Just to say I am due to be on LoveSport radio at around 14.30, on behalf of CAST. Believe it is a web only channel. @Davo55 was apparently on last Friday too, but I am not sure if it offers playback allowing us to grab soundbites off it.
Anyway, I will do my best to hit all the buttons.
Give me a shout down my ends Prago
I took my chance...
They insisted on asking me what I'm doing (as a Charlton fan) in Czecho.
I said "that's nothing, there's one famous Charlton fan who owns a huge pile near Limoges in France, and can you believe it, he's a nailed-on Brexiteer..."
Thats personal information!
Still as long you never said anything about the shop up next to Grove Park BR Station, we might've gotten away with it
Just to say I am due to be on LoveSport radio at around 14.30, on behalf of CAST. Believe it is a web only channel. @Davo55 was apparently on last Friday too, but I am not sure if it offers playback allowing us to grab soundbites off it.
Anyway, I will do my best to hit all the buttons.
Give me a shout down my ends Prago
I took my chance...
They insisted on asking me what I'm doing (as a Charlton fan) in Czecho.
I said "that's nothing, there's one famous Charlton fan who owns a huge pile near Limoges in France, and can you believe it, he's a nailed-on Brexiteer..."
Thats personal information!
Still as long you never said anything about the shop up next to Grove Park BR Station, we might've gotten away with it
The reason JamesSeed got so emotional, is because he's been caught out withholding information. This MIGHT have contributed to the 3 month takeover delay. James has told us on so many occasions, that he has shared all he knows and we know as much as him. It was obviously not true, even if he does regard the information as personal. It isn't, not in terms of data protection.
Without having to read back, what info?
Think he's saying that JS knew GM was having issues with settling in the UK and chose to withhold it.
The reason JamesSeed got so emotional, is because he's been caught out withholding information. This MIGHT have contributed to the 3 month takeover delay. James has told us on so many occasions, that he has shared all he knows and we know as much as him. It was obviously not true, even if he does regard the information as personal. It isn't, not in terms of data protection.
.....Is because I’ve been ‘caught out!?’ Not true at all. In the past I’ve said I’ve revealed everything about the takeover but several times I’ve said I wasn’t going to reveal personal stuff.
1. GM is the broker. He wasn’t sure if he’d be moving back to London as of May 18, so wasn’t sure if he’d be involved after the sale.
2. The family have been over looking at schools and houses. I didn’t share on here because frankly it’s a family matter and not relevant (except that it shows a level of commitment). Bear in mind that they spend about three years here up to around 2012, so not easy to uproot the family from schools etc again.
3. It’s possible that it’s not going to work out for the family which may mean that they will need to appoint a CEO. This won’t delay the sale. You don’t have to have a CEO in place for a sale to go through. It’s just more internet stirring from the usual suspects. It sort of sums up why I’ve had enough of it really.
I certainly see why Grapevine just comes on here once a month to post.
Thanks. No offence, but you are a strange chap. You spend all morning complaining about someone divulging personal information and then you go and divulge a whole lot more. You couldn't make it up. Thanks anyway.
No offence taken of course.
Colin’s spread a story that NLA has interpreted as meaning that the deal could be delayed or may even be off. Its better the facts were known, rather than allow speculation take over as it inevitably would.
You really are off ya titties jimbo log off come back when your not so pre menstral
Probably good advice. To be be honest, about once a month I do find myself taking it all far too seriously. Doh.
The reason JamesSeed got so emotional, is because he's been caught out withholding information. This MIGHT have contributed to the 3 month takeover delay. James has told us on so many occasions, that he has shared all he knows and we know as much as him. It was obviously not true, even if he does regard the information as personal. It isn't, not in terms of data protection.
Without having to read back, what info?
Think he's saying that JS knew GM was having issues with settling in the UK and chose to withhold it.
The reason JamesSeed got so emotional, is because he's been caught out withholding information. This MIGHT have contributed to the 3 month takeover delay. James has told us on so many occasions, that he has shared all he knows and we know as much as him. It was obviously not true, even if he does regard the information as personal. It isn't, not in terms of data protection.
.....Is because I’ve been ‘caught out!?’ Not true at all. In the past I’ve said I’ve revealed everything about the takeover but several times I’ve said I wasn’t going to reveal personal stuff.
1. GM is the broker. He wasn’t sure if he’d be moving back to London as of May 18, so wasn’t sure if he’d be involved after the sale.
2. The family have been over looking at schools and houses. I didn’t share on here because frankly it’s a family matter and not relevant (except that it shows a level of commitment). Bear in mind that they spend about three years here up to around 2012, so not easy to uproot the family from schools etc again.
3. It’s possible that it’s not going to work out for the family which may mean that they will need to appoint a CEO. This won’t delay the sale. You don’t have to have a CEO in place for a sale to go through. It’s just more internet stirring from the usual suspects. It sort of sums up why I’ve had enough of it really.
I certainly see why Grapevine just comes on here once a month to post.
Thanks. No offence, but you are a strange chap. You spend all morning complaining about someone divulging personal information and then you go and divulge a whole lot more. You couldn't make it up. Thanks anyway.
No offence taken of course.
Colin’s spread a story that NLA has interpreted as meaning that the deal could be delayed or may even be off. Its better the facts were known, rather than allow speculation take over as it inevitably would.
You really are off ya titties jimbo log off come back when your not so pre menstral
Probably good advice. To be be honest, about once a month I do find myself taking it all far too seriously. Doh.
Someone will be along to tell you in a bit no doubt, but it's up Grove Park
Is that the Grove Park in West London near Chiswick......or could it, by some amazing fluke) be on the Lewisham/Bromley borders in SE London? I mean to say, that would be almost a million to one shot, akin to winning the lottery.
.....Is because I’ve been ‘caught out!?’ Not true at all. In the past I’ve said I’ve revealed everything about the takeover but several times I’ve said I wasn’t going to reveal personal stuff.
1. GM is the broker. He wasn’t sure if he’d be moving back to London as of May 18, so wasn’t sure if he’d be involved after the sale.
2. The family have been over looking at schools and houses. I didn’t share on here because frankly it’s a family matter and not relevant (except that it shows a level of commitment). Bear in mind that they spend about three years here up to around 2012, so not easy to uproot the family from schools etc again.
3. It’s possible that it’s not going to work out for the family which may mean that they will need to appoint a CEO. This won’t delay the sale. You don’t have to have a CEO in place for a sale to go through. It’s just more internet stirring from the usual suspects. It sort of sums up why I’ve had enough of it really.
I certainly see why Grapevine just comes on here once a month to post.
Someone will be along to tell you in a bit no doubt, but it's up Grove Park
Is that the Grove Park in West London near Chiswick......or could it, by some amazing fluke) be on the Lewisham/Bromley borders in SE London? I mean to say, that would be almost a million to one shot, akin to winning the lottery.
Times I had people come in the shop asking if I knew where a certain road was and, after looking in the A to Z for em, finding it was over West Londin
Just to say I am due to be on LoveSport radio at around 14.30, on behalf of CAST. Believe it is a web only channel. @Davo55 was apparently on last Friday too, but I am not sure if it offers playback allowing us to grab soundbites off it.
Anyway, I will do my best to hit all the buttons.
Sorry I missed your slot @PragueAddick. I'll listen when it's avalable on demand.
Someone will be along to tell you in a bit no doubt, but it's up Grove Park
Is that the Grove Park in West London near Chiswick......or could it, by some amazing fluke) be on the Lewisham/Bromley borders in SE London? I mean to say, that would be almost a million to one shot, akin to winning the lottery.
Times I had people come in the shop asking if I knew where a certain road was and, after looking in the A to Z for em, finding it was over West Londin
That’s almost as mad as calling the main Hospital in Aldershot The Cambridge Hospital......I kid you not. “Hi Mum.......I’ve been in a road accident and I’m in The Cambridge Hospital.” “ Hang in there son, me and Dad are on our way.” Two or three hours later Mum and Dad turn up in Cambridge.......miles from bloody Aldershot! Dread to think how many times that scenario (or similar), must have played itself out over the years.
If the Aussies outbid the Saudis (which I don't believe) and the Saudis found out they had been outbid, they could only have acquired that information from the seller. (Why would the Aussies tell the Saudis?)
So, in that light, perhaps there are two alternative reasons the Saudis chose to back away.
1. The oft-promulgated posit is that they walked away because they had been outbid by a financially unbeatable consortium. A group of Saudi businessmen, we are asked to believe, found that a bid for the club was trumped by another party, with whom they were financially unable to compete. And they reacted by disappearing, licking their wounds. And we are asked to accept this as a plausible explanation and to cast a shadow over the Aussies.
2. The unexplored version of this is a bit different. The Saudis bid for the club. Roland solicited a counter bid from another party (the Aussies). Roland went back to the Saudis to seek another counter. At which time the Saudis, expecting a deal to be completed with due respect and professionalism, walked away. Roland disclosed privileged information (ie the other party's bid) and the Saudis decided against dealing with a business leader unable or unwilling to adhere to non-disclosure requirements.
I don't know if either of these is true. And I don't honestly think either is true. But, if pushed, I would say that 1 is less plausible than 2.
We've been fed a story that is intended to put the Aussies in a bad light. I still don't buy it.
What story have we been fed? Why would the Aussies be put in a bad light?
The story promulgated is that the Aussies made, and had accepted, an offer that, while it surpassed the Saudi bid, they had no intention of completing on. And that has put them in a bad light with those that have chosen to believe the story.
The price was agreed no lies there no issue with it
The Aussies haven’t followed through with it
And never had any intention too they gazumped and knocked out the opposition and then are playing hard ball with RD until they get investnent or he backs down
Time wasters and charlatins no surprise really seeing as they are from convict Stock
It's a narrative placed on public record (ie here) by someone (NLA) with a record of providing detailed and interesting insight into the takeover. But, in an of itself, it's difficult to determine whether the story is accurate or has been promulgated in order to discredit the Aussies. (To be clear, I am certainly not accusing NLA of deliberately spreading inaccurate information; merely that he might have repeated information he had been given that wasn't an honest reflection of what has been happening.
Incidentally, @Redhenry what information can you share on the status of the Saudis' progress through the EFL ODT test? When did it take place?
If the Aussies outbid the Saudis (which I don't believe) and the Saudis found out they had been outbid, they could only have acquired that information from the seller. (Why would the Aussies tell the Saudis?)
So, in that light, perhaps there are two alternative reasons the Saudis chose to back away.
1. The oft-promulgated posit is that they walked away because they had been outbid by a financially unbeatable consortium. A group of Saudi businessmen, we are asked to believe, found that a bid for the club was trumped by another party, with whom they were financially unable to compete. And they reacted by disappearing, licking their wounds. And we are asked to accept this as a plausible explanation and to cast a shadow over the Aussies.
2. The unexplored version of this is a bit different. The Saudis bid for the club. Roland solicited a counter bid from another party (the Aussies). Roland went back to the Saudis to seek another counter. At which time the Saudis, expecting a deal to be completed with due respect and professionalism, walked away. Roland disclosed privileged information (ie the other party's bid) and the Saudis decided against dealing with a business leader unable or unwilling to adhere to non-disclosure requirements.
I don't know if either of these is true. And I don't honestly think either is true. But, if pushed, I would say that 1 is less plausible than 2.
We've been fed a story that is intended to put the Aussies in a bad light. I still don't buy it.
What story have we been fed? Why would the Aussies be put in a bad light?
The story promulgated is that the Aussies made, and had accepted, an offer that, while it surpassed the Saudi bid, they had no intention of completing on. And that has put them in a bad light with those that have chosen to believe the story.
The price was agreed no lies there no issue with it
The Aussies haven’t followed through with it
And never had any intention too they gazumped and knocked out the opposition and then are playing hard ball with RD until they get investnent or he backs down
Time wasters and charlatins no surprise really seeing as they are from convict Stock
It's a narrative placed on public record (ie here) by someone (NLA) with a record of providing detailed and interesting insight into the takeover. But, in an of itself, it's difficult to determine whether the story is accurate or has been promulgated in order to discredit the Aussies. (To be clear, I am certainly not accusing NLA of deliberately spreading inaccurate information; merely that he might have repeated information he had been given that wasn't an honest reflection of what has been happening.
Incidentally, @Redhenry what information can you share on the status of the Saudis' progress through the EFL ODT test? When did it take place?
@Chizz, good post but @Redhenry already answered your last question. He does not know.
Nobody is able to confirm that any other bid than the Aussies have got as far as the EFL.
If the Aussies outbid the Saudis (which I don't believe) and the Saudis found out they had been outbid, they could only have acquired that information from the seller. (Why would the Aussies tell the Saudis?)
So, in that light, perhaps there are two alternative reasons the Saudis chose to back away.
1. The oft-promulgated posit is that they walked away because they had been outbid by a financially unbeatable consortium. A group of Saudi businessmen, we are asked to believe, found that a bid for the club was trumped by another party, with whom they were financially unable to compete. And they reacted by disappearing, licking their wounds. And we are asked to accept this as a plausible explanation and to cast a shadow over the Aussies.
2. The unexplored version of this is a bit different. The Saudis bid for the club. Roland solicited a counter bid from another party (the Aussies). Roland went back to the Saudis to seek another counter. At which time the Saudis, expecting a deal to be completed with due respect and professionalism, walked away. Roland disclosed privileged information (ie the other party's bid) and the Saudis decided against dealing with a business leader unable or unwilling to adhere to non-disclosure requirements.
I don't know if either of these is true. And I don't honestly think either is true. But, if pushed, I would say that 1 is less plausible than 2.
We've been fed a story that is intended to put the Aussies in a bad light. I still don't buy it.
What story have we been fed? Why would the Aussies be put in a bad light?
The story promulgated is that the Aussies made, and had accepted, an offer that, while it surpassed the Saudi bid, they had no intention of completing on. And that has put them in a bad light with those that have chosen to believe the story.
The price was agreed no lies there no issue with it
The Aussies haven’t followed through with it
And never had any intention too they gazumped and knocked out the opposition and then are playing hard ball with RD until they get investnent or he backs down
Time wasters and charlatins no surprise really seeing as they are from convict Stock
It's a narrative placed on public record (ie here) by someone (NLA) with a record of providing detailed and interesting insight into the takeover. But, in an of itself, it's difficult to determine whether the story is accurate or has been promulgated in order to discredit the Aussies. (To be clear, I am certainly not accusing NLA of deliberately spreading inaccurate information; merely that he might have repeated information he had been given that wasn't an honest reflection of what has been happening.
Incidentally, @Redhenry what information can you share on the status of the Saudis' progress through the EFL ODT test? When did it take place?
@Chizz, good post but @Redhenry already answered your last question. He does not know.
Nobody is able to confirm that any other bid than the Aussies have got as far as the EFL.
I hesitate to step into such an entrenched space but we are moving into some real flights of fantasy largely based on 3rd hand information, speculation and subjective conjecture.
I can but embellish my comments of 22Jul.
There is one party responsible for the current fiasco. The responsibility starts and stops with the clubs beneficial owner
We have seen from the nature of the man his rudderless infrastructure, divisive culture, alienation of thousands, and catastrophic failure to empower the football clubhouse all but destroy any vestige of a competitive senior professional football organisation.
After this appalling stewardship any new people will need to put considerably more than £40mn at risk to restore this club to any industry credibility,
Yet some wish to vilify a group who appear to be prepared to pay an exorbitant fee for the man to just go away and then take on that very challenge. It is beyond bizarre.
NLA I respect your contacts and much of your opinion but your comments re the Australians now no longer stand scrutiny.
You assert there is/was no problem with the Owners & Directors Test the primary purpose of which is to determine if the financial suitability of an ownership is sufficient to ensure the club is able to fulfill its obligations to the EFL, its competitions and other members.
Why then do you think the EFL would clear the Australian bid if they did not evidence the ability to a) acquire the club b) fund operations going forward?
Whether the EFL criteria is ever valid is always debatable but with the court revelations re Jiminez, Cash and a BVI family trust nobody was going to just nod this transaction through.
Any interested party is free to bid what they are prepared to pay. The object of the exercise is to win the bid. Had the Australians met the full EFL criteria at the outset I suspect the deal would have been done. Hence the over confident appearance of consortium members on match days.
That the EFL requirements may have had any number of stipulations requiring certain parties to complete time consuming divestment of other interests or provide legal clarifications will have caused delays. The time lapse will have meant key timelines were missed and subsequent club trading will have moved the goalposts.
Perversely the delayed EFL sanction in certifying the Australians has changed the dynamic of the deal. It strengthened the Australian negotiating position.
Thus a takeover involving multiple issues has evolved into a protracted transaction. Such transactions do not move in a straight line. They are an ever changing iterative process. The value of every trading entity is ever changing. The value of "the club" today is not what it was when negotiations began.
It is too quiet but the Australians apart from announcing they have walked away are legally prevented from a public position or platform in this matter. Any attempt to talk to any interested party be they fans or ex directors, unless approved by the club will breach the NDA, with prejudice.
Without a legal standing such dialogue would be totally inappropriate in terms of directly interfering with the vendors financial & trading position.
No matter who is involved please register the possible scale of finance involved. With contingency & margins project finance of £120-150mn is not excessive.
Acquisition £35-40mn (a grossly inflated price), 5yrs Working capital £60-75mn, Facilities infrastructure (Training ground/ Academy) £10-15mn, Playing infrastructure (Signings) £15-20mn
To deliver a 5yr plan you secure the full funding before stepping through the door. Chasing finance mid term to deliver any project is fraught with problems. Lack of working capital is precisely why Chappell, Murray, Slater & Jimenez failed and why the training ground work has stalled.
The delay is hugely frustrating but like it or not in truth the now EFL certified Australians need do absolutely nothing. They are established in pole position.
For now they need only respond to developments. It is a risk but they appear confident nobody will match their offer. With the inflated price, the club modus operandi and the current turmoil who could argue with such confidence?
Operationally there is now no burning need for any buyer to close any deal before the end of October. No one can meaningfully impact this or any other clubs fortunes until the January window.
In the meantime M.Duchatellet will continue to incur losses. The turmoil of this week revealing his scorched earth policies will reinforce their negotiating position.
I do accept the Australians may have changed their position.
If their indicative pricing referenced clear title such condition will be met by the purchase of the corporate entity owning club assets. There is a different issue. Due diligence will have identified the terms of any encumbrances to such title and the powers granted to ex directors in respect of club assets.
At a recent Fans Forum we are advised despite EFL sanction further paperwork may be required and ex director loans are not a problem. Executives rarely flat out lie but they often however revel in half truths. Though ex directors loans may not be seen as a problem their debentures may.
Due diligence is a reflective & ongoing process and certain investors may have chosen to revisit the impact of these debentures. Logically why would any investors, prepared to fund perhaps over £100mn, cede control of assets to a group whose outstanding liability is circa £7mn?
Yet the debentures are not their problem. The Australians have no authority to act
Duchatelet needed to address them on acquiring the club. Indeed such oversight may have positioned his rushed acquisition ahead of other interested parties. The debentures remain his problem to resolve.
Ultimately the overall debt/ price may indeed still be a bridge too far.
That the Australians still seem interested in trying to cross that bridge is hardly a matter of condemnation bordering on hysteria.
In all of this there is one overriding fact. Absolutely none of it is exclusive.
At any time any other party be they Saudi, British or anything else could have stepped in. To argue the Australians are somehow responsible for any aspect of our current situation is utter nonsense.
Those in charge of the business are responsible for how the business is run whether it is for sale or not. Pursuing an indiscriminate scorched earth policy in such circumstances undermines the very business you are trying to sell.
This continued campaign of distraction and deflection serves only to excuse a failed administration. It is a deflection which defines this administration. Be it other clubs, the EFL, the industry culture, the Royal Mail, multiple coaches, the fans, college students, social media, the media, the fans again, CARD, WAR, ROT, the players or the staff everybody else is to blame.
Today it is the turn of the Australians. Tomorrow it will be somebody else.
The idea if the Australians walked the price would drop is speculative nonsense. If it does drop who would likely be best positioned to move? The Australians.
The current situation is damaging but only because of the way the club is being run. It is for this ownership to manage - no one else. Not for the first time Duchatelet appears to be simply making it up as he goes along.
Yesterday saw no owner, no CEO, no CFO, no COO, no Director, no senior management, no permanent senior football management, a senior squad still not fit for purpose, in a stadium in reality nearly 4/5ths empty, with a divided fan base.
It is clear the Australians have a lot to answer for........yea right
How can it be a good post if he's asking a question that's already been answered?
Because the main point of his post was his polite and very clear explanation that @Redhenry had equally politely asked for. Admin dream post in that respect.
the Saudi’s showed their money enough to put in a firm offer they reached his number and got gazzumped by people that apart from buying a scarf and getting cheap cheers like wwe wrestlers have done nothing
They then walked away as they were at their number
Not a fake number by fake people
No. The Saudi's clearly didn't have the money to run the club or they simply weren't actually interested in the club.
I am fairly certain our latest bid received was not the same amount as the Aussies bid, however it was also accepted.
If the Saudi's had either the money or the interest, they'd own us by now.
Why they reached their limit and like in all auctions you know when to stop especially when the Aussies wouldn’t stop and seeing as they are only using Monopoly money why should they
Shame you can’t wake up and smell the coffee.
When they buy us I will drink coffee for the first time in years
But my coffee ban is well and truly safe
nla....you seem to be enjoying yourself making us all the more depressed. How much longer are you planning to go on finding countless ways of telling us exactly the same thing over and over again?
I don't think NLA enjoys it at all, I think he's just doing the same as others itk, by relaying what he's been told. The only problem is, people only seem to like good news (whether they know it to be wholly accurate or not) and what NLA is relaying, isn't necessarily what the majority of fans want to hear. The majority want to hear things like "It's gonna be a tough 2 weeks, but it'll be worth it in the end".
It seems to me that if you so much as question the Aussies in anyway, you get laughed at or jumped on.
My money is on NLA.
I don't know NLA personally, or James Seed or Airman or Doucher or Red Henry or Colin or anyone ITK. I just read the posts and NLA has stuck to his guns even when his posts have been pilloried. He has also been the most accurate, and this version of events ties in with what is transpiring at CAFC. So it'll do for me.
How can it be accurate? He said consistently the Aussie’s don’t have the funds but now we have two sources claiming the Aussies have passed the fit and proper EFL test. That means they do have the funds. Last night he changed his tune to ‘don’t have the funds or not willing to pay the price’.Remember his source is coming from the Roland camp. Would you trust Roland? All this Aussie bashing is mighty suspicious.
RD has the money to pass the fit and proper test also
You need to re read the posts go back to October when I first said
The Aussies don’t have the funds (they never then )
From December I said they don’t have the funds and are trying to get more
Me saying that they may not be willing to spend it is because the fee they agreed remember the agreed part it’s very important
They have not followed through on
I said there two reasons
They don’t have it
They don’t want to spend it
What other reasons are there if the the Club The Aussies the EFL all belive that it’s in place
It’s not directors loans that part hasn’t been addressed and is not being addressed
It’s because the Aussie bid has stalled they are unwilling to pay the amount they agreed
Was this a deliberate negotiation tactic or is it they thought they could raise the money and they can’t
The EFL can check the accounts that the consortium members have and that will show they have the required funds but that don’t mean they will use it or are willing to use it
Reading all the posters that are questioning whether they want the Aussies now because they’re being, or have always been, devious:
I 100% believe that they did NOT set out to bid high, with the intention of later on reducing their bid. I’d be shocked if that was the case.
I’m quite sure GM expected the purchase to be done and dusted the week after our meeting. He wouldn’t have be so sure if he was planning to low ball Roland.
Whether they screwed up after that I don’t know. Whether new consortium members were needed I don’t know. I don’t know when, or even if, they decided his price was too high.
But they didn’t walk. Not yet anyway.
This is a question I asked elsewhere on this thread, but, in your (humble or otherwise!) opinion (or knowledge), was it a closed bid with a deadline (ala TV rights/train franchise), or an on-going 'war'... i.e. Aussies offer, say, 30M; Saudies 32M; Aussies come back with £34M etc etc etc... Roland playing one off against the other?
Was there any hint at all (and I appreciate you might be out of the loop here) of RD questionning where the money came from? By that I mean that, if I sell my car for 5k, I don't care where the money comes from; if it's a husband/wife chipping in with the help of the mother-in-law or whatever, or some bloke who's got 5k lying around. I don't care what happens to the car after it's sold either. In other words, was the Aussie 'bid' sound?
I think a lot of people are looking for clues here as to why the Aussies (or, indeed, the Saudies; or anyone for that matter), would want to punt £40.5M on CAFC.
Muir has pedigree as an entrepreneur, and the last thing I'd expect him to be is a fool or to throw money down the drain, nor to expect other people (i.e. other investors) to. Clearly he's not prepared to stump up the cash himself to be 51% shareholder. If he's not prepared to take that risk, it's not a very good advertisment for the other investers he's trying to attract.
I can only conclude that there's something seriously wrong with the Aussie bid: indeed any bid that values the club at £40M+.
My heart sank when I found I had 200 feisty pages to read through but there have been some fine performances today, so I thought I would give them a mark out of ten (apologies to Lancashire Lad.) Stig 2/10 for ineffective refereeing James Seed 8/10 for explosive language i.e bottom feeders & numbskull. Extra mark for taking the time to write a book about your great grandad (I have a copy of his original book.) Henry Irv. 6/10 for some adroit interventions re dictionary and map definitions. Leuth 2/10 nice cartoon but the music jibe was lost on me. Arsentatters 7/10 for kind supporting words for the ‘very kind’ Elf. Elf 0/10 re being banged up “drunk as a skunk!” Ibborg 10/10 Very impressed re living in France after a kidney transplant and if possible even more so by surviving having a shop in Grove Park! Jesse, and a Charlton fan…now that is living on the edge!
Please feel free to add your own scores for the excellent ‘players’ that I have ignored.
the Saudi’s showed their money enough to put in a firm offer they reached his number and got gazzumped by people that apart from buying a scarf and getting cheap cheers like wwe wrestlers have done nothing
They then walked away as they were at their number
Not a fake number by fake people
No. The Saudi's clearly didn't have the money to run the club or they simply weren't actually interested in the club.
I am fairly certain our latest bid received was not the same amount as the Aussies bid, however it was also accepted.
If the Saudi's had either the money or the interest, they'd own us by now.
Why they reached their limit and like in all auctions you know when to stop especially when the Aussies wouldn’t stop and seeing as they are only using Monopoly money why should they
Shame you can’t wake up and smell the coffee.
When they buy us I will drink coffee for the first time in years
But my coffee ban is well and truly safe
nla....you seem to be enjoying yourself making us all the more depressed. How much longer are you planning to go on finding countless ways of telling us exactly the same thing over and over again?
I don't think NLA enjoys it at all, I think he's just doing the same as others itk, by relaying what he's been told. The only problem is, people only seem to like good news (whether they know it to be wholly accurate or not) and what NLA is relaying, isn't necessarily what the majority of fans want to hear. The majority want to hear things like "It's gonna be a tough 2 weeks, but it'll be worth it in the end".
It seems to me that if you so much as question the Aussies in anyway, you get laughed at or jumped on.
My money is on NLA.
I don't know NLA personally, or James Seed or Airman or Doucher or Red Henry or Colin or anyone ITK. I just read the posts and NLA has stuck to his guns even when his posts have been pilloried. He has also been the most accurate, and this version of events ties in with what is transpiring at CAFC. So it'll do for me.
How can it be accurate? He said consistently the Aussie’s don’t have the funds but now we have two sources claiming the Aussies have passed the fit and proper EFL test. That means they do have the funds. Last night he changed his tune to ‘don’t have the funds or not willing to pay the price’.Remember his source is coming from the Roland camp. Would you trust Roland? All this Aussie bashing is mighty suspicious.
RD has the money to pass the fit and proper test also
You need to re read the posts go back to October when I first said
The Aussies don’t have the funds (they never then )
From December I said they don’t have the funds and are trying to get more
Me saying that they may not be willing to spend it is because the fee they agreed remember the agreed part it’s very important
They have not followed through on
I said there two reasons
They don’t have it
They don’t want to spend it
What other reasons are there if the the Club The Aussies the EFL all belive that it’s in place
It’s not directors loans that part hasn’t been addressed and is not being addressed
It’s because the Aussie bid has stalled they are unwilling to pay the amount they agreed
Was this a deliberate negotiation tactic or is it they thought they could raise the money and they can’t
The EFL can check the accounts that the consortium members have and that will show they have the required funds but that don’t mean they will use it or are willing to use it
Reading all the posters that are questioning whether they want the Aussies now because they’re being, or have always been, devious:
I 100% believe that they did NOT set out to bid high, with the intention of later on reducing their bid. I’d be shocked if that was the case.
I’m quite sure GM expected the purchase to be done and dusted the week after our meeting. He wouldn’t have be so sure if he was planning to low ball Roland.
Whether they screwed up after that I don’t know. Whether new consortium members were needed I don’t know. I don’t know when, or even if, they decided his price was too high.
But they didn’t walk. Not yet anyway.
This is a question I asked elsewhere on this thread, but, in your (humble or otherwise!) opinion (or knowledge), was it a closed bid with a deadline (ala TV rights/train franchise), or an on-going 'war'... i.e. Aussies offer, say, 30M; Saudies 32M; Aussies come back with £34M etc etc etc... Roland playing one off against the other?
Was there any hint at all (and I appreciate you might be out of the loop here) of RD questionning where the money came from? By that I mean that, if I sell my car for 5k, I don't care where the money comes from; if it's a husband/wife chipping in with the help of the mother-in-law or whatever, or some bloke who's got 5k lying around. I don't care what happens to the car after it's sold either. In other words, was the Aussie 'bid' sound?
I think a lot of people are looking for clues here as to why the Aussies (or, indeed, the Saudies; or anyone for that matter), would want to punt £40.5M on CAFC.
Muir has pedigree as an entrepreneur, and the last thing I'd expect him to be is a fool or to throw money down the drain, nor to expect other people (i.e. other investors) to. Clearly he's not prepared to stump up the cash himself to be 51% shareholder. If he's not prepared to take that risk, it's not a very good advertisment for the other investers he's trying to attract.
I can only conclude that there's something seriously wrong with the Aussie bid: indeed any bid that values the club at £40M+.
Sorry Mark, I don’t know anything about the bid or the bidding process. The point about Muir having pedigree as an entrepreneur answers your next point about him wanting to spread the risk. I imagine he thinks buying 51% is too great a risk. Perhaps that isn’t a a good advertisement to other investors, I don’t know. Maybe it’s a good example to other investors?
I wouldn’t know if there’s something seriously wrong with the Aussie bid. Maybe there is. Maybe some of them were happy with the high bid and others persuaded them to see sense. I really don’t know. I don’t see it as that big a deal myself, but I know others do. If they’re trying to screw Roland I’d see that as a bonus.
Shame to see the division at the moment, whether it’s about the boycott, the protests or now the takeover. And yes I’ve been targeted by the same handful of people on here for some time. Bit pathetic really. The brown nose fella in particular. Water off a duck’s back now.
My heart sank when I found I had 200 feisty pages to read through but there have been some fine performances today, so I thought I would give them a mark out of ten (apologies to Lancashire Lad.) Stig 2/10 for ineffective refereeing James Seed 8/10 for explosive language i.e bottom feeders & numbskull. Extra mark for taking the time to write a book about your great grandad (I have a copy of his original book.) Henry Irv. 6/10 for some adroit interventions re dictionary and map definitions. Leuth 2/10 nice cartoon but the music jibe was lost on me. Arsentatters 7/10 for kind supporting words for the ‘very kind’ Elf. Elf 0/10 re being banged up “drunk as a skunk!” Ibborg 10/10 Very impressed re living in France after a kidney transplant and if possible even more so by surviving having a shop in Grove Park! Jesse, and a Charlton fan…now that is living on the edge!
Please feel free to add your own scores for the excellent ‘players’ that I have ignored.
"adroit interventions" - I've just added that to the good band name thread.
Comments
It was a Sturgeon Moon, so back to the fish puns.
I mean to say, that would be almost a million to one shot, akin to winning the lottery.
.....Is because I’ve been ‘caught out!?’ Not true at all. In the past I’ve said I’ve revealed everything about the takeover but several times I’ve said I wasn’t going to reveal personal stuff.
For the last time (hurry up @AFKABartram ):
1. GM is the broker. He wasn’t sure if he’d be moving back to London as of May 18, so wasn’t sure if he’d be involved after the sale.
2. The family have been over looking at schools and houses. I didn’t share on here because frankly it’s a family matter and not relevant (except that it shows a level of commitment). Bear in mind that they spend about three years here up to around 2012, so not easy to uproot the family from schools etc again.
3. It’s possible that it’s not going to work out for the family which may mean that they will need to appoint a CEO. This won’t delay the sale. You don’t have to have a CEO in place for a sale to go through. It’s just more internet stirring from the usual suspects. It sort of sums up why I’ve had enough of it really.
I certainly see why Grapevine just comes on here once a month to post.
because it takes him a month to write each post?
I was on their Drivetime show last Friday. Available here https://lovesportradio.com/radioplayer/od/items/990/
I'm on for about 8 minutes at 1.03.00 into the recording.
“Hi Mum.......I’ve been in a road accident and I’m in The Cambridge Hospital.”
“ Hang in there son, me and Dad are on our way.”
Two or three hours later Mum and Dad turn up in Cambridge.......miles from bloody Aldershot!
Dread to think how many times that scenario (or similar), must have played itself out over the years.
The story promulgated is that the Aussies made, and had accepted, an offer that, while it surpassed the Saudi bid, they had no intention of completing on. And that has put them in a bad light with those that have chosen to believe the story.
Here's an example, from @nth london addick It's a narrative placed on public record (ie here) by someone (NLA) with a record of providing detailed and interesting insight into the takeover. But, in an of itself, it's difficult to determine whether the story is accurate or has been promulgated in order to discredit the Aussies. (To be clear, I am certainly not accusing NLA of deliberately spreading inaccurate information; merely that he might have repeated information he had been given that wasn't an honest reflection of what has been happening.
Incidentally, @Redhenry what information can you share on the status of the Saudis' progress through the EFL ODT test? When did it take place?
Nobody is able to confirm that any other bid than the Aussies have got as far as the EFL.
Been to a kids picnic today so missed all this.
The kids were impeccably behaved...
Stig 2/10 for ineffective refereeing
James Seed 8/10 for explosive language i.e bottom feeders & numbskull. Extra mark for taking the time to write a book about your great grandad (I have a copy of his original book.)
Henry Irv. 6/10 for some adroit interventions re dictionary and map definitions.
Leuth 2/10 nice cartoon but the music jibe was lost on me.
Arsentatters 7/10 for kind supporting words for the ‘very kind’ Elf.
Elf 0/10 re being banged up “drunk as a skunk!”
Ibborg 10/10 Very impressed re living in France after a kidney transplant and if possible even more so by surviving having a shop in Grove Park! Jesse, and a Charlton fan…now that is living on the edge!
Please feel free to add your own scores for the excellent ‘players’ that I have ignored.