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.
Me, personally, I'm just trying to read between the lines... quite often there are more questions answered in what people (not necessarily you) say than don't say.
There are 5/6 pages of this everlasting thread I haven't read since your reply; I think what I'm asking you at the moent (as the unfficial
Thanks, although I’m not getting much of any use at the moment. I have no problem with someone like @Addickted because he’s motivated by his love for the club and obviously seriously thinks the Aussies would be bad for us. I disagree of course, but I can see where he’s coming from. The couple who always pop up if someone criticises me are just bottom feeders.
@JamesSeed : I'm pretty sure my post will be deleted, but you have recently been 'opted' on to the board of CAST (and I haven't read a single word about it on CL - I got it from the CAST website).
As a representitive of all the fans (and I don't have an issue with you or know anyone who has an issue with you), do you consider it correct to describe people who disagree with you as bottom feeders?
Now you are a member of CAST you are here to represent the fans - even those who disagree with you!
Thanks, although I’m not getting much of any use at the moment. I have no problem with someone like @Addickted because he’s motivated by his love for the club and obviously seriously thinks the Aussies would be bad for us. I disagree of course, but I can see where he’s coming from. The couple who always pop up if someone criticises me are just bottom feeders.
@JamesSeed : I'm pretty sure my post will be deleted, but you have recently been 'opted' on to the board of CAST (and I haven't read a single word about it on CL - I got it from the CAST website).
As a representitive of all the fans (and I don't have an issue with you or know anyone who has an issue with you), do you consider it correct to describe people who disagree with you as bottom feeders?
Now you are a member of CAST you are here to represent the fans - even those who disagree with you!
Thanks, although I’m not getting much of any use at the moment. I have no problem with someone like @Addickted because he’s motivated by his love for the club and obviously seriously thinks the Aussies would be bad for us. I disagree of course, but I can see where he’s coming from. The couple who always pop up if someone criticises me are just bottom feeders.
@JamesSeed : I'm pretty sure my post will be deleted, but you have recently been 'opted' on to the board of CAST (and I haven't read a single word about it on CL - I got it from the CAST website).
As a representitive of all the fans (and I don't have an issue with you or know anyone who has an issue with you), do you consider it correct to describe people who disagree with you as bottom feeders?
Now you are a member of CAST you are here to represent the fans - even those who disagree with you!
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.
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
Normally your posts are full of insight and deserve respect. This one, on the other hand, remains something built largely on, I presume, a bias towards the Australian bid.
I any event, it is built on pure conjecture and personal opinion: it's just a synthesis of what CL readers want to hear/read. You have absolutely no infirmation to bck up what you purport to say, which, with al due respect, isn't anything.
The fact that GM’s family may or may not have issues with uprooting themselves again to move back to the U.K. to me is info that doesn’t need to be shared here. As I said it won’t affect the sale of the club. If the family moves he’ll be CEO. If not they’ll appoint one. How is that a problem.
I wouldn’t want info about (alleged) family difficulties shared on the internet when it’s not in the public interest.
Elf joined in with personal untrue defamatory attacks on me on another site. After weeks and weeks of really personal abuse the main perpetrator eventually issued a full apology and removed material. (I also secured a donation to the Upbeats.) I was really struggling with it, losing sleep, getting stressed (as some of you noticed at the time) but was saved by a lawyer friend who pointed out that it was a very straightforward case of defamation. I was accused of being a decrepit lifelong Millwall fan who had decided to cash in on his family name in order to draw traffic to a ‘clickbait’ blog. My meetings and knowledge of Gerard was for a time apparently a fabrication (or ‘bollox’ as Elf described it) and I was a ‘prick’, a habitual liar, and a narcissist. Someone in this site alerted me to this stuff, and I joined the forum in order to deny the ‘claims’. I found Elfs on there reporting back to this character like a loyal foot soldier (the perpetrator is banned from here and other forums). He was and is clearly in thrall to the man. He still has digs at me to this day. And all this started about the time of my beer meeting with Gerard. If anyone has seen my blog they’ll know that there’s never been an ad on it. There are posters on here that know me and I hope they’ll back me up as a decent bloke. The fact that some have said Elfs is ok just shows what the internet can do to someone.
It was always going to be problematic posting on Internet forums, and this is obviously the best one for me to use as it’s well run and the vast majority of you on here are great people.
I stuck with it when the abuse started, and Elfs and others would love it if I quit now.
It’s difficult to keep going though when the same issues seem to keep coming back to haunt me.
It begs the question: after all those years supportingMillwall, why the conversion?
@JamesSeed , I genuinely appreciate the insight you have provided on this thread and I believe you are genuine in wanting to share important information with our fan base, that is a credit to you.
That being said, I understand that you want to be a board member on our Supporters Trust, as a person who thinks that is an important role I think you need to consider how you respond to people who question you, especially those who have a much longer history of supporting this club than you do. I’m glad that you have reconnected with your Charlton roots but for lots of us they never went away, please temper your offence at criticism of random Australians we’ve never heard of accordingly.
The fact that GM’s family may or may not have issues with uprooting themselves again to move back to the U.K. to me is info that doesn’t need to be shared here. As I said it won’t affect the sale of the club. If the family moves he’ll be CEO. If not they’ll appoint one. How is that a problem.
I wouldn’t want info about (alleged) family difficulties shared on the internet when it’s not in the public interest.
Elf joined in with personal untrue defamatory attacks on me on another site. After weeks and weeks of really personal abuse the main perpetrator eventually issued a full apology and removed material. (I also secured a donation to the Upbeats.) I was really struggling with it, losing sleep, getting stressed (as some of you noticed at the time) but was saved by a lawyer friend who pointed out that it was a very straightforward case of defamation. I was accused of being a decrepit lifelong Millwall fan who had decided to cash in on his family name in order to draw traffic to a ‘clickbait’ blog. My meetings and knowledge of Gerard was for a time apparently a fabrication (or ‘bollox’ as Elf described it) and I was a ‘prick’, a habitual liar, and a narcissist. Someone in this site alerted me to this stuff, and I joined the forum in order to deny the ‘claims’. I found Elfs on there reporting back to this character like a loyal foot soldier (the perpetrator is banned from here and other forums). He was and is clearly in thrall to the man. He still has digs at me to this day. And all this started about the time of my beer meeting with Gerard. If anyone has seen my blog they’ll know that there’s never been an ad on it. There are posters on here that know me and I hope they’ll back me up as a decent bloke. The fact that some have said Elfs is ok just shows what the internet can do to someone.
It was always going to be problematic posting on Internet forums, and this is obviously the best one for me to use as it’s well run and the vast majority of you on here are great people.
I stuck with it when the abuse started, and Elfs and others would love it if I quit now.
It’s difficult to keep going though when the same issues seem to keep coming back to haunt me.
It begs the question: after all those years supportingMillwall, why the conversion?
The fact that GM’s family may or may not have issues with uprooting themselves again to move back to the U.K. to me is info that doesn’t need to be shared here. As I said it won’t affect the sale of the club. If the family moves he’ll be CEO. If not they’ll appoint one. How is that a problem.
I wouldn’t want info about (alleged) family difficulties shared on the internet when it’s not in the public interest.
Elf joined in with personal untrue defamatory attacks on me on another site. After weeks and weeks of really personal abuse the main perpetrator eventually issued a full apology and removed material. (I also secured a donation to the Upbeats.) I was really struggling with it, losing sleep, getting stressed (as some of you noticed at the time) but was saved by a lawyer friend who pointed out that it was a very straightforward case of defamation. I was accused of being a decrepit lifelong Millwall fan who had decided to cash in on his family name in order to draw traffic to a ‘clickbait’ blog. My meetings and knowledge of Gerard was for a time apparently a fabrication (or ‘bollox’ as Elf described it) and I was a ‘prick’, a habitual liar, and a narcissist. Someone in this site alerted me to this stuff, and I joined the forum in order to deny the ‘claims’. I found Elfs on there reporting back to this character like a loyal foot soldier (the perpetrator is banned from here and other forums). He was and is clearly in thrall to the man. He still has digs at me to this day. And all this started about the time of my beer meeting with Gerard. If anyone has seen my blog they’ll know that there’s never been an ad on it. There are posters on here that know me and I hope they’ll back me up as a decent bloke. The fact that some have said Elfs is ok just shows what the internet can do to someone.
It was always going to be problematic posting on Internet forums, and this is obviously the best one for me to use as it’s well run and the vast majority of you on here are great people.
I stuck with it when the abuse started, and Elfs and others would love it if I quit now.
It’s difficult to keep going though when the same issues seem to keep coming back to haunt me.
@JamesSeed, I don't know you but I am sure you only have good intentions. The problem appears to be that you over react if somebody disagrees with you or says something you don't like.
I might be wrong but I thought I had read that you are standing for a position in the trust soon.
I have to say that I am not convinced that will be a good move if you find it difficult to accept criticism withou having to make such rude retorts.
Rude retorts? Would you like a list of elfs comments about me?
I very kindly was asked to stand for the Trust but eventually decided not to. My following Charlton was originally just a family thing. I only became a ‘proper fan’ in 2015, and that’s not long enough imho. Also I’ve literally just started writing my book (been researching on and off) so won’t have enough time time.
Before I go, this wasn’t a matter of developing a thick skin, or banter or rude comments. Certainly not differences of opinion.
Proper trolling is very very different to that. Its normally associated with kids, but when it affect adults there’s a tendency not to take it seriously. It should be.
I'd like to know @JamesSeed why you were 'co-opted' on to the board of CAST;
There are elections next month, so anyone who wants to can stand for election. However, having been co-opted two months beforehand, you are already in situ. Given the turnout at the elections, and the favourable publicity you've already received on the CAST site, in defference to anyone else wanting to stand, you are already in place.
Why, with less than 2 months to go before the elections, should anyone be 'co-opted' onto CAST?
To be honest, I couldn't care less if you're 'elected' or not: CAST has long since relinquished it's role in representing the fanbase, so a lifelong Millwall fan amongst our ranks won't make much difference!
Hindsight is a beautiful thing, but maybe CAST should have remained independent of CARD?
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.
Which reminds me. My Dad got a phone call to say that his brother had died on holiday. He contacted a local funeral directors to get the body transported home. The following day he got a call back from the undertakers. "We're sorry but, we've called round all the medical facilities in Perth but haven't been able to locate the deceased. We've asked the High Commission if they can assist."
My Dad: "We don't have a High Commission there do we?"
Undertakers: (Confused) "Yes, it's in Canberra."
My Dad: You know he died in Scotland don't you?"
Undertakers: Silence.....
Anyway are we sure these blokes are Australian at all?
At least we know how to get more info about GM now though. Keep putting out silly rumours Colin-style until Mr. Seed overreacts and confirms them..
.
I’m not confirming them. I haven’t heard that they’re not moving here.
I just feel very uneasy about this family stuff being shared, which is why I haven’t done so.
NLA, haven’t you even read Grapevine’s post?
It's not really got a lot to do with you though has it. You don't run this forum, you didn't post the "personal" info and you're not GM.
There are lots of personal GM related info I haven’t revealed on here because it wouldn’t have been right imho, including the family’s difficult decision about uprooting themselves again. I personally feel uneasy about this been spread, as a friend of his family, so in that sense it has got something to do with me, which is why I asked Shirty to delete it right after he posted it. But of course I don’t run this forum, but while I’m still here I’m entitled to ask someone to delete something, just as he’s perfectly entitled to refuse. If you can’t see that then I’d be disappointed. But if Colin has put the info out on another forum then it would have spread anyway I suppose.
Then why do you allow yourself to be the conduit of information (ergo abuse) then?
You seem to be lashing out at all and sundry too! Well, the entire thread has gone off the rails in the last few days, so why not join in. Good luck with putting Grapevine bang to rights.
But really I think we should all at least read the posts from the previous hour or so before piling in, don't you think? Had you done so you would have noticed @SoundAsa£ pointing out that @JamesSeed has voluntarily ended his short tenure on the CAST board and is not seeking election. So give both James and CAST a break on that eh? As for your other remarks re CAST may I suggest that rather than derail this thread, you come along to the AGM (probably mid-Oct) and share your concerns? Happy to buy you a pint and listen.
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
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
Excellent summary, it is all down to Roland.
No, for once, it's @Grapevine49 's misguided interpretation which, IMHO, shouldn't be taken as gospel.
You seem to be lashing out at all and sundry too! Well, the entire thread has gone off the rails in the last few days, so why not join in. Good luck with putting Grapevine bang to rights.
But really I think we should all at least read the posts from the previous hour or so before piling in, don't you think? Had you done so you would have noticed @SoundAsa£ pointing out that @JamesSeed has voluntarily ended his short tenure on the CAST board and is not seeking election. So give both James and CAST a break on that eh? As for your other remarks re CAST may I suggest that rather than derail this thread, you come along to the AGM (probably mid-Oct) and share your concerns? Happy to buy you a pint and listen.
I wouldn't be buying him a pint. Looks like he's had too much to drink tonight already
You seem to be lashing out at all and sundry too! Well, the entire thread has gone off the rails in the last few days, so why not join in. Good luck with putting Grapevine bang to rights.
But really I think we should all at least read the posts from the previous hour or so before piling in, don't you think? Had you done so you would have noticed @SoundAsa£ pointing out that @JamesSeed has voluntarily ended his short tenure on the CAST board and is not seeking election. So give both James and CAST a break on that eh? As for your other remarks re CAST may I suggest that rather than derail this thread, you come along to the AGM (probably mid-Oct) and share your concerns? Happy to buy you a pint and listen.
I was gonna go to that, but I’ve heard @razil is being shoehorned back on the board too and we know he doesn’t go anywhere unless he’s paid to, sheesh...
Note: Sorry, I’m just flinging shit around for fun, feels like what everyone else has been doing today and on my BIRTHDAY too....
1) @Redmidland knows that a middle eastern group was prepared to pay £40.5m to match a bid from the consortium that included Andrew Muir, I’ll call that the Australian consortium
2) Duchâtelet wants to sell
3) Duchâtelet is an arsehole
4) The sale process has taken way more time than anyone expected.
5) the transfer window in Europe shuts on 31 August.
6) My son is still interested in Charlton. He wants to have a season ticket.
7) Sint Truiden is quite a small town and 10k leaflets through people’s doors covers nearly the whole place
8) If a sale does not progress soon after the end of August, the level of protests will increase substantially
9) We don’t all agree with each other, the sniping is sometimes entertainingly awful but it would be better to give it up.
Thanks, although I’m not getting much of any use at the moment. I have no problem with someone like @Addickted because he’s motivated by his love for the club and obviously seriously thinks the Aussies would be bad for us. I disagree of course, but I can see where he’s coming from. The couple who always pop up if someone criticises me are just bottom feeders.
@JamesSeed : I'm pretty sure my post will be deleted, but you have recently been 'opted' on to the board of CAST (and I haven't read a single word about it on CL - I got it from the CAST website).
As a representitive of all the fans (and I don't have an issue with you or know anyone who has an issue with you), do you consider it correct to describe people who disagree with you as bottom feeders?
Now you are a member of CAST you are here to represent the fans - even those who disagree with you!
Comments
There are 5/6 pages of this everlasting thread I haven't read since your reply; I think what I'm asking you at the moent (as the unfficial
You do all realise you are all fucking bonkers right?
As a representitive of all the fans (and I don't have an issue with you or know anyone who has an issue with you), do you consider it correct to describe people who disagree with you as bottom feeders?
Now you are a member of CAST you are here to represent the fans - even those who disagree with you!
I any event, it is built on pure conjecture and personal opinion: it's just a synthesis of what CL readers want to hear/read. You have absolutely no infirmation to bck up what you purport to say, which, with al due respect, isn't anything.
Pop psychology's great isn't it? I'm a pineapple. Or am I?
That being said, I understand that you want to be a board member on our Supporters Trust, as a person who thinks that is an important role I think you need to consider how you respond to people who question you, especially those who have a much longer history of supporting this club than you do. I’m glad that you have reconnected with your Charlton roots but for lots of us they never went away, please temper your offence at criticism of random Australians we’ve never heard of accordingly.
There are elections next month, so anyone who wants to can stand for election. However, having been co-opted two months beforehand, you are already in situ. Given the turnout at the elections, and the favourable publicity you've already received on the CAST site, in defference to anyone else wanting to stand, you are already in place.
Why, with less than 2 months to go before the elections, should anyone be 'co-opted' onto CAST?
To be honest, I couldn't care less if you're 'elected' or not: CAST has long since relinquished it's role in representing the fanbase, so a lifelong Millwall fan amongst our ranks won't make much difference!
Hindsight is a beautiful thing, but maybe CAST should have remained independent of CARD?
My Dad: "We don't have a High Commission there do we?"
Undertakers: (Confused) "Yes, it's in Canberra."
My Dad: You know he died in Scotland don't you?"
Undertakers: Silence.....
Anyway are we sure these blokes are Australian at all?
You seem to be lashing out at all and sundry too! Well, the entire thread has gone off the rails in the last few days, so why not join in. Good luck with putting Grapevine bang to rights.
But really I think we should all at least read the posts from the previous hour or so before piling in, don't you think? Had you done so you would have noticed @SoundAsa£ pointing out that @JamesSeed has voluntarily ended his short tenure on the CAST board and is not seeking election. So give both James and CAST a break on that eh? As for your other remarks re CAST may I suggest that rather than derail this thread, you come along to the AGM (probably mid-Oct) and share your concerns? Happy to buy you a pint and listen.
Note: Sorry, I’m just flinging shit around for fun, feels like what everyone else has been doing today and on my BIRTHDAY too....
1) @Redmidland knows that a middle eastern group was prepared to pay £40.5m to match a bid from the consortium that included Andrew Muir, I’ll call that the Australian consortium
2) Duchâtelet wants to sell
3) Duchâtelet is an arsehole
4) The sale process has taken way more time than anyone expected.
5) the transfer window in Europe shuts on 31 August.
6) My son is still interested in Charlton. He wants to have a season ticket.
7) Sint Truiden is quite a small town and 10k leaflets through people’s doors covers nearly the whole place
8) If a sale does not progress soon after the end of August, the level of protests will increase substantially
9) We don’t all agree with each other, the sniping is sometimes entertainingly awful but it would be better to give it up.
10) Bowyer has the makings of a good manager
Any more?