Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
golfaddick said:
That was my initial thinking. Who ever planted the story in the ES doesn't know the full facts.ShootersHillGuru said:They can’t demand payment until the club reaches the PL
.2 -
VOTV a few of weeks ago.
http://www.votvonline.com/home/the-2018-19-blogs/9-6-ex-charlton-directors-respond-over-loan-claims/
I guess this doesn't account for the other 4? former directors stance.
Airman. Any idea how the other 4 see things?
Any of them demanding repayment?0 -
I did bring that up about 600 pages, or more, ago. I wouldn't supprise me at all if he didn't own everything he originally thought he did. He didn't do proper DD and he was dealing with a bunch of con mengrumpyaddick said:Has the possibility occured to anyone that Roland doesn't actually own the club at all and it's this tiny legal detail that's holding up everything .0 -
But,but a qualified lawyer was working for him then....Cafc43v3r said:
I did bring that up about 600 pages, or more, ago. I wouldn't supprise me at all if he didn't own everything he originally thought he did. He didn't do proper DD and he was dealing with a bunch of con mengrumpyaddick said:Has the possibility occured to anyone that Roland doesn't actually own the club at all and it's this tiny legal detail that's holding up everything .4 -
If I were buying the club, I’d want it unencumbered even if I didn’t need to raise debt against the stadium, I might have to and why should I have my hands tied.
if Duchâtelet wants to have a similar charge for a portion of his debt, he can’t unless the current directors are paid out I think1 -
For me this is the far more obvious reason.Alwaysneil said:If I were buying the club, I’d want it unencumbered even if I didn’t need to raise debt against the stadium, I might have to and why should I have my hands tied.
if Duchâtelet wants to have a similar charge for a portion of his debt, he can’t unless the current directors are paid out I think15 -
I think it's slightly (but only slightly) more complicated than that.blackpool72 said:I refuse to believe that the directors loans are stopping the sale of the club from going through.
The loans only total 7mil.and they don't need to be repayed until we reach the premiership.
I am convinced that something else is causing this delay.
Almost certainly Shitweasel at fault
The £7m is in effect a first charge against the property. If the £7m loan gets paid back, the charge goes away. But Roland doesn't want to pay it.
The buyers want clean title. And they probably also want to defer certain tranches of payments, contingent on stuff like promotion, etc. If Roland pays off the first charge, he would want his own first charge on the property to act as an insurance against not getting the additional payments.
So, on the one hand, Roland doesn't want to pony up the £7m. But, on the other hand, he wants there to be a charge (in his benefit) on the property, so that he can ensure he gets his later instalments.
The buyers (whoever they are - maybe Dalman, maybe the Aussies, maybe the Chinese consortium that was named a few pages back) will want to defer payments where they can; they might be happy for Roland to have a charge on the property in order to "guarantee" the deferred payments, but they don't see why they would have to pay to get rid of the first charge. (And why should they?)
6 -
Chizz said:
I think it's slightly (but only slightly) more complicated than that.blackpool72 said:I refuse to believe that the directors loans are stopping the sale of the club from going through.
The loans only total 7mil.and they don't need to be repayed until we reach the premiership.
I am convinced that something else is causing this delay.
Almost certainly Shitweasel at fault
The £7m is in effect a first charge against the property. If the £7m loan gets paid back, the charge goes away. But Roland doesn't want to pay it.
The buyers want clean title. And they probably also want to defer certain tranches of payments, contingent on stuff like promotion, etc. If Roland pays off the first charge, he would want his own first charge on the property to act as an insurance against not getting the additional payments.
So, on the one hand, Roland doesn't want to pony up the £7m. But, on the other hand, he wants there to be a charge (in his benefit) on the property, so that he can ensure he gets his later instalments.
The buyers (whoever they are - maybe Dalman, maybe the Aussies, maybe the Chinese consortium that was named a few pages back) will want to defer payments where they can; they might be happy for Roland to have a charge on the property in order to "guarantee" the deferred payments, but they don't see why they would have to pay to get rid of the first charge. (And why should they?)
12 -
There is no good news Chizz, just bad news and irrelevant newsChizz said:Chizz said:
I think it's slightly (but only slightly) more complicated than that.blackpool72 said:I refuse to believe that the directors loans are stopping the sale of the club from going through.
The loans only total 7mil.and they don't need to be repayed until we reach the premiership.
I am convinced that something else is causing this delay.
Almost certainly Shitweasel at fault
The £7m is in effect a first charge against the property. If the £7m loan gets paid back, the charge goes away. But Roland doesn't want to pay it.
The buyers want clean title. And they probably also want to defer certain tranches of payments, contingent on stuff like promotion, etc. If Roland pays off the first charge, he would want his own first charge on the property to act as an insurance against not getting the additional payments.
So, on the one hand, Roland doesn't want to pony up the £7m. But, on the other hand, he wants there to be a charge (in his benefit) on the property, so that he can ensure he gets his later instalments.
The buyers (whoever they are - maybe Dalman, maybe the Aussies, maybe the Chinese consortium that was named a few pages back) will want to defer payments where they can; they might be happy for Roland to have a charge on the property in order to "guarantee" the deferred payments, but they don't see why they would have to pay to get rid of the first charge. (And why should they?)
9 -
Sponsored links:
-
From Euston and changed at Leamington Spa.Uboat said:
So how did students get to Hogwarts before that?happyvalley said:1852, Kings Cross Station opened.4 -
Were they named? I don't remember seeing the name of their organisation?Chizz said:
I think it's slightly (but only slightly) more complicated than that.blackpool72 said:I refuse to believe that the directors loans are stopping the sale of the club from going through.
The loans only total 7mil.and they don't need to be repayed until we reach the premiership.
I am convinced that something else is causing this delay.
Almost certainly Shitweasel at fault
The £7m is in effect a first charge against the property. If the £7m loan gets paid back, the charge goes away. But Roland doesn't want to pay it.
The buyers want clean title. And they probably also want to defer certain tranches of payments, contingent on stuff like promotion, etc. If Roland pays off the first charge, he would want his own first charge on the property to act as an insurance against not getting the additional payments.
So, on the one hand, Roland doesn't want to pony up the £7m. But, on the other hand, he wants there to be a charge (in his benefit) on the property, so that he can ensure he gets his later instalments.
The buyers (whoever they are - maybe Dalman, maybe the Aussies, maybe the Chinese consortium that was named a few pages back) will want to defer payments where they can; they might be happy for Roland to have a charge on the property in order to "guarantee" the deferred payments, but they don't see why they would have to pay to get rid of the first charge. (And why should they?)1 -
I understand all of that.Henry Irving said:
For me this is the far more obvious reason.Alwaysneil said:If I were buying the club, I’d want it unencumbered even if I didn’t need to raise debt against the stadium, I might have to and why should I have my hands tied.
if Duchâtelet wants to have a similar charge for a portion of his debt, he can’t unless the current directors are paid out I think
The Standard has misrepresented the former directors yet again.
As far as I'm aware , under no circumstance can the former directors block a takeover for non payment of their existing loans. Everyone knows this. It's well documented.
Then why did the Standard not state this alongside the usual bollocks from Roland that they somehow can in this latest report?0 -
I've spoken to a well connected sports journo in Cardiff.
All I can say is he hasn't posted any copy in response to the Standard article.
4 -
When you say slightly 🤔Chizz said:
I think it's slightly (but only slightly) more complicated than that.blackpool72 said:I refuse to believe that the directors loans are stopping the sale of the club from going through.
The loans only total 7mil.and they don't need to be repayed until we reach the premiership.
I am convinced that something else is causing this delay.
Almost certainly Shitweasel at fault
The £7m is in effect a first charge against the property. If the £7m loan gets paid back, the charge goes away. But Roland doesn't want to pay it.
The buyers want clean title. And they probably also want to defer certain tranches of payments, contingent on stuff like promotion, etc. If Roland pays off the first charge, he would want his own first charge on the property to act as an insurance against not getting the additional payments.
So, on the one hand, Roland doesn't want to pony up the £7m. But, on the other hand, he wants there to be a charge (in his benefit) on the property, so that he can ensure he gets his later instalments.
The buyers (whoever they are - maybe Dalman, maybe the Aussies, maybe the Chinese consortium that was named a few pages back) will want to defer payments where they can; they might be happy for Roland to have a charge on the property in order to "guarantee" the deferred payments, but they don't see why they would have to pay to get rid of the first charge. (And why should they?)2 -
Dazzler21 said:
Were they named? I don't remember seeing the name of their organisation?Chizz said:
I think it's slightly (but only slightly) more complicated than that.blackpool72 said:I refuse to believe that the directors loans are stopping the sale of the club from going through.
The loans only total 7mil.and they don't need to be repayed until we reach the premiership.
I am convinced that something else is causing this delay.
Almost certainly Shitweasel at fault
The £7m is in effect a first charge against the property. If the £7m loan gets paid back, the charge goes away. But Roland doesn't want to pay it.
The buyers want clean title. And they probably also want to defer certain tranches of payments, contingent on stuff like promotion, etc. If Roland pays off the first charge, he would want his own first charge on the property to act as an insurance against not getting the additional payments.
So, on the one hand, Roland doesn't want to pony up the £7m. But, on the other hand, he wants there to be a charge (in his benefit) on the property, so that he can ensure he gets his later instalments.
The buyers (whoever they are - maybe Dalman, maybe the Aussies, maybe the Chinese consortium that was named a few pages back) will want to defer payments where they can; they might be happy for Roland to have a charge on the property in order to "guarantee" the deferred payments, but they don't see why they would have to pay to get rid of the first charge. (And why should they?)
Mentioned, not named1 -
And his reasons for that are?Valley11 said:I've spoken to a well connected sports journo in Cardiff.
All I can say is he hasn't posted any copy in response to the Standard article.
4 -
Chizz said:
I think it's slightly (but only slightly) more complicated than that.blackpool72 said:I refuse to believe that the directors loans are stopping the sale of the club from going through.
The loans only total 7mil.and they don't need to be repayed until we reach the premiership.
I am convinced that something else is causing this delay.
Almost certainly Shitweasel at fault
The £7m is in effect a first charge against the property. If the £7m loan gets paid back, the charge goes away. But Roland doesn't want to pay it.
The buyers want clean title. And they probably also want to defer certain tranches of payments, contingent on stuff like promotion, etc. If Roland pays off the first charge, he would want his own first charge on the property to act as an insurance against not getting the additional payments.
So, on the one hand, Roland doesn't want to pony up the £7m. But, on the other hand, he wants there to be a charge (in his benefit) on the property, so that he can ensure he gets his later instalments.
The buyers (whoever they are - maybe Dalman, maybe the Aussies, maybe the Chinese consortium that was named a few pages back) will want to defer payments where they can; they might be happy for Roland to have a charge on the property in order to "guarantee" the deferred payments, but they don't see why they would have to pay to get rid of the first charge. (And why should they?)
This makes sense so is obviously bollocks 😉2 -
1855, The last groat is minted. We've got an old goat who's_minted.25
-
He only speaks Welsh.Henry Irving said:
And his reasons for that are?Valley11 said:I've spoken to a well connected sports journo in Cardiff.
All I can say is he hasn't posted any copy in response to the Standard article.
6 -
Sponsored links:
-
You've tweeted at PauloAbbandonato?Valley11 said:I've spoken to a well connected sports journo in Cardiff.
All I can say is he hasn't posted any copy in response to the Standard article.
Anyway there's this from 4 days ago, not sure if posted
0 -
I don't believe the deal is dead, I think Dalman is trying to put pressure on Roland. Could be wrong, and maybe it's wishful thinking but think he will be involved in 1 or 2 twists yet.6
-
a few people have tweeted at Paul now and he last tweeted about an hour ago, only a matter of time before he replies probably0
-
I think the Standard, or whoever fed them the story, has been a little economical with facts when it comes to the Directors loans.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the are a sticking point. But we know they can’t demand payment. They are passive viewers in this unless someone wants to pay them off early. If that’s the case, and they are paid off in full, again there’s nothing they can do but accept.
This is all about the buyer wanting the loans cleared and Roland not wanting to pay in full. If the added rumor that he wants to secure his debts against some club assets is true, why would the Director’s take a haircut so that Roland can guarantee his payment in full.0 -
He can't speak English.Henry Irving said:
And his reasons for that are?Valley11 said:I've spoken to a well connected sports journo in Cardiff.
All I can say is he hasn't posted any copy in response to the Standard article.
edit: beaten to it. Well played @s@"SoundAsa£"0 -
Amended for you.happyvalley said:1855, The last groat is minted. We've got an old scroat who's_minted.0 -
Fair play, but the 'roland will probably back us now' stuff has been going on for yearsthickandthin63 said:To Shine 166,its a bit sad when discussions cant take place without personal insults,still each to their own,luckily the majority of people on this site stick to voicing their opinions about football,and Charlton.2 -
Economical??SomervilleAddick said:I think the Standard, or whoever fed them the story, has been a little economical with facts when it comes to the Directors loans.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the are a sticking point. But we know they can’t demand payment. They are passive viewers in this unless someone wants to pay them off early. If that’s the case, and they are paid off in full, again there’s nothing they can do but accept.
This is all about the buyer wanting the loans cleared and Roland not wanting to pay in full. If the added rumor that he wants to secure his debts against some club assets is true, why would the Director’s take a haircut so that Roland can guarantee his payment in full.
If I was an ex director of be bloody fuming!
To a neutral it looks like those Charlton directors being awkward again.0 -
Which one? Or both?Henry Irving said:
For me this is the far more obvious reason.Alwaysneil said:If I were buying the club, I’d want it unencumbered even if I didn’t need to raise debt against the stadium, I might have to and why should I have my hands tied.
if Duchâtelet wants to have a similar charge for a portion of his debt, he can’t unless the current directors are paid out I think0 -
That was my view.cafcfan1990 said:I don't believe the deal is dead, I think Dalman is trying to put pressure on Roland. Could be wrong, and maybe it's wishful thinking but think he will be involved in 1 or 2 twists yet.
Dalman leaked the £30m offer to the Standard in March and his name was first publicly linked there too a few weeks back.
Now this.
Dalman seems to me to be happy to use the press to put pressure on Duchatelet or at least get his version of events out there.
It maybe dead and Dalman just gave someone the story. Or maybe not.
3
This discussion has been closed.
