The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
addick05 said:
The voice of sanity. Aussies/Brits - whoever, we all want the right outcome and are ALL in this together, aren't we?stonemuse said:
To be honest, I believe there is only one group on this forum, 'pro Charlton'.JamesSeed said:
This is literally a forum for debate. The pro and anti Aussies seem pretty evenly matched, but there's no evidence that the pro Aussie mob are any worse than the anti Aussie mob. Personally I'd say it's the other way round, but then I'm biased.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
I didn't accuse Shootie of anything, I asked if he though his question was a bit sharp in the first place. Re' JS's post, it depends what context you read it in and if you know that as soon as you write something on this thread in relation to the Aussies, it'll get quoted and twisted in few minutes.PragueAddick said:
Ah but now you have done what you accuse @ShootersHillGuru of. What is wrong with @JamesSeed response there? Absolutely nothing, as far as I can see.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
You're very good at putting people into groups mate ain't you. Getting a few people behind you, ridiculing the 'opposition', then playing the victim when you get a bit back.JamesSeed said:
The scarves were just an honest expression of their enthusiasm for the project, (days from what they thought was the completion).i_b_b_o_r_g said:Is there any reason why the interested parties wont go a bit more public? Not by walking around the ground in scarves on match day, but just to release a small statement to say something along the lines of 'we're in the mix and we hope to complete soon'. At least the fans would know there is something going on
Muir also wanted to meet Charlton fans and get a sense of the atmosphere. Obviously they won’t do that again until the sale if it happens.
If they released a statement saying ‘we're in the mix and we hope to complete soon' they’d be widely ridiculed, unfortunately.
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t really.
My question wasn't a dig at anyone in particular, it was just to ask if there was a genuine reason why all the parties, with RD's say so, can't each put out small official statements** just to say they are involved, no more than that.
** Official Statement - Via their legal teams and not by walking round the ground with scarves on. Which also goes for any other buyer who might do it prematurely, in the future.
Maybe if you if you review how your post would have read by taking out the phrase Not by walking around the ground in scarves on match day
you might realise that you are accusing others of that which you yourself are guilty.
In particular while I think James sometimes has made mistakes in his phrasing here (and who does not???) I think it is manifestly unfair to suggest he is "putting people into groups".
This isn't the plaice for vitriol, and I think you cod do batter ;-)
Everything else is opinion and debate. Most of us couldn't care less about pro or anti arguments - we just want the job to be done.
8 -
Thanks, still struggling to see the link to us.The Red Robin said:
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-sources-former-manchester-united-and-chelsea-chief-peter-kenyon-plots-newcastle-takeover-11512071Henry Irving said:
Yes, long term fan.The Red Robin said:It's Mark Kleinman of Sky that's reporting the Kenyon and Newcastle link. Isn't he a Charlton fan? Would he know more on our situation?
Where is he reporting that link? @The Red Robin0 -
I think if Mark wanted to he could find out a lot. He either knows and chooses not to say or he can't really be bothered with it all.Chizz said:
Yes he is. No he wouldn't.The Red Robin said:It's Mark Kleinman of Sky that's reporting the Kenyon and Newcastle link. Isn't he a Charlton fan? Would he know more on our situation?
0 -
Not true, it was for saying I was ‘slow’. Your post didn’t mention the fact that ibborg isn’t a mod.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Be careful, he flagged me for pointing out that mistake.cabbles said:
Assistant to the Mods, maybeJamesSeed said:
What an extraordinary statement, particularly from a mod. How can you possibly extrapolate that from my comment above.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
You're very good at putting people into groups mate ain't you. Getting a few people behind you, ridiculing the 'opposition', then playing the victim when you get a bit back.JamesSeed said:
The scarves were just an honest expression of their enthusiasm for the project, (days from what they thought was the completion).i_b_b_o_r_g said:Is there any reason why the interested parties wont go a bit more public? Not by walking around the ground in scarves on match day, but just to release a small statement to say something along the lines of 'we're in the mix and we hope to complete soon'. At least the fans would know there is something going on
Muir also wanted to meet Charlton fans and get a sense of the atmosphere. Obviously they won’t do that again until the sale if it happens.
If they released a statement saying ‘we're in the mix and we hope to complete soon' they’d be widely ridiculed, unfortunately.
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t really.
My question wasn't a dig at anyone in particular, it was just to ask if there was a genuine reason why all the parties, with RD's say so, can't each put out small official statements** just to say they are involved, no more than that.
** Official Statement - Via their legal teams and not by walking round the ground with scarves on. Which also goes for any other buyer who might do it prematurely, in the future.
Firstly I didn’t say you were having a dig at all.
There have been comments above about the aggressive tone of some posts, and it’s worth bearing in mind that plain text can be read in different ways by different people depending on their mindset. But your post aimed at me can only be seen as aggressive mate.
Where have I put people into groups, and what groups are you referring to? Where have I ridiculed anybody? I was just giving my view of the scarf wearing, as have many others, but I don’t see you jumping down their throats.
One of the great things about CL is the way people use humour to diffuse situations. Perhaps you’ve misconstrued my attempts at humour as something else, I really don’t know. For example I said recently something like ‘does that get me off (or on?) the scapegoat list’. It was an attempt at humour, not trying to portray myself as a victim.
Of course people have a pop at each other here, but I don’t want to get involved.
I’m more than happy to get involved in an honest debate without malice, however.
0 -
Isn't there another word for bowler ?Weegie Addick said:
Maybe doesn't help when the bowler is Belgian!Raith_C_Chattonell said:I'm beginning to see this 'contest' between the Aussies and the Brits like two cricketers playing the straightest of bats.
You've got Bill Lawry for the Aussies and Geoff Boycott for the Brits. Neither is prepared to take a chance and each is trying to bore the other into submission. Something has to give, but its best not to hold your breath.
Tosser ?9 -
Well said.addick05 said:
The voice of sanity. Aussies/Brits - whoever, we all want the right outcome and are ALL in this together, aren't we?stonemuse said:
To be honest, I believe there is only one group on this forum, 'pro Charlton'.JamesSeed said:
This is literally a forum for debate. The pro and anti Aussies seem pretty evenly matched, but there's no evidence that the pro Aussie mob are any worse than the anti Aussie mob. Personally I'd say it's the other way round, but then I'm biased.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
I didn't accuse Shootie of anything, I asked if he though his question was a bit sharp in the first place. Re' JS's post, it depends what context you read it in and if you know that as soon as you write something on this thread in relation to the Aussies, it'll get quoted and twisted in few minutes.PragueAddick said:
Ah but now you have done what you accuse @ShootersHillGuru of. What is wrong with @JamesSeed response there? Absolutely nothing, as far as I can see.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
You're very good at putting people into groups mate ain't you. Getting a few people behind you, ridiculing the 'opposition', then playing the victim when you get a bit back.JamesSeed said:
The scarves were just an honest expression of their enthusiasm for the project, (days from what they thought was the completion).i_b_b_o_r_g said:Is there any reason why the interested parties wont go a bit more public? Not by walking around the ground in scarves on match day, but just to release a small statement to say something along the lines of 'we're in the mix and we hope to complete soon'. At least the fans would know there is something going on
Muir also wanted to meet Charlton fans and get a sense of the atmosphere. Obviously they won’t do that again until the sale if it happens.
If they released a statement saying ‘we're in the mix and we hope to complete soon' they’d be widely ridiculed, unfortunately.
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t really.
My question wasn't a dig at anyone in particular, it was just to ask if there was a genuine reason why all the parties, with RD's say so, can't each put out small official statements** just to say they are involved, no more than that.
** Official Statement - Via their legal teams and not by walking round the ground with scarves on. Which also goes for any other buyer who might do it prematurely, in the future.
Maybe if you if you review how your post would have read by taking out the phrase Not by walking around the ground in scarves on match day
you might realise that you are accusing others of that which you yourself are guilty.
In particular while I think James sometimes has made mistakes in his phrasing here (and who does not???) I think it is manifestly unfair to suggest he is "putting people into groups".
This isn't the plaice for vitriol, and I think you cod do batter ;-)
Everything else is opinion and debate. Most of us couldn't care less about pro or anti arguments - we just want the job to be done.0 -
I didn't say there was a link to us, just that he if he's aware of what's going on with Newcastle, might he know more about Charlton but @Chizz says not.Henry Irving said:
Thanks, still struggling to see the link to us.The Red Robin said:
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-sources-former-manchester-united-and-chelsea-chief-peter-kenyon-plots-newcastle-takeover-11512071Henry Irving said:
Yes, long term fan.The Red Robin said:It's Mark Kleinman of Sky that's reporting the Kenyon and Newcastle link. Isn't he a Charlton fan? Would he know more on our situation?
Where is he reporting that link? @The Red Robin0 -
Mark Kleinman is a smart, diligent, excellent journalist, who interprets facts, opinions and rumours to provide a balanced and nuanced view of news as it pertains to businesses, corporations and the City. But I think even he would be challenged with the thought of trying to interpret what's going on in Roland's head.carly burn said:
I think if Mark wanted to he could find out a lot. He either knows and chooses not to say or he can't really be bothered with it all.Chizz said:
Yes he is. No he wouldn't.The Red Robin said:It's Mark Kleinman of Sky that's reporting the Kenyon and Newcastle link. Isn't he a Charlton fan? Would he know more on our situation?
1 -
That was the joke you missed, speedy.JamesSeed said:
Not true, it was for saying I was ‘slow’. Your post didn’t mention the fact that ibborg isn’t a mod.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Be careful, he flagged me for pointing out that mistake.cabbles said:
Assistant to the Mods, maybeJamesSeed said:
What an extraordinary statement, particularly from a mod. How can you possibly extrapolate that from my comment above.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
You're very good at putting people into groups mate ain't you. Getting a few people behind you, ridiculing the 'opposition', then playing the victim when you get a bit back.JamesSeed said:
The scarves were just an honest expression of their enthusiasm for the project, (days from what they thought was the completion).i_b_b_o_r_g said:Is there any reason why the interested parties wont go a bit more public? Not by walking around the ground in scarves on match day, but just to release a small statement to say something along the lines of 'we're in the mix and we hope to complete soon'. At least the fans would know there is something going on
Muir also wanted to meet Charlton fans and get a sense of the atmosphere. Obviously they won’t do that again until the sale if it happens.
If they released a statement saying ‘we're in the mix and we hope to complete soon' they’d be widely ridiculed, unfortunately.
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t really.
My question wasn't a dig at anyone in particular, it was just to ask if there was a genuine reason why all the parties, with RD's say so, can't each put out small official statements** just to say they are involved, no more than that.
** Official Statement - Via their legal teams and not by walking round the ground with scarves on. Which also goes for any other buyer who might do it prematurely, in the future.
Firstly I didn’t say you were having a dig at all.
There have been comments above about the aggressive tone of some posts, and it’s worth bearing in mind that plain text can be read in different ways by different people depending on their mindset. But your post aimed at me can only be seen as aggressive mate.
Where have I put people into groups, and what groups are you referring to? Where have I ridiculed anybody? I was just giving my view of the scarf wearing, as have many others, but I don’t see you jumping down their throats.
One of the great things about CL is the way people use humour to diffuse situations. Perhaps you’ve misconstrued my attempts at humour as something else, I really don’t know. For example I said recently something like ‘does that get me off (or on?) the scapegoat list’. It was an attempt at humour, not trying to portray myself as a victim.
Of course people have a pop at each other here, but I don’t want to get involved.
I’m more than happy to get involved in an honest debate without malice, however.1 -
I thought you were referring to Charlton's takeover. I am sure Mark Kleinman knows a lot about what's going on at Newcastle, particularly with regards to Mike Ashley and Debenhams. I just don't think he would know a lot about what our idiotic owner is up to. And I only think that because, when I asked him if he knew what was going on, his reply was pretty clear: "I wish I did".The Red Robin said:
I didn't say there was a link to us, just that he if he's aware of what's going on with Newcastle, might he know more about Charlton but @Chizz says not.Henry Irving said:
Thanks, still struggling to see the link to us.The Red Robin said:
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-sources-former-manchester-united-and-chelsea-chief-peter-kenyon-plots-newcastle-takeover-11512071Henry Irving said:
Yes, long term fan.The Red Robin said:It's Mark Kleinman of Sky that's reporting the Kenyon and Newcastle link. Isn't he a Charlton fan? Would he know more on our situation?
Where is he reporting that link? @The Red Robin2 - Sponsored links:
-
Yes, realised that. Badly worded by me.The Red Robin said:
I didn't say there was a link to us, just that he if he's aware of what's going on with Newcastle, might he know more about Charlton but @Chizz says not.Henry Irving said:
Thanks, still struggling to see the link to us.The Red Robin said:
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-sources-former-manchester-united-and-chelsea-chief-peter-kenyon-plots-newcastle-takeover-11512071Henry Irving said:
Yes, long term fan.The Red Robin said:It's Mark Kleinman of Sky that's reporting the Kenyon and Newcastle link. Isn't he a Charlton fan? Would he know more on our situation?
Where is he reporting that link? @The Red Robin
Mark would be better placed to know something.
Then again I know @garfield and know he also has/had links within the football industry1 -
If I were Roland, which thankfully I'm not, I'd probably string these Aussies along until the Newcastle sale went through and then sell up to Mike Ashley just to spite the Charlton fans.2
-
I keep coming back to what LDT said when I asked him about "Is the price the same for all the parties?"
He said it wasn't and depended on the structure of the deal.
So the offers on the table are different? (if we believe LDT and RD which I don't but for the sake of argument and to get the page count up let's do so for now).
Maybe greedy Roland gets more from the Aussies that the others and so favours them for that reason even if they haven't yet put their money down.
0 -
If it's anything like player sales (i.e Konsa last year) we all know RD prefers cash upfront. Maybe one bid is less but he gets guaranteed money upfront and one bid is more but structured on theoretical achievements and/or scenarios.Henry Irving said:I keep coming back to what LDT said when I asked him about "Is the price the same for all the parties?"
He said it wasn't and depended on the structure of the deal.
So the offers on the table are different? (if we believe LDT and RD which I don't but for the sake of argument and to get the page count up let's do so for now).
Maybe greedy Roland gets more from the Aussies that the others and so favours them for that reason even if they haven't yet put their money down.0 -
From experience this is standard practice. When I sold my business there were three offers on the table. Offer 1: 100% payment and I walk away. Offer 2: 50% up front, 50% based on performance for a designated period after the deal. Offer 3: Part payment in cash and the balance made up of shares in the company purchasing us.Henry Irving said:I keep coming back to what LDT said when I asked him about "Is the price the same for all the parties?"
He said it wasn't and depended on the structure of the deal.
So the offers on the table are different? (if we believe LDT and RD which I don't but for the sake of argument and to get the page count up let's do so for now).
Maybe greedy Roland gets more from the Aussies that the others and so favours them for that reason even if they haven't yet put their money down.
The group that purchased us bought another four companies from the same sector as ours making it five in total. I have since found out that out of the five companies purchased all five deals were different and no two were the same.2 -
I can't reveal who but I have been told by someone I know who is well known to MA, our little club is a very attractive proposition, forget the size of our fan base or ground etc....... there's huge money to be made selling it on as a premiership club, we'd sell out each match such is the international interest now of the Premiership brand and our links to airports and motorways make it easier to attend games + of course the TV money, just do the maths. Whislt he is the the owner of another club he can not make a move.1
-
Maybe Jim White could ask him? Answer may or may not be definitiveThe Red Robin said:
Would he? He's only being touted on a football forum.SoundAsa£ said:
Ashley must be fully aware that his name is at the very least being strongly touted as a ‘possible’ future owner.king addick said:This Mike Ashley rumor has no foundation right? Is it purely based on the fact he is British man looking to sell one club?
He has seen how we have been with RD and Newcastle fans have give him some shit over his tenure so why would he bother with fans who take it either? Not saying we are problem because we have been wronged! But from his perspective are we worth the hassle?
We have NO idea who the brits are do we? All we have been told is that they are about but no clue who is involved.
Please tell me if I am wrong of course.
One would have thought he would have come out and denied it by now were it not the case.
That’s not to say I believe the rumour, one way or the other.
0 -
Personally, I don’t really care one jot who buys the club or what their intentions are with it. I just hope they don’t announce it on the official site :-)27
-
Same is true of Southend, Crawley, Luton, Uxbridge Town...Daarrzzetbum said:I can't reveal who but I have been told by someone I know who is well known to MA, our little club is a very attractive proposition, forget the size of our fan base or ground etc....... there's huge money to be made selling it on as a premiership club, we'd sell out each match such is the international interest now of the Premiership brand and our links to airports and motorways make it easier to attend games + of course the TV money, just do the maths. Whislt he is the the owner of another club he can not make a move.
2 -
Wasn’t Duchâtelet taking lower bids for players for cash?
Entirely possible he’ll take X for the club, but a lower price with future add ons for promotion etc.
He clearly has never been in a hurry to sell. He probably enjoys making the Aussies and the Brits squirm.
[Edit: As I see others have said]1 - Sponsored links:
-
I'll have a go, even if no-ne else is playing.Pedro45 said:
Perhaps if we all add a Picasso picture (other painters available) to our post, or maybe just a few additional lines...Henry Irving said:
Hope so as post frequency has dropped and a statement should push us to page 1485 at least.J BLOCK said:Expect Jim White to provide an update today
Go Jim
...then we'll get to the promised land of page 1500 a little bit quicker? We should all do anything we can to get rid of Roland!
2 -
and meAFKABartram said:Personally, I don’t really care one jot who buys the club or what their intentions are with it. I just hope they don’t announce it on the official site :-)
0 -
Don't worry, they won't be announcing you on the official site.DOUCHER said:
and meAFKABartram said:Personally, I don’t really care one jot who buys the club or what their intentions are with it. I just hope they don’t announce it on the official site :-)
3 -
I thought this IS the official site.AFKABartram said:Personally, I don’t really care one jot who buys the club or what their intentions are with it. I just hope they don’t announce it on the official site :-)
2 -
0 -
0 -
Chizz said:
Don't worry, they won't be announcing you on the official site.DOUCHER said:
and meAFKABartram said:Personally, I don’t really care one jot who buys the club or what their intentions are with it. I just hope they don’t announce it on the official site :-)
Well, I've been asked to announce it on the pitch actually. When you see Kim Jong Un strolling onto the pitch before a home game and there's an exceptionally handsome man walking alongside him with a microphone, you'll know what's happening. I was going to post it on here first and although AFKA is good man, I'm not sure some of you deserve it.Chizz said:
Don't worry, they won't be announcing you on the official site.DOUCHER said:
and meAFKABartram said:Personally, I don’t really care one jot who buys the club or what their intentions are with it. I just hope they don’t announce it on the official site :-)
0 -
-
I don’t think that was for pointing out but for the Snide way in which you did it to be fairStu_of_Kunming said:
Be careful, he flagged me for pointing out that mistake.cabbles said:
Assistant to the Mods, maybeJamesSeed said:
What an extraordinary statement, particularly from a mod. How can you possibly extrapolate that from my comment above.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
You're very good at putting people into groups mate ain't you. Getting a few people behind you, ridiculing the 'opposition', then playing the victim when you get a bit back.JamesSeed said:
The scarves were just an honest expression of their enthusiasm for the project, (days from what they thought was the completion).i_b_b_o_r_g said:Is there any reason why the interested parties wont go a bit more public? Not by walking around the ground in scarves on match day, but just to release a small statement to say something along the lines of 'we're in the mix and we hope to complete soon'. At least the fans would know there is something going on
Muir also wanted to meet Charlton fans and get a sense of the atmosphere. Obviously they won’t do that again until the sale if it happens.
If they released a statement saying ‘we're in the mix and we hope to complete soon' they’d be widely ridiculed, unfortunately.
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t really.
My question wasn't a dig at anyone in particular, it was just to ask if there was a genuine reason why all the parties, with RD's say so, can't each put out small official statements** just to say they are involved, no more than that.
** Official Statement - Via their legal teams and not by walking round the ground with scarves on. Which also goes for any other buyer who might do it prematurely, in the future.
Firstly I didn’t say you were having a dig at all.
There have been comments above about the aggressive tone of some posts, and it’s worth bearing in mind that plain text can be read in different ways by different people depending on their mindset. But your post aimed at me can only be seen as aggressive mate.
Where have I put people into groups, and what groups are you referring to? Where have I ridiculed anybody? I was just giving my view of the scarf wearing, as have many others, but I don’t see you jumping down their throats.
One of the great things about CL is the way people use humour to diffuse situations. Perhaps you’ve misconstrued my attempts at humour as something else, I really don’t know. For example I said recently something like ‘does that get me off (or on?) the scapegoat list’. It was an attempt at humour, not trying to portray myself as a victim.
Of course people have a pop at each other here, but I don’t want to get involved.
I’m more than happy to get involved in an honest debate without malice, however.3 -
van Gogh associated yellow with friendship and hope.
Perfect ! :-)1
