Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
It is a fact that Roland has reduced budgets; speculation about his reasons for doing so, or his motives and thought-processes in general, is opinion.PeterGage said:
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 questionsIt'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 positionsI 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.
Personally, I believe if the ongoing losses were such an issue for him, he would have sold long ago. At this stage, I think reducing the club's income further will only result in Roland cutting even more. My view is that activity against him in Belgium is the most likely thing to push him into selling sooner, and has had the greatest impact so far.
However, you, and many other fans, have a different view. I respect your opinion, and believe it's unlikely that anything I say will change your mind in the slightest, just as anything you say is unlikely to change mine, or the minds of those fans who hold similar views to my own.
Which brings me back to my original point: that having this discussion again for the umpteenth time on this forum (indeed, on this very thread) adds nothing. I don't understand what anyone gets from perpetuating this circular debate.0 -
100% agree with this although the bitesize takeover thread did do this for a while.RedJohn said:can we not have a new thread to deal with just takeover news, all the other shit is getting very boring.
Yes i know it does sound like some of usare complete Killjoys for having this opinion. It is however very much disheartening when you see 100 new posts and think the old sod is finally packing his bags only to see a raft of bad puns ( although the odd one makes me chuckle) and a load b.s. politics about the he said, she said.
#bringbackthebitesize7 -
Jim White's your man.....robinofottershaw said:
Yes, that’s where I was coming from. Would be good to have a tenacious third party outside of the fans pushing tor answers/facts.Airman Brown said:
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.robinofottershaw said:
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.Airman Brown said:
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.KiwiValley said:For clarity has the former banker’s offer been dimissed or can I keep a candle burning for that potential deal?
2 -
I was listening to the most recent CHARLTON LIVE podcast yesterday. Listening to them, the amount of player contracts ending and the likely end of some loans is really frightening! We could be a threadbare team next season! Really makes it imperative that Douchechatelet sells us between now and December. I really did not realize our situation on the contract-front until now. Yikes.
2 -
Mainly he was the one who had his brother killed!Dazzler21 said:
You pick the one man that has shown a huge difference to their evil and corrupt father?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Laddick01 said:
Im kinda banking on the fact that every family has a nutcase. Surely his son can't be as stupid.RedChaser said:
Yeah I'm sure that it's never hereditary... :-)
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!1 -
It does make you worry what RD is planning?NapaAddick said:I was listening to the most recent CHARLTON LIVE podcast yesterday. Listening to them, the amount of player contracts ending and the likely end of some loans is really frightening! We could be a threadbare team next season! Really makes it imperative that Douchechatelet sells us between now and December. I really did not realize our situation on the contract-front until now. Yikes.2 -
This absolutely...You nailed it Dan.AFKABartram said:
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.2 -
In "land banking" terms, 14 or 17 million quid for the Valley and Sparrows Lane is a drop in the ocean......he can carry that sort of debt without missing a wink of sleep. Its a very small percentage of his wealth and he obviously thought it was a worthwhile gamble to grab the real estate...he just didn't think we would put up much of a fuss and in reality the football side of things is of little concern to him. The fans are just a minor itch he occasionally needs to scratch. Its pretty obvious he can sit this out financially, boycotting is proving to be inconsequential to the owner, its just adding to the overheads of running the club and he can carry that all the while he thinks he will get a golden pay day.N01R4M said:I think Roland has now made it abundantly clear, and in public, that he considers the club to be worth nothing - ie he is willing to give it away for free to someone who will buy SL & The Valley.
It therefore comes down to what someone is willing to pay for the land, with the ex-directors' debts tied to it.
The figure he has in mind is apparently not for current usage. Is there any way of getting through to him - presumably via LdT - just how difficult, expensive and ultimately unlikely it is in the short to medium term (and probably long term as well) for any speculator to get planning permission for change of use & development on either site?
We know he got PP for his hotel, shops & flats at Stayen (where of course he has friends in high places) and maybe he assumes it would be equally easy for someone who has friends on the Greenwich planning committee to effect a similar slight-of-hand?
Or am I completely wrong about the planning issue, and has someone on Greenwich Council maybe given him the nod & wink over this? Does Roland know a very helpful man, who knows someone... Who knows? I certainly don't!0 -
If he sticks to his insane 65m valuation then we are well truly fucked and he'll be our owner until he dies.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.0 -
Don’t worry, he won’t stick with that valuation...whether it will go down or not is another matter howeverChris_from_Sidcup said:
If he sticks to his insane 65m valuation then we are well truly fucked and he'll be our owner until he dies.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.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Indeed!😊golfaddick said:
Jim White's your man.....robinofottershaw said:
Yes, that’s where I was coming from. Would be good to have a tenacious third party outside of the fans pushing tor answers/facts.Airman Brown said:
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.robinofottershaw said:
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.Airman Brown said:
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.KiwiValley said:For clarity has the former banker’s offer been dimissed or can I keep a candle burning for that potential deal?0 -
NapaAddick said:I was listening to the most recent CHARLTON LIVE podcast yesterday. Listening to them, the amount of player contracts ending and the likely end of some loans is really frightening! We could be a threadbare team next season! Really makes it imperative that Douchechatelet sells us between now and December. I really did not realize our situation on the contract-front until now. Yikes.
I've been saying it for months. If there is no sale this year (and no strengthening / replacement) you can lump on for relegation next season - whether it's straight back down from the Championship or from League 1 we'll find out in May1 -
There isn't any take over news,RedJohn said:can we not have a new thread to deal with just takeover news, all the other shit is getting very boring.
Just more repeats than TV in the 70's
1 -
We do agree on the Belgium "factor". Whilst I do not disagree on your point about reraising the boycott argument, most points made on this particular thread are equally cyclical. If this thread contained only takeover news, it would barely have reached page 10 by now.Gillis said:t
It is a fact that Roland has reduced budgets; speculation about his reasons for doing so, or his motives and thought-processes in general, is opinion.PeterGage said:
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 questionsIt'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 positionsI 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.
Personally, I believe if the ongoing losses were such an issue for him, he would have sold long ago. At this stage, I think reducing the club's income further will only result in Roland cutting even more. My view is that activity against him in Belgium is the most likely thing to push him into selling sooner, and has had the greatest impact so far.
However, you, and many other fans, have a different view. I respect your opinion, and believe it's unlikely that anything I say will change your mind in the slightest, just as anything you say is unlikely to change mine, or the minds of those fans who hold similar views to my own.
Which brings me back to my original point: that having this discussion again for the umpteenth time on this forum (indeed, on this very thread) adds nothing. I don't understand what anyone gets from perpetuating this circular debate.
Have a nice day.0 -
But that's normal with loans. Last season we had loan players who went back at the end of the season, namely Dasilva, Amos, Mavididi, Kaikai and Zyro, the first 2 being key players. And all got replaced with new loan players.CatAddick said:NapaAddick said:I was listening to the most recent CHARLTON LIVE podcast yesterday. Listening to them, the amount of player contracts ending and the likely end of some loans is really frightening! We could be a threadbare team next season! Really makes it imperative that Douchechatelet sells us between now and December. I really did not realize our situation on the contract-front until now. Yikes.
I've been saying it for months. If there is no sale this year (and no strengthening / replacement) you can lump on for relegation next season - whether it's straight back down from the Championship or from League 1 we'll find out in May
And as for the players who's contracts are expiring, they'll be replaced by other free signings, all our signings over the last 2 seasons have been freebies or nominal fees. We'll have a competitive team next season as long as Bowyer and Gallen are still here, and losing the likes of Bauer and Igor will help rebalance the wage bill.
Losing Aribo on a free will be a financial nonsense, but most of the others leaving are either deadwood (e.g. Ajose) or replaceable (e.g. Reeves)1 -
I think you’re underplaying it a bit. Of course we’ll get more loans and freebies in but it would have been nice to have built on this season rather than start again. A whole new midfield won’t be ideal and I doubt Igor and Bauer’s wages will be reinvested in full, rather an opportunity to reduce the overall wage bill.killerandflash said:
But that's normal with loans. Last season we had loan players who went back at the end of the season, namely Dasilva, Amos, Mavididi, Kaikai and Zyro, the first 2 being key players. And all got replaced with new loan players.CatAddick said:NapaAddick said:I was listening to the most recent CHARLTON LIVE podcast yesterday. Listening to them, the amount of player contracts ending and the likely end of some loans is really frightening! We could be a threadbare team next season! Really makes it imperative that Douchechatelet sells us between now and December. I really did not realize our situation on the contract-front until now. Yikes.
I've been saying it for months. If there is no sale this year (and no strengthening / replacement) you can lump on for relegation next season - whether it's straight back down from the Championship or from League 1 we'll find out in May
And as for the players who's contracts are expiring, they'll be replaced by other free signings, all our signings over the last 2 seasons have been freebies or nominal fees. We'll have a competitive team next season as long as Bowyer and Gallen are still here, and losing the likes of Bauer and Igor will help rebalance the wage bill.
Losing Aribo on a free will be a financial nonsense, but most of the others leaving are either deadwood (e.g. Ajose) or replaceable (e.g. Reeves)6 -
Not forgetting that football genius Thomas Driessen still has to approve all these signingskillerandflash said:
But that's normal with loans. Last season we had loan players who went back at the end of the season, namely Dasilva, Amos, Mavididi, Kaikai and Zyro, the first 2 being key players. And all got replaced with new loan players.CatAddick said:NapaAddick said:I was listening to the most recent CHARLTON LIVE podcast yesterday. Listening to them, the amount of player contracts ending and the likely end of some loans is really frightening! We could be a threadbare team next season! Really makes it imperative that Douchechatelet sells us between now and December. I really did not realize our situation on the contract-front until now. Yikes.
I've been saying it for months. If there is no sale this year (and no strengthening / replacement) you can lump on for relegation next season - whether it's straight back down from the Championship or from League 1 we'll find out in May
And as for the players who's contracts are expiring, they'll be replaced by other free signings, all our signings over the last 2 seasons have been freebies or nominal fees. We'll have a competitive team next season as long as Bowyer and Gallen are still here, and losing the likes of Bauer and Igor will help rebalance the wage bill.
Losing Aribo on a free will be a financial nonsense, but most of the others leaving are either deadwood (e.g. Ajose) or replaceable (e.g. Reeves)0 -
If we are still L1 next season it is almost certain 4 big earners - likely our biggest earners - will be gone. Ajose, Bauer, Vet on free’s and Sarr for a fee. The question is, would RD invest any of that budget or just reduce accordingly. He could quite easily fund a substantial increase in Aribo’s wages through this.0
-
The answer is of course no.Athletico Charlton said:If we are still L1 next season it is almost certain 4 big earners - likely our biggest earners - will be gone. Ajose, Bauer, Vet on free’s and Sarr for a fee. The question is, would RD invest any of that budget or just reduce accordingly. He could quite easily fund a substantial increase in Aribo’s wages through this.1 -
Sarr has another year I understand, he might be sold tho
0 -
Sponsored links:
-
CatAddick said:NapaAddick said:I was listening to the most recent CHARLTON LIVE podcast yesterday. Listening to them, the amount of player contracts ending and the likely end of some loans is really frightening! We could be a threadbare team next season! Really makes it imperative that Douchechatelet sells us between now and December. I really did not realize our situation on the contract-front until now. Yikes.
I've been saying it for months. If there is no sale this year (and no strengthening / replacement) you can lump on for relegation next season - whether it's straight back down from the Championship or from League 1 we'll find out in May
This 100% !!!!0 -
Of course it would be nice to build on this season, but my comment was more a response to the "we'll be relegation candidates next season in L1" comments. Even with Roland reducing the budget, we'll still be competitive next season, and an attractive option for L1 players out of contract (like Lyle Taylor last summer)Nug said:
I think you’re underplaying it a bit. Of course we’ll get more loans and freebies in but it would have been nice to have built on this season rather than start again. A whole new midfield won’t be ideal and I doubt Igor and Bauer’s wages will be reinvested in full, rather an opportunity to reduce the overall wage bill.killerandflash said:
But that's normal with loans. Last season we had loan players who went back at the end of the season, namely Dasilva, Amos, Mavididi, Kaikai and Zyro, the first 2 being key players. And all got replaced with new loan players.CatAddick said:NapaAddick said:I was listening to the most recent CHARLTON LIVE podcast yesterday. Listening to them, the amount of player contracts ending and the likely end of some loans is really frightening! We could be a threadbare team next season! Really makes it imperative that Douchechatelet sells us between now and December. I really did not realize our situation on the contract-front until now. Yikes.
I've been saying it for months. If there is no sale this year (and no strengthening / replacement) you can lump on for relegation next season - whether it's straight back down from the Championship or from League 1 we'll find out in May
And as for the players who's contracts are expiring, they'll be replaced by other free signings, all our signings over the last 2 seasons have been freebies or nominal fees. We'll have a competitive team next season as long as Bowyer and Gallen are still here, and losing the likes of Bauer and Igor will help rebalance the wage bill.
Losing Aribo on a free will be a financial nonsense, but most of the others leaving are either deadwood (e.g. Ajose) or replaceable (e.g. Reeves)0 -
How long before players start to turn us down, on the basis we are basket case under RD. If there's no sale or promotion, I wouldn't blame LT for going in the summer. There's bound to be offers, and RD is likely to find it hard to refuse them.
Yes, it's great to have a cleaner slate to create a more balanced wage bill, but the player turnover will make success hard to come by, even if Bowyer and Gallen stay on (which i doubt they would, for the same reasons as LT).
0 -
We're not a basket case when compared to the majority of L1 sides though. Even with a reduced budget, we'll still be paying competitive wages, and have better training facilities and stadium.addicktedjim said:How long before players start to turn us down, on the basis we are basket case under RD. If there's no sale or promotion, I wouldn't blame LT for going in the summer. There's bound to be offers, and RD is likely to find it hard to refuse them.
Yes, it's great to have a cleaner slate to create a more balanced wage bill, but the player turnover will make success hard to come by, even if Bowyer and Gallen stay on (which i doubt they would, for the same reasons as LT).2 -
Yes, the optimist in me says that we could pick up some free agents but then realism kicks in. He'll probably say NO more funding cos he’s actively selling (lol) and whoever is in charge will only be able to pick from the U23's and U18's - as technically gifted as many of them are I think they would struggle against L1 teams such as Accrington..0
-
Hes just waiting to the season end to sell, if we go up via the playoffs he will get more money, if we dont get to the playiffs or lose, and facing a close season with no income he will bite the bullet and sell.0
-
Absolutely this. I'm not concerned that we would be relegated from L1 next season.killerandflash said:
But that's normal with loans. Last season we had loan players who went back at the end of the season, namely Dasilva, Amos, Mavididi, Kaikai and Zyro, the first 2 being key players. And all got replaced with new loan players.CatAddick said:NapaAddick said:I was listening to the most recent CHARLTON LIVE podcast yesterday. Listening to them, the amount of player contracts ending and the likely end of some loans is really frightening! We could be a threadbare team next season! Really makes it imperative that Douchechatelet sells us between now and December. I really did not realize our situation on the contract-front until now. Yikes.
I've been saying it for months. If there is no sale this year (and no strengthening / replacement) you can lump on for relegation next season - whether it's straight back down from the Championship or from League 1 we'll find out in May
And as for the players who's contracts are expiring, they'll be replaced by other free signings, all our signings over the last 2 seasons have been freebies or nominal fees. We'll have a competitive team next season as long as Bowyer and Gallen are still here, and losing the likes of Bauer and Igor will help rebalance the wage bill.
Losing Aribo on a free will be a financial nonsense, but most of the others leaving are either deadwood (e.g. Ajose) or replaceable (e.g. Reeves)
I may be concerned that we'd struggle to make the play offs.
As you say apart from Aribo, Bauer & maybe Fosu who would be a big loss, most of the others we either wouldn't want to renew or wouldn't be overly concerned with renewing as of today.
The reason being we don't know what division we will be in.
Why would we be giving Reeves (for example) a new contract now, when we could be in The Championship next season ?0 -
killerandflash said:
We're not a basket case when compared to the majority of L1 sides though. Even with a reduced budget, we'll still be paying competitive wages, and have better training facilities and stadium.addicktedjim said:How long before players start to turn us down, on the basis we are basket case under RD. If there's no sale or promotion, I wouldn't blame LT for going in the summer. There's bound to be offers, and RD is likely to find it hard to refuse them.
Yes, it's great to have a cleaner slate to create a more balanced wage bill, but the player turnover will make success hard to come by, even if Bowyer and Gallen stay on (which i doubt they would, for the same reasons as LT).- Graffiti. Taxis. Pigs. Crisps. Beach balls.
- Riga. Peeters. Luzon. Fraeye. Slade. Robinson.
- No management under contract on 1 July. And, at that time, too few first team players under contract to have a meaningful five-aside game in training.
- A demand that the EFL buys the club.
- A million a month in losses. That's: a million a month in losses.
- ROT.
- CARD.
- Fans travelling to Belgium to let the owner know what they think of him, instead of travelling to Charlton to watch the team play.
- The lies, built upon lies, built upon lies, built upon lies dished up at FF meetings, written down, edited out and served up as verbatim transcripts, leaving out some of the lies.
- The vacant CEO role.
- No water for the kids. No lunch for the staff at their desks. No ticket office.
- The. Owner. Is. Reported. To. Have. Turned. Down. Offers. Of. Twice. The. Amount. Of. Money. He. Paid. For. The. Club.
37 -
Wow after all of this time re RDs ownership people think he will invest !! I mean he has such a track record of that doesn't he !! FFS14
-
What I'm struggling with is that he is selling a "going concern", i.e. a functioning business/team. He's not just selling fixed assets like the stadium, training ground, etc. If the club hasn't got players and is on a downward spiral then the value will be massively reduced, it's future value eroded and any valuation will be greatly reduced. I realise that we are not dealing with a rational person here but he must realise that to stand any chance of getting any of his money back he must keep the club going at its current level, at a minimum, so why not offer the out-of-contract players new deals. It won't stop him selling them and their value will only increase if they're in demand. What's more if we were in the Championship the club must have a higher value and attractiveness to buyers. Sickeningly stupid approach.
1
This discussion has been closed.
