Great news, well done to all who campaigned for this.
It's great to have that safety valve on any potential sale of the Valley. It's also great for the Trust to have a very substantial achievement beyond counting its own reach/membership. Double Whammy.
If the valley is sold as part of a takeover that will push the club forward then it can only be a good thing. Why should they have to consult with the fans?
If the valley is sold as part of a takeover that will push the club forward then it can only be a good thing. Why should they have to consult with the fans?
Because the law says they should. Last time we left The Valley we the supporters had no say in the matter. ACV will at the very least ensure that a moratorium takes place. Ultimately the owners can sell to whoever they wish. As already said ACV is a mechanism for dialogue.
If the valley is sold as part of a takeover that will push the club forward then it can only be a good thing. Why should they have to consult with the fans?
How would you know it would "only be a good thing" without consultation ? Very rarely are things so black and white - proof of that is the various threads discussing a move on this site and elsewhere.
To be honest I'd turn the question around - why would you not want at least advanced warning of such a momentous decision for your club ?
For the record I would welcome any dialogue over a move from The Valley but am not against it. Progress involves change and change involves change.
One little question for me though. 1,900 votes for ACV is a small % of our support (floating or not). Was there an opportunity to sign a petition against the idea of ACV ?
Not trying to be troublesome but was there an option to object if anyone had wanted to ? I just hope this doesn't scupper any takeover - again, I am happy to be a poor, crap team but would like the option not to be at some stage.
can an Asset of Community Value ever stop being an ACV , if so how and by whom
The ACV is on the councils register for a period of five years. Once ACV is granted the owners of the asset have a mechanism by which they can object to the status. In our case unlikely as the club supported the application.
It was meant to mean that I hope the situation (where the Valley is sold without consulting the fans and getting agreement) never arises which is pretty much the only circumstance it would apply/be taken up.
I reserve the right to have my own personal feelings about the Valley, I am fan like anyone else but I don't believe i have ever intentionally claimed to speak for Charlton fans in that way or indeed any other except where presenting research findings.
To add to that we have repeatedly said we would consult all fans - we'd be mad not to in my view. We've done that several times now already on a number of topics in a number of surveys which demonstrates our approach.
And to be fair to us we have done this from day one, we aim to give fans a voice, but never without finding out what they think. We have stood out in the pouring rain or cold missing out on time with our kids or others time with their drinking buddies numerous times talking to fans and attempting to scientifically establish what cafc fans views are.
And it is very mush appreciated thank you for all your effort.
For the record I would welcome any dialogue over a move from The Valley but am not against it. Progress involves change and change involves change.
One little question for me though. 1,900 votes for ACV is a small % of our support (floating or not). Was there an opportunity to sign a petition against the idea of ACV ?
Not trying to be troublesome but was there an option to object if anyone had wanted to ? I just hope this doesn't scupper any takeover - again, I am happy to be a poor, crap team but would like the option not to be at some stage.
Yes there was an option to say you weren't in favour, one person took that option up.
can an Asset of Community Value ever stop being an ACV , if so how and by whom
Yep, the ACV designation lasts five years after which you have to re-apply. I'm not sure of anyway the status could cease within that timeframe but given the legislation is so new there will probably be case law in the future which clarifies that.
Well done chaps. Nice to know there are still people about that are prepared to get stuck in to do what they think is right for the benefit of OUR club, rather than mocking and slagging off all and sundry from behind their keyboards, in between wanks, whilst doing absolutely nothing for OUR club.
Sorry am bit thick, so if owners decide to sell ground to move to a rented stadium, the applicants (trust in this case) get advised, but what can they then do to stop the move if they thought it was not right ?
Sorry am bit thick, so if owners decide to sell ground to move to a rented stadium, the applicants (trust in this case) get advised, but what can they then do to stop the move if they thought it was not right ?
Once notified of intended sale it would invoke a period of six months moratorium in which time the trust and others could try to come up with an alternative bid but ultimately the owners are not obliged to sell to any particular bidder. What ACV really allows is for the period of discussion. We the fans can't not be consulted unlike the shameful move to Selhurst.
Sorry am bit thick, so if owners decide to sell ground to move to a rented stadium, the applicants (trust in this case) get advised, but what can they then do to stop the move if they thought it was not right ?
Once notified of intended sale it would invoke a period of six months moratorium in which time the trust and others could try to come up with an alternative bid but ultimately the owners are not obliged to sell to any particular bidder. What ACV really allows is for the period of discussion. We the fans can't not be consulted unlike the shameful move to Selhurst.
That could 100% happen. If the owners decide we're moving tomorrow, without selling The Valley, ACV would count for absolutely nothing, they could then sell the ground 6months later at which point it would be a little late for us, the fans, to do anything.
Sorry am bit thick, so if owners decide to sell ground to move to a rented stadium, the applicants (trust in this case) get advised, but what can they then do to stop the move if they thought it was not right ?
Once notified of intended sale it would invoke a period of six months moratorium in which time the trust and others could try to come up with an alternative bid but ultimately the owners are not obliged to sell to any particular bidder. What ACV really allows is for the period of discussion. We the fans can't not be consulted unlike the shameful move to Selhurst.
That could 100% happen. If the owners decide we're moving tomorrow, without selling The Valley, ACV would count for absolutely nothing, they could then sell the ground 6months later at which point it would be a little late for us, the fans, to do anything.
That's my understanding anyway.
If and it's a big if the football club decide to move then the reality is that it's going to be to the peninsula. Last time I looked there is lots of space but no stadium. Any move will require years not months of preparation so I believe your scenario is highly unlikely.
Sorry am bit thick, so if owners decide to sell ground to move to a rented stadium, the applicants (trust in this case) get advised, but what can they then do to stop the move if they thought it was not right ?
Once notified of intended sale it would invoke a period of six months moratorium in which time the trust and others could try to come up with an alternative bid but ultimately the owners are not obliged to sell to any particular bidder. What ACV really allows is for the period of discussion. We the fans can't not be consulted unlike the shameful move to Selhurst.
That could 100% happen. If the owners decide we're moving tomorrow, without selling The Valley, ACV would count for absolutely nothing, they could then sell the ground 6months later at which point it would be a little late for us, the fans, to do anything.
That's my understanding anyway.
If and it's a big if the football club decide to move then the reality is that it's going to be to the peninsula. Last time I looked there is lots of space but no stadium. Any move will require years not months of preparation so I believe your scenario is highly unlikely.
I think there are scenarios where ACV is ineffective. Stu's hypothetical example is one. ACV isn't the be all and end all, it doesn't mean that Charlton fans now have a cast iron guarantee of a say in the future of the Valley under every circumstance. It doesn't stop the Valley ever being used for anything other than Charlton Athletic home games. It doesn't convert the Valley from private property to public ownership (although it does recognise how valuable it is to our community).
What it does give us is forewarning (half a year) of a "wish" to sell.
What it does give us is the opportunity to consult the support base upon recieving that forewarning - the outcome of that conversation may well be that a majority of fans support a move based on seeing the business case for the new place. In that case good luck.
What it does give us is recognition of the Valleys status as an asset of our community and an understanding that disposing of it impacts stakeholders other than just parties to the sale.
It's not everything, but its much more than we had on Thursday. It's a start of giving Charlton fans back their voice in the running of their club and the things that are important to them - like our home. That's what almost 1,000 people ponied up £5 for and I hope they do so again at renewal time to help us continue to push this forward.
Comments
Once again here is the link...........
http://www.royalgreenwich.gov.uk/info/200101/voluntary_organisations/1292/assets_of_community_value/2
Congratulations and well done to all those who put in all that hard work and played a part.
It's great to have that safety valve on any potential sale of the Valley. It's also great for the Trust to have a very substantial achievement beyond counting its own reach/membership. Double Whammy.
To be honest I'd turn the question around - why would you not want at least advanced warning of such a momentous decision for your club ?
For the record I would welcome any dialogue over a move from The Valley but am not against it. Progress involves change and change involves change.
One little question for me though. 1,900 votes for ACV is a small % of our support (floating or not). Was there an opportunity to sign a petition against the idea of ACV ?
Not trying to be troublesome but was there an option to object if anyone had wanted to ? I just hope this doesn't scupper any takeover - again, I am happy to be a poor, crap team but would like the option not to be at some stage.
Make sure you get on the beers today and leave the Trust to itself for a day.
VFR
Congratulations.
That's my understanding anyway.
What it does give us is forewarning (half a year) of a "wish" to sell.
What it does give us is the opportunity to consult the support base upon recieving that forewarning - the outcome of that conversation may well be that a majority of fans support a move based on seeing the business case for the new place. In that case good luck.
What it does give us is recognition of the Valleys status as an asset of our community and an understanding that disposing of it impacts stakeholders other than just parties to the sale.
It's not everything, but its much more than we had on Thursday. It's a start of giving Charlton fans back their voice in the running of their club and the things that are important to them - like our home. That's what almost 1,000 people ponied up £5 for and I hope they do so again at renewal time to help us continue to push this forward.
If so then that's just 12 months from whenever the member signed up so the first lot are due soon.