I voted yes because i don't think organic growth will cut it anymore. I like being a premiership club and I think it does bring an amount of long term security. I think a well-known club would be much harder to, say, kick out of their own ground and leave for dead. If we stay as we are we settle for Championship status, until the big money starts affecting them too.
People say that organic growth or whatever is the Charlton way. I take a different view, if we avoid the big money spenders we are sitting back and letting outside influences knock our club down. In my mind sitting back and ignoring the warning signs is NOT the Charlton way. We fight for out club, we always have, it's just that today we have a different battle to fight.
And to finish: You can take our lives, but you'll never take our freedom.
you're right about the security being a premiership club brings. I'm indifferent to being a premiership club, i like it when we turn over big clubs, i like the increased exposure you get and always being able to see snippets of action, goals etc on the telly.
But i just don't want our club changing any more. I feel its lost a bit of its intimacy and uniqueness in (quite rightly) attempting to keep up with the Jones and is near the cross of becoming a business first, football club second. If we continue to try and keep up with the super-rich, the change will become even greater.
Perhaps too many of us can be accused of being too sentimental ? Perhaps we are being unrealistic in not want int the club to grow too far because its simply not what we are used to ?
An Extremely WorthWhile Debate, I Was Going To Post On This Earlier,Even Lower League Clubs Are Being Bought By Overseas Investors,Russian Billionaire Vs Arab Oil Magnate,Difficult To Compete With This Much Money,Also Where Will It Take Football Over The Next 5/10 Years,Will Any Premier League Club Be English Owned.The Large Investment Creates A Big Divide,Does This Make The Top Flight League Meaningless, A 3 Tier League.Leeds Tried To Buy An Unfair Advantage By Splashing Too Much Cash And Look What Happened.Charlton Will Always Be A Bit Different Because Of What We Have Been Through, We Are Set Aside From All The Other Clubs, However Romance And Money Don't Come Into The Equation.Food For Thought?
You're not the only one! The stream of consciousness style I can get my head around, but the caps make it unbearable. Is it a stylistic choice, or something wrong with your keyboard?
I think the two options are too extreme...I'm somewhere in the middle, investment would be good but not on the Abramovich scale. Like Centenary says, organic growth just wont cut it.
Accept this will happen - its business at the end of the day - quite simply we will not be able to shop for players at the same places as the larger clubs in the prem - so its a case of "do or die" - change is good isnt it and Im all for it as for organic growth yes it plays its part and is important but you will never be able to grow without out external investment at the same level- I guess it depends on what the boards long term strategic planning is and exactly what our business model actually is?
[cite]Posted By: InspectorSands[/cite]How can any Prem club which isn't one of the top four plan for the long term when relegation could kill them stone dead?
Isn't that the point though, with substantial outside investment there wouldn't be such a heavy reliance on sky money and relegation wouldn't have that same consequences.
[cite]Posted By: InspectorSands[/cite]How can any Prem club which isn't one of the top four plan for the long term when relegation could kill them stone dead?
Isn't that the point though, with substantial outside investment there wouldn't be such a heavy reliance on sky money and relegation wouldn't have that same consequences.
Surely though these "Big Investors" are only in it for the glory and kudos of the Premiership?
Get relegated and they would also be off faster than Dennis can do the 100 metres .
what if the alternative to a billionaire buying charlton is that he buys millwall or palace instead...one of those with a decent stadium and money to burn on players would hit us hard...
I have always thought it was OK for the "big" 4 clubs to have overseas investment (not sure about Arsenal) but it wouldn't affect the rest of us. But I was wrong we now have Villa, Pompey, West Ham with overseas investment and now it seems that Man City will be receiving about £70m outside investment. These four clubs are in our "league" but this investment takes them out and reduced the number of clubs with whom we compete for survival, then there are clubs who have multi millionaire owners so you can add Reading, Fulham(?), Middlesborough, Newcastle and Wigan. This is over half the teams in the Premiership with whom we cannot compete when it comes to the January transfer window and as long as it continues we shall be a small club and be fighting relegation, and as the number of clubs that recieve this massive outside investment increases so our fellow relegation candidates will decrease. So I now say YES lets have some overseas investment and compete with the best.
So I now say YES lets have some overseas investment and compete with the best.
But three teams will still get relegated at the end of the season, sooner or later one of these billionaires is going to be stuck with a CCC side and a lot of players on high salaries. There are also only so many decent managers and coaches around and there aren't that many top class players around either.
Reluctantly though I'm coming round to the point of view that we'll need serious inward investment. People moan that Dowie had £12M to spend and spent it badly, and there's some truth in that, but it's also true that we are priced out of buying genuine Premiership standard players and have to pick up the likes of Faye, Reid, Traore - ie those considered surplus to requirements at other clubs and also those who might get fed up with earning £20-30K a week but rarely play. Currently the best we can do given our financial constraints is to finish mid-division, any chance of a UEFA cup place is already remote and will become even harder to achieve with most of the teams ahead of us being able to burn money. That leaves us very little room for error.
Some will say dropping down to the Championship and becoming a yo-yo club is better than selling out but if we do it's possible that the club will stagnate and we'll become a feeder club for the Premiership stars - picking up a couple of talented kids on loan for a year or training up and giving the breaks to the Scott Parkers of this world, before selling them to invest in the next generation. You can probably make a decent living as a club doing that but we'll stay stuck in the second tier of clubs.
A tough decision to make and what make's it more annoying is that some of these teams were heavily in debt and are effectively being rescued by billionaire investors, when Charlton were a model of financial restraint and responsibility.
Some excellent arguements in this thread, and its made me perhaps think a little bit more about the situation. I'm certainly shocked and suprised that as many as 40% would welcome it.
Of course i would love to see Charlton go on and be a real success, i'm just not to sure in myself i'd be happy to pay the necessary funds to keep my level of participation going.
Look at Arsenal prices, i can't see us having the strength of fanbase in the next ten years to carry this through. In fact, how long will Arsenal sell out at these prices if they have another couple of years outside the top 2 ?
Cat A Cat B
Centre Upper £94 £66
Centre Upper Back £70 £49
Next To Centre Upper £70 £49
Next To Centre Upper Back £61 £43
Wing Upper £60 £42
Wing Upper Back £55 £38
Corner Upper £60 £42
Goal Upper £66 £46
Goal Upper Back £55 £38
I voted in favour but I would be reluctant for the board to sell 100% - better they sold a large minority holding so that the likes of Richard Murray and Martin Simons stay on board with a say in the running.
I can see that the only way to stay in the mid-table (forget UEFA) is to have in excess of £10M to spend every summer (and this January please!) and to play attractive football. This will keep the gates up which in turn justifies increasing the capacity. And so on... So a large investment to support organic growth please!
Those prices mentioned above which are not a long way from Chelsea's will only be charged for clubs that win things EVERY year who appeal to the corporates and glory hunters - much as I hope we make a cup final (in my life-time!) not sure we will ever be in that league.
"Time we got rid of our muppet and pauper of a chairman"
Unfair, he's done his best and done a good job, but the goalposts have changed and moved out of our range. Look at the Spurs side that beat us today - how could we compete to sign any of those players? Their transfer fees and weekly wages are out of our league. Even Portsmouth - for the last two seasons we've taken points off of them - going into a match with Pompey you could bet that we'd win. This year a new owner in come Glen Johnson, David James and Sol Campbell - the latter on £50k a week and there's no way through. You can criticise Murray etc but financial responsibility and stability shouldn't be sneezed at - just look where Leeds are now, it wasn't long ago that they were a game away from a CL final.
We soon will get an offer - we are a London team, nice stadium good set of fans, a tough one to call, but competing is only going to get harder not easier, there are no points awarded for balancing the budget.
[cite]Posted By: Cheeky~Bandit[/cite]I voted yes - the club has had underinvestment year after year and now the club is paying for it. Time we got rid of our muppet and pauper of a chairman.
I'd be careful about using the word "muppet", when you appear to be under the impression that sugar daddies grow on trees.
I don't see how somebody who has presided over the building of a 27,000 capacity ground from scratch as well as 8 seasons of Premiership football for what was a struggling second division club can be described as a muppet.
The other thing that worries me about the foreign investment debate is that everyone assumes we'll end up being the next Portsmouth - loads of new players that were previously out of our reach and zooming up the table. (No-one's seriously expecting us to be the next Chelsea, are they?). But it's just as likely we could end up being the next Hearts - short term improvement followed by utter chaos.
But it's just as likely we could end up being the next Hearts - short term improvement followed by utter chaos.
Fair point but this is why I'd prefer inward investment that leaves the structure of the club in place, but gives us a bit more muscle to compete in the transfer market. A lock, stock & barrel takeover wouldn't be good for the club.
[cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]But it's just as likely we could end up being the next Hearts - short term improvement followed by utter chaos.
Fair point but this is why I'd prefer inward investment that leaves the structure of the club in place, but gives us a bit more muscle to compete in the transfer market. A lock, stock & barrel takeover wouldn't be good for the club.
Yep, inward investment would be good, but it's difficult to find people who are willing to stump up lots of money without stamping their own personality on the club.
Comments
As when I read the second one and thought shit i should have voted that... but then i got to the bit about "organic growth" and had fallen asleep.
I want to use the results in an article so would be grateful if everyone voted
People say that organic growth or whatever is the Charlton way. I take a different view, if we avoid the big money spenders we are sitting back and letting outside influences knock our club down. In my mind sitting back and ignoring the warning signs is NOT the Charlton way. We fight for out club, we always have, it's just that today we have a different battle to fight.
And to finish:
You can take our lives, but you'll never take our freedom.
Sorry it seemed appropriate!
you're right about the security being a premiership club brings. I'm indifferent to being a premiership club, i like it when we turn over big clubs, i like the increased exposure you get and always being able to see snippets of action, goals etc on the telly.
But i just don't want our club changing any more. I feel its lost a bit of its intimacy and uniqueness in (quite rightly) attempting to keep up with the Jones and is near the cross of becoming a business first, football club second. If we continue to try and keep up with the super-rich, the change will become even greater.
Perhaps too many of us can be accused of being too sentimental ? Perhaps we are being unrealistic in not want int the club to grow too far because its simply not what we are used to ?
if you, haven't voted yet, grateful for your opinion.
Isn't that the point though, with substantial outside investment there wouldn't be such a heavy reliance on sky money and relegation wouldn't have that same consequences.
Surely though these "Big Investors" are only in it for the glory and kudos of the Premiership?
Get relegated and they would also be off faster than Dennis can do the 100 metres .
To be honest- i wouldn't welcome overseas investment but, for a fair few of the points above, i would accept it.
I also feel that a lot of our passion/ obsession etc for the addicks centres, amongst other things, around the sense of kinship amongst the fans.
That wouldn't change.
I have always thought it was OK for the "big" 4 clubs to have overseas investment (not sure about Arsenal) but it wouldn't affect the rest of us. But I was wrong we now have Villa, Pompey, West Ham with overseas investment and now it seems that Man City will be receiving about £70m outside investment. These four clubs are in our "league" but this investment takes them out and reduced the number of clubs with whom we compete for survival, then there are clubs who have multi millionaire owners so you can add Reading, Fulham(?), Middlesborough, Newcastle and Wigan. This is over half the teams in the Premiership with whom we cannot compete when it comes to the January transfer window and as long as it continues we shall be a small club and be fighting relegation, and as the number of clubs that recieve this massive outside investment increases so our fellow relegation candidates will decrease.
So I now say YES lets have some overseas investment and compete with the best.
But three teams will still get relegated at the end of the season, sooner or later one of these billionaires is going to be stuck with a CCC side and a lot of players on high salaries. There are also only so many decent managers and coaches around and there aren't that many top class players around either.
Reluctantly though I'm coming round to the point of view that we'll need serious inward investment. People moan that Dowie had £12M to spend and spent it badly, and there's some truth in that, but it's also true that we are priced out of buying genuine Premiership standard players and have to pick up the likes of Faye, Reid, Traore - ie those considered surplus to requirements at other clubs and also those who might get fed up with earning £20-30K a week but rarely play. Currently the best we can do given our financial constraints is to finish mid-division, any chance of a UEFA cup place is already remote and will become even harder to achieve with most of the teams ahead of us being able to burn money. That leaves us very little room for error.
Some will say dropping down to the Championship and becoming a yo-yo club is better than selling out but if we do it's possible that the club will stagnate and we'll become a feeder club for the Premiership stars - picking up a couple of talented kids on loan for a year or training up and giving the breaks to the Scott Parkers of this world, before selling them to invest in the next generation. You can probably make a decent living as a club doing that but we'll stay stuck in the second tier of clubs.
A tough decision to make and what make's it more annoying is that some of these teams were heavily in debt and are effectively being rescued by billionaire investors, when Charlton were a model of financial restraint and responsibility.
Of course i would love to see Charlton go on and be a real success, i'm just not to sure in myself i'd be happy to pay the necessary funds to keep my level of participation going.
Look at Arsenal prices, i can't see us having the strength of fanbase in the next ten years to carry this through. In fact, how long will Arsenal sell out at these prices if they have another couple of years outside the top 2 ?
Cat A Cat B
Centre Upper £94 £66
Centre Upper Back £70 £49
Next To Centre Upper £70 £49
Next To Centre Upper Back £61 £43
Wing Upper £60 £42
Wing Upper Back £55 £38
Corner Upper £60 £42
Goal Upper £66 £46
Goal Upper Back £55 £38
Centre Lower £51 £35
Wing Lower £46 £32
Corner Lower £46 £32
Goal Lower £46 £32
I can see that the only way to stay in the mid-table (forget UEFA) is to have in excess of £10M to spend every summer (and this January please!) and to play attractive football. This will keep the gates up which in turn justifies increasing the capacity. And so on... So a large investment to support organic growth please!
Those prices mentioned above which are not a long way from Chelsea's will only be charged for clubs that win things EVERY year who appeal to the corporates and glory hunters - much as I hope we make a cup final (in my life-time!) not sure we will ever be in that league.
Unfair, he's done his best and done a good job, but the goalposts have changed and moved out of our range. Look at the Spurs side that beat us today - how could we compete to sign any of those players? Their transfer fees and weekly wages are out of our league. Even Portsmouth - for the last two seasons we've taken points off of them - going into a match with Pompey you could bet that we'd win. This year a new owner in come Glen Johnson, David James and Sol Campbell - the latter on £50k a week and there's no way through. You can criticise Murray etc but financial responsibility and stability shouldn't be sneezed at - just look where Leeds are now, it wasn't long ago that they were a game away from a CL final.
We soon will get an offer - we are a London team, nice stadium good set of fans, a tough one to call, but competing is only going to get harder not easier, there are no points awarded for balancing the budget.
I'd be careful about using the word "muppet", when you appear to be under the impression that sugar daddies grow on trees.
Just my opinion though.
Don't worry Len, its the opinion of 99%
Fair point but this is why I'd prefer inward investment that leaves the structure of the club in place, but gives us a bit more muscle to compete in the transfer market. A lock, stock & barrel takeover wouldn't be good for the club.
Yep, inward investment would be good, but it's difficult to find people who are willing to stump up lots of money without stamping their own personality on the club.