Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.
I do not look for facts on this thread. I know the only fact before hand... that we would like to see the back of RD.
You keep looking for facts mate.0 -
Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.0
-
Covered End said:i_b_b_o_r_g said:JamesSeed said:Covered End said:JamesSeed said:Covered End said:Pedro45 said:Covered End said:Covered End said:Can anyone explain the following?
The Aussies arrived on the scene in April 2017.
Some time later RD & the Aussies made a joint statement on the O/S saying a price had been agreed & the price agreement has been repeated numerous times.
The price was alleged to have been around £65M and other offers in excess of £33M have been turned away.
The Aussies filed papers with the EFL and turned up at last seasons play offs wearing scarves.
Yet another year later it is suggested they had & still have the funds to proceed, but the price has mysteriously halved to what was agreed and yet they still haven't done the deal at half the agreed price and are possibly arguing over a £7M figure.
Can no one explain my post from yesterday ?
Why did they originally agree to pay £65M ?
My only explanation could be that the upfront cash sum would have been something like £20M, with the remainder paid in stages.
Plus, if they had and still have adequate funds of willing investors, (not saying this is untrue).
Why have they been advertising for additional investors and are still advertising for additional investors ?
I repeat, I have never known a business trying to raise funds for over 2 years, that they don't need.
PS Lots of business raise money over very long periods, and according to James Seed, any funds they are trying to raise are to cover future running costs, not the purchase price.
Yes, the Aussies may have/had the purchase funds, but they don't have the funds to run the club.
A house analogy if I may.
They can afford to buy a property with a mortgage, but they can't pay the mortgage. Brilliant !
You’re presenting these as facts. Are they?
Respectfully I’d ask where these facts came from.
I've been asking questions, looking for plausible explanations, which is why I placed a ? at the end of the question.
But only Poplcon has replied, suggesting the Aussies could be still attempting to raise funds to cover future running costs.
I responded that if this is true, then they can't have the funds to cover future running costs.
You wouldn't be raising funds if you didn't need them (ignoring scams, fraud and the like).
I think they’re underwriting the whole thing, but seem to want to spread it about a bit.
PS One ‘fact’ seemed to be wrapped up in a question. The second wasn’t a question at all. I was just interested to know where the info came from, that’s all. No probs if it was just a rhetorical device.
I think a chap called Roland Duchatelet is a good example of this.1 -
soapy_jones said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.
I do not look for facts on this thread. I know the only fact before hand... that we would like to see the back of RD.
You keep looking for facts mate.
There are no "Aussies" taking over CAFC.
This is just a device used by RD to keep the tennis balls off the pitch.1 -
soapy_jones said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.
I do not look for facts on this thread. I know the only fact before hand... that we would like to see the back of RD.
You keep looking for facts mate.
Yes, I will keep looking for facts. And I will continue to be interested in other people's opinions.2 -
Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.
I do not look for facts on this thread. I know the only fact before hand... that we would like to see the back of RD.
You keep looking for facts mate.
Yes, I will keep looking for facts. And I will continue to be interested in other people's opinions.1 -
i_b_b_o_r_g said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.
I do not look for facts on this thread. I know the only fact before hand... that we would like to see the back of RD.
You keep looking for facts mate.
Yes, I will keep looking for facts. And I will continue to be interested in other people's opinions.5 -
Chizz said:i_b_b_o_r_g said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.
I do not look for facts on this thread. I know the only fact before hand... that we would like to see the back of RD.
You keep looking for facts mate.
Yes, I will keep looking for facts. And I will continue to be interested in other people's opinions.
I shall read them all and see if you are correct. 😜0 -
Chizz said:i_b_b_o_r_g said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.
I do not look for facts on this thread. I know the only fact before hand... that we would like to see the back of RD.
You keep looking for facts mate.
Yes, I will keep looking for facts. And I will continue to be interested in other people's opinions.0 - Sponsored links:
-
-
i_b_b_o_r_g said:Chizz said:i_b_b_o_r_g said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.
I do not look for facts on this thread. I know the only fact before hand... that we would like to see the back of RD.
You keep looking for facts mate.
Yes, I will keep looking for facts. And I will continue to be interested in other people's opinions.0 -
AFKABartram said:i_b_b_o_r_g said:JamesSeed said:Covered End said:JamesSeed said:Covered End said:Pedro45 said:Covered End said:Covered End said:Can anyone explain the following?
The Aussies arrived on the scene in April 2017.
Some time later RD & the Aussies made a joint statement on the O/S saying a price had been agreed & the price agreement has been repeated numerous times.
The price was alleged to have been around £65M and other offers in excess of £33M have been turned away.
The Aussies filed papers with the EFL and turned up at last seasons play offs wearing scarves.
Yet another year later it is suggested they had & still have the funds to proceed, but the price has mysteriously halved to what was agreed and yet they still haven't done the deal at half the agreed price and are possibly arguing over a £7M figure.
Can no one explain my post from yesterday ?
Why did they originally agree to pay £65M ?
My only explanation could be that the upfront cash sum would have been something like £20M, with the remainder paid in stages.
Plus, if they had and still have adequate funds of willing investors, (not saying this is untrue).
Why have they been advertising for additional investors and are still advertising for additional investors ?
I repeat, I have never known a business trying to raise funds for over 2 years, that they don't need.
PS Lots of business raise money over very long periods, and according to James Seed, any funds they are trying to raise are to cover future running costs, not the purchase price.
Yes, the Aussies may have/had the purchase funds, but they don't have the funds to run the club.
A house analogy if I may.
They can afford to buy a property with a mortgage, but they can't pay the mortgage. Brilliant !
You’re presenting these as facts. Are they?
Respectfully I’d ask where these facts came from.
I've been asking questions, looking for plausible explanations, which is why I placed a ? at the end of the question.
But only Poplcon has replied, suggesting the Aussies could be still attempting to raise funds to cover future running costs.
I responded that if this is true, then they can't have the funds to cover future running costs.
You wouldn't be raising funds if you didn't need them (ignoring scams, fraud and the like).
I think they’re underwriting the whole thing, but seem to want to spread it about a bit.
PS One ‘fact’ seemed to be wrapped up in a question. The second wasn’t a question at all. I was just interested to know where the info came from, that’s all. No probs if it was just a rhetorical device.
why it’s Murphy’s project in the first place is a completely different question. What would be his driver? Has he a desire to be involved in UK football and Is he looking to create a Chairman / CEO position for himself? Is he passionate about Aus sports and sees this as a viable vehicle to progress that? Is it not that but on a financial basis there’s a very chunky arrangers fee to be had if successful? Is it a combo of all three? Is it not Murph project at all. Who knows.
I think he and Muir have talked about growing Australian football globally, and hope to somehow get Australians in London to support Charlton, I suspect by having a couple of the cream of Aussie youth talent going through the Charlton youth setup. He said they weren’t interested in shoehorning Aussie players into the Charlton team, but I wouldn’t rule out them signing an individual player if he was genuinely good enough.
If they buy the club Murphy might be CEO, but that has never been a driver. ie when his kids started the new school year in Australia he ruled it out at that time. So he has a window at the moment.
It might be best to wait until they’ve either bought the club, or walked away, to ask the detailed questions about funding etc. I agree it does sound a bit clunky, but the absence of names (other than Muir), facts and dates, it seems that speculation just leads to argument.
My opinion, for what it’s worth, is that if they have the money they’ll buy the club, if they haven’t, they won’t. Muir on his own is a serious enough player not to get involved if he thinks it looks sketchy.
0 -
Football is a very poor choice to invest your money in. There are better financial investment opportunities with less risk and better returns. On that basis alone anyone who takes us over is questionable unless they have a genuine interest in either the game generally or CAFC specifically and want a play thing.
We we will have to be grateful to whoever comes forward.4 -
98-pages to go.
C’mon, we can do this...0 -
Fumbluff said:98-pages to go.
C’mon, we can do this...0 -
Page 1905 is looking good to me.
If not, I’ll settle for 1933.
On the Aussie front, I think you can rest assured that they are sports people, not spivs.0 -
1
-
blackpool72 said:Fumbluff said:98-pages to go.
C’mon, we can do this...2 -
Henry Irving said:blackpool72 said:Fumbluff said:98-pages to go.
C’mon, we can do this...11 - Sponsored links:
-
1808, The slave trade is abolished in all U.K. colonies.8
-
blackpool72 said:Henry Irving said:blackpool72 said:Fumbluff said:98-pages to go.
C’mon, we can do this...2 -
Henry Irving said:blackpool72 said:Fumbluff said:98-pages to go.
C’mon, we can do this...1 -
My option is They still don’t have the cash to fund losses in the championship I don’t believe anything else as I am yet to see that they have progressed any further since the price has dropped4
-
nth london addick said:My option is They still don’t have the cash to fund losses in the championship I don’t believe anything else as I am yet to see that they have progressed any further since the price has dropped1
-
nth london addick said:My option is They still don’t have the cash to fund losses in the championship I don’t believe anything else as I am yet to see that they have progressed any further since the price has dropped
Do you think it’ll be someone other than Dalman or the Aussies? Chinese interest has been mentioned a few times.1 -
Valiantphil said:soapy_jones said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.
I do not look for facts on this thread. I know the only fact before hand... that we would like to see the back of RD.
You keep looking for facts mate.
There are no "Aussies" taking over CAFC.
This is just a device used by RD to keep the tennis balls off the pitch.1 -
soapboxsam said:Valiantphil said:soapy_jones said:Chizz said:soapy_jones said:Oh come on mate.
I do not look for facts on this thread. I know the only fact before hand... that we would like to see the back of RD.
You keep looking for facts mate.
There are no "Aussies" taking over CAFC.
This is just a device used by RD to keep the tennis balls off the pitch.0 -
Scoham said:nth london addick said:My option is They still don’t have the cash to fund losses in the championship I don’t believe anything else as I am yet to see that they have progressed any further since the price has dropped
Do you think it’ll be someone other than Dalman or the Aussies? Chinese interest has been mentioned a few times.
Cards on table I have been telling most that my personal opinion is that we will get the Aussies and be fuming about it by September
ny wish is Dalman I just feel there are wolves (not to hard to work out ) in sheep clothing who has influence and alternative reasons for his influence
8 -
nth london addick said:Scoham said:nth london addick said:My option is They still don’t have the cash to fund losses in the championship I don’t believe anything else as I am yet to see that they have progressed any further since the price has dropped
Do you think it’ll be someone other than Dalman or the Aussies? Chinese interest has been mentioned a few times.
Cards on table I have been telling most that my personal opinion is that we will get the Aussies and be fuming about it by September
ny wish is Dalman I just feel there are wolves (not to hard to work out ) in sheep clothing who has influence and alternative reasons for his influence2
This discussion has been closed.