The debentures are with CAHL, owned by Baton 2010 and subsequently Staprix. If new owners want to borrow money on the Valley they do NOT need permission of the 1st chargees. Hence the old git bought us without sucking up to Dick and co. Neither do the Aussies who will buy one of these three entities.
Any lender to Muir will make a judgement call as to whether there is sufficient headroom on the asset to justify a loan. Ditto for a 3rd 4th or 5th charge.
The Valley is an asset of Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited. If anybody sought to take acharge on those assets to lend money then the negative pledge (which prevents anyone else taking a charge on these assets) would come into play and prevent anyone elsetaking a charge headroomor not.
Bearing in mind the debentures were Jiminez related not RD, it is highly unlikely there is a negative pledge issue because he bought us with £7m loans in place. Only repayable in the Prem. Again the debentures were in the public domain b4 Muir spent £1m+ on DD. Doubt they became an issue so late on. Also given Muir has a $800m war chest and investors likely similar, it's unlikely he is going cap in hand to banks for an overdraft.
They were executed in 20009 and 2010 before Jimenez, and were done when all 7 Ex Directors were still on the Board and were put in place to provide cash flow to keep Club alive, this has been well documented before,keep up. There is a Negative Pledge why would Ex Directors have done their deal otherwise ? They are repayable in Premier League unless you wish to borrow against the assets and then you need Ex Directors permission, or you do what Jimenez and Roland did which is place unsecured Loans behind them in the queue, is that clear enough for you now?
No. Have read the debentures and cannot see the negative pledge issue which RD seemed to have ducked. Apologies if loans pre-dated Jiminez but that means they weren't an issue with the 2 previous owners but suddenly are with the 3rd despite them being in the public domain b4 Muir spent £1m+ on DD.
That the debentures weren't an issue for the proven liars and dodgy dealers Jimenez and Slater or for the DIY due diligence of deluded Duchatelet is hardly a valid reason to believe they aren't important.
Pretty sure the Aussies knew about and saw the significance of the debentures from the start of DD, not just now.
The problem is, imho, that Roland told the Aussies he'd deal with the old directors and the £7m but so far he still hasn't.
So we have a rumour of a 25% offer (not from Derek) but nothing further. If Muir is being held up with negotiations over £7m owed to former directors, I'd expect improved bids. More detail from one who is a prolific poster on the subject. BTW Derek fair play to you for investing in our beloved Addicks.
who said I invested?
who is Derek?
What I wanted to know too. Maybe he thinks you are Derek Chappell?
Been reported "elsewhere" that the Aussies have the funds to buy the club, but the sticking point is that the EFL are not convinced that they will be able to finance the club going forward.
No idea if there is any truth to this, it's just a rumour.
They probably haven't promised to asset strip us as much as Roland has.
Been reported "elsewhere" that the Aussies have the funds to buy the club, but the sticking point is that the EFL are not convinced that they will be able to finance the club going forward.
No idea if there is any truth to this, it's just a rumour.
If nothing else, at least it's a fresh rumour!
Having seen some of the previous takeovers allowed through, it's hard to believe that such a criteria exists, or would be a major sticking point.
Yep it has gotten more and more zabeel like every passing week I expect announcement to be made after the Sunderland game saying that RD is staying and the deals off
Yep it has gotten more and more zabeel like every passing week I expect announcement to be made after the Sunderland game saying that RD is staying and the deals off
I’m expecting someone to buy the club during the next six weeks or so, and they’ll be faced with a situation where they can’t affect things on the pitch, which’ll give them time to sort things out a bit off the pitch. But that’s the optimist’s viewpoint. Or course it could always happen next week after the window closes, or maybe all potential buyers may walk away suddenly. But would be surprised if the Aussies do, after all the time and money invested up to now.
Yep it has gotten more and more zabeel like every passing week I expect announcement to be made after the Sunderland game saying that RD is staying and the deals off
I agree.
I'm so sure it's not happening before the start of the season that I'll have the ROT logo tattooed on my arse if it does.
Well they don't exist,it's just a "group" of people ---numbers unknown--- wealth unknown--- --- all I know is one who may or may not be an investor phones up a guy on here with various "chill out it's all cool" or some such bollox and some Aussie guy wears a Charlton scarf to a game ------- that's it
The debentures are with CAHL, owned by Baton 2010 and subsequently Staprix. If new owners want to borrow money on the Valley they do NOT need permission of the 1st chargees. Hence the old git bought us without sucking up to Dick and co. Neither do the Aussies who will buy one of these three entities.
Any lender to Muir will make a judgement call as to whether there is sufficient headroom on the asset to justify a loan. Ditto for a 3rd 4th or 5th charge.
The Valley is an asset of Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited. If anybody sought to take acharge on those assets to lend money then the negative pledge (which prevents anyone else taking a charge on these assets) would come into play and prevent anyone elsetaking a charge headroomor not.
Bearing in mind the debentures were Jiminez related not RD, it is highly unlikely there is a negative pledge issue because he bought us with £7m loans in place. Only repayable in the Prem. Again the debentures were in the public domain b4 Muir spent £1m+ on DD. Doubt they became an issue so late on. Also given Muir has a $800m war chest and investors likely similar, it's unlikely he is going cap in hand to banks for an overdraft.
They were executed in 20009 and 2010 before Jimenez, and were done when all 7 Ex Directors were still on the Board and were put in place to provide cash flow to keep Club alive, this has been well documented before,keep up. There is a Negative Pledge why would Ex Directors have done their deal otherwise ? They are repayable in Premier League unless you wish to borrow against the assets and then you need Ex Directors permission, or you do what Jimenez and Roland did which is place unsecured Loans behind them in the queue, is that clear enough for you now?
No. Have read the debentures and cannot see the negative pledge issue which RD seemed to have ducked. Apologies if loans pre-dated Jiminez but that means they weren't an issue with the 2 previous owners but suddenly are with the 3rd despite them being in the public domain b4 Muir spent £1m+ on DD. I'd guess any waiver to an NP issue would have to be filed at Companies House and it hasn't on 2 occasions. How had the club functioned for the last 7 years?
Read the extract filed at companies house of each of the debentures which is on the form 395. On page 4 of the continuation sheet it clearly states a negative pledge. They weren't an issue for RD because he borrowed money from himself and his other companies and did not take a charge on the assets to secure his loans. Slater, Jimenez and Cash - well subsequent history shows the level of financial understanding and risk taking. Muir is risk averse which is why he may have spent £1m on DD and identified this as a risk to be addressed before acquisition.
Yep it has gotten more and more zabeel like every passing week I expect announcement to be made after the Sunderland game saying that RD is staying and the deals off
I agree.
I'm so sure it's not happening before the start of the season that I'll have the ROT logo tattooed on my arse if it does.
Will you take a picture to prove it, if it does happen
Yep it has gotten more and more zabeel like every passing week I expect announcement to be made after the Sunderland game saying that RD is staying and the deals off
I agree.
I'm so sure it's not happening before the start of the season that I'll have the ROT logo tattooed on my arse if it does.
Will you take a picture to prove it, if it does happen
So sure that it won't happen that I'll publically unveil it in Crossbars.
Yep it has gotten more and more zabeel like every passing week I expect announcement to be made after the Sunderland game saying that RD is staying and the deals off
I agree.
I'm so sure it's not happening before the start of the season that I'll have the ROT logo tattooed on my arse if it does.
Yep it has gotten more and more zabeel like every passing week I expect announcement to be made after the Sunderland game saying that RD is staying and the deals off
I agree.
I'm so sure it's not happening before the start of the season that I'll have the ROT logo tattooed on my arse if it does.
I think it’s been dead in the water for a very long time . Even if by some miracle the Aussies do take over my confidence in them is very low because of the balls up of trying to get this deal over the line . They obviously don’t have the financial clout to buy a club and that’s really worrying .
Has anyone else basically ignored every single post that deals with finance or the law?
It does mean you're basically left with shit jokes and people saying, 'I reckon it's off' and 'Next week, I reckon', but at least you don't have to think.
Yep it has gotten more and more zabeel like every passing week I expect announcement to be made after the Sunderland game saying that RD is staying and the deals off
I agree.
I'm so sure it's not happening before the start of the season that I'll have the ROT logo tattooed on my arse if it does.
Comments
Having seen some of the previous takeovers allowed through, it's hard to believe that such a criteria exists, or would be a major sticking point.
He does wear Aussie colours to be fair.
But that’s the optimist’s viewpoint.
Or course it could always happen next week after the window closes, or maybe all potential buyers may walk away suddenly. But would be surprised if the Aussies do, after all the time and money invested up to now.
I'm so sure it's not happening before the start of the season that I'll have the ROT logo tattooed on my arse if it does.
It does mean you're basically left with shit jokes and people saying, 'I reckon it's off' and 'Next week, I reckon', but at least you don't have to think.