Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
That and waiting for them to go through their checks on the Sunderland takeover...
@ozziedave it's worth noting that: Charlton fans have been deeply scared by the belgians ownership, it's like having been in a very very bad relationship and finding it hard to trust your new partner who might seem the perfect fit
and...
Charlton fans, I particular some of those who frequent this message board are some of the most pessamistic people on the planet who love a moan ;-) it's nohting to do with he class system!
I'm really excited about the Aussies and can't wait and I'd go to the Aussie internationals at the valley too.
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
I get the impression he thinks they have no money due to the fact they haven't tried to pay off the director loans.. however neither have previous owners. Why pay 7 million when you don't need to?
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Its is based on a few things, one being the fact that it has taken them over a year to get to a position where they can actually agree terms. Secondly they have approached many people for funding and thats a fact The issue of not approaching Ex Directors about Loans I have always found strange,if they have a multitude of funds then there is no need, but if I was the buyer I would want to at least discuss those loans and what can be done if anything , as if it all goes wrong they get paid before me as the owner.
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
Would the length of time undertaking this depend on what data is supplied with the original paperwork to the EFL, I would assume the EFL point out to backers/investors what they need supplied to them?, in which case any hold up would come from any quieries on those details, if none are forth coming then it should not take long for the EFL to sanction the takeover.
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Its is based on a few things, one being the fact that it has taken them over a year to get to a position where they can actually agree terms. Secondly they have approached many people for funding and thats a fact The issue of not approaching Ex Directors about Loans I have always found strange,if they have a multitude of funds then there is no need, but if I was the buyer I would want to at least discuss those loans and what can be done if anything , as if it all goes wrong they get paid before me as the owner.
If someone was selling something worth @£20M for @£50M, I think it would take any sensible consortium as long as it takes, to get the price down to a sensible level.
If they have a multitude of funds, there is no need to pay off ex directors. If they are struggling for funds, you still wouldn't want to pay off the ex directors.
If it all goes wrong, there won't be any money, so it doesn't matter who gets first call on nothing.
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Its is based on a few things, one being the fact that it has taken them over a year to get to a position where they can actually agree terms. Secondly they have approached many people for funding and thats a fact The issue of not approaching Ex Directors about Loans I have always found strange,if they have a multitude of funds then there is no need, but if I was the buyer I would want to at least discuss those loans and what can be done if anything , as if it all goes wrong they get paid before me as the owner.
Thanks for the answer.
I think the taking over a year could be lots of reasons other than just not having funds although I agree it could well be a significant factor.
I have highlighted the part that you say is a fact? Based on what evidence. I know you can't give names and dates but why is it fact?
The last part you seem to be arguing with yourself. If they have a multitude of funds then as you say there is no need so would point to them having more money, not less.
If there is a racist view on these pages, it is that Aussies have a winning mentality.
As for not trusting Australians, I think you will find that as a generalisation Brits don’t trust anyone coming from abroad.
Londoners, (you can insert any location here), would add the Scots, Welsh, Irish, Northerners, Yokels, Gypsies, or anyone richer or poorer than themselves. I would add that there is a bloke down my road I have a few doubts about.
The rest of your post is a valid view, but rest assured there are many supporters who are looking forward to owners that have both ambition and a plan to achieve it. Whoever and from wherever.
Being a south-east Londoner means I don't trust anyone from north of the river; west of Brixton; south of Bromley (and even then); or east of the M25. (I jest of course)
I think the racist thing is a huge stretch. Charlton fans being immensely cynical though is definitely true, and while we'll be scrutinising why foreigners (for want of a less ungainly term) want something to do with our beautiful club, it's not out of a racist suspicion.
I remember my shock at seeing the Thames barrier. I had assumed quite naturally that it would have been built along the South bank.
I also think there is a case for rebuilding Hadrian’s Wall. At Watford. And putting broken glass on top.
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Its is based on a few things, one being the fact that it has taken them over a year to get to a position where they can actually agree terms. Secondly they have approached many people for funding and thats a fact The issue of not approaching Ex Directors about Loans I have always found strange,if they have a multitude of funds then there is no need, but if I was the buyer I would want to at least discuss those loans and what can be done if anything , as if it all goes wrong they get paid before me as the owner.
Thanks for the answer.
I think the taking over a year could be lots of reasons other than just not having funds although I agree it could well be a significant factor.
I have highlighted the part that you say is a fact? Based on what evidence. I know you can't give names and dates but why is it fact?
The last part you seem to be arguing with yourself. If they have a multitude of funds then as you say there is no need so would point to them having more money, not less.
As others have said, I don't think it matters how much they have with regards to the directors loans.
It's an optional expense, why pay it? Of course the ex-directors would love to be given the money now but why should any new buyer(s) pay them if they don't have to. These loans are repayable at a time when the financial reward of reaching the Prem make them a drop in the ocean
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Its is based on a few things, one being the fact that it has taken them over a year to get to a position where they can actually agree terms. Secondly they have approached many people for funding and thats a fact The issue of not approaching Ex Directors about Loans I have always found strange,if they have a multitude of funds then there is no need, but if I was the buyer I would want to at least discuss those loans and what can be done if anything , as if it all goes wrong they get paid before me as the owner.
Thanks for the answer.
I think the taking over a year could be lots of reasons other than just not having funds although I agree it could well be a significant factor.
I have highlighted the part that you say is a fact? Based on what evidence. I know you can't give names and dates but why is it fact?
The last part you seem to be arguing with yourself. If they have a multitude of funds then as you say there is no need so would point to them having more money, not less.
As others have said, I don't think it matters how much they have with regards to the directors loans.
It's an optional expense, why pay it? Of course the ex-directors would love to be given the money now but why should any new buyer(s) pay them if they don't have to. These loans are repayable at a time when the financial reward of reaching the Prem make them a drop in the ocean
And if we reached the Premier League, their stated exit plan was to sell up in any case.
I keep seeing the concern that it's taken the Aussies over a year to get to this point. Are we all forgetting this is RD, and for a while, Katrien they're dealing with?
The only thing I want to know is @Ozziedave if the deal is dependent on a locally sourced brand of Sandpaper or not. Apologies if this joke was mentioned before but if you're not on this thread all day, then there are about 20 pages to read and that is just, well it just aint happening.
I keep seeing the concern that it's taken the Aussies over a year to get to this point. Are we all forgetting this is RD, and for a while, Katrien they've they're dealing with?
Apparently it has nothing to do with Roland being slow or awkward, but the fact that as usual he wandered in knowing bugger all about anything, decided he knew best and did not follow any recognised procedure for buying us.
This has resulted in lawyers having to go back into the mist of time to establish what the hell has gone on.
Additional delays have been caused by the fact that Rolly’s team is made up of primary school kids being given a chance to show what they can do; but having to learn how to read and write first.
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Its is based on a few things, one being the fact that it has taken them over a year to get to a position where they can actually agree terms. Secondly they have approached many people for funding and thats a fact The issue of not approaching Ex Directors about Loans I have always found strange,if they have a multitude of funds then there is no need, but if I was the buyer I would want to at least discuss those loans and what can be done if anything , as if it all goes wrong they get paid before me as the owner.
Thanks for the answer.
I think the taking over a year could be lots of reasons other than just not having funds although I agree it could well be a significant factor.
I have highlighted the part that you say is a fact? Based on what evidence. I know you can't give names and dates but why is it fact?
The last part you seem to be arguing with yourself. If they have a multitude of funds then as you say there is no need so would point to them having more money, not less.
As others have said, I don't think it matters how much they have with regards to the directors loans.
It's an optional expense, why pay it? Of course the ex-directors would love to be given the money now but why should any new buyer(s) pay them if they don't have to. These loans are repayable at a time when the financial reward of reaching the Prem make them a drop in the ocean
And if we reached the Premier League, their stated exit plan was to sell up in any case.
yeah exactly, I would be slightly perplexed that they are paying this debt off unnecessarily
I keep seeing the concern that it's taken the Aussies over a year to get to this point. Are we all forgetting this is RD, and for a while, Katrien they've they're dealing with?
This whole thing started when Muir rang up the commercial department looking to buy a billboard for The Good Guys.
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Its is based on a few things, one being the fact that it has taken them over a year to get to a position where they can actually agree terms. Secondly they have approached many people for funding and thats a fact The issue of not approaching Ex Directors about Loans I have always found strange,if they have a multitude of funds then there is no need, but if I was the buyer I would want to at least discuss those loans and what can be done if anything , as if it all goes wrong they get paid before me as the owner.
Thanks for the answer.
I think the taking over a year could be lots of reasons other than just not having funds although I agree it could well be a significant factor.
I have highlighted the part that you say is a fact? Based on what evidence. I know you can't give names and dates but why is it fact?
The last part you seem to be arguing with yourself. If they have a multitude of funds then as you say there is no need so would point to them having more money, not less.
Re Ex Director loans, why pay these back when you don't have to? You may be in a position now to negotiate the value of these down for early settlement, say 50p in the pound. but that will cost you £3.5m. Wouldn't you rather spend the £3.5m on getting to the promised land, when the loans then fall due, but you have £100m+ of income to pay the difference?
I keep seeing the concern that it's taken the Aussies over a year to get to this point. Are we all forgetting this is RD, and for a while, Katrien they're dealing with?
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
good post.
Of course they have the money. They’re f*cking millionaires!
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
good post.
Of course they have the money. They’re f*cking millionaires!
If there is a racist view on these pages, it is that Aussies have a winning mentality.
As for not trusting Australians, I think you will find that as a generalisation Brits don’t trust anyone coming from abroad.
Londoners, (you can insert any location here), would add the Scots, Welsh, Irish, Northerners, Yokels, Gypsies, or anyone richer or poorer than themselves. I would add that there is a bloke down my road I have a few doubts about.
The rest of your post is a valid view, but rest assured there are many supporters who are looking forward to owners that have both ambition and a plan to achieve it. Whoever and from wherever.
Being a south-east Londoner means I don't trust anyone from north of the river; west of Brixton; south of Bromley (and even then); or east of the M25. (I jest of course)
I think the racist thing is a huge stretch. Charlton fans being immensely cynical though is definitely true, and while we'll be scrutinising why foreigners (for want of a less ungainly term) want something to do with our beautiful club, it's not out of a racist suspicion.
Leaving aside the obvious points about the quality of the outcome, it doesn’t seem the fit and proper persons test took any time at all when it was applied to Duchatelet - and that was over Christmas.
Maybe this time its taking ages because it is a Fund/Syndicate buying the club and disclosure on multiple investors takes longer, multiple Bank references,lawyers etc... That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
good post.
Of course they have the money. They’re f*cking millionaires!
Never said they didn't, nor do I share David Smith's views.
However, having a few millionaires as part of a consortium wouldn't be enough. Firstly because we are talking about upwards of 50 million and secondly because you would need said millionaires to spend it. All well and good having 600 million in the bank but doesn't mean they want to throw it at a Football club
Comments
That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
and...
Charlton fans, I particular some of those who frequent this message board are some of the most pessamistic people on the planet who love a moan ;-) it's nohting to do with he class system!
I'm really excited about the Aussies and can't wait and I'd go to the Aussie internationals at the valley too.
You've much repeated this line about them not having the money or not being able to raise the money or needing to go to the city for money as an issue.
Quite often you have framed these concerns as questions "why if they have the money haven't they.....?"
But I've never been clear as to why you think they don't have the money or what your sources are?
It's perfectly legitimate to ask "Do they have the money?" but you have stated/implied that you are fairly sure that they don't have the money but on what basis?
Secondly they have approached many people for funding and thats a fact
The issue of not approaching Ex Directors about Loans I have always found strange,if they have a multitude of funds then there is no need, but if I was the buyer I would want to at least discuss those loans and what can be done if anything , as if it all goes wrong they get paid before me as the owner.
That's assuming they have finally raised the total amount.
Would the length of time undertaking this depend on what data is supplied with the original paperwork to the EFL, I would assume the EFL point out to backers/investors what they need supplied to them?, in which case any hold up would come from any quieries on those details, if none are forth coming then it should not take long for the EFL to sanction the takeover.
They’re a consortium, I’d expect them to approach a lot of people. Doesn’t mean they don’t have the money required now.
If they have a multitude of funds, there is no need to pay off ex directors.
If they are struggling for funds, you still wouldn't want to pay off the ex directors.
If it all goes wrong, there won't be any money, so it doesn't matter who gets first call on nothing.
Ok, a bit simplistic, but that's what I think.
Thanks for the answer.
I think the taking over a year could be lots of reasons other than just not having funds although I agree it could well be a significant factor.
I have highlighted the part that you say is a fact? Based on what evidence. I know you can't give names and dates but why is it fact?
The last part you seem to be arguing with yourself. If they have a multitude of funds then as you say there is no need so would point to them having more money, not less.
I also think there is a case for rebuilding Hadrian’s Wall. At Watford. And putting broken glass on top.
It's an optional expense, why pay it? Of course the ex-directors would love to be given the money now but why should any new buyer(s) pay them if they don't have to. These loans are repayable at a time when the financial reward of reaching the Prem make them a drop in the ocean
Phew, relax.
This has resulted in lawyers having to go back into the mist of time to establish what the hell has gone on.
Additional delays have been caused by the fact that Rolly’s team is made up of primary school kids being given a chance to show what they can do; but having to learn how to read and write first.
All very normal.
However, having a few millionaires as part of a consortium wouldn't be enough. Firstly because we are talking about upwards of 50 million and secondly because you would need said millionaires to spend it. All well and good having 600 million in the bank but doesn't mean they want to throw it at a Football club