I think we need to be careful not to demonise the current owners on the basis that we have little information. Of course we'd all like more information, but in most business's do the customers know the ins and outs of the boardroom?
Evidence so far is that they have through their structure achieved a record breaking promotion in their first full season, give SCP the backing and support as required.
You seem to be very keen to support the board. You may well be right. Perhaps if the board explained what they were doing, instead of secretly carrying on & treating us like mushrooms we may.
Perhaps, you have some sorts of links with the board ?
Bangkok Dave, you haven't responded ? You've always been keen to back Jimenez and Wise, yet they are now going to court against each other.
Jimenez has been criticised a lot, yet you staunchly back him. You may be right, I hope you are, but you must have good reason. So in the nicest possible way, what is it ?
They've made a concious decision to not comment for the time being, the News Shopper article makes that very clear. I imagine they will make a comment in the near future, so until that time we can but speculate (and even then, I imagine it won't bring the clarity that most would like)
"A spokesman for Charlton Athletic told News Shopper this lunchtime there would be no further comment on today’s confirmation Jimenez is now the single biggest shareholder or to any other questions about the club’s finances."
Oh, thats OK then. Who cares about us fans eh.
This is what it said before:
Charlton Athletic Football Company Ltd is owned by Baton 2010 Ltd, which is owned by CAFC Holdings Limited (90 per cent) and Richard Murray (10 per cent). CAFC Holdings Limited is in turn owned by Tony Jimenez (28 per cent) and Michael Slater (23 per cent) plus minority shareholders with less than 10 per cent.
This is what is says now:
Charlton Athletic Football Company Limited
Charlton Athletic Football Company Ltd is owned by Baton 2010 Ltd, which is owned by CAFC Holdings Limited (90 per cent) and Richard Murray (10 per cent). CAFC Holdings Limited is in turn owned by Tony Jimenez (47.6 per cent) and Michael Slater (20.7 per cent) plus minority shareholders with less than 10 per cent.
Unfortunately, I made a typo. Sorry. Michael Slater's shareholding has not changed at 23 per cent. The page has been updated.
So, when he meant to type 23 he typed 20.7! Right, I am now convinced that TJ's backer has injected £20.7 million into the club!
That's exactly what I was thinking, bit of an odd typo....
"A spokesman for Charlton Athletic told News Shopper this lunchtime there would be no further comment on today’s confirmation Jimenez is now the single biggest shareholder or to any other questions about the club’s finances."
Oh, thats OK then. Who cares about us fans eh.
This is what it said before:
Charlton Athletic Football Company Ltd is owned by Baton 2010 Ltd, which is owned by CAFC Holdings Limited (90 per cent) and Richard Murray (10 per cent). CAFC Holdings Limited is in turn owned by Tony Jimenez (28 per cent) and Michael Slater (23 per cent) plus minority shareholders with less than 10 per cent.
This is what is says now:
Charlton Athletic Football Company Limited
Charlton Athletic Football Company Ltd is owned by Baton 2010 Ltd, which is owned by CAFC Holdings Limited (90 per cent) and Richard Murray (10 per cent). CAFC Holdings Limited is in turn owned by Tony Jimenez (47.6 per cent) and Michael Slater (20.7 per cent) plus minority shareholders with less than 10 per cent.
Unfortunately, I made a typo. Sorry. Michael Slater's shareholding has not changed at 23 per cent. The page has been updated.
So, when he meant to type 23 he typed 20.7! Right, I am now convinced that TJ's backer has injected £20.7 million into the club!
That's exactly what I was thinking, bit of an odd typo....
23 x 90% (CAFC Holdings interest in the club) = 20.7%
I hope it is good news but you can't carry on ignoring that people had been saying for weeks that there were problems, that there had been changes at the top and that these were causing at best cash flow problems and at worst threatened the stability of the squad and club.
Now when official news comes out that the doubters asked for (and what a great way to let the fans know) some are still refusing to see even the sightest cause for concern.
If you find a lump ignoring won't change the fact that it is a lump. The doc may give you good or bad news but you just can't pretend it aint there.
If so many people are saying something for weeks, it doesn't mean something is true. It's multiple people fuelling guesswork based on information from a very small and perhaps not 100% reliable source and making it seem fact to those who are scratching their heads trying to work out what is actually going on.
The self appointed ITK 4 or 5 and the 2 or 3 wannabe ITK who are mates with the original generators are not helpful and its even less helpful when others, including yourself, use their thoughts/opinion as hindsight facts when looking back over the past couple of weeks.
"A spokesman for Charlton Athletic told News Shopper this lunchtime there would be no further comment on today’s confirmation Jimenez is now the single biggest shareholder or to any other questions about the club’s finances."
Oh, thats OK then. Who cares about us fans eh.
This is what it said before:
Charlton Athletic Football Company Ltd is owned by Baton 2010 Ltd, which is owned by CAFC Holdings Limited (90 per cent) and Richard Murray (10 per cent). CAFC Holdings Limited is in turn owned by Tony Jimenez (28 per cent) and Michael Slater (23 per cent) plus minority shareholders with less than 10 per cent.
This is what is says now:
Charlton Athletic Football Company Limited
Charlton Athletic Football Company Ltd is owned by Baton 2010 Ltd, which is owned by CAFC Holdings Limited (90 per cent) and Richard Murray (10 per cent). CAFC Holdings Limited is in turn owned by Tony Jimenez (47.6 per cent) and Michael Slater (20.7 per cent) plus minority shareholders with less than 10 per cent.
Unfortunately, I made a typo. Sorry. Michael Slater's shareholding has not changed at 23 per cent. The page has been updated.
So, when he meant to type 23 he typed 20.7! Right, I am now convinced that TJ's backer has injected £20.7 million into the club!
That's exactly what I was thinking, bit of an odd typo....
23 x 90% (CAFC Holdings interest in the club) = 20.7%
I hope it is good news but you can't carry on ignoring that people had been saying for weeks that there were problems, that there had been changes at the top and that these were causing at best cash flow problems and at worst threatened the stability of the squad and club.
Now when official news comes out that the doubters asked for (and what a great way to let the fans know) some are still refusing to see even the sightest cause for concern.
If you find a lump ignoring won't change the fact that it is a lump. The doc may give you good or bad news but you just can't pretend it aint there.
If so many people are saying something for weeks, it doesn't mean something is true. It's multiple people fuelling guesswork based on information from a very small and perhaps not 100% reliable source and making it seem fact to those who are scratching their heads trying to work out what is actually going on.
The self appointed ITK 4 or 5 and the 2 or 3 wannabe ITK who are mates with the original generators are not helpful and its even less helpful when others, including yourself, use their thoughts/opinion as hindsight facts when looking back over the past couple of weeks.
I think the problem is Suze is that they know SOMETHING happened.But for the life of 'em they don't know WHAT happened.
I'm sure they will say something when it suits them.
I bet they won't. I also doubt that anyone outside the Jimenez/Slater inner circle even know for sure who actually owns the club and how the club is being financed.
Guys, can we try and go about this from this point on without splitting it into 'sides'.
If you look back on this thread, those thinking this is good news, bad news, no news, is evenly split.
Have your opinions, state your opinions, but let's not start criticising those with different opinions, particularly while no concrete facts are known.
Guys, can we try and go about this from this point on without splitting it into 'sides'.
If you look back on this thread, those thinking this is good news, bad news, no news, is evenly split.
Have your opinions, state your opinions, but let's not start criticising those with different opinions, particularly while no concrete facts are known.
Agreed ?
Only if you can post up a venn diagram with the names of everyone in the appropriate sections....;-)
The first report on this matter? Could force the club to make a statement.
There will be no further statement on this I've been told.
So this is what I just don't get. Any form of board / ownership change always has some form of announcement, even if its a carefully worded, factual vanilla statement. See the Newell announcement for example.
Surely this is fundamental information to share with supporters ?
No disrespect, but I'd rather be informed of board changes than new air conditioning units being fitted at the training ground or the progress of Kermorgant the Kitten.
I hope it is good news but you can't carry on ignoring that people had been saying for weeks that there were problems, that there had been changes at the top and that these were causing at best cash flow problems and at worst threatened the stability of the squad and club.
Now when official news comes out that the doubters asked for (and what a great way to let the fans know) some are still refusing to see even the sightest cause for concern.
If you find a lump ignoring won't change the fact that it is a lump. The doc may give you good or bad news but you just can't pretend it aint there.
My dear Sir
I realise everyone is beholden to what you say as you are one of those ITK but this is a load of rubbish. The only negative that has come out that is most probably true is that there were cash flow problems. I am sure cash flow problems occur in every business, they do mine and I woud like to bet a pound to a lump of shite that these same problems have occured nearly every month within the club for the last ten years, even in the Premmiership. Its what happen. For some, like me, not to go down the 'lets believe the doom merchants' doesnt deserve the derision handed out by you. I happen to have a different opinion. I am 100% positive about all that has happened recently and none of the rumours have dented that. To me the change in shareholding is a new injection of funds and one I was told would be looked for in the Championship at least a year ago. Becuase my maths doesnt quite reach the standard of 2+2=5 doesn't mean I am not allowed an opinion and nor other/s who share my views.
The first report on this matter? Could force the club to make a statement.
There will be no further statement on this I've been told.
So this is what I just don't get. Any form of board / ownership change always has some form of announcement, even if its a carefully worded, factual vanilla statement. See the Newell announcement for example.
Surely this is fundamental information to share with supporters ?
No disrespect, but I'd rather be informed of board changes than new air conditioning units being fitted at the training ground or the progress of Kermorgant the Kitten.
Couldn't agree more, this could be pivotal in terms of where we go as a club for the season and it is hidden aside with no formal announcement either on the club website or from the club themselves.
So, what's happened? My take on it is that two of the previous five minority shareholders - with 9.8% each have gone. That accounts for the increase in TJ's holding by 19.6%. I guess it's Newall plus A N Other. What we don't know was whether A N Other was a source of the money, whether it was Newall fronting for someone or whether Slater is fronting for Cash. Whatever, I suspect the two minority shareholders have sold out to TJ for very little (no?) actual money. But has TJ also bought out any debt they may be holding?
Two things. Money Laundering legislation ensures that the lawyers who dealt with the takeover knew exactly who was behind the money. The lawyers could go to jail if they didn't.
Secondly the only way to make money from afootball club is to sell it to someone else for more than you paid ( for it plus put in to keep it afloat). Our club ain't worth zip in the PL unless the money coming in can be taken out by the owners. In order to stay there and compete about 101% of the money coming in would need to go out on transfers and player wages. So at the very top level it needs to be a vanity project.
The sad fact is that at Championship level with aspirations, a club like ours can't generate enough dosh to break even. So the owners either love the club (thank you once more, Richard Murray) or have an exit plan. The subsidy required means that the exit can't be too remote or all chance of a profit is lost. I do not believe our owners are putting any dosh in through love because RM aside there nothing to suggest they love Charlton. When our club is sold again it will change the experience of being an Addick for ever. The big question is whether we will like the ultimate identity we end up with.
BTW I have no inside knowledge but tell me I'm wrong?....
Comments
Jimenez has been criticised a lot, yet you staunchly back him. You may be right, I hope you are, but you must have good reason. So in the nicest possible way, what is it ?
Nothing happens = bad news.
Rumours start = bad news
TJ = bad news
I see a pattern here.
Whatever happens at Charlton Athletic Football Club = bad news.
Unless someone has concrete evidence of "bad news" that can actually quote sources I will see what happens.
If I don't agree with the doom mongers it dosen't mean I don't care it just means I have my own view which may different to yours.
Oh, thats OK then. Who cares about us fans eh.
That's exactly what I was thinking, bit of an odd typo....
23 x 90% (CAFC Holdings interest in the club) = 20.7%
If so many people are saying something for weeks, it doesn't mean something is true. It's multiple people fuelling guesswork based on information from a very small and perhaps not 100% reliable source and making it seem fact to those who are scratching their heads trying to work out what is actually going on.
The self appointed ITK 4 or 5 and the 2 or 3 wannabe ITK who are mates with the original generators are not helpful and its even less helpful when others, including yourself, use their thoughts/opinion as hindsight facts when looking back over the past couple of weeks.
I think the problem is Suze is that they know SOMETHING happened.But for the life of 'em they don't know WHAT happened.
If you look back on this thread, those thinking this is good news, bad news, no news, is evenly split.
Have your opinions, state your opinions, but let's not start criticising those with different opinions, particularly while no concrete facts are known.
Agreed ?
Have they ever explained why Jimenez owned more than Slater in the first place?
Have they ever explained who owns the rest of the shares?
Have they ever explained who is backing them financially?
Have they ever explained why Jimenez is mute?
Surely this is fundamental information to share with supporters ?
No disrespect, but I'd rather be informed of board changes than new air conditioning units being fitted at the training ground or the progress of Kermorgant the Kitten.
Just changes and us to spin off into speculation....
Don't like it, want to start swearing...
Whatever, I suspect the two minority shareholders have sold out to TJ for very little (no?) actual money. But has TJ also bought out any debt they may be holding?
Money Laundering legislation ensures that the lawyers who dealt with the takeover knew exactly who was behind the money. The lawyers could go to jail if they didn't.
Secondly the only way to make money from afootball club is to sell it to someone else for more than you paid ( for it plus put in to keep it afloat). Our club ain't worth zip in the PL unless the money coming in can be taken out by the owners. In order to stay there and compete about 101% of the money coming in would need to go out on transfers and player wages. So at the very top level it needs to be a vanity project.
The sad fact is that at Championship level with aspirations, a club like ours can't generate enough dosh to break even. So the owners either love the club (thank you once more, Richard Murray) or have an exit plan. The subsidy required means that the exit can't be too remote or all chance of a profit is lost. I do not believe our owners are putting any dosh in through love because RM aside there nothing to suggest they love Charlton. When our club is sold again it will change the experience of being an Addick for ever. The big question is whether we will like the ultimate identity we end up with.
BTW I have no inside knowledge but tell me I'm wrong?....