Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Don't know why anyone would want to leave the Valley and watch football in a soulless bowl near the O2. Anyone been to the Olympic stadium/emirates etc. its crap.1
-
What does shay given think?
Has Hayden Mullins signed yet?
Has curbs taken us as far as he can?3 -
Yeah......but just imagine the artisanal sourdough pizza with prosciutto and kalamata olive tapenade that could be purchased at half time.....benjest1989 said:Don't know why anyone would want to leave the Valley and watch football in a soulless bowl near the O2. Anyone been to the Olympic stadium/emirates etc. its crap.
12 -
Just easier to access though North Greenwich. Can get there from waterloo etc easily enough and from other areas of London a lot easier than getting to charlton station.benjest1989 said:Don't know why anyone would want to leave the Valley and watch football in a soulless bowl near the O2. Anyone been to the Olympic stadium/emirates etc. its crap.
0 -
I'm cool with John Lewis taking us over as long as I get a free coffee with my half time pie and chips.
.1 -
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.10 -
This will look very silly when our new Austrian owners are unveiled on the pitch at half time tomorrow.ShootersHillGuru said:500 posts on fucking Red Bull who are not even looking to buy Charlton. Let’s try another 500 on the prospect of John Lewis buying us or perhaps Crayford Metals.
Ffs.0 -
If we were selling our best players to balance the books but were a top 6 championship team, no-one would bat an eyelid at what Roland had done. It's entirely what happened on the pitch that led us to this moment. Football fans are fickle as fuck, and at the end of the day we all just want our team to be successfulTaxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.1 -
Taxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.
Disagree entirely. If things were all fine on the pitch then things would have had to have been different off the pitch. There is no way that off the pitch setup could ever bring success. Of the only problem was Miere making the odd stupid comment then that could have been ignored. But the whole setup was wrong from top to bottom. Results could have only gone one way.sam3110 said:
If we were selling our best players to balance the books but were a top 6 championship team, no-one would bat an eyelid at what Roland had done. It's entirely what happened on the pitch that led us to this moment. Football fans are fickle as fuck, and at the end of the day we all just want our team to be successfulTaxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.
If results were better then it would have meant they hadn't taken that approach therefore we wouldn't be protesting about their approach.11 -
So why no protests when we dropped down to league for three seasons under Murray and then the Spivs?sam3110 said:
If we were selling our best players to balance the books but were a top 6 championship team, no-one would bat an eyelid at what Roland had done. It's entirely what happened on the pitch that led us to this moment. Football fans are fickle as fuck, and at the end of the day we all just want our team to be successfulTaxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.
Charlton fans are used to having under performing sides but haven't protested in anything like the current way before?
The difference is that before we had boards, for all their faults, wanted success on the pitch and ran the club in a relatively "normal" way.
It is also a fact that when the team has started to do a bit better, like at the beginning of this season, the crowds have stayed fairly static. People haven't rushed back because it was just the poor football that was the problem.34 - Sponsored links:
-
But supporters do don't they? Man City, Arsenal and West Ham are all getting good attendances after moving stadiums. What's the common denominator? Premier league football.benjest1989 said:Don't know why anyone would want to leave the Valley and watch football in a soulless bowl near the O2. Anyone been to the Olympic stadium/emirates etc. its crap.
3 -
Exactly!!cantersaddick said:Taxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.
Disagree entirely. If things were all fine on the pitch then things would have had to have been different off the pitch. There is no way that off the pitch setup could ever bring success. Of the only problem was Miere making the odd stupid comment then that could have been ignored. But the whole setup was wrong from top to bottom. Results could have only gone one way.sam3110 said:
If we were selling our best players to balance the books but were a top 6 championship team, no-one would bat an eyelid at what Roland had done. It's entirely what happened on the pitch that led us to this moment. Football fans are fickle as fuck, and at the end of the day we all just want our team to be successfulTaxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.
If results were better then it would have meant they hadn't taken that approach therefore we wouldn't be protesting about their approach.2 -
This "if we were successful no would would of protest" is a moot point though because the way they ran the club was never going to produce success on the pitch and anyone with half a brain could see that after a few months. The way they ran the business was shit and the football ended up shit you can't separate the two, as much as people would like to.sam3110 said:
If we were selling our best players to balance the books but were a top 6 championship team, no-one would bat an eyelid at what Roland had done. It's entirely what happened on the pitch that led us to this moment. Football fans are fickle as fuck, and at the end of the day we all just want our team to be successfulTaxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.16 -
How did that make you feel Henners ?Henry Irving said:
Sold to pay our debts in 1921/2ShootersHillGuru said:
You got me. Was he our first ever sale ?Henry Irving said:
I see your Len Glover and raise you Scotty KingsleyShootersHillGuru said:
Never mind Scott Parker. I’m still fuming about Len Glover.Henry Irving said:
Only after what school you went to, is Brexit a good idea and the impact of selling Scott Parker; three topics everyone on CL seems to dodge.Stu_of_Kunming said:
We could discuss RD's asking price, that would be new and exciting.Henry Irving said:
Wow, slow down there. Where are you getting this stuff from?Stu_of_Kunming said:
I'm shocked this hasn't been brought up before.daveydanger said:But has anyone considered that new owners might try to move us to the peninsula?? What then??!
I have a feeling RB might want to change our badge as well.
Can anyone investigate?
You'll be saying no one has done due diligence and nothing is happening next.
0 -
It that's not what is being said. @Davo55 said the protests were never about results but although we all agree RDs fuckwit strategy was doomed to fail from the start, if he'd managed to fluke it, there would have been no appetite for a protest movement.Nug said:
This "if we were successful no would would of protest" is a moot point though because the way they ran the club was never going to produce success on the pitch and anyone with half a brain could see that after a few months. The way they ran the business was shit and the football ended up shit you can't separate the two, as much as people would like to.sam3110 said:
If we were selling our best players to balance the books but were a top 6 championship team, no-one would bat an eyelid at what Roland had done. It's entirely what happened on the pitch that led us to this moment. Football fans are fickle as fuck, and at the end of the day we all just want our team to be successfulTaxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.0 -
I think he played Ghandi in a film, the name of which escapes me!ShootersHillGuru said:
You got me. Was he our first ever sale ?Henry Irving said:
I see your Len Glover and raise you Scotty KingsleyShootersHillGuru said:
Never mind Scott Parker. I’m still fuming about Len Glover.Henry Irving said:
Only after what school you went to, is Brexit a good idea and the impact of selling Scott Parker; three topics everyone on CL seems to dodge.Stu_of_Kunming said:
We could discuss RD's asking price, that would be new and exciting.Henry Irving said:
Wow, slow down there. Where are you getting this stuff from?Stu_of_Kunming said:
I'm shocked this hasn't been brought up before.daveydanger said:But has anyone considered that new owners might try to move us to the peninsula?? What then??!
I have a feeling RB might want to change our badge as well.
Can anyone investigate?
You'll be saying no one has done due diligence and nothing is happening next.
Apparently I have a ticket for the football for a fiver. Am I........
A) a tight b@st@rd?
B ) In the know, re: the takeover?
C) Popping in to help our Tone pack his best china tea service and bid him a tearful farewell?
D) A hypocrite, if they are still here?1 -
That's not what is being said. There was no chance of it working for more than a month or so. The entire setup was flawed. There was no way it could have happened. No way at all.Taxi_Lad said:
It that's not what is being said. @Davo55 said the protests were never about results but although we all agree RDs fuckwit strategy was doomed to fail from the start, if he'd managed to fluke it, there would have been no appetite for a protest movement.Nug said:
This "if we were successful no would would of protest" is a moot point though because the way they ran the club was never going to produce success on the pitch and anyone with half a brain could see that after a few months. The way they ran the business was shit and the football ended up shit you can't separate the two, as much as people would like to.sam3110 said:
If we were selling our best players to balance the books but were a top 6 championship team, no-one would bat an eyelid at what Roland had done. It's entirely what happened on the pitch that led us to this moment. Football fans are fickle as fuck, and at the end of the day we all just want our team to be successfulTaxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.
As I said above the only way results could have been different is if everything they did off the pitch was changed. And if that was the case they woukd be running the club properly and there would be no need to protest.
The two are intrinsically linked. There is no way to separate the way they ran the club and results.3 -
Correct. I prefer to think about the unrest not being about 'the results' or 'not about the results' but the results AND the WAY in which the results have been achieved (if 'achieved' is the correct phrase..)cantersaddick said:Taxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.
Disagree entirely. If things were all fine on the pitch then things would have had to have been different off the pitch. There is no way that off the pitch setup could ever bring success. Of the only problem was Miere making the odd stupid comment then that could have been ignored. But the whole setup was wrong from top to bottom. Results could have only gone one way.sam3110 said:
If we were selling our best players to balance the books but were a top 6 championship team, no-one would bat an eyelid at what Roland had done. It's entirely what happened on the pitch that led us to this moment. Football fans are fickle as fuck, and at the end of the day we all just want our team to be successfulTaxi_Lad said:
Think you're kidding yourself! If results had been good then everything else would have been perceived to be run well and there would have been no protestsDavo55 said:Well said @cantersaddick. Spot on.
The protests are not and never have been about results on the pitch.
If results were better then it would have meant they hadn't taken that approach therefore we wouldn't be protesting about their approach.
Most of us have seen some crap in our lifetimes. If we've slipped down the leagues and sold players to make ends meet BUT we'd had an owner and SMT who'd admitted they were struggling, had helped out with fundraising and mixed in with the fans there wouldn't have been unrest - sure we'd still want the owner to sell to someone with cash, but they'd less likely to be met with hostility.
Instead we've been saddled with the richest owner in our history who has lent large amounts of money almost wilfully irresponsibly and an SMT who seem to go out of their way to antagonise and persecute fans. It was bound to have gone pear shaped8 -
Gutted.ShootersHillGuru said:
How did that make you feel Henners ?Henry Irving said:
Sold to pay our debts in 1921/2ShootersHillGuru said:
You got me. Was he our first ever sale ?Henry Irving said:
I see your Len Glover and raise you Scotty KingsleyShootersHillGuru said:
Never mind Scott Parker. I’m still fuming about Len Glover.Henry Irving said:
Only after what school you went to, is Brexit a good idea and the impact of selling Scott Parker; three topics everyone on CL seems to dodge.Stu_of_Kunming said:
We could discuss RD's asking price, that would be new and exciting.Henry Irving said:
Wow, slow down there. Where are you getting this stuff from?Stu_of_Kunming said:
I'm shocked this hasn't been brought up before.daveydanger said:But has anyone considered that new owners might try to move us to the peninsula?? What then??!
I have a feeling RB might want to change our badge as well.
Can anyone investigate?
You'll be saying no one has done due diligence and nothing is happening next.
Hated Fulham ever since.
The most important player in Charlton’s history?
“Although Scotty only played 20 league matches for Charlton he was undoubtedly one of the most significant and central figures in the club’s history – one could even argue, the most significant.
After the First World War is was Kingsley, who had joined the Addicks in 1912, who approached the Charlton secretary to enquire if it was possible to re-form the club and this was agreed at a subsequent meeting which was attended by Scotty.
It is also claimed that Kingsley was one of a small delegation of Charlton minded people who visited what was then called the Swamps and decided that was where they wanted their ground to be built – which signaled the birth of the Valley.
Then when, in 1922, Charlton were threatened with closure by the builders of the stand if they did not honour a £1,000 debt, Scotty agreed to a transfer to Fulham and his transfer fee wiped out the debt and probably saved the club”
Colin Cameron – Club Historian writing in the Valiant 500
The first overseas player?
Although the early Charlton teams were made up of local boys and Scotty Kingsley attended Fossdene School was born in Barbados in 1891. He died in Plumstead in 1967. He worked as a foreman optical instrument maker for the Woolwich Arsenal throughout his playing career.
10 -
That's easy @TCE.........it's A (with a little bit of C for good measure)T_C_E said:
I think he played Ghandi in a film, the name of which escapes me!ShootersHillGuru said:
You got me. Was he our first ever sale ?Henry Irving said:
I see your Len Glover and raise you Scotty KingsleyShootersHillGuru said:
Never mind Scott Parker. I’m still fuming about Len Glover.Henry Irving said:
Only after what school you went to, is Brexit a good idea and the impact of selling Scott Parker; three topics everyone on CL seems to dodge.Stu_of_Kunming said:
We could discuss RD's asking price, that would be new and exciting.Henry Irving said:
Wow, slow down there. Where are you getting this stuff from?Stu_of_Kunming said:
I'm shocked this hasn't been brought up before.daveydanger said:But has anyone considered that new owners might try to move us to the peninsula?? What then??!
I have a feeling RB might want to change our badge as well.
Can anyone investigate?
You'll be saying no one has done due diligence and nothing is happening next.
Apparently I have a ticket for the football for a fiver. Am I........
A) a tight b@st@rd?
B ) In the know, re: the takeover?
C) Popping in to help our Tone pack his best china tea service and bid him a tearful farewell?
D) A hypocrite, if they are still here?1 - Sponsored links:
-
Being told that as well as the John Lewis interest, there is a new consoritum backed by an Australian by the name of John Lewis4
-
So .......................................... still no definite news yet, then !0
-
So...anyone else back to scanning for comments from @Airman Brown and @Redhenry ??19
-
Yep. Especially after 150 new posts for the first time in what feels like weeks.cafc-west said:So...anyone else back to scanning for comments from @Airman Brown and @Redhenry ??
0 -
Good luck with that, you'd probably only be able to get to the bar once. It's murder in there with only 2 bars.letthegoodtimesroll said:.
I’d do my pre-match drinking in the O2daveydanger said:But has anyone considered that new owners might try to move us to the peninsula?? What then??!
1 -
I scan for posts from @3blokescafc-west said:So...anyone else back to scanning for comments from @Airman Brown and @Redhenry ??
1 -
I’m going to start a different thread only for Airman or Red Henry. So only they can post on it. Also I might include the Australians. Redbull Muir and now John Lewis.0
-
You surely mean Johno Lewisateamofcorygibbs said:Being told that as well as the John Lewis interest, there is a new consoritum backed by an Australian by the name of John Lewis
0 -
With our luck, it would be PoundlandSantaClaus said:I'm cool with John Lewis taking us over as long as I get a free coffee with my half time pie and chips.
.
1 -
Summary 2.2.18
Richard Murray spoke to staff members in the days before the Walsall game and told them that there is a "preferred bidder" and the takeover may come in February. The term "Preferred bidder" wasn't explained and could be someone has exclusive legal rights to take a deal forward or just someone Roland (or Murray) would rather buy the club.
RM then meet with the Supporters' Trust/CARD on the day of the Walsall game and told them that two parties had completed due dilligence but one was ahead of the other. RM didn't use the term "preferred bidder to CAST/CARD.
Still no confirmation on who these parties are although strongest rumours suggest that they could include:
An bid including Australian Andrew Muir (which is not the same as the AFC consortium who were mentioned back in April 2017 when this thread started)
A bid fronted by Donald Muir (no relation) and Alex McLeish, who's backers are unknown but some suggest they are South African and others British.
@redhenry has said there were four interested parties but this week cut this to three. We don't know who these parties are.
@Airman Brown appears to have some new information but you may have to buy VOTV tomorrow to find out (or read a version on here). His mood some optimistic and he hinted on twitter that it is the Australians who are ahead at the moment.
Richard Murray spoke to staff again this week, this time at the training ground. The SLP reported that he told staff that there "COULD BE" a deal in February but that timescales could shift.
@nth london addick states that no formal offer or offers have been made.
There is absolutely no, repeat NO, evidence that Red Bull are involved.
The transfer window saw no sale of Konsa but also no purchase of any new players. Three players joined on loan. This can, and has, been interpreted as meaning both that a sale is close and that a sale is a long way off. Robinson confirmed that Duchatelet had final sign off on deals on deadline days and rejected bids for Magennis and possibly Fosu and Konsa.
21
This discussion has been closed.
