[cite]Posted By: supaclive[/cite]Jiminez is in property. It is very usual to have a trading company that owns one or two properties and once those properties are developed and sold on, you close the company down - it is tax efficient and restricts losses etc if things go badly (and in property investment they do occassionally).
The same happens in film production - each film is produced and owned by an SPV (special purpose vehicle), formed for that specific film. That way again, each film is treated separately, because again, in film production, something can go wrong and only that film suffers.
Nothing dangerous or nasty about it - very prudent and it's just the norm!
[cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]The reason why The Guardian did not enlarge on the Slater bit is possibly that they tried and failed, like myself, to find the full judgement of the Disciplinary Tribunal. It should be a matter of public record, but so far, I haven't been able to uncover it,
The decisions are a matter of public record, the SDT being required by law to publish them.
Here's the website with decisions since the end of 2005 on it. The Slater decision is under May 2007 for some reason.
I've only had a quick look through but it seems that Slater was cleared reasonably comprehensively by the Tribunal albeit that he was not entirely professional.
Don't like Jiminez's history of being involved in liquidated companies although there may be a reasonable explanation for it.
Nothing in this IMHO. Stems from somthing almost 10 years ago. One interesting thing is that M Slater was a solicitor that ended up doing most of his work for one family.
[cite]Posted By: supaclive[/cite]Jiminez is in property. It is very usual to have a trading company that owns one or two properties and once those properties are developed and sold on, you close the company down - it is tax efficient and restricts losses etc if things go badly (and in property investment they do occassionally).
The same happens in film production - each film is produced and owned by an SPV (special purpose vehicle), formed for that specific film. That way again, each film is treated separately, because again, in film production, something can go wrong and only that film suffers.
Nothing dangerous or nasty about it - very prudent and it's just the norm!
Good post. I, for one, didnt know that, even about film production, which perhaps I ought to have known.
But this also shows the value of discussing such things here openly, and not cowering before people just because they appear to be richer than us. We are stakeholders in this club, and without us it wouldn't be here at all. All facts are worth having, but they don't always tell the whole story. Nothing wrong with a journalist asking questions. See what he comes with, pool our knowledge, and decide for ourselves, as events unfold.
[cite]Posted By: supaclive[/cite]Jiminez is in property. It is very usual to have a trading company that owns one or two properties and once those properties are developed and sold on, you close the company down - it is tax efficient and restricts losses etc if things go badly (and in property investment they do occassionally).
The same happens in film production - each film is produced and owned by an SPV (special purpose vehicle), formed for that specific film. That way again, each film is treated separately, because again, in film production, something can go wrong and only that film suffers.
Nothing dangerous or nasty about it - very prudent and it's just the norm!
Valid point supaclive, but that is the approach that concerns me a little. Its the lack of longevity and responsibility attached to it. An in and out as quick as possible, throw a cash injection at it, if it works then your laughing and see big returns. If it doesn't, you've isolated it to not impact on your other interests, and close it down and get out double quick. Works with investment funds, property developments etc, but i'm very much 'scared' of the downside of what position our club will be left in in 18 months time if things don't go to successful plan.
Accept i'm only seeing the worst case scenario, but knowing how these companies are secretly guarded in their structure and ownership, obscure in their registration, its the longevity issue i'm concerned about. And nothing i've seen so far from these two 'front men' backgrounds has eased those concerns.
[cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]Well, Nigel, I guess we will know a lot more by the end of January.
In the meantime, we can put our differences to one side and celebrate - I am already on the champagne - England's wonderful display in Sydney today. Cook, Bell and Prior were unbelievable and if we can get another 50-60 runs tomorrow morning then we could well have three innings victories in an Ashes series to celebrate.
That really would be something.
Agree with both parts of that, Ormiston.
January is going to be a big month and we will know a lot more about how the future is going to pan out by its end (which is why I think you might keep your powder dry for a bit!).
And as for the Ashes, what can you say? Cook overtaking everyone but Hammond as the heaviest run scorer in an Ashes series down under? A wonderful achievement. The end for Collingwood, I think, But the rest of the batting has been so good that his poor form hasn't mattered. And we've got people like Morgan waiting in the wings. Good times for English cricket.
And to bring it full circle, good times coming for Charlton, too, I hope.
I do understand your passion and where it comes from, and I accept that excitement is often followed by disappointment. But I am genuinely excited by what's happening at Charlton right now - and it's a long time since I've been able to say that. Let's hope it lasts.
[cite]Posted By: incorruptible addick[/cite]Think a few people need to calm down.
According to some people , we're owned by a couple of very dodgy ''herberts'' , the club's future has been written off as ''already looking very very shaky'' and the bloke who might be the new manager (although he might not) is ''vermin''.
The sale is only 80 hours old and so far the new owners have shown commendably serious intent and ambition by getting rid of a manager who most accepted was not going to get us promoted and was only in the job at all because he was the cheap option when Murray ran out of money.
After several seasons of being a joke club, the rebuilding of Charlton starts here. Why not join in, instead of standing on the sidelines hurling abuse at those trying to turn the club around ? And it's ludicrous to dismiss those of us who see the change of ownership as a golden opportunity as ''Parky haters''. Chirst, there was even someone on here last night claiming Slater and Jiminez were motivated by ''spite'' towards Parkinson!
Time some people took a reality check. In six months from now we would have faced going into administration. Perhaps we are not totally out of the woods yet. But under new leadership, on and off the field, at least we're now going to have a fighting chance!
"The Guardian Media Group is one of the shrewdest corporate avoiders of tax in Britain, in 2008 it made a £300 million profit and yet managed to pay no corporation tax, the following year in 2009 it still paid no corporation tax, it uses the offshore Caymans tax haven to own assets, it uses tax efficient trusts and deploys all manner of perfectly legal tax shelter strategies to avoid paying tax."
"Richard Brooks from the Guardian’s “Tax Gap” blog says they are going to explain the Guardian Media Group’s situation using the same approach they used on the FTSE 100 corporations (Incidentally, before anyone points it out, this blog is published by an offshore corporation owned by an opaque charitable trust, in a remarkably similar way to the Guardian set-up)."
The Guardian article has clearly been written by someone who doesn't have a basic understanding about how business/property development works as has been clearly demonstrated by earlier comments. Given that most football journalists know precious little about football why should anyone trust what they say about business matters - I have even come across so called financial jounalists who have problems in understanding the differences between a balance sheet, a profit and loss account and a cashflow statement.
Just checked the Companies House records for Richard Murray. As you can see he has been director of a number of companies that have been dissolved or in liquidation. I don't think any Charlton fan would call him 'dodgy' or a 'herbert'.
Company Number Name Status Function Appointed Date Credit Rating Credit Limit
02906231 APPLIED ELECTRONIC RENTALS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/03/1994 0
07326155 BATON 2010 LIMITED Active - Newly Incorporated Director 26/07/2010 53 1000
01788466 CHARLTON ATHLETIC FOOTBALL COMPANY LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 21/07/1991 12 0
01788363 AVESCO GROUP PLC Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 95 700000
00805968 WELSH INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT TRUST PLC In Liquidation Director 21/11/1992 0 0
06254418 GREEN ENERGY PLANTATIONS LIMITED Financial Statements too old Director 06/02/2009 0 0
04174013 MEDAL ENTERTAINMENT & MEDIA PLC In Receivership / Administration Director 12/10/2001 0 0
02808331 CA 2010 PLC Dissolution Director 13/12/1993 0 0
02803117 BOLISTROM LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 24/03/1994 9 0
01342867 SPACEWARD HOLDINGS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02228554 SPACEWARD IMAGING SYSTEMS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02228321 SPACEWARD LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02689249 CHARLTON ATHLETIC HOLDINGS LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 19/02/1992 93 100000
02086874 AMBISONIC LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02228306 SPACEWARD RESEARCH LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
Previous Directorships
Company Number Name Status Function Appointed Date Credit Rating Credit Limit
03089349 ART OF THE AVID LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 04/04/1996 0 0
02375772 METAGENCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED Non trading Director 25/04/1992 0 0
02326986 WW REALISATION 8 LIMITED In Receivership / Administration Director 21/04/1994 0 0
02285513 AVESCO SERVICES LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 91 60000
03838649 RED WAVE PLC Company is dissolved Director 09/03/2000 0 0
04034697 GLOBALWAVE GROUP PLC Company is dissolved Director 21/11/2000 0 0
02893853 TONTEL LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 04/02/1994 0 0
04423882 FOUNTAIN TELEVISION LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 05/09/2006 83 50000
02204533 FOUNTAIN GROUP LTD Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02105981 INVESTINMEDIA INVESTMENTS LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 31/01/2004 60 500
02069335 AVS RESEARCH LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 12/10/1991 0 0
02039109 CREATIVE TECHNOLOGY LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 96 100000
01978731 SCREENCO LIMITED Non trading Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01950998 AVESCO OVERSEAS LIMITED Non trading Director 10/08/1992 0 0
01933778 FOREFRONT TECHNOLOGY LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
SC115367 HOST EUROPE EIGHT LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 12/09/1996 94 700000
01784991 AVESCO FINANCE LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 93 100000
03244165 CILL HOLDINGS LIMITED Financial Statements too old Director 11/10/1996 0 0
01892004 SCREENCO GROUP LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 88 1000
01821546 MEDAL PRODUCTIONS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01807922 INVESTINMEDIA HOLDINGS LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 31/01/2004 59 5000
01764892 DIMENSION AUDIO LIMITED Non trading Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01723833 PRESTEIGNE LIMITED Non trading Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01545540 FOUNTAIN TELEVISION (PROPERTIES) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02456680 AVESCO RESEARCH LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 02/01/1992 0 0
04982392 AVESCO PLC Active - Accounts Filed Director 22/12/2003 95 180000
04045179 ZYZYGY PLC Voluntary Arrangement Director 04/08/2000 0 0
02889207 LEITCH EUROPE LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 01/07/1994 0 0
01306335 IMAGINATION TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 86 60000
01142342 STRATTON HOLDINGS PLC In Liquidation Director 21/10/1994 0 0
SC103934 AVESCO TECHNOLOGY LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 04/08/1989 0 0
SC024493 AVESCO BROADCAST LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1989 0 0
02228507 VISUAL TECHNIQUES LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02207249 POST PRODUCTION SYSTEMS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1992 0 0
01929145 AVS BROADCAST LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01951953 AUDIO VIDEO TECHNICAL SERVICES LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01554605 APPLIED VIDEO SYSTEMS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02720446 PRESTEIGNE CHARTER LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 05/03/1993 83 135000
01990979 FOREFRONT INFORMATION SYSTEMS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 04/08/1991 0 0
Thank you Jints - I should have carried on paging down! So we now know that he plays close to the edge, has been a naughty, but very clever boy. Very much suited to the murky world of football money then.
Re Jim and his businesses - it does all matter, because when companies just shut down and then start up under a new name, they leave a huge number of victims. Unfortunately, we personally have been one of the victims so our sensitivity index to these issues is on permalock high. In our case, it was eventually RBS that ended up losing all its investment money, and we have all had to pay to prop up RBS.
These are the previous Jimenez directorships referred to in the Guardian article. There does not seem to be many property companys in that list.
Directorships
Print: TAB | REPORT Company Number Name Status Function Appointed Date Credit Rating Credit Limit
05468905 WORLDWIDE FOREIGN EXCHANGE LTD Company is dissolved Director 01/06/2005 0 0
04654685 INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE CLIENT MANAGEMENT LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 20/02/2003 0 0
04654685 INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE CLIENT MANAGEMENT LIMITED Company is dissolved Company Secretary 20/02/2003 0 0
03996383 CASA SPORTS (SOCCER SCOTLAND) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 18/05/2000 0 0
03982561 CASA SPORTS (GOLF) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 28/04/2000 0 0
03982558 CASA SPORTS (SOCCER) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 28/04/2000 0 0
03982409 CASA SPORTS (MARKETING AND PROMOTIONS) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 28/04/2000 0 0
06156026 INTERNATIONAL LANDBANK WITH PLANNING LTD Company is dissolved Company Secretary 13/03/2007 0 0
06034048 MARC ANTONY LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 21/12/2006 0 0
05990571 COMPLETE ALLIANCE CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 07/11/2006 0 0
05967945 COMPLETE ALLIANCE RENOVATIONS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 16/10/2006 0 0
05967945 COMPLETE ALLIANCE RENOVATIONS LIMITED Company is dissolved Company Secretary 16/10/2006 0 0
03982413 CASA SPORTS (SPAIN) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 28/04/2000 0 0
04944516 WWC EXCHANGE BROKERS LIMITED In Liquidation Director 25/11/2003 0 0
Previous Directorships
Company Number Name Status Function Appointed Date Credit Rating Credit Limit
04478004 MEDIA PROMOTIONS WORLDWIDE LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 05/07/2002 0 0
03983440 CASA SPORTS HOLDINGS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 28/04/2000 0 0
05988156 FRACTIONAL INVESTMENTS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 03/11/2006 0 0
These trawls through the record books are meaningless.
Most of these firms will just be vehicles for mergers and acquisitions, and The Football League have already done all the digging before allowing them to take control of CAFC.
Neither Slater or Jiminez have got enough money to cover £30m of debt - all they have agreed to do is take the reins from RM and run the club. Slater's company had record profits of £4m last year - not enough to be involved in football ownership.
There is obviously something in the background, but we will have to wait and see.
[cite]Posted By: Valiantphil[/cite]Most of these firms will just be vehicles for mergers and acquisitions, and The Football League have already done all the digging before allowing them to take control of CAFC.
Well, we will indeed have to wait and see but we needn't sit on our hands while we wait. All these things are facts. The more facts we have, the more meaning we can ascribe to them.
One thing I can say with certainty is that both the Premier League and the Football League have shown lamentable failure to set up and push through a "fit and proper person test". Yes the Football League have done more than the FAPL, but it still falls lamentably short of what's needed. Whatever you do, do not put one iota of faith in football's administrators to safeguard the future of CAFC.
Indeed the Guradian article looks like it took 5 minutes of basic reseach. Omicron - by questionning the new owners you are questionning Murray(and Varney). That's my point. I don't believe that Murray almost extinguished his net worth and then handed over on a whim. It's not a fairytale - it's plain to see that the new board are in it for financial reasons. By that's not to say that their interests are not alligned with ours(or Murray or Varney). Remember whatever Murray did for Charlton - and that's a hell of a lot(despite the odd poor manager), he will be judged by who he handed over to. That's why I believe...
I wonder if the whole article is as accurate as the opening? "Charlton Athletic's new owners are decisive: they sacked the manager Phil Parkinson yesterday within 24 hours of taking control."
Surely they took over Dec 31 and sacked Parky on Jan 4 - or am I wrong about that?
I think it is true to say that if you scrutinise any seriously rich person you will find things like this. Also losses from Charlton can be offset on taxes which I presume a film company would also provide them with. Prestige things to own but you don't buy these things to make a profit. Of course they would have brought Charlton to bask in the success and I'm sure they will do what they can to achieve this.
[cite]Posted By: Vincenzo[/cite]I wonder if the whole article is as accurate as the opening? "Charlton Athletic's new owners are decisive: they sacked the manager Phil Parkinson yesterday within 24 hours of taking control."
Surely they took over Dec 31 and sacked Parky on Jan 4 - or am I wrong about that?
Pretty much set their standard for the rest of the article, garbage.
Thing is, without these two what was the alternative?
Murray said when he handed over that his resources were exhausting.We all know that we were in more of a mess than the picture he has been painting these last few months shows.
He successfully knocked Jiminez back before but the vultures kept circling. And my guess is that he had no choice second or third time around.
Interesting that the nervousness sets in a mere four days after the euphoria.
I have a more basic question:
Why would any successful business man 'invest' in a football club? It can hardly be seen as a potential money-making exercise. On the face of it, it makes no business sense whatsoever.
Remember the old joke? "Q. What's the fastest way to make £10 million out of a football club? A. Invest £20 million."
So, you would assume that our new owners are in it for the glory. For the fame. For the kudos. And yet, assuming that Slater and Jiminez are merely the front men, then the true owners seem to be shunning the very publicity they might seek.
That leads me to think that there may not be any mystery money men behind Slater and Jiminez. And then ....
... well, property development is where Jiminez seems to have made his money.
[cite]Posted By: Valiantphil[/cite]Most of these firms will just be vehicles for mergers and acquisitions, and The Football League have already done all the digging before allowing them to take control of CAFC.
Well, we will indeed have to wait and see but we needn't sit on our hands while we wait. All these things are facts. The more facts we have, the more meaning we can ascribe to them.
One thing I can say with certainty is that both the Premier League and the Football League have shown lamentable failure to set up and push through a "fit and proper person test". Yes the Football League have done more than the FAPL, but it still falls lamentably short of what's needed. Whatever you do, do not put one iota of faith in football's administrators to safeguard the future of CAFC.
If you are unhappy with what you discover - what are you going to do about it ?
We already stood by while our elected director was removed, our share certificates torn up, and RM dispensed with all other board members - and did nothing.
We allowed RM (with a woeful record of decision making in the last few years) to have sole control of our club and sell it to whoever he likes...........
He has done exactly that - for 2 quid.
As for fit and proper persons - I can't name a current football club owner that fails this test, and telling me thet TJ was a director of CASA Sports (GOLF) LTD which was dissolved 10 years ago is hardly Roger Cook.
You are wrong to say "we can't just sit on our hands and wait" - that is all we can do, we are powerless in this, except to remove our physical (financial) support for the club. This is exactly why they sacked Parky - because we are not going to get the missing crowds back by losing at home to Walsall and Swindon and a dwindling gate is the biggest weak spot in the ongoing financial plan.
Comments
This is true.
Nothing in this IMHO. Stems from somthing almost 10 years ago. One interesting thing is that M Slater was a solicitor that ended up doing most of his work for one family.
Good post. I, for one, didnt know that, even about film production, which perhaps I ought to have known.
But this also shows the value of discussing such things here openly, and not cowering before people just because they appear to be richer than us. We are stakeholders in this club, and without us it wouldn't be here at all. All facts are worth having, but they don't always tell the whole story. Nothing wrong with a journalist asking questions. See what he comes with, pool our knowledge, and decide for ourselves, as events unfold.
Valid point supaclive, but that is the approach that concerns me a little. Its the lack of longevity and responsibility attached to it. An in and out as quick as possible, throw a cash injection at it, if it works then your laughing and see big returns. If it doesn't, you've isolated it to not impact on your other interests, and close it down and get out double quick. Works with investment funds, property developments etc, but i'm very much 'scared' of the downside of what position our club will be left in in 18 months time if things don't go to successful plan.
Accept i'm only seeing the worst case scenario, but knowing how these companies are secretly guarded in their structure and ownership, obscure in their registration, its the longevity issue i'm concerned about. And nothing i've seen so far from these two 'front men' backgrounds has eased those concerns.
Agree with both parts of that, Ormiston.
January is going to be a big month and we will know a lot more about how the future is going to pan out by its end (which is why I think you might keep your powder dry for a bit!).
And as for the Ashes, what can you say? Cook overtaking everyone but Hammond as the heaviest run scorer in an Ashes series down under? A wonderful achievement. The end for Collingwood, I think, But the rest of the batting has been so good that his poor form hasn't mattered. And we've got people like Morgan waiting in the wings. Good times for English cricket.
And to bring it full circle, good times coming for Charlton, too, I hope.
I do understand your passion and where it comes from, and I accept that excitement is often followed by disappointment. But I am genuinely excited by what's happening at Charlton right now - and it's a long time since I've been able to say that. Let's hope it lasts.
But Supaclive is quite right. All property developers set up SPVs for new developments - it's just standard practice.
Some sense at last!!
Worried.
"The Guardian Media Group is one of the shrewdest corporate avoiders of tax in Britain, in 2008 it made a £300 million profit and yet managed to pay no corporation tax, the following year in 2009 it still paid no corporation tax, it uses the offshore Caymans tax haven to own assets, it uses tax efficient trusts and deploys all manner of perfectly legal tax shelter strategies to avoid paying tax."
"Richard Brooks from the Guardian’s “Tax Gap” blog says they are going to explain the Guardian Media Group’s situation using the same approach they used on the FTSE 100 corporations (Incidentally, before anyone points it out, this blog is published by an offshore corporation owned by an opaque charitable trust, in a remarkably similar way to the Guardian set-up)."
Company Number Name Status Function Appointed Date Credit Rating Credit Limit
02906231 APPLIED ELECTRONIC RENTALS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/03/1994 0
07326155 BATON 2010 LIMITED Active - Newly Incorporated Director 26/07/2010 53 1000
01788466 CHARLTON ATHLETIC FOOTBALL COMPANY LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 21/07/1991 12 0
01788363 AVESCO GROUP PLC Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 95 700000
00805968 WELSH INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT TRUST PLC In Liquidation Director 21/11/1992 0 0
06254418 GREEN ENERGY PLANTATIONS LIMITED Financial Statements too old Director 06/02/2009 0 0
04174013 MEDAL ENTERTAINMENT & MEDIA PLC In Receivership / Administration Director 12/10/2001 0 0
02808331 CA 2010 PLC Dissolution Director 13/12/1993 0 0
02803117 BOLISTROM LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 24/03/1994 9 0
01342867 SPACEWARD HOLDINGS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02228554 SPACEWARD IMAGING SYSTEMS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02228321 SPACEWARD LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02689249 CHARLTON ATHLETIC HOLDINGS LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 19/02/1992 93 100000
02086874 AMBISONIC LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02228306 SPACEWARD RESEARCH LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
Previous Directorships
Company Number Name Status Function Appointed Date Credit Rating Credit Limit
03089349 ART OF THE AVID LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 04/04/1996 0 0
02375772 METAGENCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED Non trading Director 25/04/1992 0 0
02326986 WW REALISATION 8 LIMITED In Receivership / Administration Director 21/04/1994 0 0
02285513 AVESCO SERVICES LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 91 60000
03838649 RED WAVE PLC Company is dissolved Director 09/03/2000 0 0
04034697 GLOBALWAVE GROUP PLC Company is dissolved Director 21/11/2000 0 0
02893853 TONTEL LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 04/02/1994 0 0
04423882 FOUNTAIN TELEVISION LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 05/09/2006 83 50000
02204533 FOUNTAIN GROUP LTD Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02105981 INVESTINMEDIA INVESTMENTS LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 31/01/2004 60 500
02069335 AVS RESEARCH LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 12/10/1991 0 0
02039109 CREATIVE TECHNOLOGY LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 96 100000
01978731 SCREENCO LIMITED Non trading Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01950998 AVESCO OVERSEAS LIMITED Non trading Director 10/08/1992 0 0
01933778 FOREFRONT TECHNOLOGY LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
SC115367 HOST EUROPE EIGHT LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 12/09/1996 94 700000
01784991 AVESCO FINANCE LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 93 100000
03244165 CILL HOLDINGS LIMITED Financial Statements too old Director 11/10/1996 0 0
01892004 SCREENCO GROUP LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 88 1000
01821546 MEDAL PRODUCTIONS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01807922 INVESTINMEDIA HOLDINGS LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 31/01/2004 59 5000
01764892 DIMENSION AUDIO LIMITED Non trading Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01723833 PRESTEIGNE LIMITED Non trading Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01545540 FOUNTAIN TELEVISION (PROPERTIES) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02456680 AVESCO RESEARCH LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 02/01/1992 0 0
04982392 AVESCO PLC Active - Accounts Filed Director 22/12/2003 95 180000
04045179 ZYZYGY PLC Voluntary Arrangement Director 04/08/2000 0 0
02889207 LEITCH EUROPE LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 01/07/1994 0 0
01306335 IMAGINATION TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 10/08/1991 86 60000
01142342 STRATTON HOLDINGS PLC In Liquidation Director 21/10/1994 0 0
SC103934 AVESCO TECHNOLOGY LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 04/08/1989 0 0
SC024493 AVESCO BROADCAST LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1989 0 0
02228507 VISUAL TECHNIQUES LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02207249 POST PRODUCTION SYSTEMS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1992 0 0
01929145 AVS BROADCAST LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01951953 AUDIO VIDEO TECHNICAL SERVICES LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
01554605 APPLIED VIDEO SYSTEMS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 10/08/1991 0 0
02720446 PRESTEIGNE CHARTER LIMITED Active - Accounts Filed Director 05/03/1993 83 135000
01990979 FOREFRONT INFORMATION SYSTEMS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 04/08/1991 0 0
Re Jim and his businesses - it does all matter, because when companies just shut down and then start up under a new name, they leave a huge number of victims. Unfortunately, we personally have been one of the victims so our sensitivity index to these issues is on permalock high. In our case, it was eventually RBS that ended up losing all its investment money, and we have all had to pay to prop up RBS.
Directorships
Print: TAB | REPORT Company Number Name Status Function Appointed Date Credit Rating Credit Limit
05468905 WORLDWIDE FOREIGN EXCHANGE LTD Company is dissolved Director 01/06/2005 0 0
04654685 INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE CLIENT MANAGEMENT LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 20/02/2003 0 0
04654685 INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE CLIENT MANAGEMENT LIMITED Company is dissolved Company Secretary 20/02/2003 0 0
03996383 CASA SPORTS (SOCCER SCOTLAND) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 18/05/2000 0 0
03982561 CASA SPORTS (GOLF) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 28/04/2000 0 0
03982558 CASA SPORTS (SOCCER) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 28/04/2000 0 0
03982409 CASA SPORTS (MARKETING AND PROMOTIONS) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 28/04/2000 0 0
06156026 INTERNATIONAL LANDBANK WITH PLANNING LTD Company is dissolved Company Secretary 13/03/2007 0 0
06034048 MARC ANTONY LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 21/12/2006 0 0
05990571 COMPLETE ALLIANCE CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 07/11/2006 0 0
05967945 COMPLETE ALLIANCE RENOVATIONS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 16/10/2006 0 0
05967945 COMPLETE ALLIANCE RENOVATIONS LIMITED Company is dissolved Company Secretary 16/10/2006 0 0
03982413 CASA SPORTS (SPAIN) LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 28/04/2000 0 0
04944516 WWC EXCHANGE BROKERS LIMITED In Liquidation Director 25/11/2003 0 0
Previous Directorships
Company Number Name Status Function Appointed Date Credit Rating Credit Limit
04478004 MEDIA PROMOTIONS WORLDWIDE LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 05/07/2002 0 0
03983440 CASA SPORTS HOLDINGS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 28/04/2000 0 0
05988156 FRACTIONAL INVESTMENTS LIMITED Company is dissolved Director 03/11/2006 0 0
Most of these firms will just be vehicles for mergers and acquisitions, and The Football League have already done all the digging before allowing them to take control of CAFC.
Neither Slater or Jiminez have got enough money to cover £30m of debt - all they have agreed to do is take the reins from RM and run the club. Slater's company had record profits of £4m last year - not enough to be involved in football ownership.
There is obviously something in the background, but we will have to wait and see.
Murray OUT!
... and what a track record they have
Well, we will indeed have to wait and see but we needn't sit on our hands while we wait. All these things are facts. The more facts we have, the more meaning we can ascribe to them.
One thing I can say with certainty is that both the Premier League and the Football League have shown lamentable failure to set up and push through a "fit and proper person test". Yes the Football League have done more than the FAPL, but it still falls lamentably short of what's needed. Whatever you do, do not put one iota of faith in football's administrators to safeguard the future of CAFC.
Surely they took over Dec 31 and sacked Parky on Jan 4 - or am I wrong about that?
Pretty much set their standard for the rest of the article, garbage.
Murray said when he handed over that his resources were exhausting.We all know that we were in more of a mess than the picture he has been painting these last few months shows.
He successfully knocked Jiminez back before but the vultures kept circling. And my guess is that he had no choice second or third time around.
I have a more basic question:
Why would any successful business man 'invest' in a football club? It can hardly be seen as a potential money-making exercise. On the face of it, it makes no business sense whatsoever.
Remember the old joke? "Q. What's the fastest way to make £10 million out of a football club? A. Invest £20 million."
So, you would assume that our new owners are in it for the glory. For the fame. For the kudos. And yet, assuming that Slater and Jiminez are merely the front men, then the true owners seem to be shunning the very publicity they might seek.
That leads me to think that there may not be any mystery money men behind Slater and Jiminez. And then ....
... well, property development is where Jiminez seems to have made his money.
If you are unhappy with what you discover - what are you going to do about it ?
We already stood by while our elected director was removed, our share certificates torn up, and RM dispensed with all other board members - and did nothing.
We allowed RM (with a woeful record of decision making in the last few years) to have sole control of our club and sell it to whoever he likes...........
He has done exactly that - for 2 quid.
As for fit and proper persons - I can't name a current football club owner that fails this test, and telling me thet TJ was a director of CASA Sports (GOLF) LTD which was dissolved 10 years ago is hardly Roger Cook.
You are wrong to say "we can't just sit on our hands and wait" - that is all we can do, we are powerless in this, except to remove our physical (financial) support for the club. This is exactly why they sacked Parky - because we are not going to get the missing crowds back by losing at home to Walsall and Swindon and a dwindling gate is the biggest weak spot in the ongoing financial plan.
Patience everybody please.