Sports mogul Harris pulls out of Charlton takeover talks Wednesday, 11 December 2013
EXCLUSIVE By Toby Porter
It is hoped that this six-month period will be enough to deter any potential buyer who might want to move the club to a new site, on the Greenwich Peninsula, and build social housing on the site of the current stadium.
The only thing I saw wrong with Toby's story was this sentence, since it isn't as I understand it the Trust's position. But frankly anyone getting excited about ACV stopping a takeover or even the likelihood of a new stadium in the first place, is barking up the wrong tree.
A more serious issue is how we have got this far with no serious external scrutiny, local or national, of the absentee owners, their dodgy dossier, the goings on at The Valley - a 12th long server has gone today - the club's finances, the first-team contracts, or Greenwich Council and the imaginary stadium plan.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant and it's high time we had some.
"Snide" is defined as " derogatory or mocking in an indirect way ". I would have no problem whatsoever to explain face to face to Toby Porter why I consider his behaviour was shitty; however since he's made his apologies to Barnie there is no need to do so. Just saying that I try my best to only write what I would say directly to people; should you wish to test me on that, I would happily try to meet up with you around the Brighton or Massive games (and please don't think that's a Reams type offer :-))
The reference to Peter Cordwell was largely for Airman's benefit; he knows that during the Valley Party campaign Peter was great to us, but always professional, delivering great copy for his readers. Peter was a fan. However we dealt with a whole raft of other journos, most of them in bigger jobs than Peter; and the only one who was shitty to us was Michael Herd of the Standard, and even he gave me a most gracious apology to quote for my paper for the Advertising Effectiveness awards.
I guess its because of all those positive experiences that I was so disappointed with Toby Porter's piece. I don't think times have changed so much. He screwed up, and hurt us in the process.
I understand why, but I think you (Trust people) are all way too sensitive about ACV and people misunderstanding it. Few Charlton fans read the South London Press, which is why it doesn't focus on Charlton. Its main readership is in Southwark, Lambeth, Wandsworth and Lewisham.
Back in the day the Mercury had a distribution of 240,000 across Bexley, Greenwich and Lewisham - and even though the distribution operation was crap, it packed a punch.
This SLP story didn't even appear in the print edition. It was on their website and the main audience for it will have been . . . people on Charlton Life.
Drawing a reaction on here is not the same as "hurting" the Trust, it's just a shit storm which people use to vent views they likely already have. In reality they are a minority of posters, who are a minority of visitors, who are a minority of supporters. And half an hour later the caravan moves on. None of it really matters very much.
Sports mogul Harris pulls out of Charlton takeover talks Wednesday, 11 December 2013
EXCLUSIVE By Toby Porter
It is hoped that this six-month period will be enough to deter any potential buyer who might want to move the club to a new site, on the Greenwich Peninsula, and build social housing on the site of the current stadium.
The only thing I saw wrong with Toby's story was this sentence, since it isn't as I understand it the Trust's position. But frankly anyone getting excited about ACV stopping a takeover or even the likelihood of a new stadium in the first place, is barking up the wrong tree.
A more serious issue is how we have got this far with no serious external scrutiny, local or national, of the absentee owners, their dodgy dossier, the goings on at The Valley - a 12th long server has gone today - the club's finances, the first-team contracts, or Greenwich Council and the imaginary stadium plan.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant and it's high time we had some.
And how would you suggest we go about that? Little crap Charlton are hardly back page news material are they.
Sports mogul Harris pulls out of Charlton takeover talks Wednesday, 11 December 2013
EXCLUSIVE By Toby Porter
It is hoped that this six-month period will be enough to deter any potential buyer who might want to move the club to a new site, on the Greenwich Peninsula, and build social housing on the site of the current stadium.
The only thing I saw wrong with Toby's story was this sentence, since it isn't as I understand it the Trust's position.
Well said, AB. And the reason the sentence is poor journalism is because it doesn't make it clear who is doing the alleged hoping. Someone presumably said to him that was what they hoped; if it was only a few diehard opponents of a new stadium cliutching at straws, then he should have been clearer where this view was coming from. But that doesn't make Toby "shameful" or "shitty" or "spiteful" or any of the other words of abuse heaped upon him by people who should know better.
Sports mogul Harris pulls out of Charlton takeover talks Wednesday, 11 December 2013
EXCLUSIVE By Toby Porter
It is hoped that this six-month period will be enough to deter any potential buyer who might want to move the club to a new site, on the Greenwich Peninsula, and build social housing on the site of the current stadium.
The only thing I saw wrong with Toby's story was this sentence, since it isn't as I understand it the Trust's position. But frankly anyone getting excited about ACV stopping a takeover or even the likelihood of a new stadium in the first place, is barking up the wrong tree.
A more serious issue is how we have got this far with no serious external scrutiny, local or national, of the absentee owners, their dodgy dossier, the goings on at The Valley - a 12th long server has gone today - the club's finances, the first-team contracts, or Greenwich Council and the imaginary stadium plan.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant and it's high time we had some.
And how would you suggest we go about that? Little crap Charlton are hardly back page news material are they.
"Snide" is defined as " derogatory or mocking in an indirect way ". I would have no problem whatsoever to explain face to face to Toby Porter why I consider his behaviour was shitty; however since he's made his apologies to Barnie there is no need to do so. Just saying that I try my best to only write what I would say directly to people; should you wish to test me on that, I would happily try to meet up with you around the Brighton or Massive games (and please don't think that's a Reams type offer :-))
The reference to Peter Cordwell was largely for Airman's benefit; he knows that during the Valley Party campaign Peter was great to us, but always professional, delivering great copy for his readers. Peter was a fan. However we dealt with a whole raft of other journos, most of them in bigger jobs than Peter; and the only one who was shitty to us was Michael Herd of the Standard, and even he gave me a most gracious apology to quote for my paper for the Advertising Effectiveness awards.
I guess its because of all those positive experiences that I was so disappointed with Toby Porter's piece. I don't think times have changed so much. He screwed up, and hurt us in the process.
I understand why, but I think you (Trust people) are all way too sensitive about ACV and people misunderstanding it. Few Charlton fans read the South London Press, which is why it doesn't focus on Charlton. Its main readership is in Southwark, Lambeth, Wandsworth and Lewisham.
Drawing a reaction on here is not the same as "hurting" the Trust, it's just a shit storm which people use to vent views they likely already have. In reality they are a minority of posters, who are a minority of visitors, who are a minority of supporters. And half an hour later the caravan moves on. None of it really matters very much.
I agree that there is little reason to worry about the SLP - the only reason I even look at it is the links on here and when you look at their links to follow up stories it registers 46 hits or sometimes 53!
Do we really want national scrutiny or do we want to "rebuild a credible and broad based representative organisation that can act on behalf of Charlton fans in a way that message boards and fanzines cannot"
IA now that is naughty. It is Toby's behaviours and words that have been criticised, not him as a person. There is a very real difference and I do not begin to understand how you can consider that it constitutes abuse.
"Snide" is defined as " derogatory or mocking in an indirect way ". I would have no problem whatsoever to explain face to face to Toby Porter why I consider his behaviour was shitty; however since he's made his apologies to Barnie there is no need to do so. Just saying that I try my best to only write what I would say directly to people; should you wish to test me on that, I would happily try to meet up with you around the Brighton or Massive games (and please don't think that's a Reams type offer :-))
The reference to Peter Cordwell was largely for Airman's benefit; he knows that during the Valley Party campaign Peter was great to us, but always professional, delivering great copy for his readers. Peter was a fan. However we dealt with a whole raft of other journos, most of them in bigger jobs than Peter; and the only one who was shitty to us was Michael Herd of the Standard, and even he gave me a most gracious apology to quote for my paper for the Advertising Effectiveness awards.
I guess its because of all those positive experiences that I was so disappointed with Toby Porter's piece. I don't think times have changed so much. He screwed up, and hurt us in the process.
I understand why, but I think you (Trust people) are all way too sensitive about ACV and people misunderstanding it. Few Charlton fans read the South London Press, which is why it doesn't focus on Charlton. Its main readership is in Southwark, Lambeth, Wandsworth and Lewisham.
Drawing a reaction on here is not the same as "hurting" the Trust, it's just a shit storm which people use to vent views they likely already have. In reality they are a minority of posters, who are a minority of visitors, who are a minority of supporters. And half an hour later the caravan moves on. None of it really matters very much.
I agree that there is little reason to worry about the SLP - the only reason I even look at it is the links on here and when you look at their links to follow up stories it registers 46 hits or sometimes 53!
Do we really want national scrutiny or do we want to "rebuild a credible and broad based representative organisation that can act on behalf of Charlton fans in a way that message boards and fanzines cannot"
Sports mogul Harris pulls out of Charlton takeover talks Wednesday, 11 December 2013
EXCLUSIVE By Toby Porter
It is hoped that this six-month period will be enough to deter any potential buyer who might want to move the club to a new site, on the Greenwich Peninsula, and build social housing on the site of the current stadium.
The only thing I saw wrong with Toby's story was this sentence, since it isn't as I understand it the Trust's position. But frankly anyone getting excited about ACV stopping a takeover or even the likelihood of a new stadium in the first place, is barking up the wrong tree.
A more serious issue is how we have got this far with no serious external scrutiny, local or national, of the absentee owners, their dodgy dossier, the goings on at The Valley - a 12th long server has gone today - the club's finances, the first-team contracts, or Greenwich Council and the imaginary stadium plan.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant and it's high time we had some.
That's all well and good,
The problem we have is 99% of people don't know the inner workings at the even at mid management level without trying to bring about information on the upper echelons on the organisation which was strictly designed at great effort I would suggest to avoid any such clarity, highlighted in the main by Mr Jiminez who is meant to be some kind of football fixer\property investor who signed Mikel Alonso and can't sell his own house, co-in siding with (alleged) main financier Kevin (quite spectacularly ironically named) Cash who would appear to be extremely rich yet a ghost!
The reality is we're all running around worrying how the club is going to be run and by whom in future with little to no understanding with how/whom it current runs!
Sports mogul Harris pulls out of Charlton takeover talks Wednesday, 11 December 2013
EXCLUSIVE By Toby Porter
It is hoped that this six-month period will be enough to deter any potential buyer who might want to move the club to a new site, on the Greenwich Peninsula, and build social housing on the site of the current stadium.
The only thing I saw wrong with Toby's story was this sentence, since it isn't as I understand it the Trust's position. But frankly anyone getting excited about ACV stopping a takeover or even the likelihood of a new stadium in the first place, is barking up the wrong tree.
A more serious issue is how we have got this far with no serious external scrutiny, local or national, of the absentee owners, their dodgy dossier, the goings on at The Valley - a 12th long server has gone today - the club's finances, the first-team contracts, or Greenwich Council and the imaginary stadium plan.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant and it's high time we had some.
That's all well and good,
The problem we have is 99% of people don't know the inner workings at the even at mid management level without trying to bring about information on the upper echelons on the organisation which was strictly designed at great effort I would suggest to avoid any such clarity, highlighted in the main by Mr Jiminez who is meant to be some kind of football fixer\property investor who signed Mikel Alonso and can't sell his own house, co-in siding with (alleged) main financier Kevin (quite spectacularly ironically named) Cash who would appear to be extremely rich yet a ghost!
The reality is we're all running around worrying how the club is going to be run and by whom in future with little to no understanding with how/whom it current runs!
Here we go again! The Club itself supported it! Razil and I met with two different directors at different times over the summer and it was Michael Slater who called Razil later that week to agree a form of wording to go on the club website. What the club would not do was support the actual promotion of the petition. So every one of those 1,905 (a great number) on the e-petition came from web promotion and fans working on the Trust stall which is located on CAFC property. I heard some on here and elsewhere say that once the concept of relegation was explained the purchaser valuation of the deal dropped somewhat. The value of promotion to the Premier League is far, far higher than the sale value of the Valley and IMHO the Valley is fit for purpose now and in the years to come. When someone does deals for £18M they employ people who get these things right with the precision of a Beckham free kick. When someone is trying to sell a loss making company they will inevitably exagerate the upside - it is up to the purchasers to nail the reality and it is up to both sides to cut a deal. I am 100% sure the Trust can and should write more on all of the angles here for I am sure it has members who have parts of the picture along with experts who can sum up the position the club is in.
I don't believe anyone who was that wealthy would be that dumb, I have also heard from a number of sources as you put it GJ that the ground issue is a red herring..
However I prefer to look at the facts in front of me. The trust has access to legal advice and supporters directs resources and advice. I can assure you we didnt undertake this without using that, and conducting a very careful analysis.
Acv only comes into play if the ground is sold separately, and even then only six months delay. A new stadium would take far longer to construct. The reality is all it does is act as a warning in very particular circumstances. If buyers are worried about that then something dodgy is afoot. They will also soon find very few clubs in England without it assuming it stays law.
The Valley's ACV status does not prevent its owner - current, or future - from selling it if s/he/they so wish. What it does do is afford those who will be affected by the sale (other than the seller) a period of notification, should such a sale be proposed. That period of notification would allow time for a considered response to be made, be that accepting, oppositional, or some way in between. ACV status was sought because a) the Trust Board considered The Valley to be a useful facility (i.e. a community asset) and b) it did not wish to see a repeat of the "Dear Supporter" letter in 1985, whereby Addicks were given very short notice of the then owner's decision to quit SE7. ACV status was applied for under a relatively new piece of legislation called the Localism Act. A serious and diligent purchaser wouId, I hope, investigate what ACV status meant. If a bidder pulled out, as has been reported, I think that their decision would have less to do with ACV status and more to do with something else.
This is the thread that will never die, as it seemingly draws it's last breath along comes the most random thing and in no time another 50 posts have been added. Been out on the fire engine and then went straight to bed, open CL and for a second I thought there may be another new rumour to discuss.
Sports mogul Harris pulls out of Charlton takeover talks Wednesday, 11 December 2013
EXCLUSIVE By Toby Porter
It is hoped that this six-month period will be enough to deter any potential buyer who might want to move the club to a new site, on the Greenwich Peninsula, and build social housing on the site of the current stadium.
The only thing I saw wrong with Toby's story was this sentence, since it isn't as I understand it the Trust's position. But frankly anyone getting excited about ACV stopping a takeover or even the likelihood of a new stadium in the first place, is barking up the wrong tree.
A more serious issue is how we have got this far with no serious external scrutiny, local or national, of the absentee owners, their dodgy dossier, the goings on at The Valley - a 12th long server has gone today - the club's finances, the first-team contracts, or Greenwich Council and the imaginary stadium plan.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant and it's high time we had some.
And how would you suggest we go about that? Little crap Charlton are hardly back page news material are they.
Yet we managed it in 1990.
Had a think about this AB. Why not get your mate Kleinman to have a word with the Sky news 'yellow ticker tape of sensationalism' department to see off we can get a few yards?
any sentence that starts " a Smallwall/Palarse fane told me----------" should only be posted on here if it ends " so i laughed in his face and told them to get a life and crawl back into the cat litter they came from"
Can i just clarify something and it's only my opinion so don't shoot me down.
The only people who know exactly what is going on are:
Tony Jimenez Michael Slater Kevin Cash (we think) Richard Murray & their advisors/legal team etc.
I'm guessing that even some board members are not 100% sure what the situation is as what they're being told by the above list could be construed to whatever they like.
Therefore when people come on here stating "i've heard from a good source" or something similar, unless it's from the above list DIRECTLY then please post as such.
I'm not having a go at anyone on here, honestly, but there's a big difference between hearing some news from someone who works in the ticket office or someone down the pub or a mate told me that...and hearing it from the above sources.
I could easily read something on here about admin, talk to a mate who then talks to another person about what i've told him and then it reappears on here as "i've heard it from 2 or 3 different people".
Don't get me wrong i really want to hear what people are hearing so please keep posting if you have heard something but please give it some context so that i don't get too high or low!
Just passing on some info received from a palace mate who works for sky sports. He was talking to one of the administrators who was involved in when Palace went into administration and he said it seems likely that we could be going into administration in the near future.
There are three teams that are close; us, Birmingham and Carlisle although Carlisle are the closest.
I don't know anything more but it doesn't sound great, this makes the Harris deal falling through look even worse.
My thoughts: Insolvency Practitioners live in the real world. In this world - a million miles away from the world occupied by football supporters - the Insolvency Practitioner does no work whatsoever unless he is actually likely to be paid for it: that's how they make their living. So, in this real world, IPs do not sit down and spend hour upon hour of precious fee-earning time working out which football clubs might be the next to go into administration just on the off chance that they might work for one of a dozen or so firms that might be in line to be appointed administrators. So you can tell your mate to swivel on it.
IA now that is naughty. It is Toby's behaviours and words that have been criticised, not him as a person. There is a very real difference and I do not begin to understand how you can consider that it constitutes abuse.
Blimey, this thread has descended into a bit of a free-for-all, but for some reason, like a moth to the flame, it's sadly addictive. Personally, for my own sanity, am putting it down to the hope that each time I see a hundred new comments it may, just may, be for something positive.
Whether you share the views of Prague, SR or Razil or not, if others have even had a fleeting degree of experience with the press (especially if the topic at hand is light on facts as in this case) then it is no surprise that they try to pull together as much of a newsworthy story as possible from wherever they can. Tying in a comment re ACV is to achieve exactly what it has done on here......speculation and conjecture.
As others have mentioned, there is no way ACV would even hit the radar of Apollo concerns, they've done distressed property deals in Europe in the last few years that dwarf any purchase of CAFC and came with serious DD issues for their innumerable advisers to tackle (often in a matter of weeks).
Here's still hoping for some positive news before what seems like very tough times ahead.
I think if it was admin on Thursday, Airman Brown would have a better idea about it than all the rest of us regulars, and certainly better than that of any Nigel or Spanner
And by the way, rumouring it doesn't help the club, which is probably exactly why Nigels and Stuwalls do it
Not beyond the realms of possibility IMO Prague.The complexity of our ownership probably means that Cash/Slater have very little to lose by their standards.Cash does strike me as a man who would probably lose sleep if a fiver went missing out of his wallet,It's how people like him keep that money making mentality. I do think the only reason he's really sticking around is because there has been quite a bit of interest from other parties and he can see a way of maybe making a few quid.If that interest dissipates then he'll walk and leave it all to Tony.And then we really are in trouble.
Sure, I take your general points Carly, however the rumour mongers are working on the belief that there was only one takeover bid and that it has gone away. They believe this on the basis of a tiny and clearly spoon-fed couple of 'reports' in the Daily Fail , and in a local rag which has no serious interest in covering us properly. Airman has not backed up the rumours, which I believe he would do if he thought they had substance. That's why I think Thursday admin is bull.
Maybe you have not read the South London Press for 15 years or so but the South London Press has the best coverage of Charlton anywhere in print.
Comments
A more serious issue is how we have got this far with no serious external scrutiny, local or national, of the absentee owners, their dodgy dossier, the goings on at The Valley - a 12th long server has gone today - the club's finances, the first-team contracts, or Greenwich Council and the imaginary stadium plan.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant and it's high time we had some.
Back in the day the Mercury had a distribution of 240,000 across Bexley, Greenwich and Lewisham - and even though the distribution operation was crap, it packed a punch.
This SLP story didn't even appear in the print edition. It was on their website and the main audience for it will have been . . . people on Charlton Life.
Drawing a reaction on here is not the same as "hurting" the Trust, it's just a shit storm which people use to vent views they likely already have. In reality they are a minority of posters, who are a minority of visitors, who are a minority of supporters. And half an hour later the caravan moves on. None of it really matters very much.
Little crap Charlton are hardly back page news material are they.
Well said, AB. And the reason the sentence is poor journalism is because it doesn't make it clear who is doing the alleged hoping. Someone presumably said to him that was what they hoped; if it was only a few diehard opponents of a new stadium cliutching at straws, then he should have been clearer where this view was coming from. But that doesn't make Toby "shameful" or "shitty" or "spiteful" or any of the other words of abuse heaped upon him by people who should know better.
Do we really want national scrutiny or do we want to "rebuild a credible and broad based representative organisation that can act on behalf of Charlton fans in a way that message boards and fanzines cannot"
So people are taking things and themselves ridiculously too seriously
The problem we have is 99% of people don't know the inner workings at the even at mid management level without trying to bring about information on the upper echelons on the organisation which was strictly designed at great effort I would suggest to avoid any such clarity, highlighted in the main by Mr Jiminez who is meant to be some kind of football fixer\property investor who signed Mikel Alonso and can't sell his own house, co-in siding with (alleged) main financier Kevin (quite spectacularly ironically named) Cash who would appear to be extremely rich yet a ghost!
The reality is we're all running around worrying how the club is going to be run and by whom in future with little to no understanding with how/whom it current runs!
Lord help us
In my opinion they probably didn't understand it properly - like a large percentage of charlton fans. And thought it's more hassle than it's worth.
What ever will be, will be
He may not have done but you don't have lawyers billing £800 per hour to not know.
The Club itself supported it! Razil and I met with two different directors at different times over the summer and it was Michael Slater who called Razil later that week to agree a form of wording to go on the club website.
What the club would not do was support the actual promotion of the petition. So every one of those 1,905 (a great number) on the e-petition came from web promotion and fans working on the Trust stall which is located on CAFC property.
I heard some on here and elsewhere say that once the concept of relegation was explained the purchaser valuation of the deal dropped somewhat.
The value of promotion to the Premier League is far, far higher than the sale value of the Valley and IMHO the Valley is fit for purpose now and in the years to come.
When someone does deals for £18M they employ people who get these things right with the precision of a Beckham free kick.
When someone is trying to sell a loss making company they will inevitably exagerate the upside - it is up to the purchasers to nail the reality and it is up to both sides to cut a deal.
I am 100% sure the Trust can and should write more on all of the angles here for I am sure it has members who have parts of the picture along with experts who can sum up the position the club is in.
However I prefer to look at the facts in front of me. The trust has access to legal advice and supporters directs resources and advice. I can assure you we didnt undertake this without using that, and conducting a very careful analysis.
Acv only comes into play if the ground is sold separately, and even then only six months delay. A new stadium would take far longer to construct. The reality is all it does is act as a warning in very particular circumstances. If buyers are worried about that then something dodgy is afoot. They will also soon find very few clubs in England without it assuming it stays law.
ACV status was sought because a) the Trust Board considered The Valley to be a useful facility (i.e. a community asset) and b) it did not wish to see a repeat of the "Dear Supporter" letter in 1985, whereby Addicks were given very short notice of the then owner's decision to quit SE7.
ACV status was applied for under a relatively new piece of legislation called the Localism Act. A serious and diligent purchaser wouId, I hope, investigate what ACV status meant. If a bidder pulled out, as has been reported, I think that their decision would have less to do with ACV status and more to do with something else.
Why not get your mate Kleinman to have a word with the Sky news 'yellow ticker tape of sensationalism' department to see off we can get a few yards?
The only people who know exactly what is going on are:
Tony Jimenez
Michael Slater
Kevin Cash (we think)
Richard Murray
& their advisors/legal team etc.
I'm guessing that even some board members are not 100% sure what the situation is as what they're being told by the above list could be construed to whatever they like.
Therefore when people come on here stating "i've heard from a good source" or something similar, unless it's from the above list DIRECTLY then please post as such.
I'm not having a go at anyone on here, honestly, but there's a big difference between hearing some news from someone who works in the ticket office or someone down the pub or a mate told me that...and hearing it from the above sources.
I could easily read something on here about admin, talk to a mate who then talks to another person about what i've told him and then it reappears on here as "i've heard it from 2 or 3 different people".
Don't get me wrong i really want to hear what people are hearing so please keep posting if you have heard something but please give it some context so that i don't get too high or low!
That's why.
Whether you share the views of Prague, SR or Razil or not, if others have even had a fleeting degree of experience with the press (especially if the topic at hand is light on facts as in this case) then it is no surprise that they try to pull together as much of a newsworthy story as possible from wherever they can. Tying in a comment re ACV is to achieve exactly what it has done on here......speculation and conjecture.
As others have mentioned, there is no way ACV would even hit the radar of Apollo concerns, they've done distressed property deals in Europe in the last few years that dwarf any purchase of CAFC and came with serious DD issues for their innumerable advisers to tackle (often in a matter of weeks).
Here's still hoping for some positive news before what seems like very tough times ahead.