The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Proves being an idiot like me doesn't mean you are wrong, even though you are confused.Ollywozere said:
Two purchasing parties remain in the processrobinofottershaw said:Given the differing interpretations people have arrived at as a result of the latest Richard Murray statement, i.e. are there still 2 potential purchasing parties remaining in the process, or was "parties" simply referring to one bidder and RD (my interpretation)), perhaps @Ollywozere could arrange for some kind of clarification to be issued by the club?
3 -
Sorry, I've been stuck in a freezing cold office in Cardiff all day. Have I missed something?Dazzler21 said:@AFKABartram @Stig @LoOkOuT @cabbles @Dazzler21 Won't one of you update the damn bite size thread...
2 -
Seems to suggest otherwise? I have experienced contract negotiations done like this but not for a business sale.JWADDICK said:
He hasn't said that at all. What he said is that there were negotiations with two parties at the time he made the statement. Now the parties actually involved i.e the buyer and the seller have reached agreement on price and all that is awaited is the lawyers finalising the purchase and sale agreements. Despite the use of the word parties twice and quite incorrectly we will only be sold to one purchaser.Sid James Fan Club said:
How can anyone say they have agreed a deal with two parties? You can negotiate terms, but there has to be final winner. They certainly can't state it's simply down to lawyers to conclude the sale.kentaddick said:Charlton Athletic Director Richard Murray has said that a price for a takeover of the club has been agreed with two separate parties and that the deal is now with the lawyers.
Following the news that the club was for sale, Murray updated fan representatives on January 20th where he said: “My opinion, and this is only an opinion of what might happen, I would say the most likely month is February.”
He updated fans again earlier this month where he referenced because of a non-disclosure agreement he has signed, he can’t reveal the names and certain information of the parties involved in takeover talks.
With February drawing to a close he said today: “I said in January that negotiations with two parties on the takeover were continuing well and I hoped a deal would be concluded in February of this year. Although the takeover has not yet been completed, the good news is the terms of the deal, including the price, have now been agreed between the parties and we are now just waiting for their respective lawyers to finalise the sale and purchase agreement.
"You can never tell how long lawyers will take but I’ve been informed it should be within the next few weeks. Once the new ownership has been legally achieved, we will inform everyone via our official channels.”
I have to say that it is by any measure a poorly worded statement but I believe we are nearing the end. Anyone who has ever bought a house however will know how long it can take the lawyers to finalise a purchase - hence the ridiculous time lag between exchange of contracts and completion when actually all the paperwork is already in place and merely needs printing.0 -
I have had about 3 Pot Noodles and 5 Red Bulls since I read Murrays statement! I'm buzzing off my tits. Its happening!!!!
Talking of tits. Anyone got any Kerry Katona videos to calm me down?2 -
Thank youME14addick said:This statement has created more questions than answers.
Johnny Nash.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDTvLldOgZs 3 -
Now this is what you call an optimistic postflyingkiwiDK said:
Is that what RM told you then? If so what's your take on it?Ollywozere said:
Two purchasing parties remain in the processrobinofottershaw said:Given the differing interpretations people have arrived at as a result of the latest Richard Murray statement, i.e. are there still 2 potential purchasing parties remaining in the process, or was "parties" simply referring to one bidder and RD (my interpretation)), perhaps @Ollywozere could arrange for some kind of clarification to be issued by the club?
0 -
If two parties are still in the process, how can a price be 'agreed' with both?3
-
I’m guessing that instead of getting f**ked by the one owner, ie Roland, we’re going for a ménage à trois and going to get ruined even more by two owners at the same time.1
-
Fixed that for you Len otherwise you'll have the PC brigade after youLenGlover said:
1 - Sponsored links:
-
Roland's lawyer has just been interviewed on European TV and clearly, she is as surprised as the rest of us that the incompetent buffoon has agreed a deal with two parties:
21 -
buyer 1:"I'll buy you a new pair of shoes, roland."SELR_addicks said:If two parties are still in the process, how can a price be 'agreed' with both?
Buyer 2:"me too"
Roland: DONE AND DONE14 -
Well it's going to be interesting isn't it ? I reckon about 300 more posts and we might know something!0
-
Wow! Thanks for the clarification @Ollywozere.Ollywozere said:
Two purchasing parties remain in the processrobinofottershaw said:Given the differing interpretations people have arrived at as a result of the latest Richard Murray statement, i.e. are there still 2 potential purchasing parties remaining in the process, or was "parties" simply referring to one bidder and RD (my interpretation)), perhaps @Ollywozere could arrange for some kind of clarification to be issued by the club?
So, given that confirmation, RM is stating that two sets of lawyers working for two separate bidders are working with RD's lawyers to finalise a sale and purchase agreement. Unusual?!
1 -
I wouldn't guarantee it.Horsfield9 said:Well it's going to be interesting isn't it ? I reckon about 300 more posts and we might know something!
0 -
2
-
Based on FK’s Yes Verycharente addick said:
Based on the info you've been given, are you optimistic about our future?flyingkiwiDK said:
I've been provided with some additional information by another poster on CL who I believe is very clearly ITK but it wasn't one of the usual suspects (Airman, RedHenry or even Doucher!). However, I have promised to keep my mouth shut so out of respect I will not divulge further.Callumcafc said:Airman Brown said:The original legal source info was correct. The same source said last week that what happened was that a serious party which had previously withdrawn had come back to the table and that was why things didn’t get finalised as expected.
Given the hint above (second serious party come back to the table) is that second party involved with the Scottish Muir maybe?
Muir or Muir?
I'd hope for some mega rich blokes but that doesn't happen to us...
What I will say is that I don't think the bidder has anything to do with either of the two Muir's.
Are you optimistic about our future?0 -
You may well be right, I have never seen a business sale conducted like this either but we have to remember what kind of "visionary" we are dealing with. I still think the interpretation above is the only one that makes sense but in RD's brave new demented world I suppose anything is possible.Sid James Fan Club said:
Seems to suggest otherwise? I have experienced contract negotiations done like this but not for a business sale.JWADDICK said:
He hasn't said that at all. What he said is that there were negotiations with two parties at the time he made the statement. Now the parties actually involved i.e the buyer and the seller have reached agreement on price and all that is awaited is the lawyers finalising the purchase and sale agreements. Despite the use of the word parties twice and quite incorrectly we will only be sold to one purchaser.Sid James Fan Club said:
How can anyone say they have agreed a deal with two parties? You can negotiate terms, but there has to be final winner. They certainly can't state it's simply down to lawyers to conclude the sale.kentaddick said:Charlton Athletic Director Richard Murray has said that a price for a takeover of the club has been agreed with two separate parties and that the deal is now with the lawyers.
Following the news that the club was for sale, Murray updated fan representatives on January 20th where he said: “My opinion, and this is only an opinion of what might happen, I would say the most likely month is February.”
He updated fans again earlier this month where he referenced because of a non-disclosure agreement he has signed, he can’t reveal the names and certain information of the parties involved in takeover talks.
With February drawing to a close he said today: “I said in January that negotiations with two parties on the takeover were continuing well and I hoped a deal would be concluded in February of this year. Although the takeover has not yet been completed, the good news is the terms of the deal, including the price, have now been agreed between the parties and we are now just waiting for their respective lawyers to finalise the sale and purchase agreement.
"You can never tell how long lawyers will take but I’ve been informed it should be within the next few weeks. Once the new ownership has been legally achieved, we will inform everyone via our official channels.”
I have to say that it is by any measure a poorly worded statement but I believe we are nearing the end. Anyone who has ever bought a house however will know how long it can take the lawyers to finalise a purchase - hence the ridiculous time lag between exchange of contracts and completion when actually all the paperwork is already in place and merely needs printing.1 -
They can't. Time to move to penaltiesSELR_addicks said:If two parties are still in the process, how can a price be 'agreed' with both?
2 -
If you are I am.sillav nitram said:
Based on FK’s Yes Verycharente addick said:
Based on the info you've been given, are you optimistic about our future?flyingkiwiDK said:
I've been provided with some additional information by another poster on CL who I believe is very clearly ITK but it wasn't one of the usual suspects (Airman, RedHenry or even Doucher!). However, I have promised to keep my mouth shut so out of respect I will not divulge further.Callumcafc said:Airman Brown said:The original legal source info was correct. The same source said last week that what happened was that a serious party which had previously withdrawn had come back to the table and that was why things didn’t get finalised as expected.
Given the hint above (second serious party come back to the table) is that second party involved with the Scottish Muir maybe?
Muir or Muir?
I'd hope for some mega rich blokes but that doesn't happen to us...
What I will say is that I don't think the bidder has anything to do with either of the two Muir's.
Are you optimistic about our future?
1 - Sponsored links:
-
SELR_addicks said:
If two parties are still in the process, how can a price be 'agreed' with both?
17 -
Yeah this sounds like it won’t end well...robinofottershaw said:
Wow! Thanks for the clarification @Ollywozere.Ollywozere said:
Two purchasing parties remain in the processrobinofottershaw said:Given the differing interpretations people have arrived at as a result of the latest Richard Murray statement, i.e. are there still 2 potential purchasing parties remaining in the process, or was "parties" simply referring to one bidder and RD (my interpretation)), perhaps @Ollywozere could arrange for some kind of clarification to be issued by the club?
So, given that confirmation, RM is stating that two sets of lawyers working for two separate bidders are working with RD's lawyers to finalise a sale and purchase agreement. Unusual?!0 -
Great responseForeverAddickted said:2 -
Fuck, Please No. What a nightmeire that would be.ForeverAddickted said:2 -
Without reading comments any further than @charente addick 's, I would respectfully say that Tom R has confused the issue with the contradicting words used in the first paragraph and the 4th ....charente addick said:Does this mean two parties joining together to buy the club or two parties in a 'race to the line' ?!
As if we need any further confusion !0 -
My assumption is that the price is agreed but how and when it is paid is still negotiable.
So how much upfront, how much on promotion etc.6 -
Could they have both joined together.. both agreed the same price but now only putting half in each1
-
So one party will waste thousands in legal fees in what is a race to the finish line. Seems odd to me.12
-
There's only one way to sort this out, between the 2 parties........................ FIGHT !!!!!!!!!!4
-
The voice of reason...............Henry Irving said:My assumption is that the price is agreed but how and when it is paid is still negotiable.
So how much upfront, how much on promotion etc. 0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbZC_-QhBlU
