massive distinction between a liquidated company and a dissolved company. Dissolved companies are often just dissolved by the Directors when there is no more need for them - ie it owned a property which was developed and sold and then the company was dissolved. No reaosn to think that any of these companies went under for financial reasons. Hasn't Jimenez moved all his businesses off shore for tax reasons - hence he is probably closing all his onshore companies for this reason. Terribly lazy jounalism IMO.
Have you never heard the phrase "information is power?"
Nobody is suggesting we march on the Valley with banners proclaiming "Cockney Mafia Out". Nobody is trying to prove anything one way or another. We are trying to learn and find out facts. I'd already said that we needed to see what happens in January before we get a clear idea of how things are going to change for the team. But that doesnt mean everyone should just sit there like children waiting for the headmaster to tell us we can stand up. Me, I've already learnt some interesting things about UK company law and how people use it, from posts here today, and that in turn is because the Guardian wrote the article. What's the problem with that? If it turns out that these guys are going to do the right thing by us, then we can point out to other journos that the Guardian dropped a bollock. On the other hand if Tony Jiminez is planning to do something naughty with the real estate, do you think he's going to declare it any time soon? Your patience might have to stretch right up to the time when you get handed a leaflet at the Valley telling you about the bus services to Ebbsfleet.I don't know how old you are, but that happened to me in 1985, and I'm f***ed if I'm going to be surprised like that again.
As far as I'm concerned the more people post facts about our new owners, and post rational non-libellous opinions too, the better. Rumours and opinions dressed up as facts are no good, of course, but otherwise, bring it on. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, don't read such threads.
And as for your assertion that you don't know any current owners who fail the fit and proper person test, are you serious? For a start do you know what the test is? (I don't, but many people who do, write that its not fit for purpose) Secondly if you actually know who the real owners of Leeds United are, could you tell 35,000 Leeds fans, because they've been trying to find out since Kuddly Ken arrived.
Having just sat another round of my solicitors' exams today, coincidentally Professional Conduct, the description of Slater from the SDT hearing is somewhat close to the bone!
[cite]Posted By: Valiantphil[/cite]
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.
Where did you get this from, I've seen an exact figure quoted anywhere.
Been at work all day and just trawled through this huge thread and quite frankly some of the doom on here is staggering. Yes we want and should try to find out the truth about our new owners but some on this site have already found them guilty and passed sentence which is ludicrous. They have been in control much less than a week and have already made a huge and correct decision in dismissing the coaching staff who were not good enough. In one fell swoop they got onside thousands of previously regular fans who refused to watch the dross served up by Parkinson et al. They have also reinvigorated the purpose of those of us who still attend but have been so depondant to the point of giving up. They have the backing of respected Charlton legends Mr. Murray and Peter Varney. They have cleared our debt and fended off the very real possibility of administration possibly this season. They have promised money for players and have stated ambition but tempered with the addition of living within our means. What on earth is there to moan about YET ! Please for Pitys sake give them the benefit of doubt until we have cause to question.
Ok...you buy a football club as an outlet....you can offset profits made elsewhere by a loss making vehicle...i.e.a football club....thats plain to see....so company A makes ex million, offset by company B which loses Y million. That why you would buy a football club.....
Also...another slightly different angle......Buy an ailing ex premier league club for a knockdown price in league 1....invest a sensible bob or two and get promotion....club then worth a bit more.......invest a few quid more, baring in mind that its going to be more lucrative in the CCC, get promotion and suddenly the little investment in League 1 can suddenly be worth 10 times as much in the premier league = big pay day.
Elsewhere.....if you use a company as a vehicle to say, build a house...when you come to sell the house which is owned by the company, you pay corporation tax at 40%....but if you liquidate the company (i.e. close it down as it has ended its useful life) you pay just 10% corporation tax.........so does that make sense now?
[cite]Posted By: ShootersHillGuru[/cite]Been at work all day and just trawled through this huge thread and quite frankly some of the doom on here is staggering. Yes we want and should try to find out the truth about our new owners but some on this site have already found them guilty and passed sentence which is ludicrous. They have been in control much less than a week and have already made a huge and correct decision in dismissing the coaching staff who were not good enough. In one fell swoop they got onside thousands of previously regular fans who refused to watch the dross served up by Parkinson et al. They have also reinvigorated the purpose of those of us who still attend but have been so depondant to the point of giving up. They have the backing of respected Charlton legends Mr. Murray and Peter Varney. They have cleared our debt and fended off the very real possibility of administration possibly this season. They have promised money for players and have stated ambition but tempered with the addition of living within our means. What on earth is there to moan about YET ! Please for Pitys sake give them the benefit of doubt until we have cause to question.
Thank God for a bit of sense. Though I don't think they've cleared our debt.
[cite]Posted By: ShootersHillGuru[/cite]Been at work all day and just trawled through this huge thread and quite frankly some of the doom on here is staggering. Yes we want and should try to find out the truth about our new owners but some on this site have already found them guilty and passed sentence which is ludicrous. They have been in control much less than a week and have already made a huge and correct decision in dismissing the coaching staff who were not good enough. In one fell swoop they got onside thousands of previously regular fans who refused to watch the dross served up by Parkinson et al. They have also reinvigorated the purpose of those of us who still attend but have been so depondant to the point of giving up. They have the backing of respected Charlton legends Mr. Murray and Peter Varney. They have cleared our debt and fended off the very real possibility of administration possibly this season. They have promised money for players and have stated ambition but tempered with the addition of living within our means. What on earth is there to moan about YET ! Please for Pitys sake give them the benefit of doubt until we have cause to question.
Thank God for a bit of sense. Though I don't think they've cleared our debt.
Agreed that point is wrong. At least the debt is now covered as proven by proof of money to Charltons previous bankers.
Charlton Athletic fans are wondering whether Kevin Cash, a super-wealthy property developer, has funded the club's recent takeover. The Addicks' newly installed chairman, Michael Slater, is an 11% shareholder and the chairman of Reflex Vehicle Solutions, a car-rental firm of which Cash's Rose Property Holdings owns pretty much all of the remaining 89%.
Charlton are obliged under Football League rules to announce all backers who own more than 10% of the club, and they have declared only Slater and Tony Jimenez as the major shareholders. A spokesman for the pair confirmed yesterday: "The majority owners of the club are Tony and Michael; there are several minority shareholders who each have less than 10% in the holding company."
There is obviously no reason to disbelieve the spokesman but neither is there any way of independently checking - not even for the Football League. As revealed here on Tuesday, Charlton's parent company, CAFC Holdings, is registered in the British Virgin Islands, where shareholders and directors need not be disclosed'.
Taken together with the full report on Slater's Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in May 2007 (linked in the deepestdarkest blog below) it makes at least 'interesting reading'
Although Slater was technically cleared of charges in the hearing if you take the time to read through the legal jargon of the report he would appear to have a somewhat 'flexible' and 'creative' approach to who actually 'owns' a company and to be quite skillful in opening and closing down companies and transferring assets between them.
Secondly the case itself involved a debt collecting company run by slater that bought bad debts at a knock down price and then pursued the debtor for the full amount - in this case £16700 owed by a small builder that Slater's company bought for £1000. Whatever thr rights and wrongs in that case it seems unlikely that someone who only a few years ago was was grubbing around chasing a small builder for £16700 is now the moneybags owner of a football club?
Similary Jiminez may have more money than Slater but apparently began as a security manager at Chelsea and has dabbled in 'sports promtion' and 'property development' - is he really the moneybags?
So is quote in today's Guardian that the 'majority owners of the club are Tony and Michael' correct? If so have they bought the club for a similar figure to the £2 the Richard Murray's Baton bought it for a couple of months ago - with the debt now hived off to CAFC Holdings registered in the British Virgin Islands? With Slater's creative approach to companies and assets is that a worry?
As John Window has posted on the CAFC Discussion List: 'And to think we laughed at Leeds and others regarding mystery owners. BYE, BYE, "FAMILY CLUB"
I know some people don't want to look to closely at this sort of stuff or think what can we do about it anyway - but I'd be interested in people's views - particularly PragueAddick?
[quote][cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]my thought --its in the Guardian it has to be total shit.[/quote]
Which bit - that the club is now owned by 'CAFC Holdings...registered in the British Virgin Islands, where shareholders and directors need not be disclosed' - or the quote from "A spokesman" that: "The majority owners of the club are Tony and Michael" who wouldn't appear to be flush with cash?
As I said I know some people don't want to look to closely at this sort of stuff or think what can we do about it anyway - but at the moment the new setup looks somewhat dodgy.
I think its a pretty reasonable assumption that Slater with no real football connections other than being a Man City fan has been brought in to absolutely to front whoever really is backing Charlton. It seems his real talent is for doing just exactly what is needed in keeping a companies dealings well concealed. As for Jimenez, well I think its pretty certain that if the former is correct then who better than footballs "Mr. Fixit" in as well to have all the football contacts required to make a success. I know zip about company law and dealings but if no significant other backer the why is CAFC Holdings registered in the Virgin Islands ? if not for concealment reasons.
Now i've spotted Slater.I think Dennis Wise can be seen cutting up the tiles and i do believe Jiminez is in the background of a couple of them. Cash's missus aint bad either.
The point of this? I have no idea. Just interesting to see our two directors and a bloke who visited the Valley regularaly just before the takeover,at a £1/2 billionaires wedding.That is all.
I believe there is some backer there (just a hunch no inside info)
And Kevin Cash has been mentioned as being the man. From what I've read about him he likes to keep himself out of the spotlight.
CAFC Holdings Limited, "a company managed and controlled in Switzerland", though its registration is held in the offshore tax haven of the British Virgin Islands.
I think it is coming increasingly more likely that Kevin Cash is one of the behind the scenes backers in all this.
A lot speculation that due to the relationship of the key parties, Dennis Wise was going to be hoisted upon us. It never materialised, and that was due imo to one of two reasons:
1. That they saw the public opinion was very much against him
Or
2. Dennis Wise is actually one of the minor owners of our club
I'm with GH on this. If we start bringing in good players this summer and building for success - I will be too busy celebrating that chink of light at the end of this dark, long tunnel to worry too much about much else!
Comments
Have you never heard the phrase "information is power?"
Nobody is suggesting we march on the Valley with banners proclaiming "Cockney Mafia Out". Nobody is trying to prove anything one way or another. We are trying to learn and find out facts. I'd already said that we needed to see what happens in January before we get a clear idea of how things are going to change for the team. But that doesnt mean everyone should just sit there like children waiting for the headmaster to tell us we can stand up. Me, I've already learnt some interesting things about UK company law and how people use it, from posts here today, and that in turn is because the Guardian wrote the article. What's the problem with that? If it turns out that these guys are going to do the right thing by us, then we can point out to other journos that the Guardian dropped a bollock. On the other hand if Tony Jiminez is planning to do something naughty with the real estate, do you think he's going to declare it any time soon? Your patience might have to stretch right up to the time when you get handed a leaflet at the Valley telling you about the bus services to Ebbsfleet.I don't know how old you are, but that happened to me in 1985, and I'm f***ed if I'm going to be surprised like that again.
As far as I'm concerned the more people post facts about our new owners, and post rational non-libellous opinions too, the better. Rumours and opinions dressed up as facts are no good, of course, but otherwise, bring it on. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, don't read such threads.
And as for your assertion that you don't know any current owners who fail the fit and proper person test, are you serious? For a start do you know what the test is? (I don't, but many people who do, write that its not fit for purpose) Secondly if you actually know who the real owners of Leeds United are, could you tell 35,000 Leeds fans, because they've been trying to find out since Kuddly Ken arrived.
Exactly the way I feel ... says it all for me PragueAddick.
I think Martin Simons struggled with the fitness bit.
Where did you get this from, I've seen an exact figure quoted anywhere.
I'm with you SHG. Give them a chance, people FFS!
Also...another slightly different angle......Buy an ailing ex premier league club for a knockdown price in league 1....invest a sensible bob or two and get promotion....club then worth a bit more.......invest a few quid more, baring in mind that its going to be more lucrative in the CCC, get promotion and suddenly the little investment in League 1 can suddenly be worth 10 times as much in the premier league = big pay day.
Elsewhere.....if you use a company as a vehicle to say, build a house...when you come to sell the house which is owned by the company, you pay corporation tax at 40%....but if you liquidate the company (i.e. close it down as it has ended its useful life) you pay just 10% corporation tax.........so does that make sense now?
Thank God for a bit of sense. Though I don't think they've cleared our debt.
Agreed that point is wrong. At least the debt is now covered as proven by proof of money to Charltons previous bankers.
Won't your mate tell you anything?
http://tinyurl.com/33sxlhn
'Charlton owners mystery
Charlton Athletic fans are wondering whether Kevin Cash, a super-wealthy property developer, has funded the club's recent takeover. The Addicks' newly installed chairman, Michael Slater, is an 11% shareholder and the chairman of Reflex Vehicle Solutions, a car-rental firm of which Cash's Rose Property Holdings owns pretty much all of the remaining 89%.
Charlton are obliged under Football League rules to announce all backers who own more than 10% of the club, and they have declared only Slater and Tony Jimenez as the major shareholders. A spokesman for the pair confirmed
yesterday: "The majority owners of the club are Tony and Michael; there are several minority shareholders who each have less than 10% in the holding company."
There is obviously no reason to disbelieve the spokesman but neither is there any way of independently checking - not even for the Football League. As revealed here on Tuesday, Charlton's parent company, CAFC Holdings, is registered in the British Virgin Islands, where shareholders and directors need not be disclosed'.
Taken together with the full report on Slater's Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in May 2007 (linked in the deepestdarkest blog below) it makes at least 'interesting reading'
http://addickman-deepestdarkest.blogspot.com/2011/01/michael-slater-solicitors-disciplinary.html
Although Slater was technically cleared of charges in the hearing if you take the time to read through the legal jargon of the report he would appear to have a somewhat 'flexible' and 'creative' approach to who actually 'owns' a company and to be quite skillful in opening and closing down companies and transferring assets between them.
Secondly the case itself involved a debt collecting company run by slater that bought bad debts at a knock down price and then pursued the debtor for the full amount - in this case £16700 owed by a small builder that Slater's company bought for £1000. Whatever thr rights and wrongs in that case it seems unlikely that someone who only a few years ago was was grubbing around chasing a small builder for £16700 is now the moneybags owner of a football club?
Similary Jiminez may have more money than Slater but apparently began as a security manager at Chelsea and has dabbled in 'sports promtion' and 'property development' - is he really the moneybags?
So is quote in today's Guardian that the 'majority owners of the club are Tony and Michael' correct? If so have they bought the club for a similar figure to the £2 the Richard Murray's Baton bought it for a couple of months ago - with the debt now hived off to CAFC Holdings registered in the British Virgin Islands? With Slater's creative approach to companies and assets is that a worry?
As John Window has posted on the CAFC Discussion List: 'And to think we laughed at Leeds and others regarding mystery owners. BYE, BYE, "FAMILY CLUB"
I know some people don't want to look to closely at this sort of stuff or think what can we do about it anyway - but I'd be interested in people's views - particularly PragueAddick?
Which bit - that the club is now owned by 'CAFC Holdings...registered in the British Virgin Islands, where shareholders and directors need not be disclosed' - or the quote from "A spokesman" that: "The majority owners of the club are Tony and Michael" who wouldn't appear to be flush with cash?
As I said I know some people don't want to look to closely at this sort of stuff or think what can we do about it anyway - but at the moment the new setup looks somewhat dodgy.
Nuptials
Now i've spotted Slater.I think Dennis Wise can be seen cutting up the tiles and i do believe Jiminez is in the background of a couple of them. Cash's missus aint bad either.
The point of this? I have no idea. Just interesting to see our two directors and a bloke who visited the Valley regularaly just before the takeover,at a £1/2 billionaires wedding.That is all.
http://www.justgiving.com/KevinandCarla
And Kevin Cash has been mentioned as being the man. From what I've read about him he likes to keep himself out of the spotlight.
A lot speculation that due to the relationship of the key parties, Dennis Wise was going to be hoisted upon us. It never materialised, and that was due imo to one of two reasons:
1. That they saw the public opinion was very much against him
Or
2. Dennis Wise is actually one of the minor owners of our club
It can't becoming more likely that Cash is a backer as there is no new evidence to suggest that.
We've known he has connections to Slater and others for some time but still no firm link.
As for Wise being a 9.9%er. Why?
Does not have to be 9.9% though could be 0.1% and the point I am making ... I have no idea!!
People moan "not the right type"
Zebel" selling our souls for big pot of cash" yes i wish we had
" not the Charlton type"
Stick all that moral twaddle in your beloved Guardian and burn the f**kin thing.
If we dont get out ofthis division in two seasons we are dead ! no community projects etc etc we wont have a club.
removed.. dont want to be sued.