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

The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)

15845855875895902265

Comments

  • msomerton said:

    If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.

    @msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?

    We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus
    There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?
  • Any idea what the final price for the club was?

    Ten jars of vegemite, 2 cases of Fosters and twenty packets of TimTams.

    Can see why he's accepted their offer now. Certainly more enticing than my revised bid which included two multipacks of Curly Wurlies.
  • JamesSeed said:

    msomerton said:

    If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.

    @msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?

    We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus
    There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?
    Was there? Where is the evidence for that?
  • JamesSeed said:

    msomerton said:

    If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.

    @msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?

    We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus
    There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?
    Was there? Where is the evidence for that?
    Well one thing is clear these Australians must have cash as they have never approached Ex Directors about their Loans ,if they intend to raise financing any Bank/Finance House would require those First Charges removed.
    They have supposedly been around a long time,initially looking for funding,so ask yourselves why have they never discussed those Loans,they need to be paid off before anyone is going to lend them funds, not even an overdraft for day to day cash flow.
    This all smells a little too good to be true, why would anyone pay £40/£50mn for Charlton and ignore all the assets,what downside protection do they have if it all goes wrong?
    Don't we want a buyer to clear all the debt? Isn't that a statement that they have real money and mean to take us forward.
    This story is not over yet I am guessing.
  • So RD has found one final way to get back at us by dragging his feet & ending our chances of a return of SCP.

    Never mind though, the main thing is that it appears we will soon be free of our insane owner.

    I am just enjoying the feeling of being positive about our club again, looking forward to tomorrow's game more then any game since probably the infamous quarter final trip to Bramall Lane.
  • edited March 2018

    JamesSeed said:

    msomerton said:

    If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.

    @msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?

    We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus
    There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?
    Was there? Where is the evidence for that?
    Well one thing is clear these Australians must have cash as they have never approached Ex Directors about their Loans ,if they intend to raise financing any Bank/Finance House would require those First Charges removed.
    They have supposedly been around a long time,initially looking for funding,so ask yourselves why have they never discussed those Loans,they need to be paid off before anyone is going to lend them funds, not even an overdraft for day to day cash flow.
    This all smells a little too good to be true, why would anyone pay £40/£50mn for Charlton and ignore all the assets,what downside protection do they have if it all goes wrong?
    Don't we want a buyer to clear all the debt? Isn't that a statement that they have real money and mean to take us forward.
    This story is not over yet I am guessing.
    That’s only true if they were raising money against the club’s assets - not if they are raising money against assets they already own.

    I’m not sure that they have any more or less leverage buying out the ex-directors before a takeover if it’s not seen as a deal-breaker. Ultimately they can buy out the debt at 100 percent whenever they wish and as the last two ownerships have shown it doesn’t prevent them running the club in the meantime.

    You could approach the ex-directors and say “we’ll give you 70 percent” now but unless the likely alternative is nothing now (because no takeover) I’m not sure what additional leverage there is. It will still be a good offer in a month and a year’s time.

    If you also assume that Murray (and possibly Maurice Hatter) has been squared you’re down to fractions of £3.4m being in play.
  • ...and if they can't get CP or Curbs, get Doris Stokes on the bench to converse with Jimmy Seed.

    FFS

    ...sorry, just been informed that Doris Stokes has passed over (must've missed that thread!)

    So, if they cant get CP or Curbs, or Doris Stokes, get Russell Grant on the bench to converse with Jimmy Seed.
    I wonder if she saw it coming ?
  • JamesSeed said:

    msomerton said:

    If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.

    @msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?

    We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus
    There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?
    Was there? Where is the evidence for that?
    Well one thing is clear these Australians must have cash as they have never approached Ex Directors about their Loans ,if they intend to raise financing any Bank/Finance House would require those First Charges removed.
    They have supposedly been around a long time,initially looking for funding,so ask yourselves why have they never discussed those Loans,they need to be paid off before anyone is going to lend them funds, not even an overdraft for day to day cash flow.
    This all smells a little too good to be true, why would anyone pay £40/£50mn for Charlton and ignore all the assets,what downside protection do they have if it all goes wrong?
    Don't we want a buyer to clear all the debt? Isn't that a statement that they have real money and mean to take us forward.
    This story is not over yet I am guessing.
    That’s only true if they were raising money against the club’s assets - not if they are raising money against assets they already own.

    I’m not sure that they have any more or less leverage buying out the ex-directors before a takeover if it’s not seen as a deal-breaker. Ultimately they can buy out the debt at 100 percent whenever they wish and as the last two ownerships have shown it doesn’t prevent them running the club in the meantime.

    You could approach the ex-directors and say “we’ll give you 70 percent” now but unless the likely alternative is nothing now (because no takeover) I’m not sure what additional leverage there is. It will still be a good offer in a month and a year’s time.
    True they can borrow against other assets, but why borrow against sound assets to invest in what is a risky project?
    Wouldn't you just clear the decks on Charlton giving great message to supporters and allow yourself to do what you want regarding Stadium/Training ground etc.
    Also how do you then put money into the Club?,as unsecured Debt or Equity? That scenario hasn't helped Roland to sell the Club, as buyers have been put off by his unsecured debt demands and not getting first charge without paying another £7mn.
    Same scenario left Slater and Co struggling to find a buyer willing to buy on Subordinated basis until Roland came along and never read terms of Loans and got himself all tied up when it came to finding a buyer.
    Anyone with that kind of money and a Business brain would clear those charges, it is their strongest negotiating tool with Roland, as he is negotiating on Subordinated basis, he is selling his House with a Mortgage attached,who buys houses and takes on sellers debts?


  • Roland is loaded. That hasn't helped us because he won't spend. Slater and Jimenez had little but secured investment through wealthier means.

    Yes, it was called defrauding a friend :smile:
  • Sponsored links:


  • Does anyone think if Bowyer does well he’ll get the job full time or will the Aussies not consider him at all?
  • Does anyone think if Bowyer does well he’ll get the job full time or will the Aussies not consider him at all?

    Would certainly have to start quick and look convincing in the win.

    Part of me thinks that the Australian link to Harry Kewell is just cause he is Australian though.
  • As others have said, it's unlikely they could get a new manager in before easter. Therefore you'd assume Bowyer has a 3 game audition. Win 2 or more of those 3 and they'd be crazy to replace him, so would be best served keeping him on until the end of the season and then replacing in the summer if he doesn't impress sufficiently.

    If Bowyer can't turn things around in those 3 games then there's no reason not to bring in a new manager now.
  • Does anyone think if Bowyer does well he’ll get the job full time or will the Aussies not consider him at all?

    He will probably only get one game in charge, if the takeover goes through next week. IF, Harry Kewell takes over as manager I would imagine he will keep Bowyer - team mates at Leeds and worked together at Watford.
  • Bowyer and JJ have to give the owners something to think about!
  • edited March 2018

    JamesSeed said:

    msomerton said:

    If it is the Australian consortium, then it sound more like the Jimanez and Slater era and we know how that eneded. This lot in football terms, sound like they do not have a pot to piss in, you need owners who can and are willing to lose 8-10 million pounds a season to run Charlton F.C.

    @msomerton I keep reading this but on what basis do they not have a pot to piss in?

    We don't even know who's in the consortium other than Muir who we know does have a lot of very expensive pots to piss in having sold a business for $870m Aus
    There was an earlier Aussie consortium who were struggling to raise funds wasn't there?
    Was there? Where is the evidence for that?
    Well one thing is clear these Australians must have cash as they have never approached Ex Directors about their Loans ,if they intend to raise financing any Bank/Finance House would require those First Charges removed.
    They have supposedly been around a long time,initially looking for funding,so ask yourselves why have they never discussed those Loans,they need to be paid off before anyone is going to lend them funds, not even an overdraft for day to day cash flow.
    This all smells a little too good to be true, why would anyone pay £40/£50mn for Charlton and ignore all the assets,what downside protection do they have if it all goes wrong?
    Don't we want a buyer to clear all the debt? Isn't that a statement that they have real money and mean to take us forward.
    This story is not over yet I am guessing.
    That’s only true if they were raising money against the club’s assets - not if they are raising money against assets they already own.

    I’m not sure that they have any more or less leverage buying out the ex-directors before a takeover if it’s not seen as a deal-breaker. Ultimately they can buy out the debt at 100 percent whenever they wish and as the last two ownerships have shown it doesn’t prevent them running the club in the meantime.

    You could approach the ex-directors and say “we’ll give you 70 percent” now but unless the likely alternative is nothing now (because no takeover) I’m not sure what additional leverage there is. It will still be a good offer in a month and a year’s time.
    True they can borrow against other assets, but why borrow against sound assets to invest in what is a risky project?
    Wouldn't you just clear the decks on Charlton giving great message to supporters and allow yourself to do what you want regarding Stadium/Training ground etc.
    Also how do you then put money into the Club?,as unsecured Debt or Equity? That scenario hasn't helped Roland to sell the Club, as buyers have been put off by his unsecured debt demands and not getting first charge without paying another £7mn.
    Same scenario left Slater and Co struggling to find a buyer willing to buy on Subordinated basis until Roland came along and never read terms of Loans and got himself all tied up when it came to finding a buyer.
    Anyone with that kind of money and a Business brain would clear those charges, it is their strongest negotiating tool with Roland, as he is negotiating on Subordinated basis, he is selling his House with a Mortgage attached,who buys houses and takes on sellers debts?
    Fair points, but who is lending against the club's assets, how much and on what terms? If the book value of the assets (land) is £20m and you have to buy back loans of £7m (with no current interest charges) first, I am not sure there is a lot of room for manoeuvre anyway.

  • I’m looking forward to Harry bringing his other half to The Valley .

    image
  • It's a no from me.
  • DOUCHER said:

    Despite RM publicly stating there were 2. Righto!!!

    No due diligence last year either, despite RM publicly saying there was, righto!
    wrong
  • edited March 2018
    Uboat said:

    It's a no from me.

    Come on mate, the Aussies are the only real option we have.
  • Sponsored links:


  • My main concern with Paul Elliott who has always been articulate is how discerning is he.
    Picking Richard Rufus as your financial advisor doesn't bode well.
    I can't wait to see this deal in black and white.
    This struggling football club needs a boost, it has been a comedy club for the last 5 years
    (Probably 95 years) enough is enough.
    Tomorrow is the starter, for the main course on Monday. May the future be sweet.
  • There were three

    Aussie
    Arab
    British

    During the last stages

    Quite. Murray said there were two who had agreed a price and terms, he didn’t say there were only two about.
    Its irrelevant now anyway but there were 2 who had jumped through all the hoops, agreed a price and were dotting i's and crossing T's and then possibly it seems, the arabs have piped up - when they've had 3 months to get to where the brits and aussies were - laughable that the brits get forgotten and the arabs were suddenly the competition that lost out according to you lot.

    Anyway, as I say, irrelevant now but I'm sure it will make for a good story if the aussies turn out to be shite as well. As always, just telling it how it is.
  • My main concern with Paul Elliott who has always been articulate is how discerning is he.
    Picking Richard Rufus as your financial advisor doesn't bode well.
    I can't wait to see this deal in black and white.
    This struggling football club needs a boost, it has been a comedy club for the last 5 years
    (Probably 95 years) enough is enough.
    Tomorrow is the starter, for the main course on Monday. May the future be sweet.

    Elliott as Chairman may just be the "front" for them, without much power, decision making.
    He'd be the "face of Charlton" at all games, rather than just the Parkes etc.
  • If true then the timing could play right into our hands.
    The 'new manager bounce' that so often occurs couldn't half come in handy for Charlton right now!
  • DOUCHER said:

    There were three

    Aussie
    Arab
    British

    During the last stages

    Quite. Murray said there were two who had agreed a price and terms, he didn’t say there were only two about.
    Its irrelevant now anyway but there were 2 who had jumped through all the hoops, agreed a price and were dotting i's and crossing T's and then possibly it seems, the arabs have piped up - when they've had 3 months to get to where the brits and aussies were.

    I think most of us would agree this is probably true.
  • DOUCHER said:

    There were three

    Aussie
    Arab
    British

    During the last stages

    Quite. Murray said there were two who had agreed a price and terms, he didn’t say there were only two about.
    Its irrelevant now anyway but there were 2 who had jumped through all the hoops, agreed a price and were dotting i's and crossing T's and then possibly it seems, the arabs have piped up - when they've had 3 months to get to where the brits and aussies were.

    I think most of us would agree this is probably true.
    they'll probably pop up again when the clubs not for sale again in a years time if things aren't going well
  • DOUCHER said:


    DOUCHER said:

    There were three

    Aussie
    Arab
    British

    During the last stages

    Quite. Murray said there were two who had agreed a price and terms, he didn’t say there were only two about.
    Its irrelevant now anyway but there were 2 who had jumped through all the hoops, agreed a price and were dotting i's and crossing T's and then possibly it seems, the arabs have piped up - when they've had 3 months to get to where the brits and aussies were.

    I think most of us would agree this is probably true.
    they'll probably pop up again when the clubs not for sale again in a years time if things aren't going well
    And maybe if things are going well also?
  • As others have said, it's unlikely they could get a new manager in before easter. Therefore you'd assume Bowyer has a 3 game audition. Win 2 or more of those 3 and they'd be crazy to replace him, so would be best served keeping him on until the end of the season and then replacing in the summer if he doesn't impress sufficiently.

    If Bowyer can't turn things around in those 3 games then there's no reason not to bring in a new manager now.

    Agree, and I say that as someone rather skeptical of him.

    But whether he keeps it or we bring in a new manager, we need to get at least one, maybe two more coaches in. The whole thing of having one manager and two assistants, one of whom is always on the bench as well, isn't good enough.
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!