Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
As I also said previously commented, you are gambling on the fact that the TV monies still pouring into the premier league when Charlton get promoted, what happens if the gravy train get switched off or greatly reduced prior to this promotion? That’s right your left with a £7 million pound debt, which legally has to be repaid, as a businessman I would not take that risk. That’s the flaw in your very good argument, sorry in my opinion it’s not worth the risk of the owners taking on the debt it should be settled by the Belgium twat.golfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.10 -
But, whilst you own the £40k house you cannot have a loft extension or redo the kitchen or pull down the garage and build 2x flats in the garden or any other hare brained money making schemes without the permission of 7 people you’ve never met or the early repayment of the £7,000,000 right..... jeezgolfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.15 -
I'm sure we've been over this countless times.golfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.
What you say is correct of course but you're forgetting one important factor here.
What happens when the Aussies decided to sell us in 3/4/5 years time and we haven't reached the premier league. The loans are still there and any prospective new owners insist that the loans are covered by the Aussies before they buy?
The Aussies would then lose 7m, so i'm sure you can see why they'd want them paid up by RD.18 -
It is what it is the Aussies want a Clear Title.5
-
Not sure if you're trying to be funny...Chizz said:.
When you copied that text from the Lusha website, pasted it here, word for word and published here, under your own name, you left a bit off.Dazzler21 said:
The team at Lusha is fully committed to the requirements of the GDPR. Our legal and policy experts have closely analyzed the requirements of the GDPR and continue to monitor new guidance on best practices for implementing the requirements of the GDPR. We have taken these new requirements to heart and made changes to our products, contracts and policies to ensure that we are fully in compliance with the GDPR. Lusha services comply with the GDPR as of May 25, 2018.cabbles said:
Lusha are a registered company and have an agreement with LinkedIn otherwise the whole thing would be completely illegal and I wouldn’t be using it.Gillis said:
If you really are planning on doing this, then probably best for you to delete this post, and for anyone that's quoted it (including me) to also delete their posts once you have.cabbles said:
I have access to this technology we use at work called Lusha. It somehow has access via LinkedIn to people’s mobiles that they signed up to when they opened a LinkedIn account (if they gave their mobile). For me it’s a telesales dream as I now have a chance of getting through to a lot of decision makers. I will have a little trawl through it 2mo and see what it gives me re: EFL employeesAthletico Charlton said:Does the EFL have a phone number? What about if CAFC fans spent a day bombarding it with calls demanding answers to the Trusts questions so they can do fuck all else?
Lusha complements your profile searches on LinkedIn with personal phone numbers and emails. ... Lusha gets me more real personal cell numbers than any other tool out there, including the fancy/expensive tools like DiscoverOrg.
This bit...
"© Copyright 2018"
Of course I copied and pasted it. The first paragraph is taken from their GDPR page the second paragraph was from a review that isn't on their site.
I was genuinely interested to know how they got around GDPR as they sounded sketchy and it seems somewhere they found a loophole.
1 -
.0
-
One would've thought that it should be an easy enough thing to negotiate for 2 very successful businessmen and their teams. Why they can't just split it down the middle and "go Dutch" is beyond me, when you look at the bigger picture from both sides (RD losing £millions a year and the Aussies long term investment).Chris_from_Sidcup said:
I'm sure we've been over this countless times.golfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.
What you say is correct of course but you're forgetting one important factor here.
What happens when the Aussies decided to sell us in 3/4/5 years time and we haven't reached the premier league. The loans are still there and any prospective new owners insist that the loans are covered by the Aussies before they buy?
The Aussies would then lose 7m, so i'm sure you can see why they'd want them paid up by RD.
But I'm not convinced it's got a lot, if anything, to do with these charges now. I just think the process has taken far too long, which has made RD sell a few assets to cover his losses for that period (which it hasn't), making the Aussies questions what they're actually buying. RD has come back and said that, as a favour, he won't increase the askin price to cover the shortfall (between sale of assets and losses), but the Aussies need to accept it's the same price for the Club but with less assets. Essentially, making out he's doing them a massive favour - Rolly logic
I think the only way out is for a mega mega rich person to come in and say, " Right, there's your £47.23m for everything as it is, I'll chuck the previous directors their dough, NOW FUCK OFF"4 -
Do you take requests?cabbles said:
I have access to this technology we use at work called Lusha. It somehow has access via LinkedIn to people’s mobiles that they signed up to when they opened a LinkedIn account (if they gave their mobile). For me it’s a telesales dream as I now have a chance of getting through to a lot of decision makers. I will have a little trawl through it 2mo and see what it gives me re: EFL employeesAthletico Charlton said:Does the EFL have a phone number? What about if CAFC fans spent a day bombarding it with calls demanding answers to the Trusts questions so they can do fuck all else?
I'll have Danielle Lloyd's number please.
Thank you, looking forward to my PM.1 -
Be interesting to see a graph of how much dough RD has saved / brought in since this all started, against his losses for the same period2
-
Seeing as their plan is to reach the PL then I'd have thought it immaterial.....Chris_from_Sidcup said:
I'm sure we've been over this countless times.golfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.
What you say is correct of course but you're forgetting one important factor here.
What happens when the Aussies decided to sell us in 3/4/5 years time and we haven't reached the premier league. The loans are still there and any prospective new owners insist that the loans are covered by the Aussies before they buy?
The Aussies would then lose 7m, so i'm sure you can see why they'd want them paid up by RD.
1 - Sponsored links:
-
If TV monies "stopped pouring into the Premier league", there would be a hell of a lot of troubled Clubs, and most of them would have bigger worries than finding £7m.
It could go down, stay the same, or even go up, but TV money won't stop.
2 -
Joe, it a gamble and a £7million is a lot of money to gamble with, all I’m saying is I as a business would not accept that gamble, yes you may be correct, but what if you are wrong and the money does stop, despite all the carnage that’s going on around you with all the big teams going bankrupt and being relegated to the southern league, the lower teams will get promoted and suddenly you got a bill to legally pay.
You say why should the TV money stop, I can think of one scenario no doubt there’s plenty more, but the most likely I can think of is a European super league is formed. Where do you think sky money and all the best players would go? This would cripple all of English football, then because someone has run Charlton prudently (obviously this means the takeover would have to be completed) we are pushed into the still functioning premiership, and have to cough up the cash, which won’t be there. In my opinion anyone would be foolish to take the risk unless it’s with someone elses money. Therefore the debt in my opinion has to be settled now, with Roland’s money,4 -
I think most of us would agree the club is not worth 40M so why agree to also take on the director loans , jeez17
-
You must be very well off if you think £7m is immaterial! And I saw the smiley! Seriously though - the money is significant but more significant is the right to "clean title". Without that they cannot secure additional loans against the assets as the debenture holders have first call in the event of insolvency. Not saying it is going to happen - but banks simply will not lend on that basis. RD gets away with it as he is effectively lending to himself.golfaddick said:
Seeing as their plan is to reach the PL then I'd have thought it immaterial.....Chris_from_Sidcup said:
I'm sure we've been over this countless times.golfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.
What you say is correct of course but you're forgetting one important factor here.
What happens when the Aussies decided to sell us in 3/4/5 years time and we haven't reached the premier league. The loans are still there and any prospective new owners insist that the loans are covered by the Aussies before they buy?
The Aussies would then lose 7m, so i'm sure you can see why they'd want them paid up by RD.
3 -
Especially if you've already agreed a deal that said Duchatelet would cover them and so allow the buyers clean title.charltonnick said:I think most of us would agree the club is not worth 40M so why agree to also take on the director loans , jeez
Not the Aussies fault if Roland thought he could offer 25%. Not the Aussies fault that the directors, rightly, said "no", either.
If £7m is such a minor issue then why doesn't Duchatelet just pay it and be done with it?
Duchatelet won't because £7m is a huge chunk of the rumoured £35m price.
Why should the Aussies cough up a huge amount (think what Bowyer could do with £7m) to cover yet another one of Duchatelet's mistakes?36 -
There's a trick; what you do is you pay for undersoil heating, but forget to actually connect the boilers to the system under the pitch and act all confused when winter happens. We invented it.stonemuse said:
How do we get games postponed? We haven’t managed it yet.CAFCsayer said:I think CARD/CAST should release a statement and give them an ultimatum... The club make a statement on what is going on or we actively make plans to get each and every game postponed until further notice
8 -
£7 million is 7 months running costs, Roland.Henry Irving said:
Why should the Aussies cough up a huge amount (think what Bowyer could do with £7m) to cover yet another one of Duchatelet's mistakes?
And if you lose this sale and the club is not sold for another 12 months, then that's another £12 million you've lost.
And you don't do failure?
8 -
This why there is a lot more behind the delay than the director's loans. Given RD's past behaviour and demonstrable incompetence one can be pretty sure that he is the source of the problem.golfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.0 -
Is it still a delay? I thought it was off?sm said:
This why there is a lot more behind the delay than the director's loans. Given RD's past behaviour and demonstrable incompetence one can be pretty sure that he is the source of the problem.golfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.
1 -
the DEAL Off is delayed5
- Sponsored links:
-
I don't think that there has been anything tangible to suggest that it is 'off' - except the long time it's taking and the missing of various supposed 'deadlines'?Arsenetatters said:
Is it still a delay? I thought it was off?sm said:
This why there is a lot more behind the delay than the director's loans. Given RD's past behaviour and demonstrable incompetence one can be pretty sure that he is the source of the problem.golfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.
I think it's reasonable to assume that (at the moment) the potential puchase by the Aussies has not collapsed otherwise there would probably have been a further agreed joint statement or, more likely, a statement by one or other of the two sides; probably the Aussies via GM/JamesSeed - even if it were just a short ‘sorry but it’s not going ahead’?4 -
Yes, you would think so. And the NDA no longer applicable.micks1950 said:
I don't think that there has been anything tangible to suggest that it is 'off' - except the long time it's taking and the missing of various supposed 'deadlines'?Arsenetatters said:
Is it still a delay? I thought it was off?sm said:
This why there is a lot more behind the delay than the director's loans. Given RD's past behaviour and demonstrable incompetence one can be pretty sure that he is the source of the problem.golfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.
I think it's reasonable to assume that (at the moment) the potential puchase by the Aussies has not collapsed otherwise there would probably have been a further agreed joint statement or, more likely, a statement by one or other of the two sides; probably the Aussies via GM/JamesSeed - even if it were just a short ‘sorry but it’s not going ahead’?
2 -
£7m (Or £3.5m if they could come to an agreement) is the price of dealing with stubborn old barks like RD and let's face it, he weren't ever gonna do any buyer, or the Club, any favours was he.... IF the Aussies are serious about being about for the long term, why don't they just defer it to when they get Us to the Prem (if that is definitely what the clause sags), then, it will be more if a "drop in the Ocean"?
I'd just like to also add that I've thought £7m is a very large sum of money all along, even in the relation to RD's asking price and I wouldn't expect the Aussies to pay it without a fight, but I spose that's just the price of dealing with arseholes like RD.
*That is, of course, if this hold up is to do with the £7m0 -
Where there's life there's hopeOggy Red said:
Yes, you would think so. And the NDA no longer applicable.micks1950 said:
I don't think that there has been anything tangible to suggest that it is 'off' - except the long time it's taking and the missing of various supposed 'deadlines'?Arsenetatters said:
Is it still a delay? I thought it was off?sm said:
This why there is a lot more behind the delay than the director's loans. Given RD's past behaviour and demonstrable incompetence one can be pretty sure that he is the source of the problem.golfaddick said:
oh dear.....lets do this one last time shall we.Covered End said:
Unless I've misunderstood you, I didn't read anyone saying that should the Aussies buy Charlton, they shouldn't pay off the ex-directors if we ever get to the Premier League. In fact they would have to pay them off.golfaddick said:Fulham just spent £100m in this transfer window...........and some of you were saying the Aussies shouldn't pay the £7m to the ex-directors IF we ever get to The Premier League.
yeh.......much prefer any new owners not to have this "debt" hanging over them & to be in the position we find ourselves in on Aug 9th.
I read numerous people saying that they felt the Aussies should stump up an extra £7M to pay off the ex-directors loans now, even though it's not their debt.
As has been said many times, it would be the same as agreeing to purchase a mansion at an agreed price and the owner then expecting the prospective buyer to repay their mortgage for them as well, which is clearly beyond ludicrous.
The ex-directors loans are ONLY repayable on reaching the Premier League. The £7m does not increase....it is not inflation linked or repayable in a set time frame...so it will still be £7m in 20 years time. The loans can be rolled over to any new owner & according to @AirmanBrown the ex-directors do not have any say in the matter or need to be consulted on it (although this is disputed by someone on here who has read all the salient documents.....but an ex-director has specifically said that he agrees with @AirmanBrown).
Therefore, any new owner could pay RD the agreed price for the club, lock stock & barrel, and simply "defer" paying the £7m until that time arises. As I alluded to in my post, £7m at that time could be chicken feed compared to now......especially as in the time between agreeing a price with RD back in Feb to where we are now we are in a much worse position & it may take close to £7m over the next few years (transfer fees, salaries etc) to get us into the Championship if we got relegated this season.
Therefore, imo....to not just accept that there are these loans that ONLY have to be paid when there is going to be 10x that amount available (and may never have to be repaid as we may never reach the Premier League) and instead spend months fannying around to the detriment of the playing squad & therefore to any hope of promotion is just a false economy.
so.....to your analogy. its like buying a house that had an interest only mortgage attached to it that only has to be repaid when you sell the house in the future. If the house costs £40k now, and you know that when you sell it it will be worth £200k, would you not take on the £7k interest only loan......or would you wait for the current owner to rip out the kitchen, bathroom & windows before he pays off the £7k himself....leaving you with an asset which is now worth a lot less & to which you need to make immediate improvements just to bring it up to scratch.
jeez.....its not rocket science.
I think it's reasonable to assume that (at the moment) the potential puchase by the Aussies has not collapsed otherwise there would probably have been a further agreed joint statement or, more likely, a statement by one or other of the two sides; probably the Aussies via GM/JamesSeed - even if it were just a short ‘sorry but it’s not going ahead’?1 -
Why is the agreed price now £35M?
I thought the Saudis offered £40.5M?6 -
To be fair a 25% offer is probably what the £7m is worth at the moment. The former directors have to be careful as if the bid collapses then their chance of getting ANY money back becomes even more remote...Henry Irving said:
Especially if you've already agreed a deal that said Duchatelet would cover them and so allow the buyers clean title.charltonnick said:I think most of us would agree the club is not worth 40M so why agree to also take on the director loans , jeez
Not the Aussies fault if Roland thought he could offer 25%. Not the Aussies fault that the directors, rightly, said "no", either.
If £7m is such a minor issue then why doesn't Duchatelet just pay it and be done with it?
Duchatelet won't because £7m is a huge chunk of the rumoured £35m price.
Why should the Aussies cough up a huge amount (think what Bowyer could do with £7m) to cover yet another one of Duchatelet's mistakes?0 -
Is today the day James Seed that you may find out from GM.0
-
The Aussies offered more but then it transpired that they didn't actually have the investors needed to stump up that top figure.creepyaddick said:Why is the agreed price now £35M?
I thought the Saudis offered £40.5M?
Allegedly.2 -
Rumours on both. We don't know what the price is or what was offered.creepyaddick said:Why is the agreed price now £35M?
I thought the Saudis offered £40.5M?0 -
The Aussies said "tough couple of weeks" they didn't say when we would have them ----cant be last few months as these have all been SMOOTH AND FLUFFY and top loverly shit easy1
This discussion has been closed.
