Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
@PopIcon didn’t ask how much the club cost and the make up of the consortium.Redrobo said:
It is how I feel. Come the day there will be so many posts to say “I told you so” and all will conveniently forget the gaps.Covered End said:
No one knows, they just think they do or word their comments carefully so as not to be challenged.Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
If you ask them direct questions, they tend to disappear for the rest of the day.
We can all say I heard it will happen, but to date nobody has produced anything that would suggest that they are truly in the know. i.e. How much? For what? By when?, and finally, by whom?
And as I’ve said no-one is in the know. You’re never going to get all the facts on a plate during a takeover. You just have to go with the info that you’ve got unfortunately.5 -
Soon be down to less than ten posters I reckon.1
-
SID said:
I wonder whether all you pun specialists try them out on your other halves first before you submit them just to check how hilarious they are. Of course for anyone wanting to catch up on probably the most important period of our clubs history since the homecoming, they're not funny at all and you come across as a bunch of wankers.
25 -
Thank you, I think we should skate over itHandG said:
Oops a daisy! Apologies @Johnnysummers5- in my desperation to use a rubbish fish pun, I got my Johnny Summers name related Charlton Life users mixed up.Johnnysummers5 said:
Thank you for that, I know I never said itcabbles said:
I think he means SeedJohnnysummers5 said:
Can you show me, where I said I was finished with Charlton Life pleaseHandG said:
Sorry to be a pedant but a whale isn’t a fish.Johnnysummers5 said:
I liked Noah and the Whale and thought they were goodJamesSeed said:Has anybody else ever noticed that although there are loads of bands with fish related names, none of them are very good?
Also, I thought you were finished on Charlton Life? You saw the fish bands and were reeled back in?2 -
Phew!!JamesSeed said:
Of course there are negatives too.PopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
0 -
If it helps, the Aussies tried to reduce the offer from the agreed price about a month ago - there were also a few terms still to be agreed. That was the case a month ago and I've heard nothing different since. If anything significant had happened since, I'm sure I would know about it. That is the position in a nutshell - I don't know what the figures are or what the terms are but I know rd wants shot and everyone wants the takeover to happen.2
-
I may have this wrong, but it seems to me that Jim is getting information from Murphy who is dancing around the NDA and is unable to say certain things. I don't think Jim is willingly not passing on information, it seems to me that he is passing on what he is able to and is also speculating a little in the posts. I think it's his speculation that gets people confused. I'm not sure why. The posts are always pretty clear to me as to which parts are genuine info and which parts are speculation.Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
If he IS getting more information that he isn't allowed to share, if he shares it, there's a good chance all information will dry up completely, so pushing him to reveal more isn't exactly useful.26 -
I find it easier when people ITK just state what they have heard without any - 'I know something you don't and I'll tell you in a bit' posts. I used to love @Redhenry posts. Told you what he knew in one line.16
-
.
I’m actually not holding anything back.WestCountryAddick said:
I may have this wrong, but it seems to me that Jim is getting information from Murphy who is dancing around the NDA and is unable to say certain things. I don't think Jim is willingly not passing on information, it seems to me that he is passing on what he is able to and is also speculating a little in the posts. I think it's his speculation that gets people confused. I'm not sure why. The posts are always pretty clear to me as to which parts are genuine info and which parts are speculation.Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
If he IS getting more information that he isn't allowed to share, if he shares it, there's a good chance all information will dry up completely, so pushing him to reveal more isn't exactly useful.
I certainly wouldn’t share if I was in his shoes. For example, I imagine his investors are promised anonymity if they want it, as part of the deal. He’s not going to break that for anybody @Redrobo certainly not me.
He’s not passing anything about the sale on to me other than what I post here. I wish people would believe me when I say that. I’m NOT teasing you with bits of info and holding key things back.
I don’t 100% believe any of the info that has leaked out, because it doesn’t come directly from Lieven or Gerard who are conducting the negotiations. The couple of times I have believed ‘leaks’ they been denied (correctly) by GM. That’s not to say @DOUCHER ‘s info is wrong, I just don’t know that it isn’t.
I know there’s a grouper people who don’t believe anything they read on this thread. I wouldn’t either if I was in their plaice.8 -
Sponsored links:
-
Old news @DOUCHERDOUCHER said:If it helps, the Aussies tried to reduce the offer from the agreed price about a month ago - there were also a few terms still to be agreed. That was the case a month ago and I've heard nothing different since. If anything significant had happened since, I'm sure I would know about it. That is the position in a nutshell - I don't know what the figures are or what the terms are but I know rd wants shot and everyone wants the takeover to happen.
Bite size thread summary 26 June
"First rumours appeared that following a first face to face meeting between Gerard Murphy and Roland "why don't you just feck off?" Duchatelet, that had not gone well (Roland furious and swearing when the Aussies tried to low ball him on the price at the last minute) that the deal was "as good as over" but this was refuted by those close to the antipodean camp."4 -
I tell you what. Here's a conjecture for you. And I'm not in any way in the know...
Aussie consortium first meeting after due dilligence...
Aussie 1: "Jeez! This Belgian drongo is losing a million quid a month!"
Aussie 2: (Frantically typing into his "Good Guys" calculator...) "Christ! That's nearly ten million quid a year!"
Aussie 3, at this point, declares that he has a part share in Staines Town FC, and Aussie 4 announces he owns the Hot Dog franchise at Weston-super-Mare FC...
Aussie 1: "Strewth! We'll never find another idiot willing to bite that bullet. We'd better pull out."
Aussie 2: "Mate, we're gonna lose a lot of goodwill with the poms if we do that."
Aussie 1: "OK. Here's the plan. We'll put a lot of obstacles in the way, until the Belgian pulls the plug..."
At the first meeting between the 2 parties, Aussies say, "We're a bit worried about these ex-director loans..." Parties depart, come back a month later. RD representative:"Well, it wasn't easy but we sorted that." Aussie: "Oh... While you're here, we noticed the water in the fish tank needs changing..." Parties adjourn. Come back a week later. RD representative: "OK. Done that, and changed the water filter as well!" Aussie: "Oh... The decorating in the toilets could do with a spruce up..." Parties adjourn. Parties reconvene a couple of weeks later. RD representative: "Right, went to B&Q, bought a pot of budget paint, and got the receptionist to slap a coat of paint on the toilet walls." Aussie: "Oh... Sorry, we'd like the Boardroom table moved 6" south, please?" Etc. Etc.
A few months down the line, the Aussie consortium produce a press release:
"It is with deep regret we announce that we are unable to complete the acquisition of..." blah, blah, blah. " We feel that Charlton is a club with huge potential..." blah, blah, blah. "Charlton Athletic, and it's fans deserve only the best..." blah, blah, blah. "We wish only the best for the club and it's supporters..." blah, blah, blah.
"P.S. Does anyone want to buy a second hand scarf? Worn only once..."
And my conjecture has as much chance of being right, as anyone else's has.3 -
.
Plan for Prem not Championship. But totally agree it’s not going to be easy in that there are plenty of others with the same idea.killerandflash said:
A well argued and balanced argument, but no fish puns thoughJamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I would caution that 5 year plans aren't necessarily a sign of ambition, as
a) it depends on what the plan actually covers, a plan that sees us as a mid table Championship team after 5 years would be an improvement on our current state, but hardly very inspiring
b) are the plans realistic, and proportional to the level of funding they are investing? It's easy to talk big, but in a world where there are some very rich owners splashing the cash to get in the PL, relying on Aussie sports know how and scouting as a secret weapon won't cut it.
I don’t think they’re only relying on Aussie sports know how though. *If* there have been problems replacing investors it’s probably because the level of required investment is high. I hope they have a plan of action for what to do if they’re outgunned financially in the Championship.0 -
.JamesSeed said:
If they actually buy the club of course.PopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
0 -
Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php0 -
I’m sure he’ll really appreciate thatshirty5 said:
Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php8 -
Surely if the takeover happens they won't be able to stay anonymous unless it's small amounts? I know Cash did, but I'm not sure that was entirely above boardJamesSeed said:.
I’m actually not holding anything back.WestCountryAddick said:
I may have this wrong, but it seems to me that Jim is getting information from Murphy who is dancing around the NDA and is unable to say certain things. I don't think Jim is willingly not passing on information, it seems to me that he is passing on what he is able to and is also speculating a little in the posts. I think it's his speculation that gets people confused. I'm not sure why. The posts are always pretty clear to me as to which parts are genuine info and which parts are speculation.Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
If he IS getting more information that he isn't allowed to share, if he shares it, there's a good chance all information will dry up completely, so pushing him to reveal more isn't exactly useful.
I certainly wouldn’t share if I was in his shoes. For example, I imagine his investors are promised anonymity if they want it, as part of the deal. He’s not going to break that for anybody @Redrobo certainly not me.
He’s not passing anything about the sale on to me other than what I post here. I wish people would believe me when I say that. I’m NOT teasing you with bits of info and holding key things back.
I don’t 100% believe any of the info that has leaked out, because it doesn’t come directly from Lieven or Gerard who are conducting the negotiations. The couple of times I have believed ‘leaks’ they been denied (correctly) by GM. That’s not to say @DOUCHER ‘s info is wrong, I just don’t know that it isn’t.
I know there’s a grouper people who don’t believe anything they read on this thread. I wouldn’t either if I was in their plaice.
1 -
I'm sure he willJamesSeed said:
I’m sure he’ll really appreciate thatshirty5 said:
Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php0 -
It was his decision to come to The Valley and his decision to have his email address on a public website, I don't think he can have too many complaints.JamesSeed said:
I’m sure he’ll really appreciate thatshirty5 said:
Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php5 -
When I speculated the delay was nothing to do withRoland, ex Directors or loans, you made a point of highlighting that bit and said “not so”. But if you know for a fact that this is not the case, you must know something you have not shared.JamesSeed said:.
Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
Blimey. I don’t get the anger Red, calm down.Covered End said:
No one knows, they just think they do or word their comments carefully so as not to be challenged.Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
If you ask them direct questions, they tend to disappear for the rest of the day.
You’ve read an awful lot into some simple statements.
“Just tell us exactly what you have been told” !?
I have done, that’s the point.
And above I’ve answered a question someone asked, so I gave my opinion.
Stop ranting (please?)7 -
Sponsored links:
-
True I suppose.Stu_of_Kunming said:
It was his decision to come to The Valley and his decision to have his email address on a public website, I don't think he can have too many complaints.JamesSeed said:
I’m sure he’ll really appreciate thatshirty5 said:
Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php
And he can always ignore them if he wants to. Even at our beer meeting he mentioned getting loads and said he was sorry he couldn’t answer them during sale process.0 -
Not every comment I’ve made is based on something he told me. I have a couple of other sources who send me info because I’ve shared my GM info.Redrobo said:
When I speculated the delay was nothing to do withRoland, ex Directors or loans, you made a point of highlighting that bit and said “not so”. But if you know for a fact that this is not the case, you must know something you have not shared.JamesSeed said:.
Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
Blimey. I don’t get the anger Red, calm down.Covered End said:
No one knows, they just think they do or word their comments carefully so as not to be challenged.Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
If you ask them direct questions, they tend to disappear for the rest of the day.
You’ve read an awful lot into some simple statements.
“Just tell us exactly what you have been told” !?
I have done, that’s the point.
And above I’ve answered a question someone asked, so I gave my opinion.
Stop ranting (please?)
I don’t remember that ‘not so’, or the context, and the only thing I heard from GM about pre May 18th delays was they they were from issues dating from before the Duchâtelet era.
I’m not holding anything back about the negotiations, trust me.1 -
Probably not, I wouldn’t know for sure though.killerandflash said:
Surely if the takeover happens they won't be able to stay anonymous unless it's small amounts? I know Cash did, but I'm not sure that was entirely above boardJamesSeed said:.
I’m actually not holding anything back.WestCountryAddick said:
I may have this wrong, but it seems to me that Jim is getting information from Murphy who is dancing around the NDA and is unable to say certain things. I don't think Jim is willingly not passing on information, it seems to me that he is passing on what he is able to and is also speculating a little in the posts. I think it's his speculation that gets people confused. I'm not sure why. The posts are always pretty clear to me as to which parts are genuine info and which parts are speculation.Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
If he IS getting more information that he isn't allowed to share, if he shares it, there's a good chance all information will dry up completely, so pushing him to reveal more isn't exactly useful.
I certainly wouldn’t share if I was in his shoes. For example, I imagine his investors are promised anonymity if they want it, as part of the deal. He’s not going to break that for anybody @Redrobo certainly not me.
He’s not passing anything about the sale on to me other than what I post here. I wish people would believe me when I say that. I’m NOT teasing you with bits of info and holding key things back.
I don’t 100% believe any of the info that has leaked out, because it doesn’t come directly from Lieven or Gerard who are conducting the negotiations. The couple of times I have believed ‘leaks’ they been denied (correctly) by GM. That’s not to say @DOUCHER ‘s info is wrong, I just don’t know that it isn’t.
I know there’s a grouper people who don’t believe anything they read on this thread. I wouldn’t either if I was in their plaice.
The anonymity could just last during the sale process, in case it isn’t completed successfully?
There are lots of business folk who know about this sort of thing on here, so hopefully one of them will comment.1 -
24th JulyJamesSeed said:
Not so.Redrobo said:The way that the comment has been phrased to James suggests to me it is they the Australians that have the difficulties, not Roland. Not the ex directors. Not loans.
So what is it that the Australians will find difficult to do in two weeks?
We have been told that the consortium needs to be less complicated. Who decided this and why?
There also seems to be the suggestion that two of the consortium did not pass fit and proper. Is this what will mean a difficult two weeks to resolve?
Maybe the two go together. By re-organising the consortium they can then meet the requirements of fit and proper and yet keep the consortium together.0 -
Irrelevant now with the Aussies as between them and Roland they've already managed to write this season off.9
-
There should be a separate thread for the fish puns and wading through that crap is no different to an Inbox full of spam mail.SID said:I wonder whether all you pun specialists try them out on your other halves first before you submit them just to check how hilarious they are. Of course for anyone wanting to catch up on probably the most important period of our clubs history since the homecoming, they're not funny at all and you come across as a bunch of wankers.
0 -
Ah I do remember.Redrobo said:
24th JulyJamesSeed said:
Not so.Redrobo said:The way that the comment has been phrased to James suggests to me it is they the Australians that have the difficulties, not Roland. Not the ex directors. Not loans.
So what is it that the Australians will find difficult to do in two weeks?
We have been told that the consortium needs to be less complicated. Who decided this and why?
There also seems to be the suggestion that two of the consortium did not pass fit and proper. Is this what will mean a difficult two weeks to resolve?
Maybe the two go together. By re-organising the consortium they can then meet the requirements of fit and proper and yet keep the consortium together.
I posted that GM said ‘there may be a couple of difficult weeks ahead’
You replied:
‘The way that the comment has been phrased to James suggests to me it is they the Australians that have the difficulties, not Roland. Not the ex directors. Not loans.’
My ‘not so’ was a rebuttal of your point that the comment was ‘phrased in a way ... that suggests it is the Australians are having the difficulties, not Roland. Not the ex directors. Not loans.’
‘There may be a couple of difficult weeks ahead’, means that there may be a couple of difficult weeks ahead. Just that. It doesn’t imply anything that you suggest at all. It could be difficult for any number of reasons, including or excluding those that you mentioned.
I think you’re over analysing this.3 -
Fixed for you.Ferryman said:
There should be a separate thread for the fish puns and wading through that carp is no different to an Inbox full of spam mail.SID said:I wonder whether all you pun specialists try them out on your other halves first before you submit them just to check how hilarious they are. Of course for anyone wanting to catch up on probably the most important period of our clubs history since the homecoming, they're not funny at all and you come across as a bunch of wankers.
9 -
Thank you James. I now understand what you meant.4
-
And you think he'll sing?shirty5 said:
Time to cut out the middle man and contact him direct. E mail address to be found if you click on the link below if anyone feels inclined to do so. 11 weeks today people!Redrobo said:
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?JamesSeed said:
@PopIconPopIcon said:@JamesSeed why do you have so much faith in the Aussies?
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
http://gerardmurphy.com.au/contact.php0
This discussion has been closed.
