Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)

1179717981800180218032265

Comments

  • Uboat said:

    "Based on a Deloitte Feasibility study, AFC will incorporate the best global sports management and science practices. AFC also plans to create a world-class training facility at the training ground to develop young talent.

    The Australian Football Consortium is currently raising capital. Register your interest at the button below."

    Oh god.  They have a system all worked out.  oh god oh god oh god.
    RD had a "system" all worked out, remember?
    That's exactly what I mean....not again...
    Roland had a shit system therefore systems are shit? Man City have got a system, so that's one all. 
    Man City, eh?

    I believe that their system was based on having shitloads of money and throwing it around the transfer market?
    Correct. A successful system. 
  • edited June 2019
    JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 


    I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

    the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

    if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 
    It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
    Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 
    so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

    No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

    There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo
  • 1800 pages

    6.2m views

    54k comments

    GOAT

    WIOTOS
  • 1800 pages

    6.2m views

    54k comments

    GOAT

    WIOTOS

    Roland probably would have sold the club 1799 pages ago if it wasn’t for this thread...
  • _MrDick said:
    JamesSeed said:
    I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 


    I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

    the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

    if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 
    Personal opinion alert ... I think the Aussies want clean title because they want to fund the 'process' against the assets. They might have the £33m purchase price but they haven't got the resources to fund a sustained promotion push to the PL. 
    That may not be the case. I said something along those lines to GM and he replied overnight saying it’s a post purchase strategy, and ‘Again I point to the key investors profile’. 
    Sounds complicated, but Muir, the Indian cricket guy, and perhaps the American, are all minted. But I think it’s a bit mysterious. 
  • edited June 2019
    JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 


    I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

    the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

    if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 
    It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
    Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 
    so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

    No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

    There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo
    No, £33m plus £7m making it £40m. 
    The £7m was added after the playoff final. Despite agreement not to. 
    The price was reduced because he finally realised he wasn’t going to get what he wanted for the club. 
  • People may want clean title following the spivs ownership debacle.
  • edited June 2019
    JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 


    I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

    the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

    if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 
    It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
    Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 
    so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

    No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

    There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo



    I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling 


    so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil  plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents 

    i believe this is still the case 
  • Sponsored links:


  • 1801 - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland comes into being.

    And, for those Patrick O'Brian fans out there, the brig HMS Speedy captures a 32-gun Spanish frigate El Gamo...

    Oh, and war breaks out between the United States of America and Tripoli - one of the last gasps of the Barbary Corsair state(let)s.
  • 1801 - Battle of Copenhagen. The action in which Lord Nelson ignores the signal to withdraw by holding the telescope to his blind eye. “I really did not see the signal!” 
  • JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 


    I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

    the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

    if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 
    It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
    Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 
    so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

    No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

    There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo



    I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling 


    so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil  plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents 

    i believe this is still the case 
    Where do you get £26m from? 
    I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times. 

  • edited June 2019
    JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 


    I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

    the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

    if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 
    It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
    Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 
    so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

    No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

    There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo



    I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling 


    so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil  plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents 

    i believe this is still the case 
    Where do you get £26m from? 
    I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times. 

    James,  you said the original price was £33m with RD to sort loans so people are deducting £7M to get £26M net.
  • JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 


    I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

    the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

    if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 
    It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
    Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 
    so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

    No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

    There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo



    I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling 


    so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil  plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents 

    i believe this is still the case 
    Where do you get £26m from? 
    I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times. 

    That would be me, and that’s what I interpreted “It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans.“

    so the total cost paid by the Aussies was £33m. Roland would pay out £7m meaning his own return would be £26m. Am i still interpreting that wrong?
  • 1801, The London Stock Exchange is founded.
  • Sponsored links:


  • So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?
  • bobmunro said:
    So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?
    I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.

    I could be wrong though.
    Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunro

    Tuppance Hap'ny
  • bobmunro said:
    So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?
    I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.

    I could be wrong though.
    Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunro

    Tuppance Hap'ny
    Yes, my vocabulary has changed somewhat in the years away from south London - but it does miraculously return when I’m about half way through the Blackwall Tunnel.
  • edited June 2019
    JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 


    I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

    the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

    if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 
    It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
    Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 
    so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

    No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

    There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo



    I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling 


    so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil  plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents 

    i believe this is still the case 
    Where do you get £26m from? 
    I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times. 

    That would be me, and that’s what I interpreted “It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans.“

    so the total cost paid by the Aussies was £33m. Roland would pay out £7m meaning his own return would be £26m. Am i still interpreting that wrong?
    Yes and no.

    Duchatelet thought he take £33m off the Aussies and pay a fraction of the £7m (25%???) Because Duchatelet believed that ALL the ex-directors would make a deal.

    Only it turns out White hand, Chapel and Summers won't take less than 100% and White hasn't agreed either despite Duchatelet saying he had.

    My guess is that Duchatelet, because he didn't bother to confirm it, thought the ex-directors liability was going to be £1.75m (25% of £7m) but when he found out it wasn't dumped it on the Aussies to sort/pay.

    Hence the £33m becoming £40m

    This all comes down again to the incompetence of De Turck and Duchatelet.

    They believed the ex-directors would take a small % but didn't check with them or get it in writing.

    Too many intermediaries, too many assumptions, too many incompetent Belgians.
    Yes, but why did they believe this? Can we think of anyone who knows all the ex-directors and may have given them a steer? Can we think of anyone who may have told them that the ex-directors’ loans expired after seven years?
  • Henry Irving said:Tuppence
    bobmunro said:
    So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?
    I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.

    I could be wrong though.
    Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunro

    Tuppance Hap'ny
    Tuppence ha'penny
  • LDT, not a reliable source, has stated that there were different agreed prices and pricing structures for different parties.

    And that's just agreed prices.

    Initial quotes have said to have reached £72m (Airman Brown). So NLA's £50/£45m and JS's £33m can all be correct.

    We know Duchatelet is irrational and inconsistent.

    We know Duchatelet has offered the club for sale for £1 with a separate cost on the Valley and Sparrows Lane based on house prices in Kensington.

    With Duchatelet, any price, any structure has been possible at one time or another.  

    Duchatelet is not consistent, rational or competent.

    Duchatelet is the problem.
     And Richard Murray is highly culpable.
  • :| I can't think of anyone
  • JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    JamesSeed said:
    I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to. 


    I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from 

    the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should 

    if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back 
    It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked. 
    Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem. 
    so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?

    No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final. 

    There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo



    I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling 


    so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil  plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents 

    i believe this is still the case 
    Where do you get £26m from? 
    I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times. 

    That would be me, and that’s what I interpreted “It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans.“

    so the total cost paid by the Aussies was £33m. Roland would pay out £7m meaning his own return would be £26m. Am i still interpreting that wrong?
    Yes and no.

    Duchatelet thought he take £33m off the Aussies and pay a fraction of the £7m (25%???) Because Duchatelet believed that ALL the ex-directors would make a deal.

    Only it turns out White hand, Chapel and Summers won't take less than 100% and White hasn't agreed either despite Duchatelet saying he had.

    My guess is that Duchatelet, because he didn't bother to confirm it, thought the ex-directors liability was going to be £1.75m (25% of £7m) but when he found out it wasn't dumped it on the Aussies to sort/pay.

    Hence the £33m becoming £40m

    This all comes down again to the incompetence of De Turck and Duchatelet.

    They believed the ex-directors would take a small % but didn't check with them or get it in writing.

    Too many intermediaries, too many assumptions, too many incompetent Belgians.
    Ok, that makes more sense. But still not sure that stacks up for me. My understanding was there was a play by Roland to offer 25% of the o/s debt in June LAST YEAR, which was rejected by the debt holders and never progressed. Are you saying that 12 months on you understand there was a repeated play at the same level, and just an assumption that it would be accepted?
  • edited June 2019
    It’s entirely possible different prices were agreed/quoted to different parties, all were covered by an NDA and would explain club’s reluctance to say the asking price/ day whey they were reluctant.

     I guess if you thought you could negotiate more from a particular buyer you might do that particularly if you thought you might get away with it. On the other hand you might then drag out the buying process for several years and lose more money - doh!
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!