Hear that RD knocked back a bid for the club two weeks ago. Hoping they go back with another.
I think we all more or less knew that.
We'll I haven't read or heard it
I know Bart and neither have I, but I think quite a lot of us reasoned that that is what happened.......I’ve spoken with a few Addicks of late and the general consensus is that an offer has been made but not accepted (at least thus far), though that doesn’t mean that either party have binned it completely......I reckon it’s at a ‘waiting to see who blinks first stage’ without anyone having actually said “take it or leave it,” or even if they have, that that comment is being taken as gospel by either party.
But as I understand if an offer had been made but not accepted there would not have been Due Diligence (which the general consensus seems to agree is or has taken place) as that occurs after an acceptable offer has been made (subject to Due Diligence).
There may be problems, issues and haggling as a result of Due Diligence, including how and when payment(s) might be made, or one or other party may have pulled the plug (or at least be pretending to have done).
But it seems unlikely that it's just a case of an offer being made but not accepted?
Possibly but not necessarily.
There may have been an indicative price before DD (£x).
Post DD the buyer will make an offer (£x-y).
RD then accepts or rejects that offer.
The two parties then play bid tennis until they agree a price or one party walks away.
They may even have agreed the price but not how it is paid IE is it contingent on promotion this season or to the Prem, is it spread over a number of years.
I don't know but my take is that we are, or at least were two weeks ago, at the bid tennis stage. @Redhenry is a good source.
But isn't 'an indicative price' effectively the same as 'an acceptable offer...(subject to Due Diligence)' that I mentioned, and 'problems, issues and haggling as a result of Due Diligence, including how and when payment(s) might be made' that I referred to effectively the same as your 'Post DD the buyer will make an offer (£x-y)' and 'They may even have agreed the price but not how it is paid'.
The point I've been trying to make is that for Due Diligence to have taken place the potential buyer must have made an 'acceptable offer' or agreed an 'indicative price' before DD was begun, rather than, as some have consistently suggested, that Duchatelet is asking for a price several times what any buyer has indicated they would be willing to pay.
Good points.
DD is expensive as well.
And there it is in a nutshell - sorry to piss on the fireworks but DD has not happened, no offer anywhere near the mark has been made and the whole takeover imminent story has been a non story from the start - exactly as i said months ago and have been vilified for saying ever since. Please kill this thread, its painful to watch people continually creating permutations out of complete fabrications of the imagination. Cue all the usual muppets getting upset. Well good luck because i won't be coming on here again for a while, its really not worth the bother - thanks AFKA - you are a good man and i wish you and the forum all the best - COYR
Hang on a min. A few posts ago you were agreeing with others that it had broken down because of stuff the DD had thrown up and an agreement couldn't be reached. You claimed this as some kind of victory for you and vindication as you were right all along.
Now you're back to your original story that DD hasn't started.
I call bullshit.
Also bye. You won't be missed. Class A bellend.
Joking apart, I think there may be a screw loose there. Best go easy on him.
So if a deal doesn't happen, and Roland can't sell the club, then what? Will we be in for a slow and lingering decline?
I know he is mad, but surely not that mad where he would turn down 14-20m million when he is losing money hand over fist with us, especially as he has said he wants out of football!?
@cantersaddick has become noticeably more aggressive and irritable in the tone of his posts since he started using Southeastern again, so cut him some slack.
Hear that RD knocked back a bid for the club two weeks ago. Hoping they go back with another.
'A' bid, i.e from another party or 'the' bid i.e. Muir has been knocked back after due diligence.
This was the first bid from another party that have very ambitious plans for the club. Sorry but can't say anymore. Please sell Roland, fingers crossed.
Hear that RD knocked back a bid for the club two weeks ago. Hoping they go back with another.
'A' bid, i.e from another party or 'the' bid i.e. Muir has been knocked back after due diligence.
This was the first bid from another party that have very ambitious plans for the club. Sorry but can't say anymore. Please sell Roland, fingers crossed.
Do they have the money available to carry out the ambitious plans though??
Hear that RD knocked back a bid for the club two weeks ago. Hoping they go back with another.
'A' bid, i.e from another party or 'the' bid i.e. Muir has been knocked back after due diligence.
This was the first bid from another party that have very ambitious plans for the club. Sorry but can't say anymore. Please sell Roland, fingers crossed.
For those of you who are ’angeldust’ aficionados, he is saying an offer was made during the last week which hasn’t been completely rejected by Goldfinger.....but that various matters still need to be resolved. Interesting maybe?
Napa - I would love to see the business case/ trading projections to warrant a £75-80mn investment in acquiring Baton and its collective assets.
I would question whether the generics of industry trading profiling applies to professional football. The specific realities are very different from the potential. Equally CAFC has since Jan 2014 specifically operated outside of an industry norm.
This financial debate has been painful though earlier discussions regarding 3rd party player ownership offers a possible exit plan. I apologise for extending the pain.
We all have to remember; - the ethos of this administration was player trading. I would not be surprised if there was a specific financial assessment recorded on every senior player - the club has been operated as a vehicle for such trading - M. Duchatelet told us Day 1 his status was as an investor
There can be no confusion in terms of the clubs indebtedness.
M. Duchatelet in Jan 2014 via his corporate investment company Staprix NV "uplifted" the club existing debt to Slater/ Jiminez (Cash) reported as £18.6mn i.e. Staprix NV paid £18.6mn to Messrs Slater/ Jiminez/ Cash to settle the club debts to those entities.
In return for this funding Staprix NV took ownership of Baton Ltd and the Charlton group of companies and their assets, including The Valley, Sparrows Lane, the "club", the "golden ticket" and the players' registrations & contracts. Staprix NV appointed its own executives to run the club.
Staprix has since sanctioned/ funded an increase of the clubs debts to circa £55mn to provide the club with the money to meet operational losses (inc. the net transfer position), repay an outstanding external mortgage and fund pitch, stadium & training ground refurbishment.
Please recognise; - the structure of the club debt positions Staprix NV as the clubs' banker. - the club debt is positioned as a performing asset in Staprix books. - for Staprix (M.Duchatelet) to be repaid someone at some stage has to pay them £55mn.
If Staprix (subject to the agreement of the clubs former directors) agree by a deed of sale to release its ownership/ security of the assets detailed to new owners in settlement of their full debt for anything less than £55mn they will incur a loss.
I suspect M Duchatelets' modus operandi would not allow him to "determine" any part of this debt as a loss .....yet. He can and will likely be willing to carry a part of the debt for as long as needed to secure a maximum possible return.
To try to continue Milo's analogy let us position the club debt to Staprix at £55mn secured against the sundry assets of Baton.
His first exit priority is to get out from under funding ongoing losses i.e. stop the debt to Staprix increasing. Hence the "dalliance" of separating club and ground by selling the club but retaining ownership of The Valley & Sparrows Lane allowing a rental of those facilities to the new owner. This is a STVV/ Stayen business model but with the scale of debt involved the numbers are unlikely to stack up.
For example if new owners paid £10mn for the club (what would they be getting for the money?) it would still leave Staprix with a £45mn debt. The situation is complicated by the training ground not now being fit for purpose. Completing its development could take the Staprix debt back to £50mn.
To maintain the current 3% investment return would represent a prohibitive £1.5mn per annum rental to the new owner. On the basis of circa £5k pw for a League 1 player it equates to the cost of 5 senior squad players.
So will someone pay him £55mn up front for all of the assets held by Baton? Subject to Napas projections it is very unlikely. From an investors exit plan perspective you then start to look at a sliding scale of debt reduction and retained interest in the club trading & assets.
For example would someone pay £40mn, leaving a £15mn interest bearing debt secured against a 2nd charge against the freehold assets, subject to repayment at the point of securing PL status? The interest (as opposed to rental) charge would reduce to £450k p.a.
Instead of paying £40mn would someone pay £30mn but transfer the rights to the contingent performance obligations due to the club under the sale of Gomez, Lookman, Pope, Konsa etc., to Staprix.
You could then extend/ top up this repayment/ revenue stream further by allocating a percentage (say 10%) of transfer fees received for all existing (and potentially future) player registrations.
All of the above allow RD to reduce his exposure, retain some interest in the assets, with the prospect of long term repayment and allow the remaining debt to Staprix to be continue to be seen as a performing asset.
M.Duchatelet is personally able to take a long term investment view. There is nothing startlingly unique here. I am led to believe that variations on these themes are/ were in place with both Standard Liege and STVV.
To clarify there is no 3rd party ownership in respect of the players transferred.
In the event a player's registration/ ownership is transferred to another club it belongs to the receiving club. If a part of the consideration for such transfer includes fees to be paid in respect of performance criteria and or resale profit then they form contractual (not ownership) obligations to the selling club. There is no controlling interest/ influence in the ownership of the player merely a "dividend" in respect of certain playing and financial performance.
The selling club can apportion such "contractual obligations/ contingent assets" as they wish, by either renegotiating the initial sales contract for a further consideration from the buying club or potentially factor them to any 3rd party or include them in any transfer of ownership of the club.
In the case of Batshuayi I suggest the sale of Standard Liege either included the transfer of such contractual obligation/ contingent asset to the former beneficial owner or accounted for an outstanding payment due by the new owners to the former owner.
It follows the buyer logic I the buyer am not going to reimburse you for all of your debts incurred (i.e. pay your asking price) in running the business but will allow you to offset your losses from the positive deals you concluded under your stewardship.
The one "deferment" element I would consider is the payment on attaining PL status and even then I would spread any repayment over 2 or 3 years retention of such status.
Everything else positions too much of an operational burden on the business in an already difficult industry.
Equally any such structured deal would leave Staprix (RD) in part as one of the club bankers and potentially retain undue influence on the business. On such a basis while I would expect new owners to instal a new CEO I could see Ms Meire being appointed as a director in the new structure to represent the bankers interests until such time as the Staprix exposure is deemed sufficiently reduced.
I have no direct knowledge of M.Duchatelet but have had the experience of working with people of a similar profile. My expectation is he feels throughout this experience he is the injured party. If only people had followed his ideas and plans it would all have worked out fine. He will remain convinced to this day his player trading philosophy was the right one. If only people would listen.
He is no doubt a very single minded individual, a trait which has probably served him very well in accruing his wealth to this point. Every strength however has an element of weakness and for that many of us feel we have paid a heavy emotional price.
Totally agree. Duchatelet has wasted money, Duchatelet isn’t going to get it all back from anyone, Duchatelet needs a face saver and needs to be told to FUCK OFF.
Hear that RD knocked back a bid for the club two weeks ago. Hoping they go back with another.
'A' bid, i.e from another party or 'the' bid i.e. Muir has been knocked back after due diligence.
This was the first bid from another party that have very ambitious plans for the club. Sorry but can't say anymore. Please sell Roland, fingers crossed.
Do they have the money available to carry out the ambitious plans though??
@cantersaddick has become noticeably more aggressive and irritable in the tone of his posts since he started using Southeastern again, so cut him some slack.
It's probably true. Apologies to all for that. We had a stress and anxiety workshop at work the other day. The guy told me I need to let go of things that are out of my control particularly train disruption.
As airman and others have explained to you numerous times before the £14-£18m is part of the £55m. You're double counting.
I've no doubt that RD doesn't WANT to take a haircut, who does.
I've also got no doubt that no one will want to pay him £55m for a club that he bought for £14-18m and has since relegated while reducing its income.
But some here seem to be forgetting that in addition to that £55M he paid, he has added to the debt with his academy expenditures, etc plus the losses he has accrued. As I understand it, the debt has moved from £38 to 57.5M in the last few years. And that this debt is now ALSO owed to him, and he is in fact accruing 3% interest on it. When you add that to what he paid, you are in the £70-77M total I mention. Am I to believe he will forgive and write off debt he is currently profiting from?
Many of you keep saying "he cannot get more for a club he relegated." Who says this? Where is that the law? Of course he can. He can get whatever someone will pay him for it. I think what is happening is many of you just can't stand the idea he may profit. But it does not mean he cannot.
I am gonna let it go at this. But I think I will be proven right, in time. He will break even at minimum from the sale, included all added debt since he bought, or only sell part of it. You have your opinions and I have mine. Let's wait and see.
As airman and others have explained to you numerous times before the £14-£18m is part of the £55m. You're double counting.
I've no doubt that RD doesn't WANT to take a haircut, who does.
I've also got no doubt that no one will want to pay him £55m for a club that he bought for £14-18m and has since relegated while reducing its income.
But some here seem to be forgetting that in addition to that £55M he paid, he has added to the debt with his academy expenditures, etc plus the losses he has accrued. As I understand it, the debt has moved from £38 to 57.5M in the last few years. And that this debt is now ALSO owed to him, and he is in fact accruing 3% interest on it. When you add that to what he paid, you are in the £70-77M total I mention. Am I to believe he will forgive and write off debt he is currently profiting from?
Many of you keep saying "he cannot get more for a club he relegated." Who says this? Where is that the law? Of course he can. He can get whatever someone will pay him for it. I think what is happening is many of you just can't stand the idea he may profit. But it does not mean he cannot.
I am gonna let it go at this. But I think I will be proven right, in time. He will break even at minimum from the sale, included all added debt since he bought, or only sell part of it. You have your opinions and I have mine. Let's wait and see.
Hear that RD knocked back a bid for the club two weeks ago. Hoping they go back with another.
I think we all more or less knew that.
We'll I haven't read or heard it
I know Bart and neither have I, but I think quite a lot of us reasoned that that is what happened.......I’ve spoken with a few Addicks of late and the general consensus is that an offer has been made but not accepted (at least thus far), though that doesn’t mean that either party have binned it completely......I reckon it’s at a ‘waiting to see who blinks first stage’ without anyone having actually said “take it or leave it,” or even if they have, that that comment is being taken as gospel by either party.
But as I understand if an offer had been made but not accepted there would not have been Due Diligence (which the general consensus seems to agree is or has taken place) as that occurs after an acceptable offer has been made (subject to Due Diligence).
There may be problems, issues and haggling as a result of Due Diligence, including how and when payment(s) might be made, or one or other party may have pulled the plug (or at least be pretending to have done).
But it seems unlikely that it's just a case of an offer being made but not accepted?
Possibly but not necessarily.
There may have been an indicative price before DD (£x).
Post DD the buyer will make an offer (£x-y).
RD then accepts or rejects that offer.
The two parties then play bid tennis until they agree a price or one party walks away.
They may even have agreed the price but not how it is paid IE is it contingent on promotion this season or to the Prem, is it spread over a number of years.
I don't know but my take is that we are, or at least were two weeks ago, at the bid tennis stage. @Redhenry is a good source.
But isn't 'an indicative price' effectively the same as 'an acceptable offer...(subject to Due Diligence)' that I mentioned, and 'problems, issues and haggling as a result of Due Diligence, including how and when payment(s) might be made' that I referred to effectively the same as your 'Post DD the buyer will make an offer (£x-y)' and 'They may even have agreed the price but not how it is paid'.
The point I've been trying to make is that for Due Diligence to have taken place the potential buyer must have made an 'acceptable offer' or agreed an 'indicative price' before DD was begun, rather than, as some have consistently suggested, that Duchatelet is asking for a price several times what any buyer has indicated they would be willing to pay.
Good points.
DD is expensive as well.
I remember reading that Duchatelet didn't seem to bother too much with DD, when he was buying Charlton.
Didn't he do it himself?
I get the impression there’s a lot of things he does himself...
Comments
I pressed the back button instead, I think that’s where I caused a hiccup!
Anyway I concur Seth.
Turn it in Canters, you're better than that mate
Will we be in for a slow and lingering decline?
Will we be in for a slow and lingering decline?
Nah, I'd give it 3 years not slow and lingering.
He will sell us, sooner or later he will sell us
#RolandOutToday
Would love to buy a couple. C'mon folks do a fair deal.
Interesting maybe?
Maybe I'm just turning into a grump.
Many of you keep saying "he cannot get more for a club he relegated." Who says this? Where is that the law? Of course he can. He can get whatever someone will pay him for it. I think what is happening is many of you just can't stand the idea he may profit. But it does not mean he cannot.
I am gonna let it go at this. But I think I will be proven right, in time. He will break even at minimum from the sale, included all added debt since he bought, or only sell part of it. You have your opinions and I have mine. Let's wait and see.