What are these signs of improvement you are seeing @KINSELLA7? Genuine Q as I am struggling to look beyond:
- mid table in League One - squad too thin and over reliant on loans - poor disciplinary record - dwindling crowds - growing debt
Don't understand why you're concerned with the growing debt? That's the owner's problem and from what I understand it is loose change to him. Why are we concerned with his private financial arrangements?
But it's not his debt, it's Charlton's debt. RD has loaned the club money, not given it. All needs to be paid up when Roly sails into the sunset.
This is a total misunderstanding. A shareholder's loan is always treated as equity by any purchaser & does NOT have to be repaid.
It does if the seller is insistent on getting his money back - and the seller sets the price.
To put it another way, does anyone seriously think the debt won't be a factor in the eventual selling price? Indeed in 2014 it was almost the only factor.
RD could sell it tomorrow for what he paid for it and it's very hard to see how he has added value once you allow for relegation.
Of course, which is exactly the same way that it would be treated by the seller if it had been put in as equity. It is not, however, correct to imply that somehow the loan has to be repaid outside of any purchase price paid.
Agreed - although actually the £7m to the former directors (which I accept is slightly different) does have to be repaid or an agreement reached on it with them. We're also at a point now where the interest on the Staprix loan - including the purchase price element of the debt, which is basically the same debt that accumulated under the spivs 2011-14 and was carried over - is rolling up to become significant of itself in the debt figure.
Directors' loans are fundamentally different to Shareholder loans. As a 3rd party, any director loaning money to a company in a private capacity is fully entitled to ask for those loans to be repaid. If the debt is secured by a charge on the company assets then that gives him much more control over getting the money back.
Shareholder loans, however, like Charlton's loans from Staprix will NEVER be repaid in the event of a takeover. Some people who should know better don't seem to fully understand this point. Shareholder loans are called quasi-equity for a very good reason; for all intents and purposes they are equity.
Shareholder loans can FULLY WELL be repaid in the event of a takeover. I know this because that very clause exists in my own company and the loans invested into my business by investors who are minority shareholders within the company.
ANY loan is repayable if paperwork exists that says it's repayable!
What are these signs of improvement you are seeing @KINSELLA7? Genuine Q as I am struggling to look beyond:
- mid table in League One - squad too thin and over reliant on loans - poor disciplinary record - dwindling crowds - growing debt
Don't understand why you're concerned with the growing debt? That's the owner's problem and from what I understand it is loose change to him. Why are we concerned with his private financial arrangements?
But it's not his debt, it's Charlton's debt. RD has loaned the club money, not given it. All needs to be paid up when Roly sails into the sunset.
This is a total misunderstanding. A shareholder's loan is always treated as equity by any purchaser & does NOT have to be repaid.
It does if the seller is insistent on getting his money back - and the seller sets the price.
To put it another way, does anyone seriously think the debt won't be a factor in the eventual selling price? Indeed in 2014 it was almost the only factor.
RD could sell it tomorrow for what he paid for it and it's very hard to see how he has added value once you allow for relegation.
Of course, which is exactly the same way that it would be treated by the seller if it had been put in as equity. It is not, however, correct to imply that somehow the loan has to be repaid outside of any purchase price paid.
Agreed - although actually the £7m to the former directors (which I accept is slightly different) does have to be repaid or an agreement reached on it with them. We're also at a point now where the interest on the Staprix loan - including the purchase price element of the debt, which is basically the same debt that accumulated under the spivs 2011-14 and was carried over - is rolling up to become significant of itself in the debt figure.
Directors' loans are fundamentally different to Shareholder loans. As a 3rd party, any director loaning money to a company in a private capacity is fully entitled to ask for those loans to be repaid. If the debt is secured by a charge on the company assets then that gives him much more control over getting the money back.
Shareholder loans, however, like Charlton's loans from Staprix will NEVER be repaid in the event of a takeover. Some people who should know better don't seem to fully understand this point. Shareholder loans are called quasi-equity for a very good reason; for all intents and purposes they are equity.
Weren't the loans from the BVI entity to Baton shareholder loans that were repaid in 2014?
Shareholder loans can FULLY WELL be repaid in the event of a takeover. I know this because that very clause exists in my own company and the loans invested into my business by investors who are minority shareholders within the company.
ANY loan is repayable if paperwork exists that says it's repayable!
I am the CFO of a major investment company here in Dubai, so this is my day job & has been for the last 20 years.
In theory, yes, there is nothing in law that prevents shareholder loans being repayable in the event of a takeover but in practice it never happens. For a very simple reason. The buyer will determine the total price he is prepared to pay for a company & once the deal is agreed that money is then shared out among the shareholders. The method of allocation between shareholders may well involve taking account of outstanding loans, as this properly reflects how much capital individual shareholders have contributed to funding the business. I guess this is the sort of agreement you are referring to. In the case of an individual shareholder, however, it is irrelevant. A buyer pays a price for the company based on his judgement of the value of that company. He will never take on & pay more just to settle shareholder loans.
" I noted that the pic in yesterday's VOTV showing the Charlton contingent at Southend , featured Millwall CEO Steve " good 'un" Kavanagh alongside Neil Harris , presumably watching our lads prior to their match in SE7. How many of us think OUR CEO would be caught accompanying our manager on such a mission ?"
Whilst there's not a chance in hell that our esteemed CEO would be watching a game with KR, i'd be surprised if Kavanagh does this often with Harris. I'd put his attendance there more down to the fact he used to be at Southend himself so was perhaps watching the game with Harris whilst catching up with old colleagues.
" I noted that the pic in yesterday's VOTV showing the Charlton contingent at Southend , featured Millwall CEO Steve " good 'un" Kavanagh alongside Neil Harris , presumably watching our lads prior to their match in SE7. How many of us think OUR CEO would be caught accompanying our manager on such a mission ?"
Whilst there's not a chance in hell that our esteemed CEO would be watching a game with KR, i'd be surprised if Kavanagh does this often with Harris. I'd put his attendance there more down to the fact he used to be at Southend himself so was perhaps watching the game with Harris whilst catching up with old colleagues.
Shareholder loans can FULLY WELL be repaid in the event of a takeover. I know this because that very clause exists in my own company and the loans invested into my business by investors who are minority shareholders within the company.
ANY loan is repayable if paperwork exists that says it's repayable!
I am the CFO of a major investment company here in Dubai, so this is my day job & has been for the last 20 years.
In theory, yes, there is nothing in law that prevents shareholder loans being repayable in the event of a takeover but in practice it never happens. For a very simple reason. The buyer will determine the total price he is prepared to pay for a company & once the deal is agreed that money is then shared out among the shareholders. The method of allocation between shareholders may well involve taking account of outstanding loans, as this properly reflects how much capital individual shareholders have contributed to funding the business. I guess this is the sort of agreement you are referring to. In the case of an individual shareholder, however, it is irrelevant. A buyer pays a price for the company based on his judgement of the value of that company. He will never take on & pay more just to settle shareholder loans.
True but it may well influence the thinking of the seller.
The owner having "put in" £x, in whatever form that is, may wish to hold out for a full return of that amount rather than selling at what the market and buyers consider a reasonable price.
Especially if the owner is slightly bonkers.
That is their right but in the meantime the company is left in limbo with increasing amounts needed to keep it running, income dropping, customers deserting and reputation and income generating potential damaged.
It becomes a vicious cycle of decline that becomes harder and harder to break while the price, based on investment not value, goes up.
you don't believe the PR any more than I do. But I have said all along that the continuing and obsessive but puny hostility of some fans is a complete waste of time. A man like Roland is just egged on by this to keep to any plan, misconceived or not, that he has.
It may be a "complete waste of time" to you - thankfully there are many out there committed to opposing this regime & actively doing something about it.
Unless you enjoy being patronised, manipulated & lied to by a group of paid sycophants hanging grimly on to an arrogant, stay-away owner - while the club wallows in L1 mediocrity - you will thank the obsessive, puny & hostile fans that finally one day drive them out of our club.
That's where you're completely self-deceived. I want him to sell but you will not effect him or the timing of when he does. It will be his decision or the result of other factors. You and your well intentioned group may then claim credit but you will not have earned it. Meanwhile .................
Hmm, not necessarily. Duchatelet is a very proud man, and I'm fairly sure he's not enjoying the damage to his reputation, particularly in Belgium. Imagine if the attendances were much higher, and the crowd got unrelentingly behind the team, game after game, no matter what he did. Do you think he'd sell the club then?
Good post but how much damage is actually being done to his reputation in Belgium? How do we actually measure or quantify that? I am not convinced that his parody ownership of CAFC will have any impact on his standing in Belgium from a businessman perspective. Said it before and will say it again, we are merely an inconsequential side show for him; a little play thing on a weekend when he's sitting at home dribbling over his pictures of the CEO whilst manically rocking in his chair (visualise that bad boy - yuk!!).
Let's hope that the continued excellent effort of the trips to Belgium can somehow change that and eventually get him to knock it on the head.
The trips to Belgium do definitely annoy and upset him. His staff and the local press told me to my face.
His manic rants to the media after the visits tell the same story.
Whether that will be enough to drive him out I can't say but it might push him closer to taking the next offer that comes in. Or not.
But we can only try.
Blimey, 17 likes. You're very popular on Charlton Life @Henry Irving aren't you!
you don't believe the PR any more than I do. But I have said all along that the continuing and obsessive but puny hostility of some fans is a complete waste of time. A man like Roland is just egged on by this to keep to any plan, misconceived or not, that he has.
It may be a "complete waste of time" to you - thankfully there are many out there committed to opposing this regime & actively doing something about it.
Unless you enjoy being patronised, manipulated & lied to by a group of paid sycophants hanging grimly on to an arrogant, stay-away owner - while the club wallows in L1 mediocrity - you will thank the obsessive, puny & hostile fans that finally one day drive them out of our club.
That's where you're completely self-deceived. I want him to sell but you will not effect him or the timing of when he does. It will be his decision or the result of other factors. You and your well intentioned group may then claim credit but you will not have earned it. Meanwhile .................
Hmm, not necessarily. Duchatelet is a very proud man, and I'm fairly sure he's not enjoying the damage to his reputation, particularly in Belgium. Imagine if the attendances were much higher, and the crowd got unrelentingly behind the team, game after game, no matter what he did. Do you think he'd sell the club then?
Good post but how much damage is actually being done to his reputation in Belgium? How do we actually measure or quantify that? I am not convinced that his parody ownership of CAFC will have any impact on his standing in Belgium from a businessman perspective. Said it before and will say it again, we are merely an inconsequential side show for him; a little play thing on a weekend when he's sitting at home dribbling over his pictures of the CEO whilst manically rocking in his chair (visualise that bad boy - yuk!!).
Let's hope that the continued excellent effort of the trips to Belgium can somehow change that and eventually get him to knock it on the head.
The trips to Belgium do definitely annoy and upset him. His staff and the local press told me to my face.
His manic rants to the media after the visits tell the same story.
Whether that will be enough to drive him out I can't say but it might push him closer to taking the next offer that comes in. Or not.
But we can only try.
Blimey, 17 likes. You're very popular on Charlton Life @Henry Irving aren't you!
You sound surprised
Click on my name to see how many likes I have in total
Don't come on CL then Robbo. Looking at a lot of the comments on this thread you won't see a lot of "The fans and the players – there’s a connection" here. Personally I think it's getting really old.
For me, encouraging signs - We have a Manager who knows the English league We are recruiting players that know the English league We are playing better - 6 unbeaten and, really, we should have won today Daisy is being kept quiet.
Let's get behind the team without the continual negative comments. Douche has made mistakes and I want him out as much as anyone but, he is improving so, while he's here, let's support the team.
Maybe there are people on here who don't want Charlton to do well just because it doesn't fit in with their cozy image of what they want Charlton to be. Shame if that's the case.
Like I said, all this negativity is getting old to me. And, yes, I do understand what has been happening to our club these last 3 years. But, it sure is a lot better now than when we were dealing with Peeters, Luzon and Fraeye and the likes of Naby Sarr, El-Hadji Ba, George Tucudean and Reza Ghoochannejhad every week. Not to mention Piotr Parzyszek, Yohann Thuram, Loic Nego and Christophe Lepoint to name a few.
And why do you think these things have changed? Certainly not because Roland gives a shit, if we all sat here and took whatever was served up nobby vinegar would be in charge - thank god for CARD
Without a doubt. I think CARD is helping, I support CARD and I've never said otherwise.
you don't believe the PR any more than I do. But I have said all along that the continuing and obsessive but puny hostility of some fans is a complete waste of time. A man like Roland is just egged on by this to keep to any plan, misconceived or not, that he has.
It may be a "complete waste of time" to you - thankfully there are many out there committed to opposing this regime & actively doing something about it.
Unless you enjoy being patronised, manipulated & lied to by a group of paid sycophants hanging grimly on to an arrogant, stay-away owner - while the club wallows in L1 mediocrity - you will thank the obsessive, puny & hostile fans that finally one day drive them out of our club.
That's where you're completely self-deceived. I want him to sell but you will not effect him or the timing of when he does. It will be his decision or the result of other factors. You and your well intentioned group may then claim credit but you will not have earned it. Meanwhile .................
Hmm, not necessarily. Duchatelet is a very proud man, and I'm fairly sure he's not enjoying the damage to his reputation, particularly in Belgium. Imagine if the attendances were much higher, and the crowd got unrelentingly behind the team, game after game, no matter what he did. Do you think he'd sell the club then?
Good post but how much damage is actually being done to his reputation in Belgium? How do we actually measure or quantify that? I am not convinced that his parody ownership of CAFC will have any impact on his standing in Belgium from a businessman perspective. Said it before and will say it again, we are merely an inconsequential side show for him; a little play thing on a weekend when he's sitting at home dribbling over his pictures of the CEO whilst manically rocking in his chair (visualise that bad boy - yuk!!).
Let's hope that the continued excellent effort of the trips to Belgium can somehow change that and eventually get him to knock it on the head.
The trips to Belgium do definitely annoy and upset him. His staff and the local press told me to my face.
His manic rants to the media after the visits tell the same story.
Whether that will be enough to drive him out I can't say but it might push him closer to taking the next offer that comes in. Or not.
But we can only try.
Blimey, 17 likes. You're very popular on Charlton Life @Henry Irving aren't you!
You sound surprised
Click on my name to see how many likes I have in total
" I noted that the pic in yesterday's VOTV showing the Charlton contingent at Southend , featured Millwall CEO Steve " good 'un" Kavanagh alongside Neil Harris , presumably watching our lads prior to their match in SE7. How many of us think OUR CEO would be caught accompanying our manager on such a mission ?"
Whilst there's not a chance in hell that our esteemed CEO would be watching a game with KR, i'd be surprised if Kavanagh does this often with Harris. I'd put his attendance there more down to the fact he used to be at Southend himself so was perhaps watching the game with Harris whilst catching up with old colleagues.
Kav's son has a matchday job at Southend, so he drove him down there and took the opportunity to watch the game. Neil Harris lives that way, I gather.
Bit harsh! I'd just hope that he has a disturbed sleep due to bad dreams and is very tired tomorrow. #softpunishment
Either that or he gets overcharged when dining out.
Seriously though, the FA need to look at the standards of refereeing. No wonder there's a vote of no confidence in them.
This is a fair point. All of the matches are recorded these days and rather than depend on a referees assessor who is often distracted in the stands and more frequently knows the official as a friend, we should have impartial scoring of every time the officials get decisions wrong or make somewhat bizarre decisions. This review is conducted after the match by two managers from a different league than the one in which the match was played to prevent bias.
It would not stop the Stroud's and Robinson's first time round but with any luck they would be in the 6th tier of football very quickly.
Today's match was a typical Rosler team big an d physical against a team trying to play. The ref forgave them their physicality because of their size and penalised the smaller team that tried to play when they bit back. Was Rudd impeded when he tried to collect their corner that led to the goal. He seemed very unhappy with the officials at the end.
I wasn't at the game and therefore I shan't/can't comment upon the game or the level of performance of the match referee at the time. I would however like you please to expand upon the comments I have put in bold.
1. How is it that you can report upon a match (on this site) and assess the referee's performance without distraction, yet the match assessor cannot. It is that the match assessor is constantly being interrupted by other supporters seeking advice on refereeing matters or perhaps he has trouble opening his sweet wrappers. I genuinely like to know how you arrived at that bizarre statement. Thanks
2. For you to make the statement that referees and assessors are friends implies to me that, for you to know that is the case, you are either a match official on the Premier/FL List or that you are employed in some capacity within the FA/FL etc. From my experience on the aforementioned Match Officials List (limited in my case to 4th official roles and albeit some years back), That certainly was never the case. In my day, a referees assessor would sometimes enter the changing room after the game, but only limited to seeking the referees interpretation of potential controversial incidents, to include within his match report (I don't know whether or not they are allowed in said dressing rooms these days). I never once heard any friendly talk between referees/assessors such as "Shall we share a beer tonight" of "how is the missus". Indeed assessors and referees in my period were from different generations in both age and refereeing cycles.
But hey, I bow to your knowledge on such matters and really would like to meet somebody like you to update me on current refereeing matters such as current recruitment policies, refereeing advancement, refereeing seminars (the list is endless). Perhaps in time we could even be friends; would you like that? If you are planning to attend the CARD-led protest movement in Belgium next week, I would gladly buy you a pint or two for updating me on matters that interest me (sorry we can't meet at The Valley, but I didn't renew my season ticket this year).
I really do look forward to your response on my queries and look forward to meeting up with you some time.
you don't believe the PR any more than I do. But I have said all along that the continuing and obsessive but puny hostility of some fans is a complete waste of time. A man like Roland is just egged on by this to keep to any plan, misconceived or not, that he has.
It may be a "complete waste of time" to you - thankfully there are many out there committed to opposing this regime & actively doing something about it.
Unless you enjoy being patronised, manipulated & lied to by a group of paid sycophants hanging grimly on to an arrogant, stay-away owner - while the club wallows in L1 mediocrity - you will thank the obsessive, puny & hostile fans that finally one day drive them out of our club.
That's where you're completely self-deceived. I want him to sell but you will not effect him or the timing of when he does. It will be his decision or the result of other factors. You and your well intentioned group may then claim credit but you will not have earned it. Meanwhile .................
Hmm, not necessarily. Duchatelet is a very proud man, and I'm fairly sure he's not enjoying the damage to his reputation, particularly in Belgium. Imagine if the attendances were much higher, and the crowd got unrelentingly behind the team, game after game, no matter what he did. Do you think he'd sell the club then?
Good post but how much damage is actually being done to his reputation in Belgium? How do we actually measure or quantify that? I am not convinced that his parody ownership of CAFC will have any impact on his standing in Belgium from a businessman perspective. Said it before and will say it again, we are merely an inconsequential side show for him; a little play thing on a weekend when he's sitting at home dribbling over his pictures of the CEO whilst manically rocking in his chair (visualise that bad boy - yuk!!).
Let's hope that the continued excellent effort of the trips to Belgium can somehow change that and eventually get him to knock it on the head.
The trips to Belgium do definitely annoy and upset him. His staff and the local press told me to my face.
His manic rants to the media after the visits tell the same story.
Whether that will be enough to drive him out I can't say but it might push him closer to taking the next offer that comes in. Or not.
But we can only try.
Blimey, 17 likes. You're very popular on Charlton Life @Henry Irving aren't you!
You sound surprised
Click on my name to see how many likes I have in total
I've clicked, and frankly I'm shocked. Can you buy likes, in the same way you can buy Twitter followers? ;-)
you don't believe the PR any more than I do. But I have said all along that the continuing and obsessive but puny hostility of some fans is a complete waste of time. A man like Roland is just egged on by this to keep to any plan, misconceived or not, that he has.
It may be a "complete waste of time" to you - thankfully there are many out there committed to opposing this regime & actively doing something about it.
Unless you enjoy being patronised, manipulated & lied to by a group of paid sycophants hanging grimly on to an arrogant, stay-away owner - while the club wallows in L1 mediocrity - you will thank the obsessive, puny & hostile fans that finally one day drive them out of our club.
That's where you're completely self-deceived. I want him to sell but you will not effect him or the timing of when he does. It will be his decision or the result of other factors. You and your well intentioned group may then claim credit but you will not have earned it. Meanwhile .................
Hmm, not necessarily. Duchatelet is a very proud man, and I'm fairly sure he's not enjoying the damage to his reputation, particularly in Belgium. Imagine if the attendances were much higher, and the crowd got unrelentingly behind the team, game after game, no matter what he did. Do you think he'd sell the club then?
Good post but how much damage is actually being done to his reputation in Belgium? How do we actually measure or quantify that? I am not convinced that his parody ownership of CAFC will have any impact on his standing in Belgium from a businessman perspective. Said it before and will say it again, we are merely an inconsequential side show for him; a little play thing on a weekend when he's sitting at home dribbling over his pictures of the CEO whilst manically rocking in his chair (visualise that bad boy - yuk!!).
Let's hope that the continued excellent effort of the trips to Belgium can somehow change that and eventually get him to knock it on the head.
The trips to Belgium do definitely annoy and upset him. His staff and the local press told me to my face.
His manic rants to the media after the visits tell the same story.
Whether that will be enough to drive him out I can't say but it might push him closer to taking the next offer that comes in. Or not.
But we can only try.
Blimey, 17 likes. You're very popular on Charlton Life @Henry Irving aren't you!
You sound surprised
Click on my name to see how many likes I have in total
I've clicked, and frankly I'm shocked. Can you buy likes, in the same way you can buy Twitter followers? ;-)
What are these signs of improvement you are seeing @KINSELLA7? Genuine Q as I am struggling to look beyond:
- mid table in League One - squad too thin and over reliant on loans - poor disciplinary record - dwindling crowds - growing debt
Don't understand why you're concerned with the growing debt? That's the owner's problem and from what I understand it is loose change to him. Why are we concerned with his private financial arrangements?
But it's not his debt, it's Charlton's debt. RD has loaned the club money, not given it. All needs to be paid up when Roly sails into the sunset.
?? Don't think so. If the sale price is less than the o/s debt you don't think the owner is going to demand repayment from the new owner do you?
The sale contract will wipe out the personal debt to RD.
If RD called in the debt tomorrow in a fit of pique the club would go into Administration and dozens of interested parties would be all over the Administrator to purchase the club even with a points deduction. You may care to think back to Southampton and his thrur Phoenix rose from the ashes.
As I say it is debt that is 'as soft at shite' - quoting Plank in Lock Stock.
You are deluded.
I always appreciate a well thought out response! I suppose I should at least be grateful that you didn't call me a ****
Should I PM you in draft form future posts in order for you to make reference to my mental health?
There was a comical vignette in the second half yesterday: Holmes rushed for a ball in the top left corner, was bundled over by sheer physical presence. Holmes leapt up and hacked him down. Peep! Yellow card.
His fellows were miles away, anyway. It is an insult to us, the fans, to play only one striker. All that dreary sideways stuff, left to right and back again, means – we don't trust the striker to control the ball in the first place, let alone actually shoot on target.
Damn right. It is suicidal to play only one striker – especially at home. Chris Powell ended up playing only one – and planted us at the bottom. Forget the academy; Josh Magennis is our best player, rushing over to the corner, dispossessing the Coventry defender, coming away with the ball and passing to score. And four minutes later he did the same: sprint, sei ze, control, attack.
We saw nothing of that yesterday. One shot from Watt in the first half hammered at the keeper. Magennis – like Kermorgant – wins headers. Magennis would nod down for his partner, Ajose – who would be 20 yards away, and wondering why it didn't connect.
There was a marvellous scene a few seasons ago, here at the Covered End. We had two strikers, hammering in the box: there was a ricochet, fizzing and spiralling for a corner. The atmosphere was febrile, electric. The keeper shouted at his right-back, who swivelled and sent an evil eye: “Don't ever – ever – leave me exposed like that again!” Meanwhile, our hard, accurate corner curved over in to the six-yard box.
We didn't get close, yesterday.
Two months ago at The Valley, Sheffield United played a beautifully rehearsed free-kick. Just outside our box, on the left. Ref applied the magic spray, stomped ten yards, sent the wall back. Stadium fell silent. Peep! And instead of the obvious, he tapped to a runner on the blind-side to shoot low and hard. 1-0.
We could practise that, at Sparrows Lane.
Except that we never get near our opponents' box. Too busy navel-gazing on the half-way line. Our scouts could search and find better players. Then we might hire good coaches – men who can spark players to get forward and worry our opponents.
you don't believe the PR any more than I do. But I have said all along that the continuing and obsessive but puny hostility of some fans is a complete waste of time. A man like Roland is just egged on by this to keep to any plan, misconceived or not, that he has.
It may be a "complete waste of time" to you - thankfully there are many out there committed to opposing this regime & actively doing something about it.
Unless you enjoy being patronised, manipulated & lied to by a group of paid sycophants hanging grimly on to an arrogant, stay-away owner - while the club wallows in L1 mediocrity - you will thank the obsessive, puny & hostile fans that finally one day drive them out of our club.
That's where you're completely self-deceived. I want him to sell but you will not effect him or the timing of when he does. It will be his decision or the result of other factors. You and your well intentioned group may then claim credit but you will not have earned it. Meanwhile .................
Hmm, not necessarily. Duchatelet is a very proud man, and I'm fairly sure he's not enjoying the damage to his reputation, particularly in Belgium. Imagine if the attendances were much higher, and the crowd got unrelentingly behind the team, game after game, no matter what he did. Do you think he'd sell the club then?
Good post but how much damage is actually being done to his reputation in Belgium? How do we actually measure or quantify that? I am not convinced that his parody ownership of CAFC will have any impact on his standing in Belgium from a businessman perspective. Said it before and will say it again, we are merely an inconsequential side show for him; a little play thing on a weekend when he's sitting at home dribbling over his pictures of the CEO whilst manically rocking in his chair (visualise that bad boy - yuk!!).
Let's hope that the continued excellent effort of the trips to Belgium can somehow change that and eventually get him to knock it on the head.
The trips to Belgium do definitely annoy and upset him. His staff and the local press told me to my face.
His manic rants to the media after the visits tell the same story.
Whether that will be enough to drive him out I can't say but it might push him closer to taking the next offer that comes in. Or not.
But we can only try.
Blimey, 17 likes. You're very popular on Charlton Life @Henry Irving aren't you!
You sound surprised
Click on my name to see how many likes I have in total
I've clicked, and frankly I'm shocked. Can you buy likes, in the same way you can buy Twitter followers? ;-)
you don't believe the PR any more than I do. But I have said all along that the continuing and obsessive but puny hostility of some fans is a complete waste of time. A man like Roland is just egged on by this to keep to any plan, misconceived or not, that he has.
It may be a "complete waste of time" to you - thankfully there are many out there committed to opposing this regime & actively doing something about it.
Unless you enjoy being patronised, manipulated & lied to by a group of paid sycophants hanging grimly on to an arrogant, stay-away owner - while the club wallows in L1 mediocrity - you will thank the obsessive, puny & hostile fans that finally one day drive them out of our club.
That's where you're completely self-deceived. I want him to sell but you will not effect him or the timing of when he does. It will be his decision or the result of other factors. You and your well intentioned group may then claim credit but you will not have earned it. Meanwhile .................
Hmm, not necessarily. Duchatelet is a very proud man, and I'm fairly sure he's not enjoying the damage to his reputation, particularly in Belgium. Imagine if the attendances were much higher, and the crowd got unrelentingly behind the team, game after game, no matter what he did. Do you think he'd sell the club then?
Good post but how much damage is actually being done to his reputation in Belgium? How do we actually measure or quantify that? I am not convinced that his parody ownership of CAFC will have any impact on his standing in Belgium from a businessman perspective. Said it before and will say it again, we are merely an inconsequential side show for him; a little play thing on a weekend when he's sitting at home dribbling over his pictures of the CEO whilst manically rocking in his chair (visualise that bad boy - yuk!!).
Let's hope that the continued excellent effort of the trips to Belgium can somehow change that and eventually get him to knock it on the head.
The trips to Belgium do definitely annoy and upset him. His staff and the local press told me to my face.
His manic rants to the media after the visits tell the same story.
Whether that will be enough to drive him out I can't say but it might push him closer to taking the next offer that comes in. Or not.
But we can only try.
Blimey, 17 likes. You're very popular on Charlton Life @Henry Irving aren't you!
You sound surprised
Click on my name to see how many likes I have in total
I've clicked, and frankly I'm shocked. Can you buy likes, in the same way you can buy Twitter followers? ;-)
One thing winding me up is seeing people say play offs is out of reach, from the last 6 games only one team in the league has had a higher points return than us and that is Fleetwood. Being snobby and saying 'drawing to Fleetwood' suck it up, same league as them and they are having a good season. We have 18 games to go, 18. We are 6 points outside the play offs, a win today (which could have gone our way) would have made it 4 with a game in hand over the team sitting in 6th (Southend) who have had 3 less points than us in their last 6 games.
When you actually look at the table and the games we have coming up and the fact we are definitely getting better, we could easily go on a run. Just find the out of reach messages a bit over the top, could see where you're coming from if there was 5 games to go or something but 18....
Please sit next to me from now on. I'm with you on everything. I have predicted we don't lose again. This will be our season. I'm with the Douchbag haters , but no Belgian will stop me supporting my team. Sick and tired of the bloody moaners. COYR...
Always disappointing to concede late on but I thought it was a fair result in the end, given that they created several decent chances in the last 20 minutes (including the 10 minutes of added time).
A low key first half, during which Fleetwood were content to sit deep, with everyone behind the ball, and challenge us to break them down by attempting to play intricately through them. That approach was probably motivated by both the absence of Magennis (or another big man) up front - thereby limiting our options offensively - and a hope that we would become discouraged and blow ourselves out, whilst they conserved energy for the later stages.
The goal shortly before half time changed the dynamic and we started the second half very well, without creating anything in the way of clear cut chances, given our lack of cutting edge. Tony Watt lashed one over from close range but was offside anyway.
You always felt that we'd pay for the failure to score a second goal and, as the game entered the latter stages, we seemed to run out of gas and were unable to retain possession in the way we had done earlier. That is, to a degree, probably a consequence of having a number of players who either haven't played much football this season or who are returning from injury. The net result was sustained heavy pressure on Rudd's goal and in the end we cracked.
There were certainly some positives to take from the game. For most of it, we were the better side and there was some very good combination play, much of it involving the languid and very classy Aribo. Good players always seem to have more time on the ball. Konsa also had a good game and it was good to see Ricky Holmes back.
On the negative side, our energy levels dipped alarmingly in the second half and I thought that our defending throughout from corners was p. It was no great surprise that Fleetwood's equaliser came from that source and I can't recall us winning a first header from any of them.
We're still a work in progress but, as ever, are falling a little way short and I can see no realistic prospect of making the play-offs. One sensible thing that Karl Robinson did say in his ill-judged his post-transfer deadline homily was that our recruitment for next season must start now. One can only hope (against expectation) that his words do not fall on stoney ground. Thin and undermanned squads do not win promotion.
wasnt at the game so cant comment, but from what ive seen/read sounds like 2 points dropped?, the gap to the playoffs is widening all the time but IF we can pick up a few wins in feb can still have it in our sights, dont think we will make them but all the time its mathematically possible why not think the unthinkable.
feb games are;
AFC Wimbledon - win
Oldham - win
Rochdale - draw
Oxford Utd - draw
Bury - win
Shrewsbury - win
if those results happen then i think we would be well on our way into the playoffs.
Comments
Shareholder loans, however, like Charlton's loans from Staprix will NEVER be repaid in the event of a takeover. Some people who should know better don't seem to fully understand this point. Shareholder loans are called quasi-equity for a very good reason; for all intents and purposes they are equity.
ANY loan is repayable if paperwork exists that says it's repayable!
In theory, yes, there is nothing in law that prevents shareholder loans being repayable in the event of a takeover but in practice it never happens. For a very simple reason. The buyer will determine the total price he is prepared to pay for a company & once the deal is agreed that money is then shared out among the shareholders. The method of allocation between shareholders may well involve taking account of outstanding loans, as this properly reflects how much capital individual shareholders have contributed to funding the business. I guess this is the sort of agreement you are referring to. In the case of an individual shareholder, however, it is irrelevant. A buyer pays a price for the company based on his judgement of the value of that company. He will never take on & pay more just to settle shareholder loans.
Whilst there's not a chance in hell that our esteemed CEO would be watching a game with KR, i'd be surprised if Kavanagh does this often with Harris. I'd put his attendance there more down to the fact he used to be at Southend himself so was perhaps watching the game with Harris whilst catching up with old colleagues.
The owner having "put in" £x, in whatever form that is, may wish to hold out for a full return of that amount rather than selling at what the market and buyers consider a reasonable price.
Especially if the owner is slightly bonkers.
That is their right but in the meantime the company is left in limbo with increasing amounts needed to keep it running, income dropping, customers deserting and reputation and income generating potential damaged.
It becomes a vicious cycle of decline that becomes harder and harder to break while the price, based on investment not value, goes up.
Click on my name to see how many likes I have in total
1. How is it that you can report upon a match (on this site) and assess the referee's performance without distraction, yet the match assessor cannot. It is that the match assessor is constantly being interrupted by other supporters seeking advice on refereeing matters or perhaps he has trouble opening his sweet wrappers. I genuinely like to know how you arrived at that bizarre statement. Thanks
2. For you to make the statement that referees and assessors are friends implies to me that, for you to know that is the case, you are either a match official on the Premier/FL List or that you are employed in some capacity within the FA/FL etc. From my experience on the aforementioned Match Officials List (limited in my case to 4th official roles and albeit some years back), That certainly was never the case. In my day, a referees assessor would sometimes enter the changing room after the game, but only limited to seeking the referees interpretation of potential controversial incidents, to include within his match report (I don't know whether or not they are allowed in said dressing rooms these days). I never once heard any friendly talk between referees/assessors such as "Shall we share a beer tonight" of "how is the missus". Indeed assessors and referees in my period were from different generations in both age and refereeing cycles.
But hey, I bow to your knowledge on such matters and really would like to meet somebody like you to update me on current refereeing matters such as current recruitment policies, refereeing advancement, refereeing seminars (the list is endless). Perhaps in time we could even be friends; would you like that? If you are planning to attend the CARD-led protest movement in Belgium next week, I would gladly buy you a pint or two for updating me on matters that interest me (sorry we can't meet at The Valley, but I didn't renew my season ticket this year).
I really do look forward to your response on my queries and look forward to meeting up with you some time.
It's the promotes that really matter. I had 12 once but admin got jealous and deleted them.
Should I PM you in draft form future posts in order for you to make reference to my mental health?
His fellows were miles away, anyway. It is an insult to us, the fans, to play only one striker. All that dreary sideways stuff, left to right and back again, means – we don't trust the striker to control the ball in the first place, let alone actually shoot on target.
Damn right. It is suicidal to play only one striker – especially at home. Chris Powell ended up playing only one – and planted us at the bottom. Forget the academy; Josh Magennis is our best player, rushing over to the corner, dispossessing the Coventry defender, coming away with the ball and passing to score. And four minutes later he did the same: sprint, sei ze, control, attack.
We saw nothing of that yesterday. One shot from Watt in the first half hammered at the keeper. Magennis – like Kermorgant – wins headers. Magennis would nod down for his partner, Ajose – who would be 20 yards away, and wondering why it didn't connect.
There was a marvellous scene a few seasons ago, here at the Covered End. We had two strikers, hammering in the box: there was a ricochet, fizzing and spiralling for a corner. The atmosphere was febrile, electric. The keeper shouted at his right-back, who swivelled and sent an evil eye: “Don't ever – ever – leave me exposed like that again!” Meanwhile, our hard, accurate corner curved over in to the six-yard box.
We didn't get close, yesterday.
Two months ago at The Valley, Sheffield United played a beautifully rehearsed free-kick. Just outside our box, on the left. Ref applied the magic spray, stomped ten yards, sent the wall back. Stadium fell silent. Peep! And instead of the obvious, he tapped to a runner on the blind-side to shoot low and hard. 1-0.
We could practise that, at Sparrows Lane.
Except that we never get near our opponents' box. Too busy navel-gazing on the half-way line. Our scouts could search and find better players. Then we might hire good coaches – men who can spark players to get forward and worry our opponents.
feb games are;
AFC Wimbledon - win
Oldham - win
Rochdale - draw
Oxford Utd - draw
Bury - win
Shrewsbury - win
if those results happen then i think we would be well on our way into the playoffs.
http://www.wharf.co.uk/sport/5-things-learned-charltons-draw-12561374