Deal was pulled from the yanks Friday after a bigger offer.
Source?
Heard the same today, bloke sitting behind me who claims to have a contact in the club reckons the deal was supposed to be completed yesterday & a middle eastern consortium came in at the last minute with a higher bid & Jiminiz gave the yanks the elbow. Only what I was told don't shoot the messenger ;-)
I thought the Germans had slipped in via the back door and brought their own turnstile operators with them when the one I went to kept shouting nine, nine to me as I fumbled through my season ticket book :0)
Deal was pulled from the yanks Friday after a bigger offer.
Source?
Heard the same today, bloke sitting behind me who claims to have a contact in the club reckons the deal was supposed to be completed yesterday & a middle eastern consortium came in at the last minute with a higher bid & Jiminiz gave the yanks the elbow. Only what I was told don't shoot the messenger ;-)
Just hope this doesn't come to bite us on the bum!
"It could also add to costs because any move would need to meet the approval of supporters"
Why is there so much misunderstanding of the ACV? No move away from The Valley would require the approval of supporters. All that would happen is that the owners would be obliged to inform RGB in advance, and they in turn the Trust. That's it.
Sheer ignorance.
Enough information has been posted - on here and elsewhere - about what the ACV means, so it's easy for people to find out for themselves and not just take the likes of Razil's word for it.
But people would rather trot out their own ill-conceived (and pre-conceived) ideas about stuff like this just because they like slagging things off. Particularly, it would seem, if there is any connection whatsoever with Charlton Life.
I personally have some doubts about its value, but I commend those who have got off their arses and are trying to do something positive for the benefit of OUR club - and therefore us all - ratjer than just sit there slagging others off and contributing NOTHING positive towards OUR club.
Many thanks Off_it on behalf of the Trust.
After six months of the launch and raising awareness of the Trust (+ building numbers) we took this on. Now that this is signed off there is time for a day off and then on with the next piece of activity. Dependent upon discussions over the next two weeks it might be quite big?! And it is definitely focussed on benefitting OUR club.
Sometimes we release articles, sometimes we start discussions on here or survey the fans and sometimes JFDI is the best and simplest approach. (that's Just Do It with an F in the middle!)
Incidentally I bumped into Richard Murray today and he added his congratulations about securing ACV.
I liked the sound of the American bid with the kind of interests and experience they had - thought that this Josh Harris fella came across as a decent sort too, and one that saw his sporting interests as long term projects that were aiming for the very top.
Jimenesz and Slater need to get on with it and do the deal. The club needs to move forward and Charlton are in limbo until that happens. Worse on todays performances, without strengthening there is a real risk of relegation with the lack of quality in the squad and the contract situation.
On what I saw from the American prospective owner, Josh Harris speaking with his view of how a sports club interacts with its community and the positive force they Charlton are a pretty good fit.
A deal and/or more investment needs to be found before the January window. We are running on empty and it will cost a lot more to fix later on in the season.
This site does try to lay out the ACV process in a more digestible style. ITTV has either misunderstood or is deliberately trying to whip up ill feeling between supporters. I hope it is the former.
One point Reams makes is entirely valid. If the club can afford to relocate without relying on the sale of the Valley, the ACV won't stop that happening. We could bid for the Valley, but without CAFC there what's the point?
This site does try to lay out the ACV process in a more digestible style. ITTV has either misunderstood or is deliberately trying to whip up ill feeling between supporters. I hope it is the former.
One point Reams makes is entirely valid. If the club can afford to relocate without relying on the sale of the Valley, the ACV won't stop that happening. We could bid for the Valley, but without CAFC there what's the point?
I think it's a big 'if' though.
If the club cannot afford to move without the sale of the Valley, the ACV won't stop it happening.
"It could also add to costs because any move would need to meet the approval of supporters"
Why is there so much misunderstanding of the ACV? No move away from The Valley would require the approval of supporters. All that would happen is that the owners would be obliged to inform RGB in advance, and they in turn the Trust. That's it.
Perhaps it's because posts like this get it wrong?
The owners wouldn't have to inform the Trust they were moving unless they intended to sell the Valley - the assumption that they would is probably valid, but ACV works only on the basis that there is intent to dispose of (sell) the asset.
In the week I posted that I'd be open to a move from the Valley if everything added up.
Today I stood and looked from my vantage point on the halfway line of the East Stand, and somehow I couldn't imagine a scenario where I'd want to move. It's home. That's it.
Yanks, Arabs or a Russo-German Pact (sounds vaguely familiar) - I really don't think that anyone on here knows for sure the ifs, whys and whens of the deal. We can only hope it happens and happens soon, so we have a chance to strengthen in January.
Posting without reading the whole of the thread - can't be arsed with bickering/semantics- I just want to make a couple of points.
1. Due diligence, I have personally done any number of these over the years, both as an advisor and vendor. It is a fact finding exercise and not the be all and end all. Once DD is completed a report is made - generally nothing is found which is outside the statutory information available. It is more to do with warranties and indemnities to clarify what any purchaser is letting themselves in for.
2. Wages. So wages were late(ish). As an employer in 20 years I have paid people late 3 times once my fault (forgot to run payroll) and twice due to bank/ official error. (Sh) it happens.
3. Airman brown. As an ex senior employee I am sure that over the years he had many disagreements regarding how the business was was run. I often have arguments with my partners which can get heated we are however all trying to advance the business. He may now have a separate agenda - I don't know and frankly don't care. I can assure you however that his thoughts expressed on a fans forum will carry no more weight than those of Reams or Nathan Prior! If they do then MS and TJ are not the hard noses they appear to be. Basically cut the man some slack.
Rant over- COYR
If you had bothered to read the rest of the thread you would realise that your post is way too reasonable and also apparently based on experience, in direct contravention of posting guidelines.
Comments
After six months of the launch and raising awareness of the Trust (+ building numbers) we took this on. Now that this is signed off there is time for a day off and then on with the next piece of activity. Dependent upon discussions over the next two weeks it might be quite big?! And it is definitely focussed on benefitting OUR club.
Sometimes we release articles, sometimes we start discussions on here or survey the fans and sometimes JFDI is the best and simplest approach. (that's Just Do It with an F in the middle!)
Incidentally I bumped into Richard Murray today and he added his congratulations about securing ACV.
We shall see, I suppose.......
On what I saw from the American prospective owner, Josh Harris speaking with his view of how a sports club interacts with its community and the positive force they Charlton are a pretty good fit.
csnphilly.com/basketball-philadelphia-sixers/josh-harris-sixers-are-staying-philly
Hoping for decent owners and that TJ / MS are not messing around the prospective bidders too badly.
I think it's a big 'if' though.
The owners wouldn't have to inform the Trust they were moving unless they intended to sell the Valley - the assumption that they would is probably valid, but ACV works only on the basis that there is intent to dispose of (sell) the asset.
Today I stood and looked from my vantage point on the halfway line of the East Stand, and somehow I couldn't imagine a scenario where I'd want to move. It's home. That's it.
Simple!
Possibly there are time constraints in the mix.