Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

***** Sale of Charlton - CONFIRMED (Awaiting EFL Confirmation) *****

1891113142102

Comments

  • So if he values us at 20m without The Valley, how much would be needed to purchase it all in?
  • Doesn't sound to great to me. I hope this is a strategic leak to entice other buyers.

    The more I look at it, the more I think this is the work of Roland.
  • LOOK ? Forward Planning Time.
    Tony Popovic: Western Sydney Wanderers 43 years old EX Palace
    Kevin Muscat: Melbourne Victory 43 Years old EX Dirty Bastard.
  • This is in the Mail. I mean, check out the picture of The Valley used in the article!
  • addick05 said:

    This is in the Mail. I mean, check out the picture of The Valley used in the article!

    No smoke without fire, something is happening. Doesn't look too great at the moment.
  • Yes, if they have a UK passport and have the right to move to the UK.
    I think your points are valid. Work permits are only issued to players that have played a minimum number of matches for their country. Hardly fits the business plan as published.

    Having said that, at least there is ambition.
  • Sponsored links:


  • LuckyReds said:

    Fiiish said:

    Uboat said:

    vff said:

    Reading on Twitter, suggestion that Duchatelet wants to retain ownership of the Valley & lease it to the Aussies. Appalling if true. That's not getting our clubback. Charlton won't prosper until Duchatelet is gone. Charlton bird in Duchatelet's gilded cage like St Truiden. FFS.

    Agree. That would be a fucking disaster.
    If I could play Devil's Advocate...

    If Roland has managed to successfully do anything at Charlton it is to revitalise the stadium and pitch that was in desperate need of it. Granted the undersoil heating is not actually connected to a boiler, but for the most part the stadium is in a better place.

    It is the football side of things, and how he, as an owner, and his staff, as senior managers, have treated the fans that has brought about the ire of the fans. We want Roland out, but if the club is sold at a discount to someone who is much better at the football side of things, at the cost of paying Roland rent, then is that at least a step forward? At the very least, Daisy would be very much out of the picture.
    Devil's Advocate is always appreciated, especially at times like this where it's good to see the alternative viewpoint.

    There are two major concerns as far as I'm concerned with him keeping The Valley, without going in to the sentimental and/or idealistic:

    (a) This represents another outgoing that a new administration are going to have to pay for on a regular basis; possibly in addition to the loan payments. This doesn't bode well for our future financial viability, and is another sign that we'll be paying for Roland's experiment for years to come.

    (b) This opens the avenue to rental disputes akin to Coventry and the Ricoh arena, and means we don't have full ownership over one of our key assets.

    Not to mention, surely this is really unhealthy from an accounting point of view. I'm no accountant, but I'd hazard a guess that removing a sizeable asset from a company, and introducing a recurring payment, gives a much bleaker look in to the health of the company? That's without considering the massive amount of debt already on the books.

    I think it's more interesting that he's prepared to release Sparrows Lane, the venue where it's been claimed his legacy will live on via the improvements, than the stadium. It also sheds a curious light on the claims that they want to ensure CAFC wants to stay at The Valley for years to come... I'm not surprised they feel that way if it's intended to become a new revenue stream.
    We would be far from being the only sports venture in the country that did not own its own stadium. I would also hope there would be something written into the sale that the stadium could be part of a buyback deal, or even after a tenure of ownership by RD it reverts back to the club. And it should go without saying that the club cannot be evicted.

    This is not what I truly think, by the way. We don't have much to go on and obviously separating the club and the stadium entails risk, not to mention emotional issues. A lot of fans would also not want to carry on lining RD's pockets. And who knows if the new owners will be any better than RD?
  • West Ham don't own their ground - do their fans mind ?? (I have no idea but )

    Only problem is that we had to leave in 1985 partly because Glikstein owned some ground behind the main stand which he wouldn't let us use/own - and Coventry temporally left the Ricoh because the rental payments were getting too much. Any new owner MUST buy every last bit of the club...........even the potholes !!
  • edited April 2017
    I'm not overly concerned about the details of the deal in the main, as we will find out more in time. But the separation of the ground from the club would be a disaster and if this turns out to be part of the deal I hope it breaks down.

    I want rid of RD, but not at any cost. Hopefully as others have stated, the fact that it's now been made public will mean someone who wants/can afford the whole package will come forward.

    I guess all we can do is wait until more details materialise.

  • I fail to see how a struggling league one club with most of its squad either out of contract soon or just pretty useless and who are losing a ton of money each year can be worth a price of 20m WITHOUT the ground included!!

    Agreed. I think we have to be careful not to read too much into a sketchy newspaper article, which isn't a legal document. The article just covers the basics, i.e. that the club and the New Eltham training facility would be purchased, it could be assumed that the club would include the Valley anyway

    Otherwise what would the owners be getting? Minimal gate and TV money, a set of players who wouldn't be worth much and an expensive to run academy
  • ***EXCLUSIVE***
    Charlton Athletic fans 'Don't Give a XXXX' who the new owner is, as long as Roland Duchatelet sells up and the new owner is not Stig of the Dump!

    ..........and Charltonlife members are given voting rights on the new board
    ..........and investment in players goes berserk
    ..........and Fosters/XXXX is £1 a pint
    ..........and the portions of chips increase 100% to 12!
    ..........season tickets are free if promotion not achieved (otherwise £50)
  • Roland has to go 100%. Does he honestly think protests would stop if he's remotely still involved?

    I'm not remotely in favour of spitting club and ground again, but supposing there was a viable long-term lease with a clause providing for buyback on promotion to the PL?
    Please continue to ply us with such thought provoking & thoroughly sensible questions, AB.

    It appears that we are all clutching at straws after tonight's announcement & I, for one, am very confused.

    Your comments invariably help to keep us grounded & it's reassuring to hear your thoughts on the situation.

    Please keep on keeping on.....
  • So if he doesn't sell The Valley with the club do we continue to protest and continue to make the club as difficult to run as possible?

    I'm already wondering how long it will take for someone to demand that the new owners sell up and 'Give is our club back'.

    If only there was a billionaire out there willing to drop seven figures every year to bankroll losses without any, realistic, hope of ever seeing that money paid back.

    I hate what we've become but I would, genuinely, not swap places with Coventry or Orient, and I can't help wondering just how much better we would currently be doing right now if Slater and Jimenez were still running the club with someone else's money. And when I say someone else's money I do realise that that someone else had already walked away when they sold the club.

    What I find most surprising is that anyone is, actually, surprised that RD would hold onto The Valley. As true as it is that the club are better off with the assert and no rent to pay the alternative is to physically buy the asset.

    I do love the way people on here are digging their heels in and refusing to pay £20m for the club without The Valley. You chaps stick to your guns and you put your £20m back in your pocket. Don't let anyone tell you what you have to do with your £20m.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Gods sake - why can't we just get a rich as fuck Saudi Arabian oil man to come along and buy us. No strings - just rich...


  • It's a good thing, in that we now know that Roland is looking to sell.

    I'm more skeptical of this buyer though. Potentially splitting the club an the Valley worries me, as landlords can do odd things, and it also gives the tenant an excuse to move if they don't like the terms.

    The fact they don't appear to have the money in places also concerns me, as they will need to finance losses to get to the Prem. The notion they get their money back plus some by going public seems incredibly naive. Youd need to be well established and challenging for silverware to raise any significant funds.

    Finally, the Ozzie player thing needs to be explained. They don't/won't own the players - they are owned by their clubs. So why will there clubs hand them over to this mob? If they are good enough, they'll flog them for $$$. If they aren't good enough, they won't get a work permit.

    My opinion, someone will buy us, but I'd be surprised if it was this mob (just to keep on the kangaroo theme)
  • In my mind, protests continue until Roland sells the club, and the Valley.

    i don't disagree but who do we protest to and how? If the new owners just can't afford The Valley but are going to improve the club's fortunes surely they deserve our full support do they not?

  • edited April 2017
    I always thought RD was shite at running a football club, employing shite people, who made shite decisions and that he was hidden the full picture by Meire. However, I didn't think he was necessarily a vindictive person who was gonna 'punish' us by selling the ground etc. If he does want to keep hold of The Valley that blows all that out the water, he hardly needs the money from development on the land. Keeping hold of the ground would be his way of sticking two fingers up to Charlton fans.
  • In my mind, protests continue until Roland sells the club, and the Valley.

    i don't disagree but who do we protest to and how? If the new owners just can't afford The Valley but are going to improve the club's fortunes surely they deserve our full support do they not?

    sadly this could be yet another thing that divides fans
  • LOOK ? Forward Planning Time.
    Tony Popovic: Western Sydney Wanderers 43 years old EX Palace
    Kevin Muscat: Melbourne Victory 43 Years old EX Dirty Bastard.

    Surprised nobody has mentioned the original "Hayden Mullins" - Aussie super striker John Aloisi

  • I always thought RD was shite at running a football club, employing shite people, who made shite decisions and that he was hidden the full picture by Meire. However, I didn't think he was necessarily a vindictive person who was gonna 'punish' us by selling the ground etc. If he does want to keep hold of The Valley that blows all that out the water, he hardly needs the money from development on the land. Keeping hold of the ground would be his way of sticking two fingers up to Charlton fans.

    More likely it allows him to bridge the money he wants from the club sale and what a potential buyer will pay for it.

    However, people in his position are not used to being treated how the fans have treated him. He ha damaged us off in the press and I doubt he would turn down an opportunity to be vindictive towards it. Let's remember that we have letter boxes his home town and turned up at his local club to annoy him.

    What did we really expect this super wealthy chap with, I'm guessing, sycophants falling all over him to do on his way out?

  • It's too early to say whether this may be better or not.

    However, I'm pretty sure David White said Paul Elliot's consortium offered £30M last year and were not even granted a discussion.

    So if that is correct and they are still around ............
  • Roland has beaten me into submission. Much as it pains me to say it at the moment for me its:

    ABR.

    Hope this works out I just want the old nut case gone.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!