Doesn't that contradict what Airman said the other day?
American money, based on holding the assets. Australian control, based on owning the football club. However, the same source says the Americans will now back off.
This isn’t via JW, by the way.
So if the Americans are backing off, where does that leave the takeover?
I don’t think it stacks up because of RD’s valuation.
Doesn't that contradict what Airman said the other day?
American money, based on holding the assets. Australian control, based on owning the football club. However, the same source says the Americans will now back off.
This isn’t via JW, by the way.
How many people have now pulled out of the Australian consortium? In the event that they are successful in taking over the club I would be worried that another Kevin Cash situation could unfold. Seems to be a number of individuals interested one minute only to back off at a later stage.
Doesn't that contradict what Airman said the other day?
American money, based on holding the assets. Australian control, based on owning the football club. However, the same source says the Americans will now back off.
This isn’t via JW, by the way.
So if the Americans are backing off, where does that leave the takeover?
Doesn't that contradict what Airman said the other day?
American money, based on holding the assets. Australian control, based on owning the football club. However, the same source says the Americans will now back off.
This isn’t via JW, by the way.
So if the Americans are backing off, where does that leave the takeover?
I don’t think it stacks up because of RD’s valuation.
Doesn't that contradict what Airman said the other day?
American money, based on holding the assets. Australian control, based on owning the football club. However, the same source says the Americans will now back off.
This isn’t via JW, by the way.
how does that work? American company buy the ground and training facilities and aussie company buy the club?
Sounds like it to me.
Doesn't sound ideal... and feeds into the idea the aussies either couldn't afford or wouldn't pay the price for the valley and sparrows lane. Also makes me wonder what the americans would get out the deal?
Americans get the land in London which will appreciate in value, with little to no risk. I know they can't develop it, but it's still an increasing asset, in the same way a valuable painting increases in value, without doing anything to it.
Doesn't that contradict what Airman said the other day?
American money, based on holding the assets. Australian control, based on owning the football club. However, the same source says the Americans will now back off.
This isn’t via JW, by the way.
how does that work? American company buy the ground and training facilities and aussie company buy the club?
Sounds like it to me.
Doesn't sound ideal... and feeds into the idea the aussies either couldn't afford or wouldn't pay the price for the valley and sparrows lane. Also makes me wonder what the americans would get out the deal?
Americans get the land in London which will appreciate in value, with little to no risk. I know they can't develop it, but it's still an increasing asset, in the same way a valuable painting increases in value, without doing anything to it.
which makes me quite worried. It's removing an appreciating asset from the club. Not good whatever way you want to spin it.
Doesn't that contradict what Airman said the other day?
American money, based on holding the assets. Australian control, based on owning the football club. However, the same source says the Americans will now back off.
This isn’t via JW, by the way.
So if the Americans are backing off, where does that leave the takeover?
I don’t think it stacks up because of RD’s valuation.
Never has,especially when buyers want clean title. Roland will have to buy out Ex Directors if a deal is to be done, and from what I have heard they have not been approached since low ball bid last year.
That doesn't fill me with much confidence, especially with future capital projects like the training ground rebuild or improvements at The Valley. You want one clear voice making such decisions, not two parties who might have different opinions
Doesn't that contradict what Airman said the other day?
American money, based on holding the assets. Australian control, based on owning the football club. However, the same source says the Americans will now back off.
This isn’t via JW, by the way.
So if the Americans are backing off, where does that leave the takeover?
I don’t think it stacks up because of RD’s valuation.
Never has,especially when buyers want clean title. Roland will have to buy out Ex Directors if a deal is to be done, and from what I have heard they have not been approached since low ball bid last year.
As I understand it the loans must be repaid if we ever get back to the Premier League, or at any time before then at the club's call?
In terms of valuation then it matters not whether or not the loans are paid off by RD or by the new owners upon taking control. Club with clean title £x million, Club without clean title £x-7 million. So it could still be sold by RD without talking to the ex-directors and become clean title very quickly after takeover.
That's if clean title is essential - if it isn't then they could buy the club for £7 million less than a clean title agreed valuation and leave the charges in tact.
I'm pretty sure it isn't the outstanding charges that is stopping the sale.
Doesn't that contradict what Airman said the other day?
American money, based on holding the assets. Australian control, based on owning the football club. However, the same source says the Americans will now back off.
This isn’t via JW, by the way.
how does that work? American company buy the ground and training facilities and aussie company buy the club?
Sounds like it to me.
Does that situation happen much in English football Airman, when it's divided like that. I know Ron Noades sold Palace to Mark Goldberg for 22 million without him owning the freehold of stadium and training ground. That arrangement ended in bankruptcy for Goldberg.
This sounds different but has this worked in pro football when two parties buy at the same time as landlord and tenant ?
I understand this is still speculation but we need something to hold on to.
Fair play to Jim White, telling us what he knows. It's not always accurate but he's giving us info in good faith and it's more than we've had in a long time.
All bullshine RD and LDT are the only ones that truely know what's happening, everyone else is just speculating. Inside info my arse we've all be down this road before when are people going to start growing wise to this load of old bull people are feeding us? Don't trust anything people say and just wait until it's all done and on the website confirming it .
Fair play to Jim White, telling us what he knows. It's not always accurate but he's giving us info in good faith and it's more than we've had in a long time.
Then what's the point in doing that.
I've been told the earth is flat. It might not be accurate but hey ho.....
Doesn't that contradict what Airman said the other day?
American money, based on holding the assets. Australian control, based on owning the football club. However, the same source says the Americans will now back off.
This isn’t via JW, by the way.
how does that work? American company buy the ground and training facilities and aussie company buy the club?
Sounds like it to me.
This cannot happpen and is a receipe for disaster.
Fair play to Jim White, telling us what he knows. It's not always accurate but he's giving us info in good faith and it's more than we've had in a long time.
No it isn't, because it's worth approximately fuck all. First it was within two/three days, then "next week" and then "not imminent yet" all from White. He may be saying what he's told in good faith but whoever is telling HIM doesn't seem to be so I put no faith in what he says. At all.
Comments
WTF
I know they can't develop it, but it's still an increasing asset, in the same way a valuable painting increases in value, without doing anything to it.
Roland will have to buy out Ex Directors if a deal is to be done, and from what I have heard they have not been approached since low ball bid last year.
In terms of valuation then it matters not whether or not the loans are paid off by RD or by the new owners upon taking control. Club with clean title £x million, Club without clean title £x-7 million. So it could still be sold by RD without talking to the ex-directors and become clean title very quickly after takeover.
That's if clean title is essential - if it isn't then they could buy the club for £7 million less than a clean title agreed valuation and leave the charges in tact.
I'm pretty sure it isn't the outstanding charges that is stopping the sale.
I know Ron Noades sold Palace to Mark Goldberg for 22 million without him owning the freehold of stadium and training ground.
That arrangement ended in bankruptcy for Goldberg.
This sounds different but has this worked in pro football when two parties buy at the same time as landlord and tenant ?
I understand this is still speculation but we need something to hold on to.
As a
wiseman once said: just sell the club and F OFFI've been told the earth is flat. It might not be accurate but hey ho.....
Put the wise back.
FFS!