to league two sums up what a total cnut Roland is.