An interest free loan only repayable after a few years and only if a certain level of success and no conditions (we assume altho as I've mentioned in the past it's curious how Muzza stays on the Board), you would be mad not to have a piece of that action, plus free consultancy too..
so, I have no inside info at all but from what i have read,.. my odds for our owners come Jan...
Deux Chalet 1/2 fav Aussie mob 3/1 front runners if change Gerrard Street Chinese 5/1 Swiss Tony 6/1 Alan Curbishley 16/1 (odds would not be right if he was not in them) Red Bull 20/1 Bunch of KOC's 100/1
Rules : You can bet a maximum of £1 and only if your posting name here is Airman Brown will I accept your custom..
I think the Oz bid is quite fitting because just like in The Wizard of Oz, the elation felt by all the munchkins when the wicked witch was finally gone will be a similar feeling for us when the Belgians ship out!!
Tis very close apparently. Bit of a hurdle to get over re former Directors apparently.
Can't verify accuracy of source as it's second hand (at least) to me.
Hardly a surprise if any or all of the former Directors are leveraging their positions given they owe Duchatelet nothing at all and he has the funds to true them up. It's a Day of Reckoning event in the circumstances and who can blame them?
Someone mentioned fixed and floating. The floating bit is a bit worrying for anyone who is depending on this to secure their money.
Banks love putting this charge on something because if something goes wrong, they have a claim on everything a company owns at that point of time.
What it basically means is that they have a charge on anything the Company owns "at any given time". This allows them to let a company to trade, but still have security against ALL of the assets, including assets that were not even conceived of or owned at the time the loan was made available. For example, work in progress, stock, machines etc (even if bought after the loan was agreed).
This keeps the level of protection up as the assets that would be deprecating to nothing, are (hopefully ) being replaced and updated. Also, if a company is struggling it makes the process of calling in the debt straightforward, quick, and cheap.
But, a 'fixed and floating' charge does have its risks. Which is that (say) a bailiff moves in to recover a debt, the floating bit allows them to seize everything that is not 'fixed'. Only specifically "fixed" assets are therefore protected in this situation. The "company" are also free to sell anything they like, when they like.
One would expect all lenders to be fully aware of this, but many are not.
The main point is, that a potential owner and the seller have no need or obligation to consult or inform those who have charges that are fixed AND floating, so if this is indeed what the ex Directors hold it is pehaps not surprising that they have not been told anything.
Someone mentioned fixed and floating. The floating bit is a bit worrying for anyone who is depending on this to secure their money.
Banks love putting this charge on something because if something goes wrong, they have a claim on everything a company owns at that point of time.
What it basically means is that they have a charge on anything the Company owns "at any given time". This allows them to let a company to trade, but still have security against ALL of the assets, including assets that were not even conceived of or owned at the time the loan was made available. For example, work in progress, stock, machines etc (even if bought after the loan was agreed).
This keeps the level of protection up as the assets that would be deprecating to nothing, are (hopefully ) being replaced and updated. Also, if a company is struggling it makes the process of calling in the debt straightforward, quick, and cheap.
But, a 'fixed and floating' charge does have its risks. Which is that (say) a bailiff moves in to recover a debt, the floating bit allows them to seize everything that is not 'fixed'. Only specifically "fixed" assets are therefore protected in this situation. The "company" are also free to sell anything they like, when they like.
One would expect all lenders to be fully aware of this, but many are not.
The main point is, that a potential owner and the seller have no need or obligation to consult or inform those who have charges that are fixed AND floating, so if this is indeed what the ex Directors hold it is pehaps not surprising that they have not been told anything.
Interesting. Ultimately, though, the land itself is worth more than £7m - presumably if there was an attempt to transfer that out of Holdings / CAFC Ltd in order to remove it from the reach of the charge holders (if that's possible) that would have to be disclosed publicly six months ahead via the entirely separate (and otherwise feeble) ACV legislation.
Someone mentioned fixed and floating. The floating bit is a bit worrying for anyone who is depending on this to secure their money.
Banks love putting this charge on something because if something goes wrong, they have a claim on everything a company owns at that point of time.
What it basically means is that they have a charge on anything the Company owns "at any given time". This allows them to let a company to trade, but still have security against ALL of the assets, including assets that were not even conceived of or owned at the time the loan was made available. For example, work in progress, stock, machines etc (even if bought after the loan was agreed).
This keeps the level of protection up as the assets that would be deprecating to nothing, are (hopefully ) being replaced and updated. Also, if a company is struggling it makes the process of calling in the debt straightforward, quick, and cheap.
But, a 'fixed and floating' charge does have its risks. Which is that (say) a bailiff moves in to recover a debt, the floating bit allows them to seize everything that is not 'fixed'. Only specifically "fixed" assets are therefore protected in this situation. The "company" are also free to sell anything they like, when they like.
One would expect all lenders to be fully aware of this, but many are not.
The main point is, that a potential owner and the seller have no need or obligation to consult or inform those who have charges that are fixed AND floating, so if this is indeed what the ex Directors hold it is pehaps not surprising that they have not been told anything.
Interesting. Ultimately, though, the land itself is worth more than £7m - presumably if there was an attempt to transfer that that in order to remove it from the reach of the charge holders (if that's possible) that would have to be disclosed publicly six months ahead via the entirely separate (and otherwise feeble) ACV legislation.
I was not suggesting that the club or any future owner would try and diddle them out of their money, I was merely pointing out that there is no need to consult them in anyway when selling any or all of the assets if they hold a fixed and floating charge.
That would be an interesting test of the legislation which I expect is also fairly poorly worded, but loose enough to be interpreted that way - one would assume that any change to the freehold would trigger it, but what interest me further is the process for notification?
Does it work as an additional 'interest' on a piece of land and thus any attempt to change it with the land registry should trigger a process to contact that interested party?
That trigger presumably would be after any offering of sale took place, although I expect a search would show the interest, but not necessarily trigger it. So we are still left pondering what the process would be for ACV in the putting up for sale situation.
I suggest that the reality on the ground for ACV at the Valley in a freehold sale situation is that the Trust would need to raise a legal issue in such eventuality assuming it even knew the ground was for sale, which it may not until the last moment.
Someone mentioned fixed and floating. The floating bit is a bit worrying for anyone who is depending on this to secure their money.
Banks love putting this charge on something because if something goes wrong, they have a claim on everything a company owns at that point of time.
What it basically means is that they have a charge on anything the Company owns "at any given time". This allows them to let a company to trade, but still have security against ALL of the assets, including assets that were not even conceived of or owned at the time the loan was made available. For example, work in progress, stock, machines etc (even if bought after the loan was agreed).
This keeps the level of protection up as the assets that would be deprecating to nothing, are (hopefully ) being replaced and updated. Also, if a company is struggling it makes the process of calling in the debt straightforward, quick, and cheap.
But, a 'fixed and floating' charge does have its risks. Which is that (say) a bailiff moves in to recover a debt, the floating bit allows them to seize everything that is not 'fixed'. Only specifically "fixed" assets are therefore protected in this situation. The "company" are also free to sell anything they like, when they like.
One would expect all lenders to be fully aware of this, but many are not.
The main point is, that a potential owner and the seller have no need or obligation to consult or inform those who have charges that are fixed AND floating, so if this is indeed what the ex Directors hold it is pehaps not surprising that they have not been told anything.
Interesting. Ultimately, though, the land itself is worth more than £7m - presumably if there was an attempt to transfer that that in order to remove it from the reach of the charge holders (if that's possible) that would have to be disclosed publicly six months ahead via the entirely separate (and otherwise feeble) ACV legislation.
I was not suggesting that the club or any future owner would try and diddle them out of their money, I was merely pointing out that there is no need to consult them in anyway when selling any or all of the assets if they hold a fixed and floating charge.
I understand. It would mean, I guess, that they don't need to be consulted over player sales, if it covers intangible assets. Clearly that would be unworkable.
I did hear, however, they had to be consulted about leases to third parties at the training ground. Wouldn't that suggest something?
3. Local authority lists of land of community value
Each local authority is to maintain a list of land of community value in its area. For the purposes of Chapter 3 of the 2011 Act, local authorities include district councils, county councils, London borough councils and the Common Council of the City of London3 . When an ACV is added to, or removed from, the list, the authority is required to give written notice to the owners, the occupier, the body which nominated the ACV and the parish council. Inclusion in the list is registrable as a local land charge.
The authority will also need to enter a restriction on the title of the ACV. The Regulations include an amendment to the Land Registration Rules 2003, inserting the type of restriction (Form QQ) which will be required.
The wording of the restriction will be as follows: “No transfer or lease is to be registered without a certificate signed by a conveyancer that the transfer or lease did not contravene section 95(1) of the Localism Act 2011.”
The authority must apply for cancellation of the restriction as soon as practicable after an ACV is removed from the list.
The Regulations make no reference to notifying the mortgagee of an ACV when it is listed, but it must be the case that owners will need to notify their mortgagee(s) if a charged property becomes an ACV.
The authority must be informed by the owner where title to an ACV is registered for the first time.
My understanding was that they had a first charge over the land i.e. the Valley / Sparrows Lane. Anything that affects the value of that first charge such as granting a lease would need the consent of the first charge holders. They could either give consent or refuse.
"Fixed and floating charge over the undertaking and all property and assets present and future, including goodwill, book debts, uncalled capital, buildings, fixtures, fixed plant & machinery see image for full details." - from Companies House (CAFC Ltd).
So the potential new owners are going to be leasing The Valley not purchasing it and now some or all of the previous directors are not comfortable with that ?
So the potential new owners are going to be leasing The Valley not purchasing it and now some or all of the previous directors are not comfortable with that ?
No reason to suppose that and in any case it's hardly likely most of them are comfortable with RD's ownership of the club...
It is if we got made bankrupt as it would mean they would get paid in full (assuming there was suffcient monies raised) before any other creditors, including Revenue and Customs because the 'floating' bit is now realised and becomes fixed.
A bank would tend to have a mix of both. A fixed charge on an actual building, piece of land, or Directors house; and a fixed and floating charge on everthing else.
So the potential new owners are going to be leasing The Valley not purchasing it and now some or all of the previous directors are not comfortable with that ?
No reason to suppose that and in any case it's hardly likely most of them are comfortable with RD's ownership of the club...
I would hope that they are more concerned about the future of the valley then any change of ownership
1.2 addresses the land point. It's easy to read the details of the charges on the Companies House website for anyone interested. There is a lot of legal language about how fixed can be made floating and vice versa.
I’m told by someone at Gillingham, although we are already aware, that ‘a midfielder’ (Konsa) will he sold in January and the replacement could be Billy Bingham.
Ties in with RD wanting some cash back from player sale before he departs.
I’m told by someone at Gillingham, although we are already aware, that ‘a midfielder’ (Konsa) will he sold in January and the replacement could be Billy Bingham.
Ties in with RD wanting some cash back from player sale before he departs.
If it's going to happen club will be sold pre Jan.
I’m told by someone at Gillingham, although we are already aware, that ‘a midfielder’ (Konsa) will he sold in January and the replacement could be Billy Bingham.
Ties in with RD wanting some cash back from player sale before he departs.
I know Billy Bingham and his Family. I don't think they will mind me saying this but is nowhere near good enough for us.
I’m told by someone at Gillingham, although we are already aware, that ‘a midfielder’ (Konsa) will he sold in January and the replacement could be Billy Bingham.
Ties in with RD wanting some cash back from player sale before he departs.
I know Billy Bingham and his Family. I don't think they will mind me saying this but is nowhere near good enough for us.
I don't know Billy Bingham or his family. At 86 years old I have a few doubts but if he signs I'll give him a chance. It's about what he does for us, not how he played for his previous clubs.
Comments
Deux Chalet 1/2 fav
Aussie mob 3/1 front runners if change
Gerrard Street Chinese 5/1
Swiss Tony 6/1
Alan Curbishley 16/1 (odds would not be right if he was not in them)
Red Bull 20/1
Bunch of KOC's 100/1
Rules : You can bet a maximum of £1 and only if your posting name here is Airman Brown will I accept your custom..
Once taken over injected 60m in the transfer budget.
Banks love putting this charge on something because if something goes wrong, they have a claim on everything a company owns at that point of time.
What it basically means is that they have a charge on anything the Company owns "at any given time". This allows them to let a company to trade, but still have security against ALL of the assets, including assets that were not even conceived of or owned at the time the loan was made available. For example, work in progress, stock, machines etc (even if bought after the loan was agreed).
This keeps the level of protection up as the assets that would be deprecating to nothing, are (hopefully ) being replaced and updated. Also, if a company is struggling it makes the process of calling in the debt straightforward, quick, and cheap.
But, a 'fixed and floating' charge does have its risks. Which is that (say) a bailiff moves in to recover a debt, the floating bit allows them to seize everything that is not 'fixed'. Only specifically "fixed" assets are therefore protected in this situation. The "company" are also free to sell anything they like, when they like.
One would expect all lenders to be fully aware of this, but many are not.
The main point is, that a potential owner and the seller have no need or obligation to consult or inform those who have charges that are fixed AND floating, so if this is indeed what the ex Directors hold it is pehaps not surprising that they have not been told anything.
Does it work as an additional 'interest' on a piece of land and thus any attempt to change it with the land registry should trigger a process to contact that interested party?
That trigger presumably would be after any offering of sale took place, although I expect a search would show the interest, but not necessarily trigger it. So we are still left pondering what the process would be for ACV in the putting up for sale situation.
I suggest that the reality on the ground for ACV at the Valley in a freehold sale situation is that the Trust would need to raise a legal issue in such eventuality assuming it even knew the ground was for sale, which it may not until the last moment.
I did hear, however, they had to be consulted about leases to third parties at the training ground. Wouldn't that suggest something?
3. Local authority lists of land of community value
Each local authority is to maintain a list of land of community value in its area. For the purposes
of Chapter 3 of the 2011 Act, local authorities include district councils, county councils, London
borough councils and the Common Council of the City of London3
.
When an ACV is added to, or removed from, the list, the authority is required to give written
notice to the owners, the occupier, the body which nominated the ACV and the parish council.
Inclusion in the list is registrable as a local land charge.
The authority will also need to enter a restriction on the title of the ACV. The Regulations include
an amendment to the Land Registration Rules 2003, inserting the type of restriction (Form QQ)
which will be required.
The wording of the restriction will be as follows:
“No transfer or lease is to be registered without a certificate signed by a conveyancer that the
transfer or lease did not contravene section 95(1) of the Localism Act 2011.”
The authority must apply for cancellation of the restriction as soon as practicable after an ACV is
removed from the list.
The Regulations make no reference to notifying the mortgagee of an ACV when it is listed, but it
must be the case that owners will need to notify their mortgagee(s) if a charged property
becomes an ACV.
The authority must be informed by the owner where title to an ACV is registered for the first
time.
https://www.castrust.org/2013/12/whatdoesvalleyacvmean4charlton/
Next year will be 5 years, so we will need to reapply for the status.
A bank would tend to have a mix of both. A fixed charge on an actual building, piece of land, or Directors house; and a fixed and floating charge on everthing else.
1.2 addresses the land point. It's easy to read the details of the charges on the Companies House website for anyone interested. There is a lot of legal language about how fixed can be made floating and vice versa.
Ties in with RD wanting some cash back from player sale before he departs.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Bingham