Can someone please get this track back on the rails , instead of having a go at each other for whatever reason , i come on here to get away from my kids bickering!
If the adverse publicity meant that urgent steps were taken to ensure that the staff were paid today when it was apparent the usual transfers had not gone through then that is all good as far as I am concerned.
I cannot help but wonder how those condemning Airman and others who exposed this would react if it was THEIR wages that were apparently not paid.
lol yes, the club weren't going to pay a squad of players in the second tier of English football and all it's staff until the people of Charlton Life caught wind of it.
Can someone please get this track back on the rails , instead of having a go at each other for whatever reason , i come on here to get away from my kids bickering!
Well said. This non takeover is having an effect on everyone's nerves.
Not singling out Airman, although I agree he should never have raised the matter in the first place. Within five mins of his post,there were others citing it as evidence of why we should never thank the current owners for their stewardship of the club.
When this sale goes through, Slater & Jiminez will have passed on the club in a much healthier position than it was when they inherited it. That means they go down in the ledger of Charlton history with a credit rather than a debit. And that seems to infuriate some folk.
Don't know how old you are but do you understand what an an independent fans forum in the internet world is?
I don't understand anything. But my mummy let me stay up late as it's Friday night so I thought I might as well post something, even though I don't really grasp these grown-up issues.
Actually I was thinking you might be a 90 year old who thought CL was some sort of quarterly village church gazette
Be patient with me. It's only by listening to the wise words of people like you that I will ever learn the ways of the world.
Ironic! Because that is exactly the way your post came across to me.
I'm worried the granting of this ACV might derail any takeover. If a guy across the pond suddenly thinks that he is already facing opposition to any plan he might have to move us elsewhere and decides he can't really be arsed after all. We may have cut off our nose to spite our face. If the takeover collapses admin might not be far round the corner. Might not be good timing.
When my wages had not cleared at 9am on expected day, my bank phoned me to ask if I was going to fund the account to cover my direct debits. Didn't matter that my company were paying by CHAPS later that day.
Why not post it on Tuesday that you knew it was Josh Harris. I mean nobody waited until next Monday to mention about the non story of the wages.
It's not a non-issue with the wages.
Yes it is. Wages were paid on the day they were contracted to be. It's got nothing to do with you if they were paid by BACS, CHAPS or in cash. The Club fulfilled it's obligations.
Yet before 9.00am this morning you were on here telling us that the wages weren't paid.
I'm with this. Credibility gets stretched when we see such bitterness come in.
It's a big jump from posting an accurate piece of information which was making waves inside the club and had clearly been given to me for a reason to this so-called "bitterness", which frankly is laughable now. I wasn't the only person who posted it anyway but I did so because someone wanted it out there.
There was a problem paying the wages. Staff were anxious, because they hadn't been kept informed. That's not down to me, however you box it up, and the consequence is that it emerged through two different sources on here. If there was in fact no problem then staff should have been briefed and it wouldn't have surfaced.
And I heard it from a completely different source, so the Airman baiting is quite unnecessary.
It's relevant for at least two reasons. Making waves throughout the club, particularly on the eve of a game, is far from insignificant. But more importantly it reveals that in the middle of the season we have a serious cash issue. The fact it was sorted by 5pm suggests to me that funds were needed and raised quickly, perhaps Richard Murray put his hand in his pocket again, who knows. Let's hope so, because taking on external debt at such short notice won't be cheap.
If you can't even pay your own staff, the chances that your creditors are getting paid is probably nil, which is a situation they won't allow to last forever.
EDIT: or I guess a cynical attempt at keeping your hand out of your pockets until it's someone else's problem.
But Bournemouth, in what way would the board A) think they could simply get away with not paying staff think it would remain out of public knowledge C) have the money ( which they had as staff have been paid) and jeopardise not only morale after a win but also the potential of a takeover.
All I'm saying is that, we know this lot have pushed it to the wire with payments on more than one occasion. Maybe they thought that another 24-36 hours would see them the other side of the game and the deal either finalised or at least passed off without it becoming widely known leading to any potential embarrassment.
Or maybe the new guys are in place and they were waiting for Thomas Cooks to open to change up some dollars ;-)
Not singling out Airman, although I agree he should never have raised the matter in the first place. Within five mins of his post,there were others citing it as evidence of why we should never thank the current owners for their stewardship of the club.
When this sale goes through, Slater & Jiminez will have passed on the club in a much healthier position than it was when they inherited it. That means they go down in the ledger of Charlton history with a credit rather than a debit. And that seems to infuriate some folk.
Don't know how old you are but do you understand what an an independent fans forum in the internet world is?
I don't understand anything. But my mummy let me stay up late as it's Friday night so I thought I might as well post something, even though I don't really grasp these grown-up issues.
Actually I was thinking you might be a 90 year old who thought CL was some sort of quarterly village church gazette
Be patient with me. It's only by listening to the wise words of people like you that I will ever learn the ways of the world.
Ironic! Because that is exactly the way your post came across to me.
Sorry. I don't understand big words like 'quarterly' and 'gazette' and 'ironic'.
I just asked mummy what they mean and she said something about a partronsing wind-up merchant who is best ignored. I don't know what she meant by that, but perhaps you will know what she means. Nighty night!
I'm worried the granting of this ACV might derail any takeover. If a guy across the pond suddenly thinks that he is already facing opposition to any plan he might have to move us elsewhere and decides he can't really be arsed after all. We may have cut off our nose to spite our face. If the takeover collapses admin might not be far round the corner. Might not be good timing.
I can see where you are coming from but any move away from The a Valley would need several years of planning and a six month consultation to put forward the business case would pretty much what an owner would be doing anyway with its customers or in this case supporters. Ultimately the owners can sell to whoever they like. What ACV really stops is what happened all those years ago where we were presented with a piece of paper saying we were moving. Done and dusted. No discussion.
I note your comments and you can disregard mine as you wish.
I've been doing that for years. Ever since I heard you having a massive row on your phone with someone I presume was from RTM, probably Steve Sutherland, at a motorway service station on the way to Old Trafford. It was just after the club had announced an exclusive deal with Capital Radio and so was then the end for Charlton Chat/Charlton Live for RTM/Radio Thamesmead/Millennium Radio. That was a crap decision that probably brought in peanuts and is up there with Richard Murray's decision to sack Brian Cole.
Richard Murray didn't sack Brian Cole, but he did engineer the Capital deal to put a stop to Charlton Live. It had bugger all to do with me, but I do know the financial logic was overwhelming.
Wouldn't have been Suthers but I don't honestly know who it would have been. From recollection Mark Mansfield refused to cover the match (happy to be corrected on whether it was that match), but it wouldn't have been him.
I meant Mark Mansfield not SS. Of course RM sacked Brian Cole, he was chairman. The most embarrassing episode in the history of CAFC - STILL. I e-mailed Mr Murray himself and told him as much.
Why not post it on Tuesday that you knew it was Josh Harris. I mean nobody waited until next Monday to mention about the non story of the wages.
It's not a non-issue with the wages.
Yes it is. Wages were paid on the day they were contracted to be. It's got nothing to do with you if they were paid by BACS, CHAPS or in cash. The Club fulfilled it's obligations.
Yet before 9.00am this morning you were on here telling us that the wages weren't paid.
I'm with this. Credibility gets stretched when we see such bitterness come in.
It's a big jump from posting an accurate piece of information which was making waves inside the club and had clearly been given to me for a reason to this so-called "bitterness", which frankly is laughable now. I wasn't the only person who posted it anyway but I did so because someone wanted it out there.
There was a problem paying the wages. Staff were anxious, because they hadn't been kept informed. That's not down to me, however you box it up, and the consequence is that it emerged through two different sources on here. If there was in fact no problem then staff should have been briefed and it wouldn't have surfaced.
And I heard it from a completely different source, so the Airman baiting is quite unnecessary.
It's relevant for at least two reasons. Making waves throughout the club, particularly on the eve of a game, is far from insignificant. But more importantly it reveals that in the middle of the season we have a serious cash issue. The fact it was sorted by 5pm suggests to me that funds were needed and raised quickly, perhaps Richard Murray put his hand in his pocket again, who knows. Let's hope so, because taking on external debt at such short notice won't be cheap.
If you can't even pay your own staff, the chances that your creditors are getting paid is probably nil, which is a situation they won't allow to last forever.
EDIT: or I guess a cynical attempt at keeping your hand out of your pockets until it's someone else's problem.
Does it?????
Or could there have been an actual fuck up by payroll??
More guess work is all we have against this board it seems.
Just a thought, I wonder how relevant the AVC application was to the leaks we all seen this week in the press. Everyone has assumed they were to flush out a prospective buyer or force the hand of a potential bidder, what if they were to sow discontent and division amongst us to prevent the AVC application going through.
Not sure how the leaks would have prevented ACV from happening.
Well I was reading the ITV forum last night and to say that there is some discontent might be understating things, there is also a certain amount of scepticism elsewhere. It could be that some parties considered that the news of a possible move to the peninsular would/could cause a schism and thus prevent/delay the decision.
I'm worried the granting of this ACV might derail any takeover. If a guy across the pond suddenly thinks that he is already facing opposition to any plan he might have to move us elsewhere and decides he can't really be arsed after all. We may have cut off our nose to spite our face. If the takeover collapses admin might not be far round the corner. Might not be good timing.
The ACV couldn't derail a Hornby. It has about as much legal weight as a parking ticket appeal. Sorry, but that's the reality. No potential deal will be scuppered because of it.
Just a thought, I wonder how relevant the AVC application was to the leaks we all seen this week in the press. Everyone has assumed they were to flush out a prospective buyer or force the hand of a potential bidder, what if they were to sow discontent and division amongst us to prevent the AVC application going through.
Not sure how the leaks would have prevented ACV from happening.
Well I was reading the ITV forum last night and to say that there is some discontent might be understating things, there is also a certain amount of scepticism elsewhere. It could be that some parties considered that the news of a possible move to the peninsular would/could cause a schism and thus prevent/delay the decision.
An official proposal to move from The Valley would create a schism in the support regardless. Any owner would already have factored in a percentage of fans 10% ? Not following but in the scheme of things would be just collateral damage.
Of course, it could be that the takeover is a done deal so the old owners aren't obliged to pay the wages anymore and the new owners just struggled to get the payment details set up in time.
I note your comments and you can disregard mine as you wish.
I've been doing that for years. Ever since I heard you having a massive row on your phone with someone I presume was from RTM, probably Steve Sutherland, at a motorway service station on the way to Old Trafford. It was just after the club had announced an exclusive deal with Capital Radio and so was then the end for Charlton Chat/Charlton Live for RTM/Radio Thamesmead/Millennium Radio. That was a crap decision that probably brought in peanuts and is up there with Richard Murray's decision to sack Brian Cole.
Richard Murray didn't sack Brian Cole, but he did engineer the Capital deal to put a stop to Charlton Live. It had bugger all to do with me, but I do know the financial logic was overwhelming.
Wouldn't have been Suthers but I don't honestly know who it would have been. From recollection Mark Mansfield refused to cover the match (happy to be corrected on whether it was that match), but it wouldn't have been him.
I meant Mark Mansfield not SS. Of course RM sacked Brian Cole, he was chairman. The most embarrassing episode in the history of CAFC - STILL. I e-mailed Mr Murray himself and told him as much.
I might write the Millennium saga up some time but I don't think this is the place. I wouldn't have been speaking to Mark on the phone because from recollection we never discussed it directly at all.
Brian knows that I was the one who stood up for him as pitch announcer against consistent criticism from Suthers who felt he wasn't the right image for the club. However, when he overstepped the mark I couldn't protect him any further and Peter Varney sacked him. Whether RM had a view I can't say, but non-exec directors don't usually get involved with hiring and firing full-timers, never mind casual matchday staff.
Without wanting to divert away from the main issue at hand, why would anybody set up DDs to go out on pay day? Why would you expose yourself to all those potentials issues if your employer makes any sort of mistake?
Overstepped the mark? Image for the club? Oh dear! I never questioned your loyalty to Brian but your support of the Capital Radio deal, and I heard you standing up for it, was in my opinion wrong, however much money it brought in.
Always amazes me how different people react to different things in different ways.
It's the selective posting that annoys me.
You can't post some positive inside knowledge that could be detrimental to the sales process, yet other negative inside knowledge which without a doubt would be detrimental to the sales process is stuck up with apparent glee.
Comments
I'm a Charlton supporter, get me out of here.
(Don't worry, it will happen soon what with the move and path to long term success).
It's relevant for at least two reasons. Making waves throughout the club, particularly on the eve of a game, is far from insignificant. But more importantly it reveals that in the middle of the season we have a serious cash issue. The fact it was sorted by 5pm suggests to me that funds were needed and raised quickly, perhaps Richard Murray put his hand in his pocket again, who knows. Let's hope so, because taking on external debt at such short notice won't be cheap.
If you can't even pay your own staff, the chances that your creditors are getting paid is probably nil, which is a situation they won't allow to last forever.
EDIT: or I guess a cynical attempt at keeping your hand out of your pockets until it's someone else's problem.
Or maybe the new guys are in place and they were waiting for Thomas Cooks to open to change up some dollars ;-)
Sorry. I don't understand big words like 'quarterly' and 'gazette' and 'ironic'.
I just asked mummy what they mean and she said something about a partronsing wind-up merchant who is best ignored. I don't know what she meant by that, but perhaps you will know what she means. Nighty night!
Or could there have been an actual fuck up by payroll??
More guess work is all we have against this board it seems.
Of course, it could be that the takeover is a done deal so the old owners aren't obliged to pay the wages anymore and the new owners just struggled to get the payment details set up in time.
Or we could just sling some more shit about.
Brian knows that I was the one who stood up for him as pitch announcer against consistent criticism from Suthers who felt he wasn't the right image for the club. However, when he overstepped the mark I couldn't protect him any further and Peter Varney sacked him. Whether RM had a view I can't say, but non-exec directors don't usually get involved with hiring and firing full-timers, never mind casual matchday staff.
I never questioned your loyalty to Brian but your support of the Capital Radio deal, and I heard you standing up for it, was in my opinion wrong, however much money it brought in.
And it was hardly well spent was it?
You can't post some positive inside knowledge that could be detrimental to the sales process, yet other negative inside knowledge which without a doubt would be detrimental to the sales process is stuck up with apparent glee.