If we have to suffer another season under RD, thank God we’ve got Lee Bowyer, JJ and Gallen all under contract. I think Lee pulled off a miracle last season, and although I don’t doubt it will be ten times harder this season, I have faith he’ll do what needs to be done.
I only know what I read on here re: the Aussies, but IF, their financial situation is so precarious, and I mean IF, then as crazy as this may sound, I think I’d rather stick it out with RD for the time being. Let me explain my warped thinking, because I don’t say this lightly.
RD has, for all his faults, never stopped paying the bills or to my knowledge, paid anyone late. He’s acted like a total scumbag on numerous occasions and done many wrongs, but the club haven’t flirted with administration as far as I know. I understand he wouldn’t let that happen anyway, because he stands to lose everything should he let that happen.
I also think we’ve reached the point where the set up that exists is somehow the most stable it’s ever going to be, comparatively speaking, under his ownership. We have, by the grace of God, a divine intervention in Bowyer and what he has achieved and what I think he’s capable of, given the circumstances he operates in.
we also know, categorically RD does want to sell. Granted, his original idea of what the club is worth, versus what he wanted was fantasy, but I think as time goes by, reality is kicking in, and he’s aware of the club’s true value.
Giving Lee the contract he wanted was another sign. 12/18 months ago, he would’ve held firm on his insane statement and Karel Frayere would’ve probably been taking training on Friday. He knows that in order to sell the club, he can’t run it like he has been given the success on the pitch over the last year.
I know there’s probably a hundred things and more I don’t know about the Aussie bid, including how difficult RD is to deal with, ex Directors’ loans etc, but, given the Aussies’ interest is over a year old now, regardless of what I pick up on here, I just think that the funds aren’t there to sustain running the club. I may be wrong. If that’s the case given the current circumstances of RD’s reign and the situation we find ourselves in, I think I’d rather opt for this, than risk one/two seasons of Aussie ownership and then possible administration. This is all hypothetical at the moment and I don’t want people to think I’m suddenly an apologist for RD, or that I have forgotten all the wrongs he has done to us and the club. I just mean that the position we find ourselves in now, at this point in time under his ownership, is to an extent, steady(ish).
Putting the old proverbial tin hat on
I think that in the worse case scenario where the Aussie's or someone else come in and have us in admin after two years, there would be plenty of potential new owners, without an unrealistic price tag which is delaying this change if ownership.
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.
Ah sorry, got ya. As far as the Aussies were concerned it was £33m, as that was what they’d be paying.
RD had always said he’d take care of the loans, probably believing the directors would ‘settle’. I suspect he may have reached agreement with RM, the principal lender, only to go batty when others wouldn’t follow suit.
So I can see where the £26m comes from, but as far as the Aussies were concerned, I believe their deal was £33m with clean title. So when Roland decided not to settle the loans that sum became £40m.
Not sure where any of this gets us though. Club still isn’t sold. But I guess it may be soon?
There it is. Roland has an overvaluation of £40M which no one will pay hence we ain't sold.
My gut tells me no matter how good the offer is to Duchatelet is head keeps telling him there will be an even better one around the corner.
How ever made it in business wonders never cease.
carly......you and most others are working on the assumption that he is being driven only by financial concerns in this instance. My take is, and always has been, that you have to factor in a significant amount of vengeance on his part bordering on obsessive psychotic lunacy, which in turn clouds the whole mind numbing takeover to an unfathomable position. There is something going on in the guys head that we just can’t see or fully understand, forget business ethics or business acumen ......it’s that unknown factor which is driving his mindset to the total detriment of the whole sorry saga that has stretched out for years.....there simply cannot be any other reason in my view. I’m no expert on the matters of his complicated mindset regarding CAFC, but it’s perfectly clear to me........It ain’t just the money. Like I have said before, he’s a very very strange individual and will doubtless continue to be so.........end of.
1803, Martello towers are built along the coast to protect England from a French invasion.
They were actually built around the coasts of the United Kingdom as a whole, and possibly not just to protect England (particularly given the recent history of Revoutionary French support for Irish insurrections).
1803, Martello towers are built along the coast to protect England from a French invasion.
They were actually built around the coasts of the United Kingdom as a whole, and possibly not just to protect England (particularly given the recent history of Revoutionary French support for Irish insurrections).
Shame (for the monkey) none were built off the coast of Hartlepool...
I have a deep aversion to fish puns so only skim this thread occasionally. I may have missed something so please ignore this post if I am raising an issue that has already been dealt with.
Fact: we have some director loans totalling £7 million. These loans have been raised against the ground and training ground.
Fact: these loans only become payable on promotion to the Premier League.
Fact: on promotion to the Premiership Charlton will immediately receive approximately £100 million and guaranteed £90 million for the following three years in parachute payments if we are relegated after one season.
Is it still being claimed that the £7 million in loans is holding up a sale?
I have a deep aversion to fish puns so only skim this thread occasionally. I may have missed something so please ignore this post if I am raising an issue that has already been dealt with.
Fact: we have some director loans totalling £7 million. These loans have been raised against the ground and training ground.
Fact: these loans only become payable on promotion to the Premier League.
Fact: on promotion to the Premiership Charlton will immediately receive approximately £100 million and guaranteed £90 million for the following three years in parachute payments if we are relegated after one season.
Is it still being claimed that the £7 million in loans is holding up a sale?
It is suggested that new owners who might want to raise finance on the assets might not be able to without clean title.
I have a deep aversion to fish puns so only skim this thread occasionally. I may have missed something so please ignore this post if I am raising an issue that has already been dealt with.
Fact: we have some director loans totalling £7 million. These loans have been raised against the ground and training ground.
Fact: these loans only become payable on promotion to the Premier League.
Fact: on promotion to the Premiership Charlton will immediately receive approximately £100 million and guaranteed £90 million for the following three years in parachute payments if we are relegated after one season.
Is it still being claimed that the £7 million in loans is holding up a sale?
Some people are suggesting that the title of the properties, clear of the directors' loans, remains to be settled before a deal can go through.
If Roland thought that he could buy off the £7m loans at a discount last summer, surely that discount will have lessened now we are one division closer to them becoming due. That could be his reason for bumping the price up to the Aussies.
Who cares how much it’ll cost to buy us? We just need it done ASAP.
Surprisingly, the buyers and the seller.
I don’t believe there are any buyers or sellers on here.
Maybe the people that come on here want to find out what is or might be happening; might want to share their understanding or prediction are to the outcome; or are genuinely curious as to what the effect of a significant investment in Charlton would be on the playing strength of the squad, future plans, catering, ticket pricing and ambitions of the club.
I have a deep aversion to fish puns so only skim this thread occasionally. I may have missed something so please ignore this post if I am raising an issue that has already been dealt with.
Fact: we have some director loans totalling £7 million. These loans have been raised against the ground and training ground.
Fact: these loans only become payable on promotion to the Premier League.
Fact: on promotion to the Premiership Charlton will immediately receive approximately £100 million and guaranteed £90 million for the following three years in parachute payments if we are relegated after one season.
Is it still being claimed that the £7 million in loans is holding up a sale?
It is suggested that new owners who might want to raise finance on the assets might not be able to without clean title.
If the assets are worth £33m, the loans £7m then new owners can still borrow up to £26m, and I believe the book value of the Valley & Sparrows Lane is over £40m.
I have a deep aversion to fish puns so only skim this thread occasionally. I may have missed something so please ignore this post if I am raising an issue that has already been dealt with.
Fact: we have some director loans totalling £7 million. These loans have been raised against the ground and training ground.
Fact: these loans only become payable on promotion to the Premier League.
Fact: on promotion to the Premiership Charlton will immediately receive approximately £100 million and guaranteed £90 million for the following three years in parachute payments if we are relegated after one season.
Is it still being claimed that the £7 million in loans is holding up a sale?
Some people are suggesting that the title of the properties, clear of the directors' loans, remains to be settled before a deal can go through.
The last two disastrous owners didn't see the ex-directors bonds as an issue.
But because the new owners MIGHT that has to mean they, the new owners, are dodgy!
If I was paying £33m for something I'd want to own it all and have clear title. I really don't see why any rational, non- spiv owners wouldn't.
Yes, they MIGHT want to take out a loan.
For example, to spend the remaining £10m on the training ground they might take out a mortgage/loan at the current very low interest rates rather than trying up capital. Charlton did similar when building the north stand.
But at present any of the ex-directors could block that. I doubt they would, but a buyer would rather be safe than sorry.
Isn't all the problems the loans are causing Duchatelet (totally his fault, no blame on the ex-directors) just proof of why clean title is preferable?
I have a deep aversion to fish puns so only skim this thread occasionally. I may have missed something so please ignore this post if I am raising an issue that has already been dealt with.
Fact: we have some director loans totalling £7 million. These loans have been raised against the ground and training ground.
Fact: these loans only become payable on promotion to the Premier League.
Fact: on promotion to the Premiership Charlton will immediately receive approximately £100 million and guaranteed £90 million for the following three years in parachute payments if we are relegated after one season.
Is it still being claimed that the £7 million in loans is holding up a sale?
It is suggested that new owners who might want to raise finance on the assets might not be able to without clean title.
The land is worth about £23m. I’m not an expert but I would have thought anyone incoming will have trouble borrowing anywhere near that against it.
What removing the ex-directors’ loans would allow, however, is Roland to secure debt that he leaves on the books as a first charge against the assets, while selling the club and the land.
Don’t forget that LDT has said that one of the “agreed” deals includes a further payment to RD on promotion to the Premier League. In that scenario it’s very likely he would look to secure that debt - the fact the fixed assets wouldn’t necessarily cover it doesn’t mean this can’t be done. The valuation would, however, prevent a new loan that exceeded the value of the assets.
It’s just a theory but no one is borrowing huge sums against the assets because any lender would establish what they are worth.
Comments
My take is, and always has been, that you have to factor in a significant amount of vengeance on his part bordering on obsessive psychotic lunacy, which in turn clouds the whole mind numbing takeover to an unfathomable position.
There is something going on in the guys head that we just can’t see or fully understand, forget business ethics or business acumen ......it’s that unknown factor which is driving his mindset to the total detriment of the whole sorry saga that has stretched out for years.....there simply cannot be any other reason in my view.
I’m no expert on the matters of his complicated mindset regarding CAFC, but it’s perfectly clear to me........It ain’t just the money.
Like I have said before, he’s a very very strange individual and will doubtless continue to be so.........end of.
Rebellion, led by Robert Emmet, in Ireland.
And...
Most importantly...
The wagonway between Wandsworth and Croydon is opened, being the first public railway line in England (Wikipedia says).
Wont get much change out of her
Fact: we have some director loans totalling £7 million. These loans have been raised against the ground and training ground.
Fact: these loans only become payable on promotion to the Premier League.
Fact: on promotion to the Premiership Charlton will immediately receive approximately £100 million and guaranteed £90 million for the following three years in parachute payments if we are relegated after one season.
Is it still being claimed that the £7 million in loans is holding up a sale?
A seat for every comment, we have now filled Anfield.
The Etihad is next (55,097) probably done by the weekend!
Why do you post on here?
But because the new owners MIGHT that has to mean they, the new owners, are dodgy!
If I was paying £33m for something I'd want to own it all and have clear title. I really don't see why any rational, non- spiv owners wouldn't.
Yes, they MIGHT want to take out a loan.
For example, to spend the remaining £10m on the training ground they might take out a mortgage/loan at the current very low interest rates rather than trying up capital. Charlton did similar when building the north stand.
But at present any of the ex-directors could block that. I doubt they would, but a buyer would rather be safe than sorry.
Isn't all the problems the loans are causing Duchatelet (totally his fault, no blame on the ex-directors) just proof of why clean title is preferable?
What removing the ex-directors’ loans would allow, however, is Roland to secure debt that he leaves on the books as a first charge against the assets, while selling the club and the land.
Don’t forget that LDT has said that one of the “agreed” deals includes a further payment to RD on promotion to the Premier League. In that scenario it’s very likely he would look to secure that debt - the fact the fixed assets wouldn’t necessarily cover it doesn’t mean this can’t be done. The valuation would, however, prevent a new loan that exceeded the value of the assets.
It’s just a theory but no one is borrowing huge sums against the assets because any lender would establish what they are worth.