The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)

happyvalley said:

1577, The Great Comet can be seen from Earth.

happyvalley said:

1578, the last outbreak of sweating sickness occurs in England.

Gillis said:

PeterGage said:

AFKABartram said:

PeterGage said:

Taxi_Lad said:

PeterGage said:

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.

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 😎

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.
A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”

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.

You can put your own definition on the word "supporter". I dont have any need to justify my interpretation.

Have a good day.

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.

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. 

Thanks @AFKABartram for your balanced views, which deserve a response.

I accept that gate money goes towards funding our players and potentially funding the retention of Joe Aribo. However, from my perception, the bigger goal is to see the back of Roly and I believe reducing his income accelerates his departure. I understand however that others may not share my view.

I did not criticise those that still go, although I cannot understand their stance. My point was that I find it unbelievable that some on here puts money into Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and slags him off on here from 1700 onwards. Surely that is an oxymoron!

Have a good day 

It's only paradoxical if people accept your premise that reducing the club's income accelerates Roland's departure.

Plenty of people don't accept that premise, and therefore see no contradiction in going to watch the team whilst being critical of the ownership.

But it's been long established that these two opposing views exist on Charlton Life. And every time a poster chooses to raise the issue, it leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions

I understand that people wish to express which of the aforementioned views they personally hold, but I'm fairly confident that everyone that wants to do so has done so by now, probably more than once.

So I can't see what people get from bringing the same issue up time and time again. As far as I can tell, the debate never progresses, people's views never change. It just seems tedious. And I'm aware of the irony of the fact that I'm now contributing to the tedium.

PeterGage said:

Gillis said:

PeterGage said:

AFKABartram said:

PeterGage said:

Taxi_Lad said:

PeterGage said:

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.

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 😎

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.
A so called Charlton fan who has not watched “us” for 3 years and after watching this game refers to the team as “them”

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.

You can put your own definition on the word "supporter". I dont have any need to justify my interpretation.

Have a good day.

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.

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. 

Thanks @AFKABartram for your balanced views, which deserve a response.

I accept that gate money goes towards funding our players and potentially funding the retention of Joe Aribo. However, from my perception, the bigger goal is to see the back of Roly and I believe reducing his income accelerates his departure. I understand however that others may not share my view.

I did not criticise those that still go, although I cannot understand their stance. My point was that I find it unbelievable that some on here puts money into Roly's pocket at 3pm on a Saturday and slags him off on here from 1700 onwards. Surely that is an oxymoron!

Have a good day 

It's only paradoxical if people accept your premise that reducing the club's income accelerates Roland's departure.

Plenty of people don't accept that premise, and therefore see no contradiction in going to watch the team whilst being critical of the ownership.

But it's been long established that these two opposing views exist on Charlton Life. And every time a poster chooses to raise the issue, it leads to the same debate, with the same entrenched positions

I understand that people wish to express which of the aforementioned views they personally hold, but I'm fairly confident that everyone that wants to do so has done so by now, probably more than once.

So I can't see what people get from bringing the same issue up time and time again. As far as I can tell, the debate never progresses, people's views never change. It just seems tedious. And I'm aware of the irony of the fact that I'm now contributing to the tedium.

It is a fact, not an opinion, that Roly has reduced his budget in recent months, as shown by many cost cutting areas, such as not paying staff bonuses, selling Grant etc. Do you believe that the reduction in gate money had no bearing whatsoever on the current financial activities and has no bearing on Roly's decision to sell.. genuine questions

Laddick01 said:

Scoham said:

https://twitter.com/bobwhitehand/status/1105179708659036160?s=21

It's gonna sound bad, but if this really is the case, we only have a chance of a takeover when he dies.

Laddick01 said:

RedChaser said:

Laddick01 said:

Scoham said:

https://twitter.com/bobwhitehand/status/1105179708659036160?s=21

It's gonna sound bad, but if this really is the case, we only have a chance of a takeover when he dies.

Not necessarily if the beneficiaries under his will adopt the same stance on sale price.

Im kinda banking on the fact that every family has a nutcase. Surely his son can't be as stupid.

RodneyCharltonTrotta said:

Laddick01 said:

RedChaser said:

Laddick01 said:

Scoham said:

https://twitter.com/bobwhitehand/status/1105179708659036160?s=21

It's gonna sound bad, but if this really is the case, we only have a chance of a takeover when he dies.

Not necessarily if the beneficiaries under his will adopt the same stance on sale price.

Im kinda banking on the fact that every family has a nutcase. Surely his son can't be as stupid.

 
Yeah I'm sure that it's never hereditary... :-)

Dazzler21 said:

RodneyCharltonTrotta said:

Laddick01 said:

RedChaser said:

Laddick01 said:

Scoham said:

https://twitter.com/bobwhitehand/status/1105179708659036160?s=21

It's gonna sound bad, but if this really is the case, we only have a chance of a takeover when he dies.

Not necessarily if the beneficiaries under his will adopt the same stance on sale price.

Im kinda banking on the fact that every family has a nutcase. Surely his son can't be as stupid.

 
Yeah I'm sure that it's never hereditary... :-)

You pick the one man that has shown a huge difference to their evil and corrupt father?

Sure he's still nuts but he's shown a willingness to negotiate and talk with other world leaders about peace... Something his father never would have.

He's even ensured the charges were dropped against his brothers alleged killer!

Airman Brown said:

robinofottershaw said:

Airman Brown said:

KiwiValley said:

For clarity has the former banker’s offer been dimissed or can I keep a candle burning for that potential deal?

I expect the club to treat that offer like it does Roland’s statements - pretend it doesn’t exist and move on. It’s really up to the media, in the first instance, to make that impossible for them.

Airman, I was wondering about that. Are there contacts at the Standard who could do a follow up on the status of the bid they reported on last week? Assuming he has responded negatively to the bid (assuming the bidder is willing to confirm) it might be helpful to have a report saying that RD had apparently turned down a bid in the region of £30-35M plus paying off the £7M former directors loans. This, so soon after going on Talksport to say he was willing to give the club away bar The Valley and Sparrows Lane. Would kind of put focus in the public domain on the offers RD is turning down and the high valuation he is holding out for. Probably achieves nothing other than continuing to highlight that it is his valuation as opposed to fans protests et al which are preventing any sale.

Yes. And elsewhere. Tom Rubashow’s usual tactic is to refer reporters to the fans’ forum. I think it’s up to the press to tell him that won’t wash.

Off_it said:

soapboxsam said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

What is the end game ?

A big Cheque mate.

Prague Addick?

He's not that big, is he?

RedJohn said:

can we not have a new thread to deal with just takeover news, all the other shit is getting very boring.