Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
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.
53 -
Uh oh, Grapevine's chipping in. Better start up the auxiliary likes counter.
48 -
I think what you're all missing is that Napa has inside knowledge that Roland's loans to the club have all been in BitCoin, that's why the debt is increasing so fast.5
-
Can we have a counter for those who actually get to the end of his post!11
-
Just got in from work to find I've started something silly.Henry Irving said:
If they use their highly advanced science to teleport themselves to the far post and nod one in (with either head) are they technically offside?Fumbluff said:
How tall are they?RedChaser said:
If they've all got two heads and bring in some players as well, they'll do for me especially a centre forwardSoundAsa£ said:
Were this to happen who on here would be in agreement.......especially if they wanted to bring in their own manager and coaching set up?catfordmorry said:Good news. The discovery by NASA of another solar system means there are more potential buyers out there.
Any chance Admin could set up an opinion poll..........on this thread only of course.
But anyway in answer to Henry's question, Addickted is technically correct, but I've a feeling they would rewrite the rules of association football and I don't think there's a lot we could do about it.0 -
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 - COYRHenry Irving said:
Good points.micks1950 said:
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'.Henry Irving said:
Possibly but not necessarily.micks1950 said:
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).SoundAsa£ said:
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.AFKABartram said:
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?
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.
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.
DD is expensive as well.32 -
DOUCHER said:
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 - COYRHenry Irving said:
Good points.micks1950 said:
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'.Henry Irving said:
Possibly but not necessarily.micks1950 said:
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).SoundAsa£ said:
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.AFKABartram said:
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?
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.
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.
DD is expensive as well.
20 -
Grapevine49 said:
Oi Roland. You've fucked up big time. Just take what you've been offered and piss off out of our Club
24 - Sponsored links:
-
DOUCHER said:
Well good luck because i won't be coming on here again for a while, its really not worth the botherHenry Irving said:
Good points.micks1950 said:
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'.Henry Irving said:
Possibly but not necessarily.micks1950 said:
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).SoundAsa£ said:
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.AFKABartram said:
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?
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.
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.
DD is expensive as well.
29 -
oh DOUCHER is back - DD hasnt happened blah blah, head in sand still.2
-
Bye Doucher. See you soon. As I keep saying, you can't resist pissing vinegar onto the takeover hope. See you in a day or two.1
-
DOUCHER said:
» show previous quotes
Well good luck because i won't be coming on here again for a while, its really not worth the bother
Where are you 3blokes,we need a Countdown the Days till DOUCHER is back on this thread again thread...;)3 -
Fair play to Doucher. He has completed the circle and gone back to his starting point.
Add to that a quality flounce and he's had a good day.17 -
Given that at least one version of multiverse theory has it that every decision point or option right down to the level of sub atomic particles has the whole universe tearing itself in two and duplicating itself, there will be countless billions of universes where Duchatelet is the toast of Charlton. Some of them he may still have yellow teeth, others he may not. In some of them he'll still have duck tape shoes and in others he won't. And in others still, 'duct tape' will be the proper name for 'duck tape'. How dreadfully unlucky that we have to be stuck in this version where he is a pathetic loser who has brought destruction on our club.Coyotejohn1947 said:
Even more good news.catfordmorry said:Good news. The discovery by NASA of another solar system means there are more potential buyers out there.
Yesterday's BBC documentary on the existence of parallel Universes would suggest that Charlton supporters in at least one such parallel Universe are enjoying unprecedented success under a new beneficial ownership so................err.............not sure now that this really helps does it?6 -
For the one millionth time.NapaAddick said:I still contend he will take zero haircut on debt and demand (at minimum) the £14-20M he paid in the first place for the equity. Which, assuming debt has not grown from the £57.5M as of the last financial statement... is £71.5 to £77.5M. And I think he will get it. Either that, or only part of the club gets sold.
Given what we know about the debt and what reports have been about the purchase price he made, how do others here calculate this sale can happen for £50M or less? Haircut on debt? Haircut on equity? I am interested in how others come up with the calculation.
I just don't see him eating £20-30M in any form. If he sells for some crazy low sum like £35M, I bet he holds onto assets like the Valley or Sparrows, or his company will continue to hold the debt, which the new owners will have to service and he keeps looming over the club in some fashion.
I would be thrilled to get him out at a big loss. I just think it won't happen.
YOU ARE DOUBLE COUNTING!!!
The purchase price is included in the debt and has been growing at 3% a year. So the debt figure is basically the total sum..
To add context to your claim that 35m is "ridiculously low" last time we were sold in league 1 I believe it was for £1 and taking on debt of considerably less than 50m.1 -
Please God. Don't let Napa buy us. The fella can't even count. Or read.NapaAddick said:
Wait, isn't £70M actually something like $90M? Makes it sound even worse. Guess I will have to sell a lot more wine if I am going to afford this. Like 100x my production.RedChaser said:
It's ok, it wont be that much, Napa deals in $red10 said:Who on earth would pay upwards of 70 mill for a L1 club ...... ? If he doesnt budge on that sort of figure and cut his losses we will be stuck with him, stating the bleeding obvious !
0 -
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.DOUCHER said:
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 - COYRHenry Irving said:
Good points.micks1950 said:
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'.Henry Irving said:
Possibly but not necessarily.micks1950 said:
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).SoundAsa£ said:
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.AFKABartram said:
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?
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.
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.
DD is expensive as well.
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.22 -
I will make one last visit for u - u need to stop inventing things that I said - then u will realise who the bellend is - I had a view previously on who the biggest muppet on this board was but congratulations, u top the list and tone frank are a bit of an embarrassment to this forum - see ucantersaddick said:
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.DOUCHER said:
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 - COYRHenry Irving said:
Good points.micks1950 said:
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'.Henry Irving said:
Possibly but not necessarily.micks1950 said:
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).SoundAsa£ said:
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.AFKABartram said:
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?
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.
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.
DD is expensive as well.
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.2 - Sponsored links:
-
Who's Tone Frank? Did he have an 80's hit with Funky Cold Medina?DOUCHER said:
I will make one last visit for u - u need to stop inventing things that I said - then u will realise who the bellend is - I had a view previously on who the biggest muppet on this board was but congratulations, u top the list and tone frank are a bit of an embarrassment to this forum - see ucantersaddick said:
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.DOUCHER said:
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 - COYRHenry Irving said:
Good points.micks1950 said:
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'.Henry Irving said:
Possibly but not necessarily.micks1950 said:
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).SoundAsa£ said:
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.AFKABartram said:
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?
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.
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.
DD is expensive as well.
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.18 -
Annnnnnddddddd he's back. Who had 15 mins in the sweepstake?DOUCHER said:
I will make one last visit for u - u need to stop inventing things that I said - then u will realise who the bellend is - I had a view previously on who the biggest muppet on this board was but congratulations, u top the list and tone frank are a bit of an embarrassment to this forum - see ucantersaddick said:
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.DOUCHER said:
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 - COYRHenry Irving said:
Good points.micks1950 said:
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'.Henry Irving said:
Possibly but not necessarily.micks1950 said:
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).SoundAsa£ said:
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.AFKABartram said:
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?
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.
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.
DD is expensive as well.
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.
I'm genuinely not sure if you have some kind of split personality disorder. If I was as sad as you are I would go back and quote you saying those things (again). But frankly I can't be arsed and you're not worth it.
I don't give a shit about your opinion of me, I think I'm fairly well liked on here. Its not a popularity contest anyway. I just stay myself and give my opinion.
I'm not a sad little internet troll who makes up stories to try and seem ITK and to get attention. My stories dont change every 10 mins and they don't come from a made up friend of a friend who may or may not lie which is all bullshit. And I don't attack people's personal lives when I've lost the argument.
Go back to your hole you little twat.18 -
Will you stop using text speak, it is not U.4
-
Who said you were well liked on here you support Slurrey nobody likes anybody who supports Slurrey ;-)cantersaddick said:
Annnnnnddddddd he's back. Who had 15 mins in the sweepstake?DOUCHER said:
I will make one last visit for u - u need to stop inventing things that I said - then u will realise who the bellend is - I had a view previously on who the biggest muppet on this board was but congratulations, u top the list and tone frank are a bit of an embarrassment to this forum - see ucantersaddick said:
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.DOUCHER said:
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 - COYRHenry Irving said:
Good points.micks1950 said:
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'.Henry Irving said:
Possibly but not necessarily.micks1950 said:
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).SoundAsa£ said:
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.AFKABartram said:
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?
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.
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.
DD is expensive as well.
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.
I'm genuinely not sure if you have some kind of split personality disorder. If I was as sad as you are I would go back and quote you saying those things (again). But frankly I can't be arsed and you're not worth it.
I don't give a shit about your opinion of me, I think I'm fairly well liked on here. Its not a popularity contest anyway. I just stay myself and give my opinion.
I'm not a sad little internet troll who makes up stories to try and seem ITK and to get attention. My stories dont change every 10 mins and they don't come from a made up friend of a friend who may or may not lie which is all bullshit.
Go back to your hole you little twat.
5 -
Well that's fair enough. You Kent fans support Gillingham though.northstandsteve said:
Who said you were well liked on here you support Slurrey nobody likes anybody who supports Slurrey ;-)cantersaddick said:
Annnnnnddddddd he's back. Who had 15 mins in the sweepstake?DOUCHER said:
I will make one last visit for u - u need to stop inventing things that I said - then u will realise who the bellend is - I had a view previously on who the biggest muppet on this board was but congratulations, u top the list and tone frank are a bit of an embarrassment to this forum - see ucantersaddick said:
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.DOUCHER said:
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 - COYRHenry Irving said:
Good points.micks1950 said:
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'.Henry Irving said:
Possibly but not necessarily.micks1950 said:
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).SoundAsa£ said:
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.AFKABartram said:
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?
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.
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.
DD is expensive as well.
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.
I'm genuinely not sure if you have some kind of split personality disorder. If I was as sad as you are I would go back and quote you saying those things (again). But frankly I can't be arsed and you're not worth it.
I don't give a shit about your opinion of me, I think I'm fairly well liked on here. Its not a popularity contest anyway. I just stay myself and give my opinion.
I'm not a sad little internet troll who makes up stories to try and seem ITK and to get attention. My stories dont change every 10 mins and they don't come from a made up friend of a friend who may or may not lie which is all bullshit.
Go back to your hole you little twat. 3 -
Fighting talk therecantersaddick said:
Well that's fair enough. You Kent fans support Gillingham though.northstandsteve said:
Who said you were well liked on here you support Slurrey nobody likes anybody who supports Slurrey ;-)cantersaddick said:
Annnnnnddddddd he's back. Who had 15 mins in the sweepstake?DOUCHER said:
I will make one last visit for u - u need to stop inventing things that I said - then u will realise who the bellend is - I had a view previously on who the biggest muppet on this board was but congratulations, u top the list and tone frank are a bit of an embarrassment to this forum - see ucantersaddick said:
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.DOUCHER said:
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 - COYRHenry Irving said:
Good points.micks1950 said:
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'.Henry Irving said:
Possibly but not necessarily.micks1950 said:
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).SoundAsa£ said:
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.AFKABartram said:
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?
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.
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.
DD is expensive as well.
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.
I'm genuinely not sure if you have some kind of split personality disorder. If I was as sad as you are I would go back and quote you saying those things (again). But frankly I can't be arsed and you're not worth it.
I don't give a shit about your opinion of me, I think I'm fairly well liked on here. Its not a popularity contest anyway. I just stay myself and give my opinion.
I'm not a sad little internet troll who makes up stories to try and seem ITK and to get attention. My stories dont change every 10 mins and they don't come from a made up friend of a friend who may or may not lie which is all bullshit.
Go back to your hole you little twat. 1 -
8 -
I think canters is a great contributor.22
-
Wrong thread3
This discussion has been closed.
