The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)

Henry Irving said:

AFKABartram said:

Henry Irving said:

AFKABartram said:

JamesSeed said:

nth london addick said:

AFKABartram said:

JamesSeed said:

nth london addick said:

JamesSeed said:

I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 

I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 

It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 

so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo

I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling 


so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil  plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents 

i believe this is still the case 

Where do you get £26m from? 
I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times. 

That would be me, and that’s what I interpreted “It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans.“

so the total cost paid by the Aussies was £33m. Roland would pay out £7m meaning his own return would be £26m. Am i still interpreting that wrong?

Yes and no.

Duchatelet thought he take £33m off the Aussies and pay a fraction of the £7m (25%???) Because Duchatelet believed that ALL the ex-directors would make a deal.

Only it turns out White hand, Chapel and Summers won't take less than 100% and White hasn't agreed either despite Duchatelet saying he had.

My guess is that Duchatelet, because he didn't bother to confirm it, thought the ex-directors liability was going to be £1.75m (25% of £7m) but when he found out it wasn't dumped it on the Aussies to sort/pay.

Hence the £33m becoming £40m

This all comes down again to the incompetence of De Turck and Duchatelet.

They believed the ex-directors would take a small % but didn't check with them or get it in writing.

Too many intermediaries, too many assumptions, too many incompetent Belgians.

Ok, that makes more sense. But still not sure that stacks up for me. My understanding was there was a play by Roland to offer 25% of the o/s debt in June LAST YEAR, which was rejected by the debt holders and never progressed. Are you saying that 12 months on you understand there was a repeated play at the same level, and just an assumption that it would be accepted?

My assumption.  The 25% was a guess, as I said, based on the previous offer.

My again guess is that Duchatelet thought it would all be OK because Murray and/or incompetent De Turck told him it would be OK.

Maybe Murray and Hatter were willing to take a lower fee so Duchatelet just assumed the others would do the same. Again I don't know.

Redskin said:

Henry Irving said:Tuppence

bobmunro said:

i_b_b_o_r_g said:

So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?

I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.

I could be wrong though.

Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunro

Tuppance Hap'ny

Tuppence ha'penny

Henry Irving said:

favershamaddick said:

Redskin said:

Henry Irving said:Tuppence

bobmunro said:

i_b_b_o_r_g said:

So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?

I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.

I could be wrong though.

Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunro

Tuppance Hap'ny

Tuppence ha'penny

Phonetic spelling for northern Bob

Addickted said:

Henry Irving said:

AFKABartram said:

Henry Irving said:

AFKABartram said:

JamesSeed said:

nth london addick said:

AFKABartram said:

JamesSeed said:

nth london addick said:

JamesSeed said:

I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 

I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 

It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 

so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo

I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling 


so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil  plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents 

i believe this is still the case 

Where do you get £26m from? 
I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times. 

That would be me, and that’s what I interpreted “It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans.“

so the total cost paid by the Aussies was £33m. Roland would pay out £7m meaning his own return would be £26m. Am i still interpreting that wrong?

Yes and no.

Duchatelet thought he take £33m off the Aussies and pay a fraction of the £7m (25%???) Because Duchatelet believed that ALL the ex-directors would make a deal.

Only it turns out White hand, Chapel and Summers won't take less than 100% and White hasn't agreed either despite Duchatelet saying he had.

My guess is that Duchatelet, because he didn't bother to confirm it, thought the ex-directors liability was going to be £1.75m (25% of £7m) but when he found out it wasn't dumped it on the Aussies to sort/pay.

Hence the £33m becoming £40m

This all comes down again to the incompetence of De Turck and Duchatelet.

They believed the ex-directors would take a small % but didn't check with them or get it in writing.

Too many intermediaries, too many assumptions, too many incompetent Belgians.

Ok, that makes more sense. But still not sure that stacks up for me. My understanding was there was a play by Roland to offer 25% of the o/s debt in June LAST YEAR, which was rejected by the debt holders and never progressed. Are you saying that 12 months on you understand there was a repeated play at the same level, and just an assumption that it would be accepted?

My assumption.  The 25% was a guess, as I said, based on the previous offer.

My again guess is that Duchatelet thought it would all be OK because Murray and/or incompetent De Turck told him it would be OK.

Maybe Murray and Hatter were willing to take a lower fee so Duchatelet just assumed the others would do the same. Again I don't know.

Well it was a very accurate guess. Which is why Duchatalet was told to do one.

More recent offers have been made that are still unacceptable, but I believe that at least two ex directors are happy to take a reduced amount for early settlement as long as they're satisfied over the long term future of the Club.

The one I've spoken to however has concerns as to why is it so essential for the debenture needs to be settled now. 

cabbles said:

If we have to suffer another season under RD, thank God we’ve got Lee Bowyer, JJ and Gallen all under contract.  I think Lee pulled off a miracle last season, and although I don’t doubt it will be ten times harder this season, I have faith he’ll do what needs to be done.

I only know what I read on here re: the Aussies, but IF, their financial situation is so precarious, and I mean IF, then as crazy as this may sound, I think I’d rather stick it out with RD for the time being.  Let me explain my warped thinking, because I don’t say this lightly.  

RD has, for all his faults, never stopped paying the bills or to my knowledge, paid anyone late.  He’s acted like a total scumbag on numerous occasions and done many wrongs, but the club haven’t flirted with administration as far as I know.  I understand he wouldn’t let that happen anyway, because he stands to lose everything should he let that happen.  

I also think we’ve reached the point where the set up that exists is somehow the most stable it’s ever going to be, comparatively speaking, under his ownership.  We have, by the grace of God, a divine intervention in Bowyer and what he has achieved and what I think he’s capable of, given the circumstances he operates in.

we also know, categorically RD does want to sell.  Granted, his original idea of what the club is worth, versus what he wanted was fantasy, but I think as time goes by, reality is kicking in, and he’s aware of the club’s true value.  

Giving Lee the contract he wanted was another sign.  12/18 months ago, he would’ve held firm on his insane statement and Karel Frayere would’ve probably been taking training on Friday.  He knows that in order to sell the club, he can’t run it like he has been given the success on the pitch over the last year.

I know there’s probably a hundred things and more I don’t know about the Aussie bid, including how difficult RD is to deal with, ex Directors’ loans etc, but, given the Aussies’ interest is over a year old now, regardless of what I pick up on here, I just think that the funds aren’t there to sustain running the club.  I may be wrong.  If that’s the case given the current circumstances of RD’s reign and the situation we find ourselves in, I think I’d rather opt for this, than risk one/two seasons of Aussie ownership and then possible administration.  This is all hypothetical at the moment and I don’t want people to think I’m suddenly an apologist for RD, or that I have forgotten all the wrongs he has done to us and the club.  I just mean that the position we find ourselves in now, at this point in time under his ownership, is to an extent, steady(ish).

Putting the old proverbial tin hat on 

Rudders22 said:

If Henry is going tonight we will have to wait for his missus to cook him dinner 1st before he writes up his minutes. 

Solidgone said:

He could draft the minutes before he goes. 

JamesSeed said:

Weegie Addick said:

JamesSeed said:

nth london addick said:

AFKABartram said:

JamesSeed said:

nth london addick said:

JamesSeed said:

I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 

I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 

It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 

so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo

I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling 


so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil  plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents 

i believe this is still the case 

Where do you get £26m from? 
I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times. 

James,  you said the original price was £33m with RD to sort loans so people are deducting £7M to get £26M net.

Ah sorry, got ya. As far as the Aussies were concerned it was £33m, as that was what they’d be paying.

RD had always said he’d take care of the loans, probably believing the directors would ‘settle’. I suspect he may have reached agreement with RM, the principal lender, only to go batty when others wouldn’t follow suit.

So I can see where the £26m comes from, but as far as the Aussies were concerned, I believe their deal was £33m with clean title. So when Roland decided not to settle the loans that sum became £40m.

Not sure where any of this gets us though. Club still isn’t sold. But I guess it may be soon?

happyvalley said:

1803, Martello towers are built along the coast to protect England from a French invasion.