Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
So Millwall (who've been run fairly sensibly over the last few years) lose £5m a year. This shows the nonsense of football finances really.Henry Irving said:
Worth reading the whole, long, thread on twitter as a comparison0 -
It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.2
-
It happens if and when it happens. God help those who are frantically hitting F5 on this thread
0 -
That's a great idea. Wish I'd thought of it.AFKABartram said:As Macronarty puts so beautifully, those that get wound up wanting to know what's happened and then get annoyed wading through pages of horse jokes, we've set up a little non-banter version for you
http://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/80858/the-bite-size-takeover-thread1 -
Might have something to do with the fact most of that’s been written off as equity. All of ours is loans, with interest to Duchatelet.Henry Irving said:It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.
1 -
Glad it's only a small minor issue and not a large minor issue or small major issue!cafc999 said:
I don't think all the issues have been resolved though as I have heard of at least one group of people have been waiting for small minor issue to be resolved.Airman Brown said:
It’s one source, albeit an interesting one. It would mean, for example, that a party which hadn’t completed due diligence could do so safe in the knowledge that the club won’t be sold from under them while they are doing the work. It could mean that an agreement has been reached in principle but certain things remain to be bottomed out. It gives the buyer confidence that the seller isn’t negotiating with a third party behind their back.PeterGage said:
What does this actually mean in taking the takeover process forward - thanksAirman Brown said:I have a source who says that a period of exclusivity began nearly two weeks ago.
I’ve been separately told that due diligence is complete, i.e. all the issues identified before Christmas have now been resolved.
Some of the “nothing is happening” reports are likely to originate from ex-directors with loans - however, it is possible to do the deal without their consent so there is little reason to bring them in before the end if at all. They don’t have sufficient clout to be the difference between the deal happening or not happening, IMO, (and they don’t speak with one voice, either) which isn’t to say they won’t be offered a deal. Obviously they are all (or most of them) very interested spectators.
My view on this has changed since one of them confirmed to me that the loans can be rolled over without their consent (that is, they can be when no new leases are required, which I understand is the case. The freehold is being acquired with the club).
Hopefully this can get sorted quickly so the takeover has a new lease of life given to it2 -
And I thank you for it but scold you for not letting us take it off piste!AFKABartram said:As Macronarty puts so beautifully, those that get wound up wanting to know what's happened and then get annoyed wading through pages of horse jokes, we've set up a little non-banter version for you
http://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/80858/the-bite-size-takeover-thread0 -
Poor old AFKA seems to be losing the plot. He's started a thread that only he can reply to.
Even pin-up darling Henry hasn't dared do that.
0 -
Quoting the Gaffer's PageOggy Red said:
Poor old AFKA seems to be losing the plot. He's started a thread that only he can reply to.
Even pin-up darling Henry hasn't dared do that.
"I don't think all the issues have been resolved though as I have heard of at least one group of people have been waiting for small minor issue to be resolved."
I've a heard rumour "The small minor issue" is someone who makes tea and serves cake, apparently he's looking for a settlement before takes up the offer of "Head of Security" at saturday morning pictures.
5 -
Dam it..!! I knew my cryptic clue wasn't robust enoughjac52 said:
Glad it's only a small minor issue and not a large minor issue or small major issue!cafc999 said:
I don't think all the issues have been resolved though as I have heard of at least one group of people have been waiting for small minor issue to be resolved.Airman Brown said:
It’s one source, albeit an interesting one. It would mean, for example, that a party which hadn’t completed due diligence could do so safe in the knowledge that the club won’t be sold from under them while they are doing the work. It could mean that an agreement has been reached in principle but certain things remain to be bottomed out. It gives the buyer confidence that the seller isn’t negotiating with a third party behind their back.PeterGage said:
What does this actually mean in taking the takeover process forward - thanksAirman Brown said:I have a source who says that a period of exclusivity began nearly two weeks ago.
I’ve been separately told that due diligence is complete, i.e. all the issues identified before Christmas have now been resolved.
Some of the “nothing is happening” reports are likely to originate from ex-directors with loans - however, it is possible to do the deal without their consent so there is little reason to bring them in before the end if at all. They don’t have sufficient clout to be the difference between the deal happening or not happening, IMO, (and they don’t speak with one voice, either) which isn’t to say they won’t be offered a deal. Obviously they are all (or most of them) very interested spectators.
My view on this has changed since one of them confirmed to me that the loans can be rolled over without their consent (that is, they can be when no new leases are required, which I understand is the case. The freehold is being acquired with the club).
Hopefully this can get sorted quickly so the takeover has a new lease of life given to it0 -
Sponsored links:
-
This thread is dead now, and not a moment too soon. (Actually, quite a few moments too late.)1
-
When the takeover finally goes through, UK productivity figures will soar as all the time we spend reading this will be put to different (not necessarily better) use.5
-
Cryptic? Didn't have to muse on that for too long.cafc999 said:
Dam it..!! I knew my cryptic clue wasn't robust enoughjac52 said:
Glad it's only a small minor issue and not a large minor issue or small major issue!cafc999 said:
I don't think all the issues have been resolved though as I have heard of at least one group of people have been waiting for small minor issue to be resolved.Airman Brown said:
It’s one source, albeit an interesting one. It would mean, for example, that a party which hadn’t completed due diligence could do so safe in the knowledge that the club won’t be sold from under them while they are doing the work. It could mean that an agreement has been reached in principle but certain things remain to be bottomed out. It gives the buyer confidence that the seller isn’t negotiating with a third party behind their back.PeterGage said:
What does this actually mean in taking the takeover process forward - thanksAirman Brown said:I have a source who says that a period of exclusivity began nearly two weeks ago.
I’ve been separately told that due diligence is complete, i.e. all the issues identified before Christmas have now been resolved.
Some of the “nothing is happening” reports are likely to originate from ex-directors with loans - however, it is possible to do the deal without their consent so there is little reason to bring them in before the end if at all. They don’t have sufficient clout to be the difference between the deal happening or not happening, IMO, (and they don’t speak with one voice, either) which isn’t to say they won’t be offered a deal. Obviously they are all (or most of them) very interested spectators.
My view on this has changed since one of them confirmed to me that the loans can be rolled over without their consent (that is, they can be when no new leases are required, which I understand is the case. The freehold is being acquired with the club).
Hopefully this can get sorted quickly so the takeover has a new lease of life given to it
#promotehenryffs
3 -
Wigan being sold.0
-
You mentioned a Major, are we being taken over by the Army and will it be a Coup?jac52 said:
Glad it's only a small minor issue and not a large minor issue or small major issue!cafc999 said:
I don't think all the issues have been resolved though as I have heard of at least one group of people have been waiting for small minor issue to be resolved.Airman Brown said:
It’s one source, albeit an interesting one. It would mean, for example, that a party which hadn’t completed due diligence could do so safe in the knowledge that the club won’t be sold from under them while they are doing the work. It could mean that an agreement has been reached in principle but certain things remain to be bottomed out. It gives the buyer confidence that the seller isn’t negotiating with a third party behind their back.PeterGage said:
What does this actually mean in taking the takeover process forward - thanksAirman Brown said:I have a source who says that a period of exclusivity began nearly two weeks ago.
I’ve been separately told that due diligence is complete, i.e. all the issues identified before Christmas have now been resolved.
Some of the “nothing is happening” reports are likely to originate from ex-directors with loans - however, it is possible to do the deal without their consent so there is little reason to bring them in before the end if at all. They don’t have sufficient clout to be the difference between the deal happening or not happening, IMO, (and they don’t speak with one voice, either) which isn’t to say they won’t be offered a deal. Obviously they are all (or most of them) very interested spectators.
My view on this has changed since one of them confirmed to me that the loans can be rolled over without their consent (that is, they can be when no new leases are required, which I understand is the case. The freehold is being acquired with the club).
Hopefully this can get sorted quickly so the takeover has a new lease of life given to it0 -
We are being taken over by the Coop?4
-
Don't be silly, We'll then be pouring over every detail of the new owner, what she wears, how much money she has.Davo55 said:When the takeover finally goes through, UK productivity figures will soar as all the time we spend reading this will be put to different (not necessarily better) use.
Then there will the will she sack Robinson debate, the is £100m enough debate, the were we better off under Roland debate, the do we want Conte debate, the is the Europa league worth it with all the Thursday games debate, etc etc3 -
..its a she .? ..reckon its the grumpy woman from the apprenticeHenry Irving said:
Don't be silly, We'll then be pouring over every detail of the new owner, what she wears, how much money she has.Davo55 said:When the takeover finally goes through, UK productivity figures will soar as all the time we spend reading this will be put to different (not necessarily better) use.
Then there will the will she sack Robinson debate, the is £100m enough debate, the were we better off under Roland debate, the do we want Conte debate, the is the Europa league worth it with all the Thursday games debate, etc etc0 -
Haven’t studied the Millwall figures, but RD hasn’t lost £55m - as we know the Staprix debt includes the money he paid the spivs to acquire the assets, which he still owns and which still have a value.Henry Irving said:It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.
Or, if you like, the Staprix debt figure represents losses back to 2010 - not losses since 2014.1 -
My bad terminology.Airman Brown said:
Haven’t studied the Millwall figures, but RD hasn’t lost £55m - as we know the Staprix debt includes the money he paid the spivs to acquire the assets, which he still owns and which still have a value.Henry Irving said:It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.
Both have spent £55m and both still hold assets ie Charlton in Duchatelet's case and some poxy club about to lose its ground with Berylson.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Did Berylson pay anything to acquire Millwall? If so you would have to add that to his figure.Henry Irving said:
My bad terminology.Airman Brown said:
Haven’t studied the Millwall figures, but RD hasn’t lost £55m - as we know the Staprix debt includes the money he paid the spivs to acquire the assets, which he still owns and which still have a value.Henry Irving said:It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.
Both have spent £55m and both still hold assets ie Charlton in Duchatelet's case and some poxy club about to lose its ground with Berylson.0 -
What is this? The Spanish Inquisition? ; - )Airman Brown said:
Did Berylson pay anything to acquire Millwall? If so you would have to add that to his figure.Henry Irving said:
My bad terminology.Airman Brown said:
Haven’t studied the Millwall figures, but RD hasn’t lost £55m - as we know the Staprix debt includes the money he paid the spivs to acquire the assets, which he still owns and which still have a value.Henry Irving said:It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.
Both have spent £55m and both still hold assets ie Charlton in Duchatelet's case and some poxy club about to lose its ground with Berylson.
I don't know how much he paid and yes you would have to factor in the price to get a like for like comparison.
It still highlights just how poorly Duchatelet has "invested" in Charlton over a shorter period.
When are the Charlton accounts for 16/17 due to be published BTW?2 -
Henry Irving said:
What is this? The Spanish Inquisition? ; - )Airman Brown said:
Did Berylson pay anything to acquire Millwall? If so you would have to add that to his figure.Henry Irving said:
My bad terminology.Airman Brown said:
Haven’t studied the Millwall figures, but RD hasn’t lost £55m - as we know the Staprix debt includes the money he paid the spivs to acquire the assets, which he still owns and which still have a value.Henry Irving said:It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.
Both have spent £55m and both still hold assets ie Charlton in Duchatelet's case and some poxy club about to lose its ground with Berylson.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WJXHY2OXGE&t=81s 8 -
Accounts are due for filling by the 31st March. Wonder if this has any significance for the delay of the takeover. The potential new owners who have not carried out due diligence as of yet may want to review these before making a move?Henry Irving said:
What is this? The Spanish Inquisition? ; - )Airman Brown said:
Did Berylson pay anything to acquire Millwall? If so you would have to add that to his figure.Henry Irving said:
My bad terminology.Airman Brown said:
Haven’t studied the Millwall figures, but RD hasn’t lost £55m - as we know the Staprix debt includes the money he paid the spivs to acquire the assets, which he still owns and which still have a value.Henry Irving said:It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.
Both have spent £55m and both still hold assets ie Charlton in Duchatelet's case and some poxy club about to lose its ground with Berylson.
I don't know how much he paid and yes you would have to factor in the price to get a like for like comparison.
It still highlights just how poorly Duchatelet has "invested" in Charlton over a shorter period.
When are the Charlton accounts for 16/17 due to be published BTW?0 -
I'm sure any party interested would have access to the accounts to be published and much more as part of the Due Dilligence process.We are J Block said:
Accounts are due for filling by the 31st March. Wonder if this has any significance for the delay as the potential new owners want to review these before making a move?Henry Irving said:
What is this? The Spanish Inquisition? ; - )Airman Brown said:
Did Berylson pay anything to acquire Millwall? If so you would have to add that to his figure.Henry Irving said:
My bad terminology.Airman Brown said:
Haven’t studied the Millwall figures, but RD hasn’t lost £55m - as we know the Staprix debt includes the money he paid the spivs to acquire the assets, which he still owns and which still have a value.Henry Irving said:It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.
Both have spent £55m and both still hold assets ie Charlton in Duchatelet's case and some poxy club about to lose its ground with Berylson.
I don't know how much he paid and yes you would have to factor in the price to get a like for like comparison.
It still highlights just how poorly Duchatelet has "invested" in Charlton over a shorter period.
When are the Charlton accounts for 16/17 due to be published BTW?4 -
What about the parties that have not carried out due diligence as of yet? Sounds like there are a couple of parties who have not based on the rumours on here.cantersaddick said:
I'm sure any party interested would have access to the accounts to be published and much more as part of the Due Dilligence process.We are J Block said:
Accounts are due for filling by the 31st March. Wonder if this has any significance for the delay as the potential new owners want to review these before making a move?Henry Irving said:
What is this? The Spanish Inquisition? ; - )Airman Brown said:
Did Berylson pay anything to acquire Millwall? If so you would have to add that to his figure.Henry Irving said:
My bad terminology.Airman Brown said:
Haven’t studied the Millwall figures, but RD hasn’t lost £55m - as we know the Staprix debt includes the money he paid the spivs to acquire the assets, which he still owns and which still have a value.Henry Irving said:It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.
Both have spent £55m and both still hold assets ie Charlton in Duchatelet's case and some poxy club about to lose its ground with Berylson.
I don't know how much he paid and yes you would have to factor in the price to get a like for like comparison.
It still highlights just how poorly Duchatelet has "invested" in Charlton over a shorter period.
When are the Charlton accounts for 16/17 due to be published BTW?0 -
Just out of interest does anyone know anything of the consortium behind Paul Elliott??0
-
In which case of they are serious they will enter DD at some stage and will see much more than is offered in the published accounts. I guess if one was unsure whether or not to pursue interest in the club waiting for the published accounts could help make the decision of whether to spend the money on DD or not. Unlikely though I'd guess.We are J Block said:
What about the parties that have not carried out due diligence as of yet? Sounds like there are a couple of parties who have not based on the rumours on here.cantersaddick said:
I'm sure any party interested would have access to the accounts to be published and much more as part of the Due Dilligence process.We are J Block said:
Accounts are due for filling by the 31st March. Wonder if this has any significance for the delay as the potential new owners want to review these before making a move?Henry Irving said:
What is this? The Spanish Inquisition? ; - )Airman Brown said:
Did Berylson pay anything to acquire Millwall? If so you would have to add that to his figure.Henry Irving said:
My bad terminology.Airman Brown said:
Haven’t studied the Millwall figures, but RD hasn’t lost £55m - as we know the Staprix debt includes the money he paid the spivs to acquire the assets, which he still owns and which still have a value.Henry Irving said:It was more that Duchatelet has lost similar (approx £55m) to Berylson at Millwall but in a shorter period yet Millwall are now in a higher division.
Both have spent £55m and both still hold assets ie Charlton in Duchatelet's case and some poxy club about to lose its ground with Berylson.
I don't know how much he paid and yes you would have to factor in the price to get a like for like comparison.
It still highlights just how poorly Duchatelet has "invested" in Charlton over a shorter period.
When are the Charlton accounts for 16/17 due to be published BTW?0 -
If I had the authority that would be worthy of a promote, which is probably why the last bit of responsibility I had was being Milk Monitor at schoolHenry Irving said:
Don't be silly, We'll then be pouring over every detail of the new owner, what she wears, how much money she has.Davo55 said:When the takeover finally goes through, UK productivity figures will soar as all the time we spend reading this will be put to different (not necessarily better) use.
Then there will the will she sack Robinson debate, the is £100m enough debate, the were we better off under Roland debate, the do we want Conte debate, the is the Europa league worth it with all the Thursday games debate, etc etc 1 -
.0
This discussion has been closed.
