The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Maybe someday those who laughed and said I was crazy when I quoted that figure a year+ ago will stop laughing and instead maybe ask... how did he know that?Airman Brown said:
Over £70m.
23 -
With that insight I have a better question, would you mind helping me with the Euromillion numbers so I can buy the club myself?NapaAddick said:
Maybe someday those who laughed and said I was crazy when I quoted that figure a year+ ago will stop laughing and instead maybe ask... how did he know that?Airman Brown said:
Over £70m.0 -
It was used as a deterrentNapaAddick said:
Maybe someday those who laughed and said I was crazy when I quoted that figure a year+ ago will stop laughing and instead maybe ask... how did he know that?Airman Brown said:
Over £70m.6 -
Isn't it time we established a clear scapegoating policy for this latest episode of shambolic balls up and ensure it is based on the usual irrational prejudice and petty malice. The seven clear contenders are:
1. #JamesSeed. For returning to this site after a long absence, having contact with the hated Ozzies and generally being pleasant, well informed and reasonable.
2. #airmanbrown for consistently, shamelessly and incorrectly predicting the takeover since 11 March 1803.
3. STD/LDV/BLT for being a lacky and lickspittle of the dreaded Roland, for having no idea what is happening and lacking a proper name.
4. Jim White who is obviously just toying with our emotions for his own sadistic gratification.
5. Any random Australian (alive or dead) we can think of but in particular, Nicole Kidman, Kerry Packer, Rolf Harris, Les Paterson, Mel Gibson and Skippy the bush kangaroo.
6. Any new signing with a dodgy beard
7. Err.. that's it.
33 -
Also Noel Edmondsgrumpyaddick said:Isn't it time we established a clear scapegoating policy for this latest episode of shambolic balls up and ensure it is based on the usual irrational prejudice and petty malice. The seven clear contenders are:
1. #JamesSeed. For returning to this site after a long absence, having contact with the hated Ozzies and generally being pleasant, well informed and reasonable.
2. #airmanbrown for consistently, shamelessly and incorrectly predicting the takeover since 11 March 1803.
3. STD/LDV/BLT for being a lacky and lickspittle of the dreaded Roland, for having no idea what is happening and lacking a proper name.
4. Jim White who is obviously just toying with our emotions for his own sadistic gratification.
5. Any random Australian (alive or dead) we can think of but in particular, Nicole Kidman, Kerry Packer, Rolf Harris, Les Paterson, Mel Gibson and Skippy the bush kangaroo.
6. Any new signing with a dodgy beard
7. Err.. that's it.4 -
Money unlocked Monday, takeover by Wednesday. Today must be the day.9
-
Here we go2
-
I've just seen the headline:Scoham said:Money unlocked Monday, takeover by Wednesday. Today must be the day.
"Charlton owner Roland Duchatelet ready to sell with Australian consortium in talks over potential takeover of League One club"
In fact it's some 1,454 pages back and written almost two years ago. The wonderful Daily Mail, with their finger on the pulse, even told us that "The potential deal for the takeover is believed to be worth around £20 million".
Such are the vagaries ofgreedy ownersdue diligence and inflation.
1 -
You’re an hour ahead of us, perhaps you’ve heard something?i_b_b_o_r_g said:Here we go
7 - Sponsored links:
-
So Varney has been back in?0
-
Welcome back James, you'll note all the nutters are still here.1
-
At this rate , in 30 years more of Roland’s Charlton Athletic we will be (in Napa’s and Rolys crazy dead mind) valued more than Man Utd1
-
Leave Skippy out of this you vindictive bast'dgrumpyaddick said:Isn't it time we established a clear scapegoating policy for this latest episode of shambolic balls up and ensure it is based on the usual irrational prejudice and petty malice. The seven clear contenders are:
1. #JamesSeed. For returning to this site after a long absence, having contact with the hated Ozzies and generally being pleasant, well informed and reasonable.
2. #airmanbrown for consistently, shamelessly and incorrectly predicting the takeover since 11 March 1803.
3. STD/LDV/BLT for being a lacky and lickspittle of the dreaded Roland, for having no idea what is happening and lacking a proper name.
4. Jim White who is obviously just toying with our emotions for his own sadistic gratification.
5. Any random Australian (alive or dead) we can think of but in particular, Nicole Kidman, Kerry Packer, Rolf Harris, Les Paterson, Mel Gibson and Skippy the bush kangaroo.
6. Any new signing with a dodgy beard
7. Err.. that's it.1 -
Well I dunno. I'v slept on this £70m "deterrent" thing, and it just doesn't ring right somehow. But...it is Duchatelet, so with that huge caveat, here is what I would I expect based on limited M&A experience involving relatively normal business people like Sir Martin Sorrell
1. If you believe a buyer has reached an advanced stage, and you believe it's a matter of ironing out detail, you offer them a period of exclusivity, which generally would mean you would not process parties with other discussions.
2. That however need not stop you providing basic sale documents, provided you inform the potential buyer that a period of exclusivity has been opened.
3. It's worth noting that the spivs did exactly this with the Vienna based consortium in 2014. By the time they had themselves in order, Duchatelet, who of course did minimal DD, was advanced. Slater told the consortium, sorry you are too late, we are advanced. Normal behaviour, no drama. Slater didn't upset them in saying that, for obvious rational reasons. Indeed they came back in March to see if RD wanted to consider a Peninsula move.
Last night it hadn't occurred to me the identity of a buyer that RD 'didn't like". Now that I've been reminded of Varney, well, OK. Would a really good businessman turn people away on the basis of personal enmity? I don't think so. I think he would only do that if by selling to that seller, that seller might present an increased business/market risk to the buyer's other interests. Otherwise, if you lose your preferred buyer at the last minute, and the unpreferred buyer seems serious, why would you not try to get your hands on that buyer's money?
Doesn't smell right to me.8 -
Sir Martin Sorrell normal?0
-
I’m 13 hours ahead and not a whispercabbles said:
You’re an hour ahead of us, perhaps you’ve heard something?i_b_b_o_r_g said:Here we go
1 -
If the answer was “£70M” are we sure we know what the question actually was?
‘How much to buy?’
or
‘How much over 5 years has it cost the risible old bungler to relegate the team, alienate the fan base and decimate all revenue streams?’ pause while questioner laughs their cock off7 - Sponsored links:
-
Any chance the Vienna lot could resurface this time around?PragueAddick said:Well I dunno. I'v slept on this £70m "deterrent" thing, and it just doesn't ring right somehow. But...it is Duchatelet, so with that huge caveat, here is what I would I expect based on limited M&A experience involving relatively normal business people like Sir Martin Sorrell
1. If you believe a buyer has reached an advanced stage, and you believe it's a matter of ironing out detail, you offer them a period of exclusivity, which generally would mean you would not process parties with other discussions.
2. That however need not stop you providing basic sale documents, provided you inform the potential buyer that a period of exclusivity has been opened.
3. It's worth noting that the spivs did exactly this with the Vienna based consortium in 2014. By the time they had themselves in order, Duchatelet, who of course did minimal DD, was advanced. Slater told the consortium, sorry you are too late, we are advanced. Normal behaviour, no drama. Slater didn't upset them in saying that, for obvious rational reasons. Indeed they came back in March to see if RD wanted to consider a Peninsula move.
Last night it hadn't occurred to me the identity of a buyer that RD 'didn't like". Now that I've been reminded of Varney, well, OK. Would a really good businessman turn people away on the basis of personal enmity? I don't think so. I think he would only do that if by selling to that seller, that seller might present an increased business/market risk to the buyer's other interests. Otherwise, if you lose your preferred buyer at the last minute, and the unpreferred buyer seems serious, why would you not try to get your hands on that buyer's money?
Doesn't smell right to me.0 -
I agree with Prague on this one. There's no need to offer an off-the-planet sale price if you feel another party is almost at the point of completing the deal, you simply say there is a period of exclusivity, or put them on hold, or whatever. The other party may not complete, in which case the party you have just mugged off with a 70m valuation may seem more appealing. I'm not saying some or all of this happened, just that the whole 70m over-valuation feels bizarre.
Is Roland wishing to sell, or simply 'prepared to consider it'? There is obviously a lot we don't know about here, but you get get a lot more for 70m than the likes of Charlton.5 -
This thread deserves its own DNHOTYA. I might compile a list of the most ridiculous ITK comments that have emerged and we can vote on a winner.14
-
Does anyone even know if talks did actually happen yesterday? I suppose we have to wait for Mr White’s show at 10am for an update.0
-
In business, M&A terms, absolutely. He has completed 100s of them, and they follow a rational process for valuing a company and doing the due diligence before completing. And all his rivals follow a very similar process. How he managed the empire he built is a different matter, of course.Nug said:Sir Martin Sorrell normal?
1 -
That fella has to get the push when the sale goes through. One horrid individual. Part of what Charlton are at the moment No place for nasty people like him once we get our club backAlwaysneil said:
That Tony Keohane was always going to be dangerous once he escaped from his short albino-panda suit.Fanny Fanackapan said:
I'm aware that, until now, at least one member of the FF has stated he has no reason to believe that LDT has not been telling them the truth at the recent update meetings.Airman Brown said:
If he’s the honest guy that some believe him to be then he won’t be comfortable lying. And he might want to consider what evidence may emerge to expose him if he does.razil said:He can simply deny anything we put to him unless we have evidence
1 -
If LDT gets challenged tonight on Prague’s mob and doesn’t reply “it means nothing to me, Vienna” then I am going to be very disappointed with him17
-
Steve (the Addick) is just the enabler, the investment banker who brings the big names together. We are meeting in a couple of weeks, but AFAIK right now he has no other player now that Usmanov is out. His Arenacom guy is far too busy in Qatar apparently, anyway he wanted to move us to the Pen.The Red Robin said:
Any chance the Vienna lot could resurface this time around?PragueAddick said:Well I dunno. I'v slept on this £70m "deterrent" thing, and it just doesn't ring right somehow. But...it is Duchatelet, so with that huge caveat, here is what I would I expect based on limited M&A experience involving relatively normal business people like Sir Martin Sorrell
1. If you believe a buyer has reached an advanced stage, and you believe it's a matter of ironing out detail, you offer them a period of exclusivity, which generally would mean you would not process parties with other discussions.
2. That however need not stop you providing basic sale documents, provided you inform the potential buyer that a period of exclusivity has been opened.
3. It's worth noting that the spivs did exactly this with the Vienna based consortium in 2014. By the time they had themselves in order, Duchatelet, who of course did minimal DD, was advanced. Slater told the consortium, sorry you are too late, we are advanced. Normal behaviour, no drama. Slater didn't upset them in saying that, for obvious rational reasons. Indeed they came back in March to see if RD wanted to consider a Peninsula move.
Last night it hadn't occurred to me the identity of a buyer that RD 'didn't like". Now that I've been reminded of Varney, well, OK. Would a really good businessman turn people away on the basis of personal enmity? I don't think so. I think he would only do that if by selling to that seller, that seller might present an increased business/market risk to the buyer's other interests. Otherwise, if you lose your preferred buyer at the last minute, and the unpreferred buyer seems serious, why would you not try to get your hands on that buyer's money?
Doesn't smell right to me.
1 -
True, but when you take the several million square feet of real estate comprised of the Valley and Sparrows Lane, and you compare that to house prices in Kensington, £70m is a bargainken_shabby said:I agree with Prague on this one. There's no need to offer an off-the-planet sale price if you feel another party is almost at the point of completing the deal, you simply say there is a period of exclusivity, or put them on hold, or whatever. The other party may not complete, in which case the party you have just mugged off with a 70m valuation may seem more appealing. I'm not saying some or all of this happened, just that the whole 70m over-valuation feels bizarre.
Is Roland wishing to sell, or simply 'prepared to consider it'? There is obviously a lot we don't know about here, but you get get a lot more for 70m than the likes of Charlton.2 -
I wonder if Jim will completely ignore the Charlton question today? IMO he’s been great. Probably over enthusiastic but well meaning nonetheless.18
