From the Mail on Sunday this morning. Another Charlton hating journo comes to the surface. We obviously have a leak in the boardroom which is never a good sign is it?
Great Dane too dear for The Valley
By Mick Collins
Charlton Athletic are fighting for their Championship survival but are unable to field a player for whom they paid £250,000 because it would cost the cash-strapped club an extra £100,000 if they picked him.
The financial plight of the Championship’s bottom club means that they could pay out as much as £1.5 million without Martin Christensen ever tasting competitive action at The Valley.
The 21-year-old Dane was signed by former manager Alan Pardew in 2007 on a four-year, £5,000 a week contract from Danish club Herfolge Boldklub on the understanding that Charlton would pay an additional £100,000 when he made his first-team debut.
He was signed a week after 28 staff were made redundant following Charlton’s relegation from the Premier League.
The deal also involved Herfolge receiving £50,000 a year for the remaining span of the contract in exchange for Charlton having first refusal on their young players.
“There was a lot of opposition,” said one board member. “But Pardew was determined. He dug his heels in and insisted we sign him.
“Christensen will never play. It’s just not going to happen. First, there’s not the money and secondly, he’s not the player we were lead to believe he was. The whole situation, to be honest, is a complete mess.”
With Charlton’s wage bill now fast approaching 100% of their turnover, their position is a precarious one on and off the field.
Club chairman Richard Murray declined to comment about the situation after Phil Parkinson’s men drew 1-1 at home to Norwich in the FA Cup yesterday.
0
Comments
And from the article, clearly Pardew's fault. He signed the player and then never used him.
He bought Christensen summer '07 so had only been at the club a few months at that point
Not happy about that though. Why weren't we watching a player a lot more before signing them?
At least now with no money they won't be signing all these gambles like Pardew did. On their own their cheap, but when you add it all up it's money we could really do with.
How much time and money has the club spent on Christensen, Dean Sinclair, Dickson, Fleetwood, Monteiro, Dorian Smith, a handful of non-league trialists, loan signings we didn't need (Cook, Scott Sinclair, arguably some of the others), Dowie signings like Walton, Staunton and Pouso, and any others I've missed?
There's over 10 players there and Dickson has played more than most of them put together, and he's never even started a game for us!
Here's something anyone going to the AGM should be homing in on:
With Charlton’s wage bill now fast approaching 100% of their turnover, their position is a precarious one on and off the field.
Forget pointing fingers - blaming people, although I understand the love of having a good scapegoat, isn't going to pull us out of the shit. It's working out how we get out of this mess that's the most important thing.
Pardew had Christensien on trial at West Ham before he was sacked there so no, not just seen on youtube.
Too much which is why we have very little money to spend on players now. At least most of Pardew's gambles were relatively cheap in terms of fees and wages unlike Dowie's £11m on fees plus big wages.
You reap what you sow.
I remember that, not suggesting he signs players off youtube videos, but doesn't sound like we watched him in 10 league games either.
At the time the gambles seemed cheap, and if everything went to plan and we got promotion it wouldn't have been a problem.
It's the everything not going to plan and not getting promotion that is the problem ; - )
For the last time RM is still on the PLC and still the majority shareholder. He has not been "sidelined".
There are about 274 board members plus a few 100 ex board members, any of whom could have given that quote.
It is a good read and the sub title brilliant, from Porta cabins to Porto captains. Mick is a good bloke and maybe remembered by some fro seeing Tango man getting into a cab in London and rushing over and singing "We put the Palace down!"
From Porta cabins to Porto Captains to Porta loos
The club could always go after Pardew for the wages, they paid out.
"I counted them in, I counted them out"
Oohaah - My life at the turnstiles.
Mick Collins has excellent Charlton credentials.
When you bear in mind that Curbs paid to get the kits washed and later reclaimed the cost of the soap powder how on earth was Pardew allowed to be so profligate?
In Pardew's case it was desperation. In Dowie's case it was hubris.
Not quite, Blackheath, but it appears that we are liable for a million in wages (a four-year, £5,000 a week contract, according to Mick C - and given that according to several Charlton Lifers the bloke is driving around south London in a convertible Mercedes, his figures sound more than plausible...)
Mick Collins "Another Charlton hating journo comes to the surface" - LMFAO!!!!
If anyone knows Mick they should link him to this post, I bet he's been called a lot of things in his time but never that....
You must give me the number of your car dealer, Bexleyheath! The MRP on a new Merc convertible goes from around £65k - 160k. I know there are some good discounts around in these credit crunched times , but even so!
Firstly, Ben’s suggestion that I made up the quote is silly and a bit beneath him. It came from a senior member of the board, who will obviously remain anonymous. It could, I understand, equally have come from any one of them, as it is fairly widely-held. I obtained similar quotes from other people at the club, well-placed to judge either the contract or the player.
Secondly, I don’t think someone talking to me off the record, and Richard offering no comment on the record indicates, in itself, a split. I submitted the essence of the story before filing it, in order that Richard could consider a response. He thought about it for a while, plainly, and decided it would not be appropriate, but he got back to me with an answer, when lots of chairmen would not have done. That is entirely in keeping with they way he has always behaved towards me. Having said that, sometimes, a no comment says more than a comment.
Thirdly, the figures are right. They have been checked, and confirmed. Had any of them been wrong, I’m sure Richard would have corrected me. That, after all, was why I showed them to him before publishing.
Fourthly, I didn’t shout that at Simon Jordan. I sang it. In my defence, it may have been after a long lunch. On reflection, that’s not a very good defence, but that’s life.
Fifthly, I have been called worse. I was once mistaken for a West Ham fan. It still rankles.
Finally, my story was about a silly contract, a damaging deal and a young man earning a million pounds for not playing football. The bigger picture, as someone observed, is the issue of salaries against turnover. That figure was gained by a globally recognised firm of accountants, and it’s a really frightening one.
And, having said that, I’m off.
Cheers,
Mick
As for wages being 100% of Turnover, that is very scary stuff and is why Weaver / ZZ / Hudson etc will not be on our books next year whether we stay up or not.