I'm sure I remember someone insinuating that there were allegedly some issues around the legality of certain things when RD purchased the club, relating to the spivs. Does anyone recall this and as far as we know has that been resolved? I just can't think what would mean multiple groups of purchasers need to be so silent on everything
Yes I remember it, but no one ever knew what it was about, as far as I know.
I'm sure I remember someone insinuating that there were allegedly some issues around the legality of certain things when RD purchased the club, relating to the spivs. Does anyone recall this and as far as we know has that been resolved? I just can't think what would mean multiple groups of purchasers need to be so silent on everything
That would be my theory if there was the same reason why both groups had not completed.
My hunch though is it’s different reasons. For the Aussies, i suspect it’s due to the own inability to get their own ducks in a row, for the Brits, my hunch is because one of their key ducks current involvement with another club means at this point they would not be allowed by the EFL to proceed. The reason why both have been content to have a backdrop of dual ‘continuing interest without exclusivity’ is neither having confidence in the other to be in a position to get over the line.
I think running costs is a euphemism here as we all know one of the main costs of the club related to the panic level contracts handed out as the club was run by shite managers and Katrien.
Unfortunately we can’t afford championship wages if we are in League 1, but we also can’t afford to let all our players who are championship standard leave at the end of the year.
I'm sure I remember someone insinuating that there were allegedly some issues around the legality of certain things when RD purchased the club, relating to the spivs. Does anyone recall this and as far as we know has that been resolved? I just can't think what would mean multiple groups of purchasers need to be so silent on everything
Yes I remember it, but no one ever knew what it was about, as far as I know.
Somewhere in the back of my mind wasn't there mention on CL of the spivs share holdings in the club being held via an offshore company (Virgin Islands) ?
Yeah I heard that now they no longer have to pay for the wall, maybe, that the Mexican givernment is looking to invest aignificant capital with new trading partners and so after the end of March, we will be their new besties.
Only in for Charlton come August though I heard from a reliable source (I think the betting ads call it trusting your hunch)
I'm sure I remember someone insinuating that there were allegedly some issues around the legality of certain things when RD purchased the club, relating to the spivs. Does anyone recall this and as far as we know has that been resolved? I just can't think what would mean multiple groups of purchasers need to be so silent on everything
Yes I remember it, but no one ever knew what it was about, as far as I know.
Somewhere in the back of my mind wasn't there mention on CL of the spivs share holdings in the club being held via an offshore company (Virgin Islands) ?
Yes the BVI, but that in itself is not legally dodgy.
I'm sure I remember someone insinuating that there were allegedly some issues around the legality of certain things when RD purchased the club, relating to the spivs. Does anyone recall this and as far as we know has that been resolved? I just can't think what would mean multiple groups of purchasers need to be so silent on everything
Yep, I've been thinking this for about a year or so now.
I've worked on enough deals professionally to know that if you've got two interested parties who have both got the money and both agreed a price (which is what we''be been told) then the deal will generally get done, UNLESS there's a steaming pile of something potentially toxic sitting somewhere.
If there is potentially such a smell then the first question that gets asked is "what's the statute of limitations on this?", Ie. if things all go tits up then what's the risk to us?
If that's the case then you might still go ahead with the deal if the vendor (Roland) gives you some sort of warranty and indemnity against historic liabilities, or you might just go ahead anyway and take the risk. Or you might hang on for a bit until it's too late for the potentially smelly stuff to cause any real issue.
I'm not suggesting that Roland has done anything materially wrong on his watch from a legal perspective (ruining our club doesn't count, unfortunately), but it seems like the previous owners may have been up to the necks in all sorts, and we know Roland didn't do any due diligence of his own and effectively bought the club blind.
To me this seems the only plausible reason why either of the two different potential buyers with the money lined up haven't done the deal, yet.
But I have no insider knowledge on any of this, just an educated guess.
But if I'm right then it suits nobody to go shouting the reasons why from the rooftops.
but you point this out to the admin and they laugh in your face : - (
Unfortunately I’m the least influential/powerful on the council. I live in constant fear my modding rights will be rescinded, so I continue my meek existence taking pelters on here from the members and too afraid to voice my opinions to my colleagues and superiors
I'm sure I remember someone insinuating that there were allegedly some issues around the legality of certain things when RD purchased the club, relating to the spivs. Does anyone recall this and as far as we know has that been resolved? I just can't think what would mean multiple groups of purchasers need to be so silent on everything
Yep, I've been thinking this for about a year or so now.
I've worked on enough deals professionally to know that if you've got two interested parties who have both got the money and both agreed a price (which is what we''be been told) then the deal will generally get done, UNLESS there's a steaming pile of something potentially toxic sitting somewhere.
If there is potentially such a smell then the first question that gets asked is "what's the statute of limitations on this?", Ie. if things all go tits up then what's the risk to us?
If that's the case then you might still go ahead with the deal if the vendor (Roland) gives you some sort of warranty and indemnity against historic liabilities, or you might just go ahead anyway and take the risk. Or you might hang on for a bit until it's too late for the potentially smelly stuff to cause any real issue.
I'm not suggesting that Roland has done anything materially wrong on his watch from a legal perspective (ruining our club doesn't count, unfortunately), but it seems like the previous owners may have been up to the necks in all sorts, and we know Roland didn't do any due diligence of his own and effectively bought the club blind.
To me this seems the only plausible reason why either of the two different potential buyers with the money lined up haven't done the deal, yet.
But I have no insider knowledge on any of this, just an educated guess.
But if I'm right then it suits nobody to go shouting the reasons why from the rooftops.
I have a fair idea of things that went on under the Spivs, as do a number of others. There may be more we don’t know, of course, but it’s hard to see why what is known would be a factor now.
I think White has been played but a lot of reporters do indulge in sensationalism, however small. As an example, and I don’t know if any of you listen to the LoveSport show last Thursday, Aaron Paul the presenter said, ‘we have news of the takeover coming up folks’. It was in response to that stupid tweet that guy put up saying done deal get down the valley on sat. Aaron is a top bloke and he’s someone who I think is very good at his job, but that little example gave me an insight into how some of them react, and I think Jim White falls firmly in that category. We’ve seen his antics on transfer deadline day.
I believe he has been genuine in his pursuit of the story of our club, but there’s a showman in him as well, playing up to the cameras
The main hope this month is if we don't get a new owner, no damage is done to our squad. We still have our major player plus a new LB and Cullen and Aribo fit by February.
Good work by Henry and co in the pursuit of truth.
Interesting F.F. it seems today, what I would like to pick up on is this sentence - "They want to restore the relationship with the fans, I have told them that one of the first things they need to tell the fans when they takeover is why it took so long" LDT" which was highlighted, LDT in part of that stated WHEN THEY TAKE OVER, now was that because his English is bad, or is there more to it and a slip of the tongue?
Interesting F.F. it seems today, what I would like to pick up on is this sentence - "They want to restore the relationship with the fans, I have told them that one of the first things they need to tell the fans when they takeover is why it took so long" LDT" which was highlighted, LDT in part of that stated WHEN THEY TAKE OVER, now was that because his English is bad, or is there more to it and a slip of the tongue?
Probably because the Brit bid is less likely. Whether it's due to them waiting for the Aussies to disappear, or they are waiting for a Brit to disentangle from another club or any other reason.
Me - did you quote a price of over £70m to a buyer at short notice.
LDT "I haven't signed an NDA" ( My personal view - OK English isn't his first language but this made no sense. If he hasn't signed an NDA he can comment)
Me - but did you tell a potential buyer the price was over £70m three hours before a meeting having previously agreed a lower price.
LDT "That is a rumour, i can't comment on rumours"
I pushed him on this a few times and he finally said that no, this hadn't happened but he, IMHO squirmed a bit and didn't deny it straight away despite saying he was aware of the "rumour". He did finally say it hadn't happened or anything similar had happened.
Good work. That is a lie.
Your credibility has already gone mate, so you can pack that in right now..
So the training ground tour happened as I tweeted, the Aussie money is American as I posted and DeTurck struggled with the £70m, which I knew he would. Pretty fair, I’d say.
DONE DEAL!
No need to be an asshole to one of the actual legitimate sources we have.
Are you sucking up to the Yanks already? It's arsehole
If different deals have been done with the interested parties and with the mention of different amounts agreed in different currencies could it be the case of them waiting for Sterling to plunge after Brexit so they get more bang for their buck as it were?
Comments
My hunch though is it’s different reasons. For the Aussies, i suspect it’s due to the own inability to get their own ducks in a row, for the Brits, my hunch is because one of their key ducks current involvement with another club means at this point they would not be allowed by the EFL to proceed. The reason why both have been content to have a backdrop of dual ‘continuing interest without exclusivity’ is neither having confidence in the other to be in a position to get over the line.
That’s my left field guess.
Unfortunately we can’t afford championship wages if we are in League 1, but we also can’t afford to let all our players who are championship standard leave at the end of the year.
Only in for Charlton come August though I heard from a reliable source (I think the betting ads call it trusting your hunch)
:-( x10
I've worked on enough deals professionally to know that if you've got two interested parties who have both got the money and both agreed a price (which is what we''be been told) then the deal will generally get done, UNLESS there's a steaming pile of something potentially toxic sitting somewhere.
If there is potentially such a smell then the first question that gets asked is "what's the statute of limitations on this?", Ie. if things all go tits up then what's the risk to us?
If that's the case then you might still go ahead with the deal if the vendor (Roland) gives you some sort of warranty and indemnity against historic liabilities, or you might just go ahead anyway and take the risk. Or you might hang on for a bit until it's too late for the potentially smelly stuff to cause any real issue.
I'm not suggesting that Roland has done anything materially wrong on his watch from a legal perspective (ruining our club doesn't count, unfortunately), but it seems like the previous owners may have been up to the necks in all sorts, and we know Roland didn't do any due diligence of his own and effectively bought the club blind.
To me this seems the only plausible reason why either of the two different potential buyers with the money lined up haven't done the deal, yet.
But I have no insider knowledge on any of this, just an educated guess.
But if I'm right then it suits nobody to go shouting the reasons why from the rooftops.
I don’t think anyone’s saying the Aussies have no money.
Happy to have the Brits, but would be gutted to get Mike Ashley.
To yo-yo between the championship and the Premier for the next 10 years would be
shockinghold on a moment.I believe he has been genuine in his pursuit of the story of our club, but there’s a showman in him as well, playing up to the cameras
We still have our major player plus a new LB and Cullen and Aribo fit by February.
Good work by Henry and co in the pursuit of truth.
Whether it's due to them waiting for the Aussies to disappear, or they are waiting for a Brit to disentangle from another club or any other reason.