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

The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)

17747757777797802262

Comments

  • Does anyone know who, or what sort of people (solicitors? / accountants?) sit on this panel? Surely they should have the capability to deal with 2 cases at the same time if ever the need arrises?

    If it's like a lot of advisory panels, it won't be their day job so it will need to be scheduled around that. Also there are probably statutory timescales you need to give them to read the submitted pack. I can't imagine two takeovers pop up at once very often so probably date ordered.

    Having done it for local government in a previous life, panel and committee admin is a ball ache and can lead to delays just because of statutory process. Unlikely they'll call an extraordinary session for little old charlton ;)

    Patience is a virtue!
    I'd be a bit more sympathetic to this very reasonable POV if anyone had actually failed the process.

  • Henry - it’s Gerard Murphy and the new UK firm would need to acquire Baton 2010 or both its subsidiaries - CAH Ltd and CAFC Ltd.
  • 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.

    Possibly because there are multiple individuals being considered in the fit and proper test. For Duchatelet it was just Duchatelet and his mate who owns 10% of staprix.
  • Didn’t the Man City owner before the Arabs have to sell the club because he failed the fit and proper test when it got brought in?
  • 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.

    Possibly because there are multiple individuals being considered in the fit and proper test. For Duchatelet it was just Duchatelet and his mate who owns 10% of staprix.
    Imagine when Swansea got bought then - dont they have somethng like 30+ US investors?
  • The end of the old scrote is nigh, rejoice brothers & sisters!

    Like many people on here I will welcome the change of ownership with open arms and honestly just hope for the best that they have the interests of the club at heart.

    Aslong as the toxic old turd has gone that's the main thing.
  • 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...
  • Sponsored links:


  • @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.
  • I reckon the only hold up is captain yellow teeth trying to cash in on Jeremy Sarmiento
  • 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.
    @Davidsmith

    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?
    Ditto.
  • 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.
    @Davidsmith

    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.
    @Davidsmith

    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.
  • 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.
  • Sponsored links:


  • 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.
    @Davidsmith

    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.
  • I'm going for Thursday this week
  • 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.
    @Davidsmith

    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.
    @Davidsmith

    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.
  • 778.
    Phew, relax.
  • 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.

    All very normal.
  • 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.
    @Davidsmith

    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
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!