Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Boycotts don't work if you have an owner like Duchatelet who can live with the losses - I think that's pretty clear by now.
I also don't really get the argument that buying a ticket is somehow lining RD's pocket? The club doesn't run on thin air and I can't see that he's making any money.
4 -
This. We need yo put pressure on the EFL to seriously "engage" with RD.....and when I say "engage" I mean they actually see him face to face & tell him must sell, or that they wil be putting sanctions in place for running the club without an effective management structure.Davo55 said:
It is amazing to me that anyone is prepared to offer RD the equivalent of £42m for the club.Airman Brown said:
I believe De Turck is playing games when he says the club hasn’t received an “offer” of £35m, because he and RD haven’t enabled the talks to progress to the point where a firm bid can be made.J BLOCK said:
Has he offered more then?Airman Brown said:I confirmed yesterday that the ex-banker in the Standard is the same party as the one discussed in the Voice. We went to print before the Standard came out, and before I received a tip-off about the story, so the publication sequence is slightly confusing. It’s why the Standard story isn’t referenced.
I don’t know why they told the Standard £30m, but I am very confident of what I’ve written.
I am told it was made clear to them the party was willing and able to pay £35m and take on the £7m directors’ loans, subject to seeing the DD. RD/LDT haven’t engaged fully at those numbers and they have quoted £65m - although that wouldn’t all have to be up front. The party won’t pay that.
It is even more amazing that RD isn't engaging at that price, and seems to be seeking £65m. Which he will never, ever get.
Now that the would-be buyer has broken cover and we have some numbers, it would be great if the EFL (who have offered to "help" Duchatelet find a buyer) could put some pressure on him to at least negotiate seriously around that number.
They should commission their own independent valuation of the club......like a sales prospectus......so that EVERYONE knows the true value of the club. It can be in a range of values, but I think we'd all agree it wouldn't be anywhere near £65m.....not likely £35m either.4 -
VOTV mentions an independent valuation of the land and gives figures for that.
The other assets ie player contracts, league membership and location (is being in London more desirable than Bolton or Wigan for example) are far more difficult to value.3 -
Roland shouldn’t have the cheek to value the players. Most of them should be valued at next to nothing because there contracts are ending in a few months time.Henry Irving said:VOTV mentions an independent valuation of the land and gives figures for that.
The other assets ie player contracts, league membership and location (is being in London more desirable than Bolton or Wigan for example) are far more difficult to value.6 -
Henry Irving said:VOTV mentions an independent valuation of the land and gives figures for that.
The other assets ie player contracts, league membership and location (is being in London more desirable than Bolton or Wigan for example) are far more difficult to value.I haven't seen the VOTV valuation but it should be the value as current use only - i.e. without planning permission for any other use.In terms of ongoing operations, the club is losing £10m a year so it could be argued that the value of the players' contracts, league membership and 'goodwill' (in very short supply) is offset by the operational losses - unless potential growth (promotion to PL) is taken into account.So club value zero - asset value as a stadium and training ground maybe £20m. A lot more if both sites, especially SL, could be developed, but the chances of that are remote.6 -
The second part may be true to an extent, but like any purchase it's a two way street.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:Boycotts don't work if you have an owner like Duchatelet who can live with the losses - I think that's pretty clear by now.
I also don't really get the argument that buying a ticket is somehow lining RD's pocket? The club doesn't run on thin air and I can't see that he's making any money.
The vendor, in this case Roland, may not actually care if you buy or not. But if the purchaser, the boycotters, don't want to hand over their money then they don't have to.
And they're not. Which means it’s costing him more to fund his folly.
Does he care about a few hundred quid per person? Not individually, no. But each of those individual people cares enough about that particular transaction to not give him a penny.12 -
Without going into all the ins and outs of it, the valuation of the land given Is £20m for The Valley and £3m for Sparrows Lane, reflecting their planning status.bobmunro said:Henry Irving said:VOTV mentions an independent valuation of the land and gives figures for that.
The other assets ie player contracts, league membership and location (is being in London more desirable than Bolton or Wigan for example) are far more difficult to value.I haven't seen the VOTV valuation but it should be the value as current use only - i.e. without planning permission for any other use.In terms of ongoing operations, the club is losing £10m a year so it could be argued that the value of the players' contracts, league membership and 'goodwill' (in very short supply) is offset by the operational losses - unless potential growth (promotion to PL) is taken into account.So club value zero - asset value as a stadium and training ground maybe £20m. A lot more if both sites, especially SL, could be developed, but the chances of that are remote.3 -
Who who was the valuer?0
-
Athletico Charlton said:Who who was the valuer?
Probably some teenage spotty twirp who plays minecraft all day.7 -
I would love for someone to come in with a bid of 70mil, Roland accepts without reading anything because he is so happy to get all his money back.
The deal goes through and everyone is shocked.
Roland looks at his account and something doesn’t quite add up.
For the first time he looks at the contract and price agreement and realises it says 70 million rupees.
We’re rid of him and there’s nothing he can do about it because this act would demonstrate his pure idiocy over the last 5 years.
I am surprised no one has done this yet.
8 - Sponsored links:
-
Indian takeover rumour from Sage. Must be worth five more pages.18
-
I am not claiming to hold any moral high ground, just simply stating a fact that I cant understand how ppl can put money into Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and bitch about him for the rest of the week - oxymoron.Taxi_Lad said:
For me what is unbelievable is that you claim to be a Charlton fan who sees boycotting as taking some sort of moral high ground.PeterGage said:
I guess you are one of those that do give their £25 plus to Roly at 1500hrs and then moan later about the guy - unbelievable 😎Gillis said:PeterGage said:As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”
You can put your own definition on the word "supporter". I dont have any need to justify my interpretation.
Have a good day.9 -
Like everyone else, my concern is when, if ever, is the penny going to drop with RD, that he is isn't likely going to get £65-70M.
The season isn't that far off ending. Even if we get promotion there is no certainty he will be prepared to do enough on player contract renewals to allow the club to make a decent fist of staying up. Even less so if there is no promotion. If we don't go up I can't see any logic in him retaining ownership of the club. Even if he reduces his monthly losses even further by reducing player salaries, he is even more unlikely to receive his supposed high valuation.
You watch a game like Saturday's and feel like we could with this management team and players starting to move up the leagues. Then you come right down to earth with a thud when you realise again that we are saddled with an owner with zero ambitions on the football front.6 -
Layman's guide to takeover.
23 million value on Valley and Sparrows Lane because of football status.
8 millions lost over 12 months on running costs of Cafc (estimate has been mentioned 6 to 10 million)
8 × 5 years of RD tenure= 40 million.
40 + 23 = 63 million + players values which is low because Aribo is out of Contract plus loan players are just on loan !
2 million or so value on Taylor + Sarr (under contract 19/20 season) and we have a 65 million price tag in the mind of Roland Duchatelet.
(7 million ex directors payment is payable on premier status so plenty of wriggle room there)0 -
Thomas Driesen must have many strings to his bow.carly burn said:Athletico Charlton said:Who who was the valuer?
Probably some teenage spotty twirp who plays minecraft all day.
1 -
Oh no. This is going to curry on and on now.Henry Irving said:Indian takeover rumour from Sage. Must be worth five more pages.2 -
I like it. But let’s go even further. That amount in Uzbek Som will leave Roland with £6.50. I think that’s more than fair after the way he’s treated us.Sage said:I would love for someone to come in with a bid of 70mil, Roland accepts without reading anything because he is so happy to get all his money back.
The deal goes through and everyone is shocked.
Roland looks at his account and something doesn’t quite add up.
For the first time he looks at the contract and price agreement and realises it says 70 million rupees.
We’re rid of him and there’s nothing he can do about it because this act would demonstrate his pure idiocy over the last 5 years.
I am surprised no one has done this yet.7 -
Airman Brown said:
Without going into all the ins and outs of it, the valuation of the land given Is £20m for The Valley and £3m for Sparrows Lane, reflecting their planning status.bobmunro said:Henry Irving said:VOTV mentions an independent valuation of the land and gives figures for that.
The other assets ie player contracts, league membership and location (is being in London more desirable than Bolton or Wigan for example) are far more difficult to value.I haven't seen the VOTV valuation but it should be the value as current use only - i.e. without planning permission for any other use.In terms of ongoing operations, the club is losing £10m a year so it could be argued that the value of the players' contracts, league membership and 'goodwill' (in very short supply) is offset by the operational losses - unless potential growth (promotion to PL) is taken into account.So club value zero - asset value as a stadium and training ground maybe £20m. A lot more if both sites, especially SL, could be developed, but the chances of that are remote.
Then £23m is all the club is worth.6 -
Would you even say its worth that if it costs 50% of the value to operate every year?bobmunro said:Airman Brown said:
Without going into all the ins and outs of it, the valuation of the land given Is £20m for The Valley and £3m for Sparrows Lane, reflecting their planning status.bobmunro said:Henry Irving said:VOTV mentions an independent valuation of the land and gives figures for that.
The other assets ie player contracts, league membership and location (is being in London more desirable than Bolton or Wigan for example) are far more difficult to value.I haven't seen the VOTV valuation but it should be the value as current use only - i.e. without planning permission for any other use.In terms of ongoing operations, the club is losing £10m a year so it could be argued that the value of the players' contracts, league membership and 'goodwill' (in very short supply) is offset by the operational losses - unless potential growth (promotion to PL) is taken into account.So club value zero - asset value as a stadium and training ground maybe £20m. A lot more if both sites, especially SL, could be developed, but the chances of that are remote.
Then £23m is all the club is worth.0 -
My view is (and always has been), each to their own.PeterGage said:
I am not claiming to hold any moral high ground, just simply stating a fact that I cant understand how ppl can put money into Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and bitch about him for the rest of the week - oxymoron.Taxi_Lad said:
For me what is unbelievable is that you claim to be a Charlton fan who sees boycotting as taking some sort of moral high ground.PeterGage said:
I guess you are one of those that do give their £25 plus to Roly at 1500hrs and then moan later about the guy - unbelievable 😎Gillis said:PeterGage said:As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”
You can put your own definition on the word "supporter". I dont have any need to justify my interpretation.
Have a good day.
Apart that is, from those who do absolutely nothing by way of protesting, some of whom also (to their eternal shame), find it acceptable to criticise those who do.
IMHO to turn a blind eye and make no effort by way of protest whatsoever is and always has been inexcusable.......to those who have taken that stance I have little or no time for.2 - Sponsored links:
-
Got potential this one.Henry Irving said:Indian takeover rumour from Sage. Must be worth five more pages.
First player they’d try to sign is Mo Salah.0 -
Cafc43v3r said:
Would you even say its worth that if it costs 50% of the value to operate every year?bobmunro said:Airman Brown said:
Without going into all the ins and outs of it, the valuation of the land given Is £20m for The Valley and £3m for Sparrows Lane, reflecting their planning status.bobmunro said:Henry Irving said:VOTV mentions an independent valuation of the land and gives figures for that.
The other assets ie player contracts, league membership and location (is being in London more desirable than Bolton or Wigan for example) are far more difficult to value.I haven't seen the VOTV valuation but it should be the value as current use only - i.e. without planning permission for any other use.In terms of ongoing operations, the club is losing £10m a year so it could be argued that the value of the players' contracts, league membership and 'goodwill' (in very short supply) is offset by the operational losses - unless potential growth (promotion to PL) is taken into account.So club value zero - asset value as a stadium and training ground maybe £20m. A lot more if both sites, especially SL, could be developed, but the chances of that are remote.
Then £23m is all the club is worth.
There is an opportunity value in potential future earnings based on the fact that the club is a going concern with an EFL licence and a stadium to play in. My view is that this potential just about mitigates the current operating losses.Tesla haven't made a profit in 15 years yet their market value is $49bn!
2 -
Yes, I like it. Couldn’t agree more.stoneroses19 said:
I like it. But let’s go even further. That amount in Uzbek Som will leave Roland with £6.50. I think that’s more than fair after the way he’s treated us.Sage said:I would love for someone to come in with a bid of 70mil, Roland accepts without reading anything because he is so happy to get all his money back.
The deal goes through and everyone is shocked.
Roland looks at his account and something doesn’t quite add up.
For the first time he looks at the contract and price agreement and realises it says 70 million rupees.
We’re rid of him and there’s nothing he can do about it because this act would demonstrate his pure idiocy over the last 5 years.
I am surprised no one has done this yet.
That’s now an Indian takeover and a Uzbekistan takeover.
HI is going to wet his pants!1 -
Agree......this could be a Goa.Henry Irving said:Indian takeover rumour from Sage. Must be worth five more pages.
Badooom......tish!5 -
If they have enough Kashmir then perhaps they Calcutta deal1
-
Can then even afford to sign Naani....Taxi_Lad said:If they have enough Kashmir then perhaps they Calcutta deal0 -
It's only a going concern with "owner funding". This is a much bigger problem than just RD and us. How long can 80 plus clubs keep being signed off as going concerns when they are all either 1 relegation or an owner no longer prepared to sub them away from going out of business?bobmunro said:Cafc43v3r said:
Would you even say its worth that if it costs 50% of the value to operate every year?bobmunro said:Airman Brown said:
Without going into all the ins and outs of it, the valuation of the land given Is £20m for The Valley and £3m for Sparrows Lane, reflecting their planning status.bobmunro said:Henry Irving said:VOTV mentions an independent valuation of the land and gives figures for that.
The other assets ie player contracts, league membership and location (is being in London more desirable than Bolton or Wigan for example) are far more difficult to value.I haven't seen the VOTV valuation but it should be the value as current use only - i.e. without planning permission for any other use.In terms of ongoing operations, the club is losing £10m a year so it could be argued that the value of the players' contracts, league membership and 'goodwill' (in very short supply) is offset by the operational losses - unless potential growth (promotion to PL) is taken into account.So club value zero - asset value as a stadium and training ground maybe £20m. A lot more if both sites, especially SL, could be developed, but the chances of that are remote.
Then £23m is all the club is worth.
There is an opportunity value in potential future earnings based on the fact that the club is a going concern with an EFL licence and a stadium to play in. My view is that this potential just about mitigates the current operating losses.Tesla haven't made a profit in 15 years yet their market value is $49bn!
3 -
Im not going to criticise you @PeterGage nor question your Charlton credentials as I know what they are and I have far too much respect for you and others.PeterGage said:
I am not claiming to hold any moral high ground, just simply stating a fact that I cant understand how ppl can put money into Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and bitch about him for the rest of the week - oxymoron.Taxi_Lad said:
For me what is unbelievable is that you claim to be a Charlton fan who sees boycotting as taking some sort of moral high ground.PeterGage said:
I guess you are one of those that do give their £25 plus to Roly at 1500hrs and then moan later about the guy - unbelievable 😎Gillis said:PeterGage said:As a boycotter, I rarely watch Charlton these days. I watched the game yesterday on TV and thought they played really well; far better than 3 years ago before I ceased attending. However I find it incomprehensibly that supporters can put money in Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and then trash him on CL at 1705pm and indeed any other time...just my opinion.An opinion you (and others) have aired many, many times before, which inevitably leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions.I'm not sure it's productive for people on either side of this issue to keep raising it, but people inevitably will. I can't be the only person that's a little tired of it now.
A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”
You can put your own definition on the word "supporter". I dont have any need to justify my interpretation.
Have a good day.
And I also understand your argument. Indeed I never renewed my season ticket a couple of seasons ago as I too felt a fraud through protesting and then paying my money.
But with one side of your argument there are also other sides.
Would you not equally agree that that £25 that ‘lines Roland’s pockets’ also goes towards paying Lyle Taylor’s wages, Josh Cullen and Bielik’s loan fees, and the wages of everyone of those players that busted an absolute gut in our shirt on Saturday?
That it pays Tracey Leaburn’s wages and a whole host of long serving staff that have been here long before Roland and who many equally can’t stand what he’s done to the club?
That if more people paid their £25 than currently are the club would have a better chance of securing Joe Aribo as a Charlton player for the next 3 years?
And finally, that the badge, The Valley and heart and spirit of being ‘Charlton’ is so much more than a distant overseas man that currently owns it at this specific point in time?
It’s never straight forward and there is no convincing argument either way imo. I can’t only speak for myself and say I got back back into it and I am so so pleased that I did as I’ve loved seeing the commitment and football played by our players, particularly since Bowyer has taken over.41 -
Sounds a bit Phal-fetched to me.Sage said:
Got potential this one.Henry Irving said:Indian takeover rumour from Sage. Must be worth five more pages.
First player they’d try to sign is Mo Salah.
0 -
So on that basis lets all get back down Charlton and spend our hard earned cash so Roland will invest more in to better players !!4
This discussion has been closed.
