Told a few people on hear a couple of weeks ago about this but have been told today this deal is no where near done and has been released by someone to to hurry it up
My honest thoughts are that unfortunately in the not so distant future we will not be playing at the valley in floyd rd
For that reason I pick and choose what I spend my time doing and now its mainly the knowledge and I go to non league football watching my mates boy at waltham abbey and enfield town Then the wrench and decision will not be as changing to my football rountine
I won't go to a new home ground I would not want too I would go away games if I fancied but I soon would stop that also
I would still be very much a fan but it would receive zero of my money due to it selling its soul
How others choose to support would have no impact on my life and I would never judge nor expect to be judged on my choice or anyone elses
Be like being a fan on a banning order
if it means you stop spouting your crap on here as well then I say make the move
I went to Selhurst to support my team- but many didn't. If we were to move to a modern new ground that is not shared with a rival, i think people would have less of an issue with it.
Chris from Sidcup. Think you'd make a good MK Dons fan mate. Change the team colour, change the badge, change the ground. Sell the club's soul. But who cares ? We could be in the prem , in Europe, maybe. What does it matter ? If you are are true Charlton fan , it matters - a lot.
Not sure what it's got to do with MK Dons, the situation we were comparing it to was Cardiff. MK Dons is off the scale, no one would want that.
The point i made was that if someone came in and pumped £100m into us and got us into the premier league and then said 'i want charlton to wear black and we're going to modernise the club badge', i could live with it if the alternative is struggling along in the championship or league one without even enough money to maintain a decent playing pitch.
As for the ground, i said i'd prefer it if we didn't move but is moving grounds such a big deal these days? I wonder how many Man City, Cardiff, Swansea, Southampton, Reading, Sunderland, Hull, Derby, Leicester, Middlesbrough etc etc fans are gutted that their club sold it's soul and moved grounds. I don't think we need to move grounds, but i don't think it'd be the end of the world if we did.
I don' think your point is unreasonable but I do want to stress again what I pointed out earlier. All those grounds you listed were various levels of crap, and the clubs needed better. Nobody has put up a case why we need significantly better than the current Valley. If we return to the Premier League what we need is lots of executive boxes and entertainment suites. Those can still be built into the Valley.
And finally none of those club's fans fought like tigers to get their club back to those stadia in the first place. That fight is part of our recent history. I don't mind giving that up, if it's necessary. Let's hear the case. We are all capable of understanding a solid business argument. However it might take a few months to go through it, which is why ACV is so important
If there is a case to be heard, at the moment it is all speculation. We currently don't have new owners and the ones we have do not have two pennies to rub together to move us.
at the very least any proposal needs to be in our long term interests, rather than a make weight or pawn in a property deal in some way shape or form, after that it would be up to fans to decide what they want to do, hopefully we can achieve a consultation process should it ever happen
Told a few people on hear a couple of weeks ago about this but have been told today this deal is no where near done and has been released by someone to to hurry it up
It's worth remembering that both the former directors and RBS have a veto unless their loans are repaid. I doubt if RBS read the SLP. However, that's just one possibility among several as to why the story has been put out.
Told a few people on hear a couple of weeks ago about this but have been told today this deal is no where near done and has been released by someone to to hurry it up
It's worth remembering that both the former directors and RBS have a veto unless their loans are repaid. I doubt if RBS read the SLP. However, that's just one possibility among several as to why the story has been put out.
You'd probably say the board are daft, but not withstanding that, surely they would be daft to leak this story if they had not already at least passed it by RBS and the directors?
Wasn't the russian deal vetoed by the bank, therefore once bitten twice shy?
Told a few people on hear a couple of weeks ago about this but have been told today this deal is no where near done and has been released by someone to to hurry it up
It's worth remembering that both the former directors and RBS have a veto unless their loans are repaid. I doubt if RBS read the SLP. However, that's just one possibility among several as to why the story has been put out.
You'd probably say the board are daft, but not withstanding that, surely they would be daft to leak this story if they had not already at least passed it by RBS and the directors?
Wasn't the russian deal vetoed by the bank, therefore once bitten twice shy?
It's not a question of them being daft, just that the story has appeared for a reason and we don't know what that is. It could be to put pressure on a third party, which doesn't have to be the former directors. But I believe one former director, at least, was an obstacle to a previous deal (with good reason).
It's also interesting to consider the weekend contract stories in the context of this leak.
One of the factors that has made the club an attractive proposition is its low level of debt – it owes just £4million to banks, a reduction from the £7m owed when the club was taken over by Michael Slater and Tony Jimenez on December 31, 2010. Another £7m is owed to former directors such as Richard Murray, but none of this is payable until the club is back in the Premier League.
I see - clearly based on the content you can work out who leaked it. It paints them in a very positive light!!!!
One of the factors that has made the club an attractive proposition is its low level of debt – it owes just £4million to banks, a reduction from the £7m owed when the club was taken over by Michael Slater and Tony Jimenez on December 31, 2010. Another £7m is owed to former directors such as Richard Murray, but none of this is payable until the club is back in the Premier League.
Actually sounds more like part of a sales brochure than anything else. Not so convinced that this is imminent or a done deal.
The SLP story is not a leak but a very deliberate plant by one of the parties most closely involved.
That suggests talks are well advanced but certainly not finalised. Yet in usual CL fashion we're all getting way ahead of ourselves - launching the campaign against a move from the Valley when we don't know if there is any such intention; issuing lists of questions for new owners whose identity we don't know and who have not yet taken possession; passing judgement on the Slater/Jiminez era before we know it's over...
Slow down. Digest what is potentially good news. And await further developments.
The SLP story is not a leak but a very deliberate plant by one of the parties most closely involved.
That suggests talks are well advanced but certainly not finalised. Yet in usual CL fashion we're all getting way ahead of ourselves - launching the campaign against a move from the Valley when we don't know if there is any such intention; issuing lists of questions for new owners whose identity we don't know and who have not yet taken possession; passing judgement on the Slater/Jiminez era before we know it's over...
Slow down. Digest what is potentially good news. And await further developments.
The SLP story is not a leak but a very deliberate plant by one of the parties most closely involved.
That suggests talks are well advanced but certainly not finalised. Yet in usual CL fashion we're all getting way ahead of ourselves - launching the campaign against a move from the Valley when we don't know if there is any such intention; issuing lists of questions for new owners whose identity we don't know and who have not yet taken possession; passing judgement on the Slater/Jiminez era before we know it's over...
Slow down. Digest what is potentially good news. And await further developments.
Well said. Many seem to be getting well ahead of themselves, talking about the color of the kit and whatnot. One bloke was already laid out his criteria for what the parking should be like at the new stadium for christ sake!
The SLP story is not a leak but a very deliberate plant by one of the parties most closely involved.
That suggests talks are well advanced but certainly not finalised. Yet in usual CL fashion we're all getting way ahead of ourselves - launching the campaign against a move from the Valley when we don't know if there is any such intention; issuing lists of questions for new owners whose identity we don't know and who have not yet taken possession; passing judgement on the Slater/Jiminez era before we know it's over...
Slow down. Digest what is potentially good news. And await further developments.
Well said. Many seem to be getting well ahead of themselves, talking about the color of the kit and whatnot. One bloke was already laid out his criteria for what the parking should be like at the new stadium for christ sake!
None of the conditions seem unrealistic or undoable. Sharing with Palace was a step too far and made us yearn for the Valley, but a number of clubs have moved without too many problems - Millwall, Man City, Arsenal, Derby, reading, Southampton, Middlesborough, Brighton, Stoke........ - the list goes on! If it is our ground and ticks the boxes, many listed by Seth, I won't oppose it!
I'm with you on that one but I cant see many others agreeing
How is moving stadiums selling the clubs soul? I honestly wouldn't be too arsed if we moved from The Valley, it's still my team, same kit, same badge, just ten minutes down the road in more than likely a nicer stadium.
its more to do with the battle the hardship and the times supporting cafc through the 80s and early 90s , like isaid I wouldn't force my view on my choice on anyone we all follow football for differing reasons
As my member name suggests, I have been attending The Valley since 1952, notwithstanding, a short but painful interval that nobody here needs being reminded of. Obviously, I would be happy to see my days out, continuing to go there, to watch my "addictive" club, but more important to me would be the continued success and progress of the team/club, in recent seasons. As a very minor historian of The Club,I know it is well documented and would be far from the first time that we have moved "house" in the name of "progress". I would hope that with every due consideration of the previous outcomes of those moves, any future owners would take full account of such. However, if any move should take place, I would hope that it would be within a very small distance of the current site and with easy travelling access i.e. not a "Selhurst". Moving would not alter my allegiance if favourable success came as a result.
its more to do with the battle the hardship and the times supporting cafc through the 80s and early 90s , like isaid I wouldn't force my view on my choice on anyone we all follow football for differing reasons
Exactly mate leaving the valley would be hard to take after all the toil to get back there, i for 1 would find it hard after some great memories growing up going to watch matches with my family and mates etc. Tradition is dying out and its a real shame.
I love the Valley, but I am too young to fully understand the love some of you have for it. I could deal with a ground move if it was down the road, but any change to colour/badge/name and that would be it for me.
Comments
If your answer is that TJ and Slater just want to share good news with the fans, you've probably not been paying attention. It's worth remembering that both the former directors and RBS have a veto unless their loans are repaid. I doubt if RBS read the SLP. However, that's just one possibility among several as to why the story has been put out.
Is this takeover going to help bring in loan players before Thursday weeks's deadline?
Wasn't the russian deal vetoed by the bank, therefore once bitten twice shy?
It's also interesting to consider the weekend contract stories in the context of this leak.
* I would hope that regardless of any takeover powell will be able to at least dip into the loan market in jan
Is that not really them in the Prem?
For what it's worth would prefer to stay put, has any other club left such a fit for purpose stadium other than Arsenal and that was capacity reasons.
One of the factors that has made the club an attractive proposition is its low level of debt – it owes just £4million to banks, a reduction from the £7m owed when the club was taken over by Michael Slater and Tony Jimenez on December 31, 2010.
Another £7m is owed to former directors such as Richard Murray, but none of this is payable until the club is back in the Premier League.
Actually sounds more like part of a sales brochure than anything else. Not so convinced that this is imminent or a done deal.
It will always be Charlton and as long as its our own stadium I will always be there
and yes I wouldn't attend
That suggests talks are well advanced but certainly not finalised. Yet in usual CL fashion we're all getting way ahead of ourselves - launching the campaign against a move from the Valley when we don't know if there is any such intention; issuing lists of questions for new owners whose identity we don't know and who have not yet taken possession; passing judgement on the Slater/Jiminez era before we know it's over...
Slow down. Digest what is potentially good news. And await further developments.
Double glazing or energy supplier salesman underhand tactics!
Perhaps that's why I'm the economic failure I am!
And some padding...
its more to do with the battle the hardship and the times supporting cafc through the 80s and early 90s , like isaid I wouldn't force my view on my choice on anyone we all follow football for differing reasons
Moving would not alter my allegiance if favourable success came as a result.
Tradition is dying out and its a real shame.