Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

CAST Interview with Southall published

2

Comments

  • edited January 2020
    Makes sense that they would want to take up the footballing side in January as it is crucial we keep our Championship status. Otherwise we would see a Duchatelet like transfer window with no signings.......er wait a minute. Still time for some signings, including a new contract for the manager. Will be relieved when I see them though!
  • edited January 2020
    So if I read correctly, as it stands they are in ‘Mark Goldberg territory’ (with Noades still owning Selhurst) and them just owning the ‘football club with no fixed assets’?

    If that’s the case, anyone with any knowledge around these attached legal obligations? Does there mean there is a fixed agreement of price to be completed within a certain timeline?

    What happens if that doesn’t get met? 
    Depends what is in the sale contract. I would suspect the first thing he does is sue ESI for breach of contract to which ESI as a new company with likely little assets just folds-there will be no through recourse to MS or His Excellency unless in the contract.  Then either RD kicks us out as tenant or resumes control of the club.

    If they do not own The Valley or training ground then surely all they have acquired is the operating business RD said he would give away for nothing so what actual hurt money do these guys currently have in the deal.

    This makes me very uneasy and I am glad I did not renew my season ticket now, potential to be our most spivy owners of all time.
  • Does this mean they could have paid precisely zero for the privilege?
  • razil said:
    Does this mean they could have paid precisely zero for the privilege?
    Even so RD and EFL must have seen proof of funds no?
  • edited January 2020
    So if I read correctly, as it stands they are in ‘Mark Goldberg territory’ (with Noades still owning Selhurst) and them just owning the ‘football club with no fixed assets’?

    If that’s the case, anyone with any knowledge around these attached legal obligations? Does there mean there is a fixed agreement of price to be completed within a certain timeline?

    What happens if that doesn’t get met? 
    Depends what is in the sale contract. I would suspect the first thing he does is sue ESI for breach of contract to which ESI as a new company with likely little assets just folds-there will be no through recourse to MS or His Excellency unless in the contract.  Then either RD kicks us out as tenant or resumes control of the club.

    If they do not own The Valley or training ground then surely all they have acquired is the operating business RD said he would give away for nothing so what actual hurt money do these guys currently have in the deal.

    This makes me very uneasy and I am glad I did not renew my season ticket now, potential to be our most spivy owners of all time.
    I agree up to a point.
    If you fail to complete after exchanging, you would normally forfeit your exchange deposit and could be sued for compensation.
    But as you say what assets do ESI have ?
    Presumably not a lot.

    However, we have been told by many sources that HE is a 100% trusted businessman and on that basis I cannot envisage he would be involved in anything underhand.

    We just need some clarity.
  • Sponsored links:


  • This sounds like Jimenez part 2, something’s not right here.

    He clearly said they owned the valley, this is saying the opposite.

    Said it day one frying pan to fire, really hope I’m wrong.

    MS talks the talk, thus far not walking the walk.

    More worried after reading this.
    ESI own the leasehold to the Valley. 
  • Furrowed brow to the above.
  • If he uses the phrase "we are aiming to be competitive" the petrol cans come out of retirement .

    Monday --- no news re Bowyer signing contract or Maddison signing
    Tuesday -- We loose Connor
    Wednesday -- We find the "owners" don't own The Valley

    Thursday -- we sign Roger Johnson
    Friday--Taylor signs for Millwall
    Saturday -- We loose 6 nil to Preston ,but try hard
    Sunday --- His Excellency informs us he isn't mined and it's all a spoof from Belgian TV channel owned by RD


    Nothing nothing is ever fecking simple with CAFC.
    If you can correct your spellings, you’ll earn a like from me
  • Chizz said:
    This sounds like Jimenez part 2, something’s not right here.

    He clearly said they owned the valley, this is saying the opposite.

    Said it day one frying pan to fire, really hope I’m wrong.

    MS talks the talk, thus far not walking the walk.

    More worried after reading this.
    ESI own the leasehold to the Valley. 
    But under Uncle Roland he owned both sides of the ‘contract’, the lease and the property - now he owns the asset which has a value and ESI own the asset which is a liability 

    We are not privy to the terms of the delayed purchase agreement and what it says about non performance on the part of ESI

    Roland will however hold all the cards if they don’t perform, let’s not kid ourselves he would agree to anything other than a position which protects his ownership of the most valuable thing of all ........The Valley
  • Sponsored links:


  • Can someone just ask Matt on Twitter, ‘have you or have you not at this moment in time purchased the freehold of The Valley’ ... simples.
  • Davo55 has asked....
  • So we know ESI have purchased the bit that we can all afford - the club itself. They have a requirement to purchase the expensive bits by the end of June. We know Roland was asking a ridiculous price for that part of the business as you can't build houses or hotels on the Valley and we don't know how much ESI have promised to pay for it. If ESI folds and is unable to pay Roland what has been agreed, say the Sheikh drops out after our relegation, I presume Roland can charge any rent he wants or get his money back by selling the land for houses and hotels with no responsibility for the club.  

    Strangely, what reassures me is that the EFL have looked into all of this and signed it off. We are probably just being paranoid. Would be good to see some positive indicators in the next few days though! 
  • Can someone just ask Matt on Twitter, ‘have you or have you not at this moment in time purchased the freehold of The Valley’ ... simples.
    To which you might get a simple, straight answer, either "yes" or "no".  

    If he says "yes", some will take as meaning "yes, we have purchased the freehold of The Valley".  But he might mean "yes, we have or have not purchased the freehold". 

    And if he says "no", some will take it as meaning "no, we have not purchased the freehold".  But he might mean, "no, we have not purchased it at this moment in time, we purchased it last week". 
  • Valley11 said:
    Is this the ‘strange’ thing Bowyer was talking about? 
    No. That was his own contract.
  • It goes back to what started me getting jittery. ESI have said they have done it this way because the January window is so vital. Well so far, the January window has been a bit of a disaster - 15 days into it. If they wanted control to improve the playing side, surely we need to see that happening before we can fully relax. As of now, LB and LT have yet to agree contracts, we have lost CG and brought in one loan player.
  • Matt Southall's idea of "Lock stock and Barrel" should've read "Lock" ? 
  • Or Barrell.
  • Can someone just ask Matt on Twitter, ‘have you or have you not at this moment in time purchased the freehold of The Valley’ ... simples.
    I asked him a couple of hours ago.
    No reply as yet.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!