Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Well it was a very accurate guess. Which is why Duchatalet was told to do one.Henry Irving said:
My assumption. The 25% was a guess, as I said, based on the previous offer.AFKABartram said:
Ok, that makes more sense. But still not sure that stacks up for me. My understanding was there was a play by Roland to offer 25% of the o/s debt in June LAST YEAR, which was rejected by the debt holders and never progressed. Are you saying that 12 months on you understand there was a repeated play at the same level, and just an assumption that it would be accepted?Henry Irving said:
Yes and no.AFKABartram said:
That would be me, and that’s what I interpreted “It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans.“JamesSeed said:
Where do you get £26m from?nth london addick said:AFKABartram said:
so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?JamesSeed said:
It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked.nth london addick said:JamesSeed said:I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to.
I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from
the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should
if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back
Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem.
No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final.
There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo
I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling
so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents
i believe this is still the case
I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times.
so the total cost paid by the Aussies was £33m. Roland would pay out £7m meaning his own return would be £26m. Am i still interpreting that wrong?
Duchatelet thought he take £33m off the Aussies and pay a fraction of the £7m (25%???) Because Duchatelet believed that ALL the ex-directors would make a deal.
Only it turns out White hand, Chapel and Summers won't take less than 100% and White hasn't agreed either despite Duchatelet saying he had.
My guess is that Duchatelet, because he didn't bother to confirm it, thought the ex-directors liability was going to be £1.75m (25% of £7m) but when he found out it wasn't dumped it on the Aussies to sort/pay.
Hence the £33m becoming £40m
This all comes down again to the incompetence of De Turck and Duchatelet.
They believed the ex-directors would take a small % but didn't check with them or get it in writing.
Too many intermediaries, too many assumptions, too many incompetent Belgians.
My again guess is that Duchatelet thought it would all be OK because Murray and/or incompetent De Turck told him it would be OK.
Maybe Murray and Hatter were willing to take a lower fee so Duchatelet just assumed the others would do the same. Again I don't know.
More recent offers have been made that are still unacceptable, but I believe that at least two ex directors are happy to take a reduced amount for early settlement as long as they're satisfied over the long term future of the Club.
The one I've spoken to however has concerns as to why is it so essential for the debenture needs to be settled now.3 -
My gut tells me that the minutes will have a familiar ring to them.Uboat said:
What does your gut tell you?CH4RLTON said:In my heart i get the feeling that tonight's FF meeting should be a really good indicator and the most informative one to date.
My head says hes just going to spout exactly the same pointless things hes said in all the others, that's if he even bothers to turn up.
I hope that they remember to change the date at the top.4 -
Redskin said:
Tuppence ha'pennyHenry Irving said:Tuppence
Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunrobobmunro said:
I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.i_b_b_o_r_g said:So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?
I could be wrong though.
Tuppance Hap'ny
0 -
Tuppence Middleton. That's definitely the correct version.1
-
Phonetic spelling for northern Bobfavershamaddick said:Redskin said:
Tuppence ha'pennyHenry Irving said:Tuppence
Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunrobobmunro said:
I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.i_b_b_o_r_g said:So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?
I could be wrong though.
Tuppance Hap'ny0 -
That I shouldn’t of had that curry 🍛 last night.Uboat said:
What does your gut tell you?CH4RLTON said:In my heart i get the feeling that tonight's FF meeting should be a really good indicator and the most informative one to date.
My head says hes just going to spout exactly the same pointless things hes said in all the others, that's if he even bothers to turn up.0 -
Riches beyond his wildest dreams.Henry Irving said:
Phonetic spelling for northern Bobfavershamaddick said:Redskin said:
Tuppence ha'pennyHenry Irving said:Tuppence
Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunrobobmunro said:
I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.i_b_b_o_r_g said:So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?
I could be wrong though.
Tuppance Hap'ny0 -
Wish I was a quid behind himAddickted said:
Riches beyond his wildest dreams.Henry Irving said:
Phonetic spelling for northern Bobfavershamaddick said:Redskin said:
Tuppence ha'pennyHenry Irving said:Tuppence
Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunrobobmunro said:
I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.i_b_b_o_r_g said:So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?
I could be wrong though.
Tuppance Hap'ny1 -
Seems like the ED you spoke to must be an intelligent person, needing clean title should be a huge red flag to all of us.Addickted said:
Well it was a very accurate guess. Which is why Duchatalet was told to do one.Henry Irving said:
My assumption. The 25% was a guess, as I said, based on the previous offer.AFKABartram said:
Ok, that makes more sense. But still not sure that stacks up for me. My understanding was there was a play by Roland to offer 25% of the o/s debt in June LAST YEAR, which was rejected by the debt holders and never progressed. Are you saying that 12 months on you understand there was a repeated play at the same level, and just an assumption that it would be accepted?Henry Irving said:
Yes and no.AFKABartram said:
That would be me, and that’s what I interpreted “It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans.“JamesSeed said:
Where do you get £26m from?nth london addick said:AFKABartram said:
so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?JamesSeed said:
It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked.nth london addick said:JamesSeed said:I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to.
I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from
the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should
if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back
Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem.
No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final.
There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo
I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling
so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents
i believe this is still the case
I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times.
so the total cost paid by the Aussies was £33m. Roland would pay out £7m meaning his own return would be £26m. Am i still interpreting that wrong?
Duchatelet thought he take £33m off the Aussies and pay a fraction of the £7m (25%???) Because Duchatelet believed that ALL the ex-directors would make a deal.
Only it turns out White hand, Chapel and Summers won't take less than 100% and White hasn't agreed either despite Duchatelet saying he had.
My guess is that Duchatelet, because he didn't bother to confirm it, thought the ex-directors liability was going to be £1.75m (25% of £7m) but when he found out it wasn't dumped it on the Aussies to sort/pay.
Hence the £33m becoming £40m
This all comes down again to the incompetence of De Turck and Duchatelet.
They believed the ex-directors would take a small % but didn't check with them or get it in writing.
Too many intermediaries, too many assumptions, too many incompetent Belgians.
My again guess is that Duchatelet thought it would all be OK because Murray and/or incompetent De Turck told him it would be OK.
Maybe Murray and Hatter were willing to take a lower fee so Duchatelet just assumed the others would do the same. Again I don't know.
More recent offers have been made that are still unacceptable, but I believe that at least two ex directors are happy to take a reduced amount for early settlement as long as they're satisfied over the long term future of the Club.
The one I've spoken to however has concerns as to why is it so essential for the debenture needs to be settled now.0 -
My gut tells me no matter how good the offer is to Duchatelet is head keeps telling him there will be an even better one around the corner.
How ever made it in business wonders never cease.0 - Sponsored links:
-
So I did not know the director's loans expired after 7 years. When do they expire please?
Could be a reason for the delay.0 -
They don't expire.bolloxbolder said:So I did not know the director's loans expired after 7 years. When do they expire please?
Could be a reason for the delay.
1 -
Beware.... @cabbles is suffering from Stockholm Syndromecabbles said:If we have to suffer another season under RD, thank God we’ve got Lee Bowyer, JJ and Gallen all under contract. I think Lee pulled off a miracle last season, and although I don’t doubt it will be ten times harder this season, I have faith he’ll do what needs to be done.
I only know what I read on here re: the Aussies, but IF, their financial situation is so precarious, and I mean IF, then as crazy as this may sound, I think I’d rather stick it out with RD for the time being. Let me explain my warped thinking, because I don’t say this lightly.
RD has, for all his faults, never stopped paying the bills or to my knowledge, paid anyone late. He’s acted like a total scumbag on numerous occasions and done many wrongs, but the club haven’t flirted with administration as far as I know. I understand he wouldn’t let that happen anyway, because he stands to lose everything should he let that happen.
I also think we’ve reached the point where the set up that exists is somehow the most stable it’s ever going to be, comparatively speaking, under his ownership. We have, by the grace of God, a divine intervention in Bowyer and what he has achieved and what I think he’s capable of, given the circumstances he operates in.
we also know, categorically RD does want to sell. Granted, his original idea of what the club is worth, versus what he wanted was fantasy, but I think as time goes by, reality is kicking in, and he’s aware of the club’s true value.
Giving Lee the contract he wanted was another sign. 12/18 months ago, he would’ve held firm on his insane statement and Karel Frayere would’ve probably been taking training on Friday. He knows that in order to sell the club, he can’t run it like he has been given the success on the pitch over the last year.
I know there’s probably a hundred things and more I don’t know about the Aussie bid, including how difficult RD is to deal with, ex Directors’ loans etc, but, given the Aussies’ interest is over a year old now, regardless of what I pick up on here, I just think that the funds aren’t there to sustain running the club. I may be wrong. If that’s the case given the current circumstances of RD’s reign and the situation we find ourselves in, I think I’d rather opt for this, than risk one/two seasons of Aussie ownership and then possible administration. This is all hypothetical at the moment and I don’t want people to think I’m suddenly an apologist for RD, or that I have forgotten all the wrongs he has done to us and the club. I just mean that the position we find ourselves in now, at this point in time under his ownership, is to an extent, steady(ish).
Putting the old proverbial tin hat on3 -
If Henry is going tonight we will have to wait for his missus to cook him dinner 1st before he writes up his minutes.1
-
He could draft the minutes before he goes.11
-
Jill Ha'penny?favershamaddick said:Redskin said:
Tuppence ha'pennyHenry Irving said:Tuppence
Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunrobobmunro said:
I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.i_b_b_o_r_g said:So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?
I could be wrong though.
Tuppance Hap'ny
8 -
Henry isn’t going.Rudders22 said:If Henry is going tonight we will have to wait for his missus to cook him dinner 1st before he writes up his minutes.0 -
I think that in the worse case scenario where the Aussie's or someone else come in and have us in admin after two years, there would be plenty of potential new owners, without an unrealistic price tag which is delaying this change if ownership.cabbles said:If we have to suffer another season under RD, thank God we’ve got Lee Bowyer, JJ and Gallen all under contract. I think Lee pulled off a miracle last season, and although I don’t doubt it will be ten times harder this season, I have faith he’ll do what needs to be done.
I only know what I read on here re: the Aussies, but IF, their financial situation is so precarious, and I mean IF, then as crazy as this may sound, I think I’d rather stick it out with RD for the time being. Let me explain my warped thinking, because I don’t say this lightly.
RD has, for all his faults, never stopped paying the bills or to my knowledge, paid anyone late. He’s acted like a total scumbag on numerous occasions and done many wrongs, but the club haven’t flirted with administration as far as I know. I understand he wouldn’t let that happen anyway, because he stands to lose everything should he let that happen.
I also think we’ve reached the point where the set up that exists is somehow the most stable it’s ever going to be, comparatively speaking, under his ownership. We have, by the grace of God, a divine intervention in Bowyer and what he has achieved and what I think he’s capable of, given the circumstances he operates in.
we also know, categorically RD does want to sell. Granted, his original idea of what the club is worth, versus what he wanted was fantasy, but I think as time goes by, reality is kicking in, and he’s aware of the club’s true value.
Giving Lee the contract he wanted was another sign. 12/18 months ago, he would’ve held firm on his insane statement and Karel Frayere would’ve probably been taking training on Friday. He knows that in order to sell the club, he can’t run it like he has been given the success on the pitch over the last year.
I know there’s probably a hundred things and more I don’t know about the Aussie bid, including how difficult RD is to deal with, ex Directors’ loans etc, but, given the Aussies’ interest is over a year old now, regardless of what I pick up on here, I just think that the funds aren’t there to sustain running the club. I may be wrong. If that’s the case given the current circumstances of RD’s reign and the situation we find ourselves in, I think I’d rather opt for this, than risk one/two seasons of Aussie ownership and then possible administration. This is all hypothetical at the moment and I don’t want people to think I’m suddenly an apologist for RD, or that I have forgotten all the wrongs he has done to us and the club. I just mean that the position we find ourselves in now, at this point in time under his ownership, is to an extent, steady(ish).
Putting the old proverbial tin hat on0 -
Would only take a few secondsSolidgone said:He could draft the minutes before he goes.0 -
RD is not desperate to sell - that much is evident.0
- Sponsored links:
-
There it is. Roland has an overvaluation of £40M which no one will pay hence we ain't sold.JamesSeed said:
Ah sorry, got ya. As far as the Aussies were concerned it was £33m, as that was what they’d be paying.Weegie Addick said:
James, you said the original price was £33m with RD to sort loans so people are deducting £7M to get £26M net.JamesSeed said:
Where do you get £26m from?nth london addick said:AFKABartram said:
so, from your knowledge, at some stage in this process there was an agreed price of £26m to buy the club and it’s assets from Roland, plus another £7m needed to secure complete clear title by settling the directors loans?JamesSeed said:
It was £33m, and RD was supposed to have given clean title, ie settled the directors’ loans. As you know he failed massively to do that, and then told the Aussies to do it. Hence the £7m increase. I’m not sure why they want clean title. Never asked.nth london addick said:JamesSeed said:I posted a few weeks ago that the price was £33m but went up by £7m when we won promotion, despite a promise not to raise it on promotion. I’m not sure if what price Dalman has agreed to.
I an led to believe the price is now 30-33 mil so not sure where the extra 7 come from
the 7 mil is the charges which I don’t see why Roland should settle to be honest I don’t think anyone should
if we ever get back to prem those fine gentleman who saved our club from going into admin deserve every penny back
Agree the directors should otherwise get their money back once in Prem.
No offence intended but I struggle to accept that was correct JS if that is what you’ve been told. It is the complete opposite of suggestions RD is being greedy, difficult, and if that was true then why the hell did they not proceed and complete before the ambiguity of the play off final.
There is is no way it has taken RD over two years to sell the club if he is looking for a personal return of just £26m imo
I was personally in a room where 50 mil was touted and involved in a follow up call with the person who was asked to instigate the initial approach where proof of 45-50 mil was the going price to start the ball rolling
so i have no idea where jimmy has got 26 mil from my personal belief was always we would be sold for 30-35 mil plus the directors loans being settled by the new incumbents
i believe this is still the case
I said £33m plus loans = £40m. Been saying the same since after playoff final. Quite a few times.
RD had always said he’d take care of the loans, probably believing the directors would ‘settle’. I suspect he may have reached agreement with RM, the principal lender, only to go batty when others wouldn’t follow suit.
So I can see where the £26m comes from, but as far as the Aussies were concerned, I believe their deal was £33m with clean title. So when Roland decided not to settle the loans that sum became £40m.
Not sure where any of this gets us though. Club still isn’t sold. But I guess it may be soon?2 -
carly......you and most others are working on the assumption that he is being driven only by financial concerns in this instance.carly burn said:My gut tells me no matter how good the offer is to Duchatelet is head keeps telling him there will be an even better one around the corner.
How ever made it in business wonders never cease.
My take is, and always has been, that you have to factor in a significant amount of vengeance on his part bordering on obsessive psychotic lunacy, which in turn clouds the whole mind numbing takeover to an unfathomable position.
There is something going on in the guys head that we just can’t see or fully understand, forget business ethics or business acumen ......it’s that unknown factor which is driving his mindset to the total detriment of the whole sorry saga that has stretched out for years.....there simply cannot be any other reason in my view.
I’m no expert on the matters of his complicated mindset regarding CAFC, but it’s perfectly clear to me........It ain’t just the money.
Like I have said before, he’s a very very strange individual and will doubtless continue to be so.........end of.
3 -
1803, Martello towers are built along the coast to protect England from a French invasion.5
-
But not a Belgian one unfortunately!happyvalley said:1803, Martello towers are built along the coast to protect England from a French invasion.7 -
1803 - United States of America and France agree the Louisiana Purchase.
Rebellion, led by Robert Emmet, in Ireland.
And...
Most importantly...
The wagonway between Wandsworth and Croydon is opened, being the first public railway line in England (Wikipedia says).
1 -
hawksmoor said:
Jill Ha'penny?favershamaddick said:Redskin said:
Tuppence ha'pennyHenry Irving said:Tuppence
Tuppance halfpenny. You've been away too long @bobmunrobobmunro said:
I’m supremely confident in saying it will be in the range of tuppence halfpenny and £77m.i_b_b_o_r_g said:So what is the amount Dalman is believed to have agreed?
I could be wrong though.
Tuppance Hap'ny
Wont get much change out of her5 -
They were actually built around the coasts of the United Kingdom as a whole, and possibly not just to protect England (particularly given the recent history of Revoutionary French support for Irish insurrections).happyvalley said:1803, Martello towers are built along the coast to protect England from a French invasion.0 -
Shame (for the monkey) none were built off the coast of Hartlepool...NornIrishAddick said:
They were actually built around the coasts of the United Kingdom as a whole, and possibly not just to protect England (particularly given the recent history of Revoutionary French support for Irish insurrections).happyvalley said:1803, Martello towers are built along the coast to protect England from a French invasion.0 -
I have a deep aversion to fish puns so only skim this thread occasionally. I may have missed something so please ignore this post if I am raising an issue that has already been dealt with.
Fact: we have some director loans totalling £7 million. These loans have been raised against the ground and training ground.
Fact: these loans only become payable on promotion to the Premier League.
Fact: on promotion to the Premiership Charlton will immediately receive approximately £100 million and guaranteed £90 million for the following three years in parachute payments if we are relegated after one season.
Is it still being claimed that the £7 million in loans is holding up a sale?1 -
It is suggested that new owners who might want to raise finance on the assets might not be able to without clean title.Red_in_SE8 said:I have a deep aversion to fish puns so only skim this thread occasionally. I may have missed something so please ignore this post if I am raising an issue that has already been dealt with.
Fact: we have some director loans totalling £7 million. These loans have been raised against the ground and training ground.
Fact: these loans only become payable on promotion to the Premier League.
Fact: on promotion to the Premiership Charlton will immediately receive approximately £100 million and guaranteed £90 million for the following three years in parachute payments if we are relegated after one season.
Is it still being claimed that the £7 million in loans is holding up a sale?0
This discussion has been closed.
