Some time later RD & the Aussies made a joint statement on the O/S saying a price had been agreed & the price agreement has been repeated numerous times.
The price was alleged to have been around £65M and other offers in excess of £33M have been turned away.
The Aussies filed papers with the EFL and turned up at last seasons play offs wearing scarves.
Yet another year later it is suggested they had & still have the funds to proceed, but the price has mysteriously halved to what was agreed and yet they still haven't done the deal at half the agreed price and are possibly arguing over a £7M figure.
If the Aussies recently agreed, pre Wembley to pay £33M for clean title.
Can no one explain my post from yesterday ?
Why did they originally agree to pay £65M ?
My only explanation could be that the upfront cash sum would have been something like £20M, with the remainder paid in stages.
James Seed, I think it's more than possible RD agreed to deal with the ex-director loans and then the Aussies would buy for £33M with clean title.
However, even if this is now the hold up, it still doesn't explain the last year of inaction, when we were told on the OS that the price had been agreed by both parties and the Aussies filed papers with the EFL.
It's still only Poplcon that has tried to answer, which indicated no one else can.
That's not what Gerard told me, mate.
Sorry, but I'm almost certain that's what you have been telling us for a while ? Surely, you said Aussies agreed £33M ? RD was to clear the ex-director loans, so effectively he gets £26M ? Aussies own the club with clean title for £33M ? If you've not been saying this, then I'm astounded.
Way I read it the price was £33m and Duchatelet sorted the bonds.
Duchatelet then tried to pass the bonds on to the Indian/Yank/Oz group so making it £40m
Please let Dalman be waiting in the wings to beat the Aussie's price at the eleventh hour. I suspect Roland will be playing one off against another anyway.
Some time later RD & the Aussies made a joint statement on the O/S saying a price had been agreed & the price agreement has been repeated numerous times.
The price was alleged to have been around £65M and other offers in excess of £33M have been turned away.
The Aussies filed papers with the EFL and turned up at last seasons play offs wearing scarves.
Yet another year later it is suggested they had & still have the funds to proceed, but the price has mysteriously halved to what was agreed and yet they still haven't done the deal at half the agreed price and are possibly arguing over a £7M figure.
If the Aussies recently agreed, pre Wembley to pay £33M for clean title.
Can no one explain my post from yesterday ?
Why did they originally agree to pay £65M ?
My only explanation could be that the upfront cash sum would have been something like £20M, with the remainder paid in stages.
James Seed, I think it's more than possible RD agreed to deal with the ex-director loans and then the Aussies would buy for £33M with clean title.
However, even if this is now the hold up, it still doesn't explain the last year of inaction, when we were told on the OS that the price had been agreed by both parties and the Aussies filed papers with the EFL.
It's still only Poplcon that has tried to answer, which indicated no one else can.
That's not what Gerard told me, mate.
Sorry, but I'm almost certain that's what you have been telling us for a while ? Surely, you said Aussies agreed £33M ? RD was to clear the ex-director loans, so effectively he gets £26M ? Aussies own the club with clean title for £33M ? If you've not been saying this, then I'm astounded.
Way I read it the price was £33m and Duchatelet sorted the bonds.
Duchatelet then tried to pass the bonds on to the Indian/Yank/Oz group so making it £40m
That’s correct. I misread Covered End’s post earlier.
When a price is agreed, you don't need any special knowledge to see that something was uncovered to show the agreed price was not taking into account something that came to light. The Aussies spent a lot of money on DD so you can see why they might not want to lose it, although it is surprising that have not given up by now.
What we have to do is wait for the news that Roland is willing to lower the price to what people will pay. If we get all activity over a new potential buyer it simply shows we have forgotten why the club has not been sold and is not likely to be sold anytime soon.
Some time later RD & the Aussies made a joint statement on the O/S saying a price had been agreed & the price agreement has been repeated numerous times.
The price was alleged to have been around £65M and other offers in excess of £33M have been turned away.
The Aussies filed papers with the EFL and turned up at last seasons play offs wearing scarves.
Yet another year later it is suggested they had & still have the funds to proceed, but the price has mysteriously halved to what was agreed and yet they still haven't done the deal at half the agreed price and are possibly arguing over a £7M figure.
If the Aussies recently agreed, pre Wembley to pay £33M for clean title.
Can no one explain my post from yesterday ?
Why did they originally agree to pay £65M ?
My only explanation could be that the upfront cash sum would have been something like £20M, with the remainder paid in stages.
James Seed, I think it's more than possible RD agreed to deal with the ex-director loans and then the Aussies would buy for £33M with clean title.
However, even if this is now the hold up, it still doesn't explain the last year of inaction, when we were told on the OS that the price had been agreed by both parties and the Aussies filed papers with the EFL.
It's still only Poplcon that has tried to answer, which indicated no one else can.
This with bells on
What he paid for the club and where we are when he bought it are irrelevant. The Aussies (publicly at least) were the first in and agreed a price & completed DD then sat on their hands for nearly 2 years. This set the price and all other bids have been negotiated with this price in the mind. The fact that they have done this probably without having funding secured has been hugely damaging imo to the whole process and has contributed massively to why RD is still our owner.
RD is being blamed by the Aussies for going back on the deal by changing the structure or price but surely they went back on the deal by not completing last summer. Once it became evident they weren't going to sell RD pulled his horns in and cut the budget, Aribo's contract offer was halved and we are where we are.
RD and his camp are lying toads but I for one don't think the Aussies are much better.
Some time later RD & the Aussies made a joint statement on the O/S saying a price had been agreed & the price agreement has been repeated numerous times.
The price was alleged to have been around £65M and other offers in excess of £33M have been turned away.
The Aussies filed papers with the EFL and turned up at last seasons play offs wearing scarves.
Yet another year later it is suggested they had & still have the funds to proceed, but the price has mysteriously halved to what was agreed and yet they still haven't done the deal at half the agreed price and are possibly arguing over a £7M figure.
If the Aussies recently agreed, pre Wembley to pay £33M for clean title.
Can no one explain my post from yesterday ?
Why did they originally agree to pay £65M ?
My only explanation could be that the upfront cash sum would have been something like £20M, with the remainder paid in stages.
James Seed, I think it's more than possible RD agreed to deal with the ex-director loans and then the Aussies would buy for £33M with clean title.
However, even if this is now the hold up, it still doesn't explain the last year of inaction, when we were told on the OS that the price had been agreed by both parties and the Aussies filed papers with the EFL.
It's still only Poplcon that has tried to answer, which indicated no one else can.
That's not what Gerard told me, mate.
Sorry, but I'm almost certain that's what you have been telling us for a while ? Surely, you said Aussies agreed £33M ? RD was to clear the ex-director loans, so effectively he gets £26M ? Aussies own the club with clean title for £33M ? If you've not been saying this, then I'm astounded.
Way I read it the price was £33m and Duchatelet sorted the bonds.
Duchatelet then tried to pass the bonds on to the Indian/Yank/Oz group so making it £40m
Yes, that's what it says doesn't it ? There must be something in the air today :-)
There's plenty of football clubs that the owners would love to sell. Why persist in trying to buy Charlton for the last two years knowing that the owner is a deluded old fool. Why not just buy another club instead. Something just doesn't add up to me
Been saying this for a long time, just don't understand why they're still hanging around after two years. Even a bad smell disappears eventually.
Some time later RD & the Aussies made a joint statement on the O/S saying a price had been agreed & the price agreement has been repeated numerous times.
The price was alleged to have been around £65M and other offers in excess of £33M have been turned away.
The Aussies filed papers with the EFL and turned up at last seasons play offs wearing scarves.
Yet another year later it is suggested they had & still have the funds to proceed, but the price has mysteriously halved to what was agreed and yet they still haven't done the deal at half the agreed price and are possibly arguing over a £7M figure.
If the Aussies recently agreed, pre Wembley to pay £33M for clean title.
Can no one explain my post from yesterday ?
Why did they originally agree to pay £65M ?
My only explanation could be that the upfront cash sum would have been something like £20M, with the remainder paid in stages.
James Seed, I think it's more than possible RD agreed to deal with the ex-director loans and then the Aussies would buy for £33M with clean title.
However, even if this is now the hold up, it still doesn't explain the last year of inaction, when we were told on the OS that the price had been agreed by both parties and the Aussies filed papers with the EFL.
It's still only Poplcon that has tried to answer, which indicated no one else can.
That's not what Gerard told me, mate.
Sorry, but I'm almost certain that's what you have been telling us for a while ? Surely, you said Aussies agreed £33M ? RD was to clear the ex-director loans, so effectively he gets £26M ? Aussies own the club with clean title for £33M ? If you've not been saying this, then I'm astounded.
Way I read it the price was £33m and Duchatelet sorted the bonds.
Duchatelet then tried to pass the bonds on to the Indian/Yank/Oz group so making it £40m
Yes, that's what it says doesn't it ? There must be something in the air today :-)
I’ve twice posted that I misread your post. Apologies again. Sheesh.
Some time later RD & the Aussies made a joint statement on the O/S saying a price had been agreed & the price agreement has been repeated numerous times.
The price was alleged to have been around £65M and other offers in excess of £33M have been turned away.
The Aussies filed papers with the EFL and turned up at last seasons play offs wearing scarves.
Yet another year later it is suggested they had & still have the funds to proceed, but the price has mysteriously halved to what was agreed and yet they still haven't done the deal at half the agreed price and are possibly arguing over a £7M figure.
If the Aussies recently agreed, pre Wembley to pay £33M for clean title.
Can no one explain my post from yesterday ?
Why did they originally agree to pay £65M ?
My only explanation could be that the upfront cash sum would have been something like £20M, with the remainder paid in stages.
James Seed, I think it's more than possible RD agreed to deal with the ex-director loans and then the Aussies would buy for £33M with clean title.
However, even if this is now the hold up, it still doesn't explain the last year of inaction, when we were told on the OS that the price had been agreed by both parties and the Aussies filed papers with the EFL.
It's still only Poplcon that has tried to answer, which indicated no one else can.
That's not what Gerard told me, mate.
Sorry, but I'm almost certain that's what you have been telling us for a while ? Surely, you said Aussies agreed £33M ? RD was to clear the ex-director loans, so effectively he gets £26M ? Aussies own the club with clean title for £33M ? If you've not been saying this, then I'm astounded.
Way I read it the price was £33m and Duchatelet sorted the bonds.
Duchatelet then tried to pass the bonds on to the Indian/Yank/Oz group so making it £40m
Yes, that's what it says doesn't it ? There must be something in the air today :-)
I’ve twice posted that I misread your post. Apologies again. Sheesh.
I was replying to HI not your good self and I liked your apology. I think you need some time out mate.
So he technically didn't pay anything as he just added what he paid onto the debt?
And he is charging interest on that, in essence adding more money to the debt that he then wants someone else to pay for?
I don't get it
It's the same as the American guys did at Man U, although they bought the club with borrowed money and charge the interest to the club. So it seems they get to be in the big time, without actually pulling any of their own banknotes out of their pocket.
Comments
Duchatelet is very difficult to negotiate with clearly but I am a bit sceptical about the length of time & the scrabbling around. for investment.
Prefer Dalman as he appears to have the knowledge & contacts & already was part of getting Cardiff to the Premiership.
Duchatelet then tried to pass the bonds on to the Indian/Yank/Oz group so making it £40m
Can I ask a q? What's the concensus on whether Roland is expecting add ons from the sale of the likes of Lookman and Gomez?
Not while they've got someone on the inside doing their bidding for them.
What we have to do is wait for the news that Roland is willing to lower the price to what people will pay. If we get all activity over a new potential buyer it simply shows we have forgotten why the club has not been sold and is not likely to be sold anytime soon.
What he paid for the club and where we are when he bought it are irrelevant. The Aussies (publicly at least) were the first in and agreed a price & completed DD then sat on their hands for nearly 2 years. This set the price and all other bids have been negotiated with this price in the mind. The fact that they have done this probably without having funding secured has been hugely damaging imo to the whole process and has contributed massively to why RD is still our owner.
RD is being blamed by the Aussies for going back on the deal by changing the structure or price but surely they went back on the deal by not completing last summer. Once it became evident they weren't going to sell RD pulled his horns in and cut the budget, Aribo's contract offer was halved and we are where we are.
RD and his camp are lying toads but I for one don't think the Aussies are much better.
There must be something in the air today :-)
I think you need some time out mate.
So it seems they get to be in the big time, without actually pulling any of their own banknotes out of their pocket.
Its the usual gobbledegook