The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Agree - but I think we are looking at December/January at the earliest, and most probably next May/JuneHenry Irving said:
Agreebobmunro said:
Do not underestimate the power of internal intelligence (jungle drums). They may be short on detail but they will know if it's generally good or bad news.Dazzler21 said:
Agree with this, but still do not believe staff know any more than us until the deal is signed and sealed and even then they will know only hours before.Henry Irving said:
I think the staff often know a lot about not being paid their bonuses or their departed colleagues not being replaced.Dazzler21 said:I have to say staff often know as little as supporters around this kind of stuff.
In the event of a collapse I don't think they'd know any quicker than us as the business seems to be primarily being done over the phone or maybe over teleconference?
I still think that when the takeover eventually comes it will be done very quickly, with very little or no build up, just a statement on the website saying that
"Subject to football league approval the club has been sold to ???????"
#teamWIOTOS0 -
Great post that I wish RD could read!NapaAddick said:After learning about SCMT, Roland is even more than a loser that I thought.
Although I can see us easily bumping up against the 60% wage limit under SCMT (as a percent of turnover,) RD could easily just directly "inject equity" to cover the difference. He last did that the year we were relegated and he said afterword "this will never be repeated."
CAFC is in NO way in any financial bind. He just no longer wants to put any more of his money in the club and.... that's it. So rather than put any money in at all, Roland uses SCMT as an excuse to asset strip and sell players to the highest cash bidder, even if it is below market value.
For example... our turnover is about £12M. Likely our total wages are 60%, at the limit. £7.2M. He could just inject one million pounds and the problem is over. But instead he sells Konsa below market, uses the transfer "profit" to goose the "turnover," and deal with it that way. LUNACY!
In fact, after reading, I am kind of blown away at how much leeway owners of L1 and L2 clubs have. We could technically spend £500,000,000 on Messi in the winter and it would not breech spending rules under SCMT. In the Premier League, you would get busted for losing all that money.
In a more reasonable scenario, an owner of CAFC could give Bowyer £3,000,000 to spend, buy six top players at £500K each, and we would probably go straight up. In the Championship, this club would easily fetch far more than the £3M spent on top of it's rational League One valuation.
Profits on transfers count as "turnover" for wage limits but money spent on transfers do not count as wages. That's amazing, and again, different than The Championship or PL. You can spend all the money you want on transfers in L1 without any effect on SCMT at all. No limit. You just have to keep first team wages within 60% of the total of turnover + owner equity injections.
Here is a quick article that explains it well (and easier) than the actual EFL document.
RD could have got us out of L1 as fast as he wanted. He just did not want to. His stupidity is almost beyond understanding.
https://bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/financial-fair-play-you-need-888037
On you're last point, I've often wondered why RD didn't sell after relegation, especially considering that he made no attempt to get promotion the following season?1 -
With moshiri now the main shareholder of Everton with 68.6% I can not see usmanov putting any money into them as he wants to have is own say on running a club let's just hope that is us !!!!1
-
His niece still needed a jobFerryman said:
Great post that I wish RD could read!NapaAddick said:After learning about SCMT, Roland is even more than a loser that I thought.
Although I can see us easily bumping up against the 60% wage limit under SCMT (as a percent of turnover,) RD could easily just directly "inject equity" to cover the difference. He last did that the year we were relegated and he said afterword "this will never be repeated."
CAFC is in NO way in any financial bind. He just no longer wants to put any more of his money in the club and.... that's it. So rather than put any money in at all, Roland uses SCMT as an excuse to asset strip and sell players to the highest cash bidder, even if it is below market value.
For example... our turnover is about £12M. Likely our total wages are 60%, at the limit. £7.2M. He could just inject one million pounds and the problem is over. But instead he sells Konsa below market, uses the transfer "profit" to goose the "turnover," and deal with it that way. LUNACY!
In fact, after reading, I am kind of blown away at how much leeway owners of L1 and L2 clubs have. We could technically spend £500,000,000 on Messi in the winter and it would not breech spending rules under SCMT. In the Premier League, you would get busted for losing all that money.
In a more reasonable scenario, an owner of CAFC could give Bowyer £3,000,000 to spend, buy six top players at £500K each, and we would probably go straight up. In the Championship, this club would easily fetch far more than the £3M spent on top of it's rational League One valuation.
Profits on transfers count as "turnover" for wage limits but money spent on transfers do not count as wages. That's amazing, and again, different than The Championship or PL. You can spend all the money you want on transfers in L1 without any effect on SCMT at all. No limit. You just have to keep first team wages within 60% of the total of turnover + owner equity injections.
Here is a quick article that explains it well (and easier) than the actual EFL document.
RD could have got us out of L1 as fast as he wanted. He just did not want to. His stupidity is almost beyond understanding.
https://bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/financial-fair-play-you-need-888037
On you're last point, I've often wondered why RD didn't sell after relegation, especially considering that he made no attempt to get promotion the following season?4 -
FFS -----ALL stop trying to apply logic to anything this egotistical twonk RD does,It's EGO backed by arsewipes and millions in his bank account11
-
In normal takeovers yes, but here nobody actually involved in the takeover is on site.bobmunro said:
Do not underestimate the power of internal intelligence (jungle drums). They may be short on detail but they will know if it's generally good or bad news.Dazzler21 said:
Agree with this, but still do not believe staff know any more than us until the deal is signed and sealed and even then they will know only hours before.Henry Irving said:
I think the staff often know a lot about not being paid their bonuses or their departed colleagues not being replaced.Dazzler21 said:I have to say staff often know as little as supporters around this kind of stuff.
In the event of a collapse I don't think they'd know any quicker than us as the business seems to be primarily being done over the phone or maybe over teleconference?
Roland not replacing staff to me suggests that the takeover if anything is still on.3 -
I’m a few days behind on this thread, but WTF is going on here? Posters “driven” from the site, taking legal action against posters on other sites. Get a fucking grip for gods sake!Addickted said:"had to take legal action"
Really?
Why not just ignore the wind up merchant like plenty of other posters on here do? Legal action against genuine Charlton fans, even if they are complete idiots, is a step too far as far as I'm concerned.
2 -
Wait until you get to page 1282, there’s orgies and all sorts of things going down...YTS1978 said:
I’m a few days behind on this thread, but WTF is going on here? Posters “driven” from the site, taking legal action against posters on other sites. Get a fucking grip for gods sake!Addickted said:"had to take legal action"
Really?
Why not just ignore the wind up merchant like plenty of other posters on here do? Legal action against genuine Charlton fans, even if they are complete idiots, is a step too far as far as I'm concerned.19 -
Haha...now that’s more like it!Fumbluff said:
Wait until you get to page 1282, there’s orgies and all sorts of things going down...YTS1978 said:
I’m a few days behind on this thread, but WTF is going on here? Posters “driven” from the site, taking legal action against posters on other sites. Get a fucking grip for gods sake!Addickted said:"had to take legal action"
Really?
Why not just ignore the wind up merchant like plenty of other posters on here do? Legal action against genuine Charlton fans, even if they are complete idiots, is a step too far as far as I'm concerned.
0 -
I fear that unless the Rat departs soon the only thing going down will be us!Fumbluff said:
Wait until you get to page 1282, there’s orgies and all sorts of things going down...YTS1978 said:
I’m a few days behind on this thread, but WTF is going on here? Posters “driven” from the site, taking legal action against posters on other sites. Get a fucking grip for gods sake!Addickted said:"had to take legal action"
Really?
Why not just ignore the wind up merchant like plenty of other posters on here do? Legal action against genuine Charlton fans, even if they are complete idiots, is a step too far as far as I'm concerned.
0 - Sponsored links:
-
I have read that twice and I don't understand it.kitchenchef said:4 -
Early October!!kitchenchef said:
Why so long?1 -
That smacks of a Duchatelet fed statementkitchenchef said:2 -
That is highly unlikely wouldn’t you say.addick05 said:
I fear that unless the Rat departs soon the only thing going down will be us!Fumbluff said:
Wait until you get to page 1282, there’s orgies and all sorts of things going down...YTS1978 said:
I’m a few days behind on this thread, but WTF is going on here? Posters “driven” from the site, taking legal action against posters on other sites. Get a fucking grip for gods sake!Addickted said:"had to take legal action"
Really?
Why not just ignore the wind up merchant like plenty of other posters on here do? Legal action against genuine Charlton fans, even if they are complete idiots, is a step too far as far as I'm concerned.1 -
"We've got our excuses ready on these issues so can we just talk about them and not the underlying piss poor management.kitchenchef said:
"It's not that we've run the club badly, we've just not communicated very well just how good we've been at running the club, look at the training ground, OK, forget that. And we're 8th in the league. It might be a lower league than when the owner bought us but hey, that's football"
"and anyway, it's all the fan's fault the clubs not been sold with their protests. What's that? OK, there's only been one protest in the last 14 months and yes, we didliesay a deal would be done by now, quite a few times actually but you know it's the fan's fault not ours."
31 -
Yeah it's all Moshiri's money ;-)FAVADDICK said:With moshiri now the main shareholder of Everton with 68.6% I can not see usmanov putting any money into them as he wants to have is own say on running a club let's just hope that is us !!!!
1 -
.0
-
That statement makes no sense whatsoever.2
-
Once again brilliantly bizarre, the only thing missing was a {…} or two.kitchenchef said:1 - Sponsored links:
-
"We have also asked the EFL to consider:
Are the cost efficiencies helping the sale of the club?
Are the protests helping the sale of the club?"
lol a blame shifting attempt of the highest order here.
it's all the fans fault in truth. we should never have thrown those beach balls!!!!3 -
Yup, exactly as I read I too.Henry Irving said:
"We've got our excuses ready on these issues so can we just talk about them and not the underlying piss poor management.kitchenchef said:
"It's not that we've run the club badly, we've just not communicated very well just how good we've been at running the club, look at the training ground, OK, forget that. And we're 8th in the league. It might be a lower league than when the owner bought us but hey, that's football"
"and anyway, it's all the fan's fault the clubs not been sold with their protests. What's that? OK, there's only been one protest in the last 14 months and yes, we didliesay a deal would be done by now, quite a few times actually but you know it's the fan's fault not ours."0 -
wow.2
-
We have also asked the EFL to consider:
This bit has me in stitches. It's like they're crying for sympathy with the last line.
Are the cost efficiencies helping the sale of the club?
Are the protests helping the sale of the club?0 -
It's ridiculous - we've had one - yes count them, one - match day protest since they've admitted the club is for sale. He really is an odd blokecafc-4-life said:We have also asked the EFL to consider:
Are the cost efficiencies helping the sale of the club?
Are the protests helping the sale of the club?
This bit has me in stitches. It's like they're crying for sympathy with the last line.2 -
Club: How can we improve communication?kitchenchef said:
Me: Tell the feckin' truth!
Club: Are the cost efficiencies helping the sale of the club?
Me: Bar the refusal to pay agreed bonuses to staff the cost efficiencies will have a minor effect, if any, on a prospective purchaser. More of an issue would be:
* the salaries paid to Meire, Keohane, Eager, Rubashow etc
* numerous signings over the last four years, many of whom played no more than a season for us before being put out on loan with us picking up the tab.
* then the decimation of the fan-base & dwindling attendances, with no-one to blame but the regime. Remember that our attendances pretty much held up the last time we were L1
Club: Are the protests helping the sale of the club?
Me: The protests have all been firmly aimed at Duchatelet & his management and have been creative and certainly not violent. They have received widespread positive coverage from national and international press.
Any potential owner worth their salt would want to harness the strength of feeling and creativity among this fan-base and use it to rebuild. It's not rocket science and if they have any common sense - sadly lacking in SE7 in recent years - it would be one of the first things they do.47 -
Those are key statements. Blaming the fans for the fact they have been unable to reach an agreement with a keen buyer for the last 9 months or so.cafc-4-life said:We have also asked the EFL to consider:
Are the cost efficiencies helping the sale of the club?
Are the protests helping the sale of the club?4 -
No way does a Comms professional allow that nonsense to go out willingly, I smell another RD forced communiqué. I wonder if their integrity forces another Comms manager out the door...
Nah.2 -
The only position the club can take, is to portray the problem as one of "communications" - rather than proven incompetence, arrogance, ignorance, deceit and disrespect to fans.
The fault clearly lies with the fans who just refuse to believe what the club says and prefer to believe what they see and hear with their own eyes and ears and spread the word through social media and targeted protests.
By analysing the communications it will be obvious that anything which contradicts the club's views must be a pack of lies dreamed up by a conspiracy of thousands of bitter ex-employees.
Are the cost efficiencies helping the sale of the club? - NO - COSTS AFFECT NO ONE APART FROM CURRENT OWNER
Are the protests helping the sale of the club? - NO - PROTESTS AFFECT NO ONE APART FROM CURRENT OWNER
4 -
Are the protests helping the sale of the club?
Presumably Roland will give the EFL full details about, and full access to, all of the prospective purchasers there have been so they can find out.1
