Please don't shoot the messenger. Posted on Into The Valley
Italian businessmen connected to Italian club Napoli very interested in buying Charlton. Talks on going this week involving concerned parties. The deal has been brokered by another Italian gentleman well known for his connection to another London club. This is where I got the info from today.
Perhaps the weirdest rumour yet !
After the 'the money is in the bank' statement on Into the Valley, and all the Kosh talk, I think I'll take the Into the Valley rumour with a large salt spreading anti ice truck load of salt. Particularly as the suggested rumour may not be positive for the club.
I guess that is the trouble if TJ / MS / KC want their money back with a quick sale, then how fussy are they going to be for the next buyer ? With God knows what intentions the next lot have, some of it maybe not connected with football.
Will be happy for the next stage and security of the club to be secured, with hopefully long term sensible, non dodgy and proper owners.
No ITK, no absolute facts just a summary of the rumours bouncing around here, other sites, text messages etc
Don't shoot the messanger. Some people asked, I replied.
-------------
There was serious interest from Koc holdings and some representatives came to a game.
There were said to be other interested parties including the Swedish owner of H&M
Initially the word was that the Koc deal was done but this quickly turned out to be false.
The South London Press ran a small story on the Koc rumours and was banned by the Club.
The story then became that Koc would buy in March or if we were challenging etc,etc. This was still believed by some despite the version of events changing almost weekly. IMHO this was all bluster and bluff to hide the fact that Koc had pulled out.
No clear evidence is available as to why Koc withdrew (or if they had or if they had ever been seriously in) but some sources suggested irregularities were found when the books were examined.
TJ was said to be unhappy with SCP after the poor results and losing Koc and so had sacked him, partially blaming SCP for Koc pulling out. This was denied by others close to board very quickly. These sources poured cold water on the idea that SCP was going or that his dismissal had even been discussed.
Other sources suggested that TJ continues to borrow money to cover monthly loses. The lenders of this money are unknown but are very much lenders looking for a repayment+profit not investors in CAFC.
------------------------------------
There you go. None of this is LOCKED ON FACT imho. Some sources I believe to be very reliable and others not. But even reliable sources can be wrong or can be fed misinformation (as I think is the case with source most quoted by ROV on Into the Valley and could well be with others)
And before you say it I'm not doom mongering or shit stirring. These are the stories doing to rounds retold in many cases in far less emotive lanaguage than used originally. As I understand it a few lifers who were very much in the "its all nonsense, there are no problems" camp in the summer have changed their views based on new information received. Nothing wrong in that.
Interesting and instructive post.
A few comments – all based on inference not fact.
The rumoured takeover
I’m not terribly surprised that this has fallen through – if indeed that’s the case. There were and will remain three important issues to resolve before any deal can be consummated. These are;
Price – The Club is very hard to value. In reality ownership represents the combination of a significant liability, i.e. funding costs of circa £10m p.a., or more potentially, along with an option which is obviously worth a lot if, but only if, the Club is promoted to the Premier League. If you are an optimistic owner you might think the option “dominates” the liability. If you were a buyer your valuation might be close to zero. All other things being equal you need a desperate seller or a gullible buyer for a deal to complete.
Control – A key issue. Who decides on the annual operating plan, transfer outlays etc? There has to be a dominant partner, but whom? Who is going to commit serious money without control?
Trust – Is critical in any partnership. The murkiness of the offshore vehicle that owns the Football Club along with evidence of late payment of bills would not have inspired confidence.
It’s likely that any serious investor would want to acquire the entirety of the CAFCH holding in Baton and wave goodbye to Jimenez, Cash et al, but they may not have been up for that, especially at the price on offer. Just speculation, but not unreasonable.
What happens next?
There really is no easy way out for Jimenez, Cash et al. If they want their money back, let alone to make a profit, they need to keep funding ongoing losses and hope for promotion or sell. There is no walk-away option. Administration doesn’t help them. Only Jimenez knows how tenuous the funding model is. An optimistic interpretation is that this season is covered with recent discussions about new investment designed either to accelerate a promotion push, but only on his terms, or to convince Cash that there are buyers around if needed. The alternative scenario is that he needs to sell and has messed up. If so, he’ll need to lower his price and keep looking. In the meantime, he’ll be desperate to avoid relegation. Let’s wish him luck!!
The key issues
I’d say there are two.
First, are there potential buyers out there or not? If Jimenez and/or Cash can’t sustain the current level of funding he’ll/they’ll eventually have to swallow his/their pride and sell. A nothing up front, £Xm on promotion to the Premier League deal might, ultimately, be the best they can get. Critically though, this would still be a better outcome for both TJ and the Club than simply walking away. There is some comfort in this – provided there are buyers.
Second, can we avoid relegation this season? If not, buyers would be much thinner on the ground and the outlook much worse. This would be my biggest concern, especially so having studied our home form and the away fixture list.
Sorry to come to this late, but to what extent would The Valley potentially offset the liabilities you outline in (i). And I mean that question in terms of stadium potential. I believe the freehold is with the club.
That is to say, what if the club was given a very attractive option at the Peninsular that enabled the exploitation or sale of the Valley for residential property development? Could this transform the underlying business proposition?
No ITK, no absolute facts just a summary of the rumours bouncing around here, other sites, text messages etc
Don't shoot the messanger. Some people asked, I replied.
-------------
There was serious interest from Koc holdings and some representatives came to a game.
There were said to be other interested parties including the Swedish owner of H&M
Initially the word was that the Koc deal was done but this quickly turned out to be false.
The South London Press ran a small story on the Koc rumours and was banned by the Club.
The story then became that Koc would buy in March or if we were challenging etc,etc. This was still believed by some despite the version of events changing almost weekly. IMHO this was all bluster and bluff to hide the fact that Koc had pulled out.
No clear evidence is available as to why Koc withdrew (or if they had or if they had ever been seriously in) but some sources suggested irregularities were found when the books were examined.
TJ was said to be unhappy with SCP after the poor results and losing Koc and so had sacked him, partially blaming SCP for Koc pulling out. This was denied by others close to board very quickly. These sources poured cold water on the idea that SCP was going or that his dismissal had even been discussed.
Other sources suggested that TJ continues to borrow money to cover monthly loses. The lenders of this money are unknown but are very much lenders looking for a repayment+profit not investors in CAFC.
------------------------------------
There you go. None of this is LOCKED ON FACT imho. Some sources I believe to be very reliable and others not. But even reliable sources can be wrong or can be fed misinformation (as I think is the case with source most quoted by ROV on Into the Valley and could well be with others)
And before you say it I'm not doom mongering or shit stirring. These are the stories doing to rounds retold in many cases in far less emotive lanaguage than used originally. As I understand it a few lifers who were very much in the "its all nonsense, there are no problems" camp in the summer have changed their views based on new information received. Nothing wrong in that.
Interesting and instructive post.
A few comments – all based on inference not fact.
The rumoured takeover
I’m not terribly surprised that this has fallen through – if indeed that’s the case. There were and will remain three important issues to resolve before any deal can be consummated. These are;
Price – The Club is very hard to value. In reality ownership represents the combination of a significant liability, i.e. funding costs of circa £10m p.a., or more potentially, along with an option which is obviously worth a lot if, but only if, the Club is promoted to the Premier League. If you are an optimistic owner you might think the option “dominates” the liability. If you were a buyer your valuation might be close to zero. All other things being equal you need a desperate seller or a gullible buyer for a deal to complete.
Control – A key issue. Who decides on the annual operating plan, transfer outlays etc? There has to be a dominant partner, but whom? Who is going to commit serious money without control?
Trust – Is critical in any partnership. The murkiness of the offshore vehicle that owns the Football Club along with evidence of late payment of bills would not have inspired confidence.
It’s likely that any serious investor would want to acquire the entirety of the CAFCH holding in Baton and wave goodbye to Jimenez, Cash et al, but they may not have been up for that, especially at the price on offer. Just speculation, but not unreasonable.
What happens next?
There really is no easy way out for Jimenez, Cash et al. If they want their money back, let alone to make a profit, they need to keep funding ongoing losses and hope for promotion or sell. There is no walk-away option. Administration doesn’t help them. Only Jimenez knows how tenuous the funding model is. An optimistic interpretation is that this season is covered with recent discussions about new investment designed either to accelerate a promotion push, but only on his terms, or to convince Cash that there are buyers around if needed. The alternative scenario is that he needs to sell and has messed up. If so, he’ll need to lower his price and keep looking. In the meantime, he’ll be desperate to avoid relegation. Let’s wish him luck!!
The key issues
I’d say there are two.
First, are there potential buyers out there or not? If Jimenez and/or Cash can’t sustain the current level of funding he’ll/they’ll eventually have to swallow his/their pride and sell. A nothing up front, £Xm on promotion to the Premier League deal might, ultimately, be the best they can get. Critically though, this would still be a better outcome for both TJ and the Club than simply walking away. There is some comfort in this – provided there are buyers.
Second, can we avoid relegation this season? If not, buyers would be much thinner on the ground and the outlook much worse. This would be my biggest concern, especially so having studied our home form and the away fixture list.
Sorry to come to this late, but to what extent would The Valley potentially offset the liabilities you outline in (i). And I mean that question in terms of stadium potential. I believe the freehold is with the club.
That is to say, what if the club was given a very attractive option at the Peninsular that enabled the exploitation or sale of the Valley for residential property development? Could this transform the underlying business proposition?
They'd have to pay off the debt on the north stand and the former directors before they could realise the value of The Valley, I should think.
Based on the Baton accounts to end June 2011 bank loans totalled £6.8m. I'd assume that most if not all of this is the debt to RBS secured on the North Stand. £1.1m of this amount was due to repaid by end June '12 (at the latest) and a further £1.6m by end June this year, by which time the total outstanding will be £4.1m. This remaining balance is scheduled to be repaid by end June '16, almost certainly in three annual payments. I'd think it highly unlikely that RBS will have any interest in rolling this funding.
The loans to former directors total £4.4m, again based on the 2011 accounts. This £4.4m balance is not due unless the Club is promoted to the Premier League with another £3.6m due to Richard Murray if that happens. There is no mention in the notes to the accounts that a sale of the Valley would trigger immediate repayment of these loans, but this doesn't mean it wasn't negotiated.
No ITK, no absolute facts just a summary of the rumours bouncing around here, other sites, text messages etc
Don't shoot the messanger. Some people asked, I replied.
-------------
There was serious interest from Koc holdings and some representatives came to a game.
There were said to be other interested parties including the Swedish owner of H&M
Initially the word was that the Koc deal was done but this quickly turned out to be false.
The South London Press ran a small story on the Koc rumours and was banned by the Club.
The story then became that Koc would buy in March or if we were challenging etc,etc. This was still believed by some despite the version of events changing almost weekly. IMHO this was all bluster and bluff to hide the fact that Koc had pulled out.
No clear evidence is available as to why Koc withdrew (or if they had or if they had ever been seriously in) but some sources suggested irregularities were found when the books were examined.
TJ was said to be unhappy with SCP after the poor results and losing Koc and so had sacked him, partially blaming SCP for Koc pulling out. This was denied by others close to board very quickly. These sources poured cold water on the idea that SCP was going or that his dismissal had even been discussed.
Other sources suggested that TJ continues to borrow money to cover monthly loses. The lenders of this money are unknown but are very much lenders looking for a repayment+profit not investors in CAFC.
------------------------------------
There you go. None of this is LOCKED ON FACT imho. Some sources I believe to be very reliable and others not. But even reliable sources can be wrong or can be fed misinformation (as I think is the case with source most quoted by ROV on Into the Valley and could well be with others)
And before you say it I'm not doom mongering or shit stirring. These are the stories doing to rounds retold in many cases in far less emotive lanaguage than used originally. As I understand it a few lifers who were very much in the "its all nonsense, there are no problems" camp in the summer have changed their views based on new information received. Nothing wrong in that.
Interesting and instructive post.
A few comments – all based on inference not fact.
The rumoured takeover
I’m not terribly surprised that this has fallen through – if indeed that’s the case. There were and will remain three important issues to resolve before any deal can be consummated. These are;
Price – The Club is very hard to value. In reality ownership represents the combination of a significant liability, i.e. funding costs of circa £10m p.a., or more potentially, along with an option which is obviously worth a lot if, but only if, the Club is promoted to the Premier League. If you are an optimistic owner you might think the option “dominates” the liability. If you were a buyer your valuation might be close to zero. All other things being equal you need a desperate seller or a gullible buyer for a deal to complete.
Control – A key issue. Who decides on the annual operating plan, transfer outlays etc? There has to be a dominant partner, but whom? Who is going to commit serious money without control?
Trust – Is critical in any partnership. The murkiness of the offshore vehicle that owns the Football Club along with evidence of late payment of bills would not have inspired confidence.
It’s likely that any serious investor would want to acquire the entirety of the CAFCH holding in Baton and wave goodbye to Jimenez, Cash et al, but they may not have been up for that, especially at the price on offer. Just speculation, but not unreasonable.
What happens next?
There really is no easy way out for Jimenez, Cash et al. If they want their money back, let alone to make a profit, they need to keep funding ongoing losses and hope for promotion or sell. There is no walk-away option. Administration doesn’t help them. Only Jimenez knows how tenuous the funding model is. An optimistic interpretation is that this season is covered with recent discussions about new investment designed either to accelerate a promotion push, but only on his terms, or to convince Cash that there are buyers around if needed. The alternative scenario is that he needs to sell and has messed up. If so, he’ll need to lower his price and keep looking. In the meantime, he’ll be desperate to avoid relegation. Let’s wish him luck!!
The key issues
I’d say there are two.
First, are there potential buyers out there or not? If Jimenez and/or Cash can’t sustain the current level of funding he’ll/they’ll eventually have to swallow his/their pride and sell. A nothing up front, £Xm on promotion to the Premier League deal might, ultimately, be the best they can get. Critically though, this would still be a better outcome for both TJ and the Club than simply walking away. There is some comfort in this – provided there are buyers.
Second, can we avoid relegation this season? If not, buyers would be much thinner on the ground and the outlook much worse. This would be my biggest concern, especially so having studied our home form and the away fixture list.
Sorry to come to this late, but to what extent would The Valley potentially offset the liabilities you outline in (i). And I mean that question in terms of stadium potential. I believe the freehold is with the club.
That is to say, what if the club was given a very attractive option at the Peninsular that enabled the exploitation or sale of the Valley for residential property development? Could this transform the underlying business proposition?
Others will almost certainly have more insight here than I. Nevertheless, for what it's worth, I would be surprised if a 3/4 way deal, whereby, based on planning consent for residential development, the Club sold the Valley and moved as tenant to a mini, Emirates style multi purpose stadium on the Peninsula, had not been a twinkle in TJ's eye at some point during his tenure as owner. However, it's not easy to see how this would work in practice; the Valley site is no gold mine, someone would have to fund the development of the new stadium and, from a purely practical perspective, the transportstion links into the Peninsula present a major challenge. Moreover, it seems almost inconceivable that such a scheme would make sense with the Club playing in the Champjonship.
Promotion to the EPL really is the only way out!! What a dilemma if you are an owner!!
The only way we would move to the Peninsular is if the AEG dudes that own the O2 were to approach us with plans for a new 40000 seater multi use stadium that could be used by us for football, a Rugby Union or Rugby League side, concerts and 'one-off' events like the ROC/Speedway/Motocross etc.
The fact we wouldn't be the only tenants would be a positive in terms of paying rent, but the negatives would far outweigh this imo, as the stadium would be a genero-bowl, the other tenants could be detrimental to the condition of the playing surface, the buses and the tube could not cope with such numbers (imagine us playing Arsenal in the League and Lady Gaga perfoming at the O2 on the same Tuesday night for instance) and the price of everything would increase to cover the substancial costs
The only way we would move to the Peninsular is if the AEG dudes that own the O2 were to approach us with plans for a new 40000 seater multi use stadium that could be used by us for football, a Rugby Union or Rugby League side, concerts and 'one-off' events like the ROC/Speedway/Motocross etc.
The fact we wouldn't be the only tenants would be a positive in terms of paying rent, but the negatives would far outweigh this imo, as the stadium would be a genero-bowl, the other tenants could be detrimental to the condition of the playing surface, the buses and the tube could not cope with such numbers (imagine us playing Arsenal in the League and Lady Gaga perfoming at the O2 on the same Tuesday night for instance) and the price of everything would increase to cover the substancial costs
Would the Paramount Resort development be an option/competitor ?
I think the mortgage on the north stand costs around £1M a year and is due to be paid off within a few years... any deal involving renting or investing in a new ground would have much bigger numbers involved so this won't stop anything if there was really a serious option to move. But to me it has to be 40-50,000 capacity with the club financed to actually get back to top half of the premier league for that to make sense.
Having said that Kidbrooke Village is running again after a long halt during the crash and while I have no idea of the residential value of the Valley, maybe the current owners have a calculation on a sale and new stadium rental... any suggestion of a sale and leaseback deal and we are going down a completely different path... one that was trodden by us in the early 80s and that others have also followed and one that is 100% non-viable... the only person to win out of those deals was Ron Noades who used our money to subsidise his club and then went off to another club and proceeded to take cash from both Palace and Wimbledon.
The dilemma facing all championship clubs is that the average wage bill is around £17M a year - I've just seen the Deloitte summary report for 2010/11 and some clubs are shelling out £25M+ (including promotion bonuses) which is a nonsense when the TV deal is only £1M a year.
Several have speculated on the precise losses at Charlton but nobody knows until the accounts are filed. I would imagine that losing £5-8M a year would have been part of the original plan which works IF we secure a second promotion in the next couple of seasons. Should it take longer then the current owners need to push on or find others to share the pain.
Pricing the club now while it is not a play off contender is based more on hope than actual book value but the closer we get to the top 6 in the next 18 months, the more interest there might be. So instead of joining the clamour for new signings, perhaps we and the board have to wait for this U18 team of ours to come through and maybe we have a top six club in the making?
Meanwhile join www.CASTrust.org as we simply do not know what the future holds!
I we ever had to move out of the Valley or need to expand would it not be better to look at the opportunities that the new Theme Park proposals in North Kent and see if we can piggy back on the transport improvements, new jobs, and high profile world wide attention the area will recieve?
I we ever had to move out of the Valley or need to expand would it not be better to look at the opportunities that the new Theme Park proposals in North Kent and see if we can piggy back on the transport improvements, new jobs, and high profile world wide attention the area will recieve?
The only way we would move to the Peninsular is if the AEG dudes that own the O2 were to approach us with plans for a new 40000 seater multi use stadium that could be used by us for football, a Rugby Union or Rugby League side, concerts and 'one-off' events like the ROC/Speedway/Motocross etc.
The fact we wouldn't be the only tenants would be a positive in terms of paying rent, but the negatives would far outweigh this imo, as the stadium would be a genero-bowl, the other tenants could be detrimental to the condition of the playing surface, the buses and the tube could not cope with such numbers (imagine us playing Arsenal in the League and Lady Gaga perfoming at the O2 on the same Tuesday night for instance) and the price of everything would increase to cover the substancial costs
Greenwich Council's peninsula masterplan shows plans for a 40k capacity stadium, so presumably there are plans for the supporting infrastructure. It's unthinkable that with the Valley just 2 miles away Charlton wouldn't be consulted as to tenancy, and if this was on a long cheap lease it might be considered a better opex option than maintaining the Valley. The question is whether a business case would stack up.
The RBS loan might be an issue, but then this depends on the speculative value of the Valley site. I would presume that the bank didn't loan in significant excess of the value on which the loan is secured after all, and with planning permission...
The Directors' loans wouldn't presumably be paid until we returned to the Premiership, so not sure why the sale of the Valley would change this.
Would any of our millionaire ex players help CAFC.
JUAN MATA’S ROOTING FOR HIS OLD CLUB
Chelsea star Juan Mata
Saturday January 19,2013
THEY will be opponents at Stamford Bridge tomorrow, but off the pitch Chelsea’s Juan Mata and Santi Cazorla of Arsenal have become united in a remarkable bid to save the club where they began their careers.
Among those who have rallied behind them to stave off a financial crisis at Spain’s Real Oviedo are more than 20,000 people from 60 countries, who were won over during a phenomenal internet campaign.
It also brought a £1.5 million response from Carlos Slim, the Mexican telecommunications tycoon and the world’s richest man.
The newly-celebrated and much-coveted Michu of Swansea is also part of the campaign to resuscitate the club in the North-west of their homeland. “Oviedo taught Santi and Mata how to play,” said Michu.
The stirrings of revolt have begun in the stands at the Emirates over high ticket prices while, at Chelsea, supporters continue to voice their opposition to the appointment of Rafa Benitez as manager by the super-rich but remote owner Roman Abramovich.
There may be fans of both clubs yearning for the kind of involvement being supported by Mata and Cazorla. Oviedo are now effectively owned by their followers, who have representatives on the board; a familiar situation across Europe but non-existent in the Premier League, where some supporters’ groups are becoming increasingly disgruntled at the way their game is being globalised.
All three players have invested heavily in the shares and although the official figures are not available, they are thought to have contributed many thousands of pounds to the cause.
The shares have no worth because the £1.4m they have raised is being used to keep the club afloat.
We were desperate. We thought the club was going to disappear
Pedro Zuazua
But after the campaign was launched on social media and given impetus by the backing of the three Premier League stars, it attracted buyers from across the globe.
“We were desperate. We thought the club was going to disappear,” said one of the current board members, Pedro Zuazua.
Mata, Cazorla and Michu return to the club each summer to mingle with the fans at social events.
They are in the most money-laden league in the world now and tomorrow’s London derby will attract millions of viewers across the planet, fuelling its financial boom.
But the two opposing players are also permanently entwined at football’s roots.
I'm not sure why the penninsular would apparently be any worse than Charlton for transport, tube station, 1 stop to DLR or on cable car, bus station, big res, near blackwall tunnel, you could divert more buses nearby, and run shuttle from Charlton station (or even walk) strikes me it would actually be better, and might even have better parking if done right?
Agree with razil. The logistics are not going to be a stumbling block. It will be a business plan for the club stacking up that will / could make or break any deal. I doubt sentiment about our ancestral home will enter into the thinking of our current owners.
The idea of the open air stadium at North Greenwich is for a music venue/baseball park. Baseball for the Americans at Canary Wharf in the same way as a basketball franchise at the 02 is gaining pace.
With the Olympic Park now staging concerts the scheme may not stack up.
The only way we would move to the Peninsular is if the AEG dudes that own the O2 were to approach us with plans for a new 40000 seater multi use stadium that could be used by us for football, a Rugby Union or Rugby League side, concerts and 'one-off' events like the ROC/Speedway/Motocross etc.
The fact we wouldn't be the only tenants would be a positive in terms of paying rent, but the negatives would far outweigh this imo, as the stadium would be a genero-bowl, the other tenants could be detrimental to the condition of the playing surface, the buses and the tube could not cope with such numbers (imagine us playing Arsenal in the League and Lady Gaga perfoming at the O2 on the same Tuesday night for instance) and the price of everything would increase to cover the substancial costs
Greenwich Council's peninsula masterplan shows plans for a 40k capacity stadium, so presumably there are plans for the supporting infrastructure. It's unthinkable that with the Valley just 2 miles away Charlton wouldn't be consulted as to tenancy, and if this was on a long cheap lease it might be considered a better opex option than maintaining the Valley. The question is whether a business case would stack up.
The RBS loan might be an issue, but then this depends on the speculative value of the Valley site. I would presume that the bank didn't loan in significant excess of the value on which the loan is secured after all, and with planning permission...
The Directors' loans wouldn't presumably be paid until we returned to the Premiership, so not sure why the sale of the Valley would change this.
I believe the loans are secured through a second legal charge on The Valley, in which case they'd have be repaid or renegotiated with other security.
I'm not sure why the penninsular would apparently be any worse than Charlton for transport, tube station, 1 stop to DLR or on cable car, bus station, big res, near blackwall tunnel, you could divert more buses nearby, and run shuttle from Charlton station (or even walk) strikes me it would actually be better, and might even have better parking if done right?
Remember its Greenwich Council - there will be no parking!
I'm not sure why the penninsular would apparently be any worse than Charlton for transport, tube station, 1 stop to DLR or on cable car, bus station, big res, near blackwall tunnel, you could divert more buses nearby, and run shuttle from Charlton station (or even walk) strikes me it would actually be better, and might even have better parking if done right?
"Better"? Really?
Not really sure how the tube station would help unless you're coming in from Central London - which is not what the majority of our fans do (unless it's an evening match).
And although I don't want to re-open the parking debate, I think it would be unlikely to be better than free and fairly abundant locally, which it is now.
A stadium by North Greenwich would be convenient for me, as I live in North London, but for 90% of the supporters would be less convenient. I can imagine the whole are easily getting gridlocked if there was any trouble in the Blackwall Tunnels as well.
Maybe a mile from WC st to that site on the plan, but right next to the tube not as convenient for home fans. I guess any plan would need to help with access to the nearest BR station for the Kent direction. My personal preference would be to somehow make the Valley site more viable.
The Royal Borough of Greenwich Peninsula Masterplan
as I said the new stadium at North Greenwich is aimed at baseball - picture on cover is an oval
That's just an image for presentation purposes. No one is going to build a 40k stadium for baseball in London and why bother with an open air music venue which is unusable two thirds of the year when the O2 has 22000 seats and is covered not more than a few hundred metres away. If the finances stack up I have no doubt that the board would seriously consider it. They would be mad not to give it at least thought.
Comments
I guess that is the trouble if TJ / MS / KC want their money back with a quick sale, then how fussy are they going to be for the next buyer ? With God knows what intentions the next lot have, some of it maybe not connected with football.
Will be happy for the next stage and security of the club to be secured, with hopefully long term sensible, non dodgy and proper owners.
That is to say, what if the club was given a very attractive option at the Peninsular that enabled the exploitation or sale of the Valley for residential property development? Could this transform the underlying business proposition?
The loans to former directors total £4.4m, again based on the 2011 accounts. This £4.4m balance is not due unless the Club is promoted to the Premier League with another £3.6m due to Richard Murray if that happens. There is no mention in the notes to the accounts that a sale of the Valley would trigger immediate repayment of these loans, but this doesn't mean it wasn't negotiated.
Others will almost certainly have more insight here than I. Nevertheless, for what it's worth, I would be surprised if a 3/4 way deal, whereby, based on planning consent for residential development, the Club sold the Valley and moved as tenant to a mini, Emirates style multi purpose stadium on the Peninsula, had not been a twinkle in TJ's eye at some point during his tenure as owner. However, it's not easy to see how this would work in practice; the Valley site is no gold mine, someone would have to fund the development of the new stadium and, from a purely practical perspective, the transportstion links into the Peninsula present a major challenge. Moreover, it seems almost inconceivable that such a scheme would make sense with the Club playing in the Champjonship.
Promotion to the EPL really is the only way out!! What a dilemma if you are an owner!!
The fact we wouldn't be the only tenants would be a positive in terms of paying rent, but the negatives would far outweigh this imo, as the stadium would be a genero-bowl, the other tenants could be detrimental to the condition of the playing surface, the buses and the tube could not cope with such numbers (imagine us playing Arsenal in the League and Lady Gaga perfoming at the O2 on the same Tuesday night for instance) and the price of everything would increase to cover the substancial costs
Having said that Kidbrooke Village is running again after a long halt during the crash and while I have no idea of the residential value of the Valley, maybe the current owners have a calculation on a sale and new stadium rental... any suggestion of a sale and leaseback deal and we are going down a completely different path... one that was trodden by us in the early 80s and that others have also followed and one that is 100% non-viable... the only person to win out of those deals was Ron Noades who used our money to subsidise his club and then went off to another club and proceeded to take cash from both Palace and Wimbledon.
The dilemma facing all championship clubs is that the average wage bill is around £17M a year - I've just seen the Deloitte summary report for 2010/11 and some clubs are shelling out £25M+ (including promotion bonuses) which is a nonsense when the TV deal is only £1M a year.
Several have speculated on the precise losses at Charlton but nobody knows until the accounts are filed. I would imagine that losing £5-8M a year would have been part of the original plan which works IF we secure a second promotion in the next couple of seasons. Should it take longer then the current owners need to push on or find others to share the pain.
Pricing the club now while it is not a play off contender is based more on hope than actual book value but the closer we get to the top 6 in the next 18 months, the more interest there might be. So instead of joining the clamour for new signings, perhaps we and the board have to wait for this U18 team of ours to come through and maybe we have a top six club in the making?
Meanwhile join www.CASTrust.org as we simply do not know what the future holds!
The RBS loan might be an issue, but then this depends on the speculative value of the Valley site. I would presume that the bank didn't loan in significant excess of the value on which the loan is secured after all, and with planning permission...
The Directors' loans wouldn't presumably be paid until we returned to the Premiership, so not sure why the sale of the Valley would change this.
Would any of our millionaire ex players help CAFC.
JUAN MATA’S ROOTING FOR HIS OLD CLUB
Chelsea star Juan Mata
Saturday January 19,2013
THEY will be opponents at Stamford Bridge tomorrow, but off the pitch Chelsea’s Juan Mata and Santi Cazorla of Arsenal have become united in a remarkable bid to save the club where they began their careers.
Among those who have rallied behind them to stave off a financial crisis at Spain’s Real Oviedo are more than 20,000 people from 60 countries, who were won over during a phenomenal internet campaign.
It also brought a £1.5 million response from Carlos Slim, the Mexican telecommunications tycoon and the world’s richest man.
The newly-celebrated and much-coveted Michu of Swansea is also part of the campaign to resuscitate the club in the North-west of their homeland. “Oviedo taught Santi and Mata how to play,” said Michu.
The stirrings of revolt have begun in the stands at the Emirates over high ticket prices while, at Chelsea, supporters continue to voice their opposition to the appointment of Rafa Benitez as manager by the super-rich but remote owner Roman Abramovich.
There may be fans of both clubs yearning for the kind of involvement being supported by Mata and Cazorla. Oviedo are now effectively owned by their followers, who have representatives on the board; a familiar situation across Europe but non-existent in the Premier League, where some supporters’ groups are becoming increasingly disgruntled at the way their game is being globalised.
All three players have invested heavily in the shares and although the official figures are not available, they are thought to have contributed many thousands of pounds to the cause.
The shares have no worth because the £1.4m they have raised is being used to keep the club afloat.
We were desperate. We thought the club was going to disappear
Pedro Zuazua
But after the campaign was launched on social media and given impetus by the backing of the three Premier League stars, it attracted buyers from across the globe.
“We were desperate. We thought the club was going to disappear,” said one of the current board members, Pedro Zuazua.
Mata, Cazorla and Michu return to the club each summer to mingle with the fans at social events.
They are in the most money-laden league in the world now and tomorrow’s London derby will attract millions of viewers across the planet, fuelling its financial boom.
But the two opposing players are also permanently entwined at football’s roots.
With the Olympic Park now staging concerts the scheme may not stack up.
Not really sure how the tube station would help unless you're coming in from Central London - which is not what the majority of our fans do (unless it's an evening match).
And although I don't want to re-open the parking debate, I think it would be unlikely to be better than free and fairly abundant locally, which it is now.
;o)