If the courts couldn’t actually un pick the tangle of concealment and decide who actually owned what. How can the sale take place. Anyone looking to spend upwards of £100 million would need to be crystal clear as to what they were buying.
I’m not at all sure that this will end either soon or particularly well.
Surely, the answer to that first bit (assuming the mem and arts were bog-standard), is the directors of the company (notwithstanding who the beneficial owner is) together with whoever was authorised to sign the share transfer document (probably the company secretary). As long as the Land Registry was clear as to the name of the corporate owner of the freehold assets: sorted.
Second paragraph: I agree with you.
Wouldn’t the BVI aspect of this muddy the water ?
In any case Airman has settled my nerves. I think
I doubt it, though I concede that I'm well out of date on this stuff. The oft-used process used to be to set up a BVI company with local nominee directors and a confidential beneficial owner. The BVI company would then become 100% owner of an Isle of Man subsidiary company and that would be used to acquire UK assets. (I don't recall that the spivs even bothered with the IoM bit.)
Anyway, I suppose if a beneficial owner of the ultimate holding company said that stuff is mine and I didn't give consent for its sale, that would be a whole can of worms that could likely only be sorted in the Courts.
Below is a diagram of CAFC's ownership structure under the spivs taken from the recent court case against Jimenez and Cash.
Small wonder that it's taking time to unravel and may not be clear yet.
Facinating stuff on the link too. Perhaps due to ignorance and/or only spending 1.5% of his time on CAFC, RD confused this debacle with Varney, and KM's comment at the Russell Slade press conference related to that confusion?
When clubs go into administration, and have their debts written off, if they reach the Premier League then they should repay them, or the PL should take the money of their central payments for redistribution.
It might be too late for some small businesses, but in no other sector can broke businesses like football clubs hit the jackpot like this, a year or two after going broke and writing off their debts
And, let's not forget, most clubs go into administration because they're being chased by revenue and customs.
When clubs go into administration, and have their debts written off, if they reach the Premier League then they should repay them, or the PL should take the money of their central payments for redistribution.
It might be too late for some small businesses, but in no other sector can broke businesses like football clubs hit the jackpot like this, a year or two after going broke and writing off their debts
I'm not an accountant but I believe that they are not the same business. The old business closes down and a new business is set up, pays something to the administrator and takes over the assets, including membership of the football league, and starts trading.
In the same way if a pub closes, you and I can take it over and re-open it using the same name, serve the same beer to the same people as before but it is a new business under the law. If we then make the pub a roaring success why should we have to pay off the unpaid bills left by the previous landlord?
I'm not saying it is right and the football league should be a lot more to control debt but businesses closing and then re-opening is not unique to football.
They might be a new business, but in terms of the football pyramid, they are the same club, getting the same benefits from the league structure, central TV money etc. Indeed other football clubs get preferential treatment when clubs go broke.
Morally, the PL could easily deduct some TV money from newly promoted clubs who had gone into administration during the previous 5 years say and give it to charity or perhaps a central fund to help compensate future small businesses that suffer due to football clubs defaulting on their debts.
So many of the issues holding up the sale are not RD’s fault as it’s turned out. Had he done DD he would have walked away, and the club would have gone into administration. (Maybe for the better as people are saying)
This takeover may be the best thing that’s happened to the club for many years. So many major problems have been, or are being, sorted out. It’s unbelievable really. For whatever reason the Aussies have stuck with it. You can see why other bidders walked away.
Without new owners the club might struggle to survive right now. RD is cutting every cost to the bone. If the Aussies were to walk now, what do you think he would do? Cut and run I’d say. Fire sale? It wouldn’t be pretty, that’s for sure.
Terrifying that our clubs in this country have been permitted to get into this state over the years. Ugly stuff.
Does this vindicate some of the stuff Murray has been saying over the years I wonder? i. e. has he been made aware of this mess from the cash era historically or is this all coming to the fore for the first time?
Wonder if the mess will ever be truly unravelled and revealed to us.
Maybe not because even the journalist types like Airman would find it difficult to be impartial because having been inside the Charlton tent, he knows where the bodies are burried, but having been caught in the knife throwing may find it difficult to give an unbiased view on the shenanigans.
The timeline and major players covers the period from Murray selling to Jimenez, Slater and Cash to the quick sale to Duchatelet to the elephants pregnancy of the current impasse.
Other than Peter Varney, their just seems too many shady characters (I reserve judgement on the Aussie guys) involved and the big losers are the fans, you and me that have seen us go from a well run Premier club to a comedy third tier club who could fall even further down the football pyramid if the myriad of technical issues aren't resolved very soon.
An independent transparent review of The stated period would be interesting to know so we could learn and move on but too many people may go mute for that too happen.
Wasn't it Varney who was heavily involved in bringing the Spivs into the club in the first place?
I don’t think that makes him a shady character, though, does it? That would be someone who was knowingly complicit in dishonest behaviour.
No, but it was a pretty bad judgement call though. I wouldn't call Murray throughout this period a shady character either, but someone who made a number of bad decisions
When clubs go into administration, and have their debts written off, if they reach the Premier League then they should repay them, or the PL should take the money of their central payments for redistribution.
It might be too late for some small businesses, but in no other sector can broke businesses like football clubs hit the jackpot like this, a year or two after going broke and writing off their debts
And, let's not forget, most clubs go into administration because they're being chased by revenue and customs.
So, in the end, taxpayers all lose out, too...
But it happens all the time elsewhere.
My local Woolworths closed one day and re-opened the next as a very similar shop (admittedly different name).
I don't see how keeping the shop empty until the new owners paid off previous debts would have helped anybody! (Customers , staff, taxpayers, local community ….?).
Even suppliers who may have lost some money have a replacement source of income instead of a permanently empty shop.
Don't really see how a football club is any different to Woolies in this respect.
Maybe RD didn't do proper due diligence because one of his trusted advisors told him that everything was fine. You know, someone like a sports lawyer type of person
This quick, loose purchase is probably reflected in the cheap £18M price and he was likely thinking that the Valley was worth a fortune in development if all went tits up.
So many of the issues holding up the sale are not RD’s fault as it’s turned out. Had he done DD he would have walked away, and the club would have gone into administration. (Maybe for the better as people are saying)
This takeover may be the best thing that’s happened to the club for many years. So many major problems have been, or are being, sorted out. It’s unbelievable really. For whatever reason the Aussies have stuck with it. You can see why other bidders walked away.
Without new owners the club might struggle to survive right now. RD is cutting every cost to the bone. If the Aussies were to walk now, what do you think he would do? Cut and run I’d say. Fire sale? It wouldn’t be pretty, that’s for sure.
Terrifying that our clubs in this country have been permitted to get into this state over the years. Ugly stuff.
Does this vindicate some of the stuff Murray has been saying over the years I wonder? i. e. has he been made aware of this mess from the cash era historically or is this all coming to the fore for the first time?
Wonder if the mess will ever be truly unravelled and revealed to us.
Maybe not because even the journalist types like Airman would find it difficult to be impartial because having been inside the Charlton tent, he knows where the bodies are burried, but having been caught in the knife throwing may find it difficult to give an unbiased view on the shenanigans.
The timeline and major players covers the period from Murray selling to Jimenez, Slater and Cash to the quick sale to Duchatelet to the elephants pregnancy of the current impasse.
Other than Peter Varney, their just seems too many shady characters (I reserve judgement on the Aussie guys) involved and the big losers are the fans, you and me that have seen us go from a well run Premier club to a comedy third tier club who could fall even further down the football pyramid if the myriad of technical issues aren't resolved very soon.
An independent transparent review of The stated period would be interesting to know so we could learn and move on but too many people may go mute for that too happen.
Wasn't it Varney who was heavily involved in bringing the Spivs into the club in the first place?
I don’t think that makes him a shady character, though, does it? That would be someone who was knowingly complicit in dishonest behaviour.
No, but it was a pretty bad judgement call though. I wouldn't call Murray throughout this period a shady character either, but someone who made a number of bad decisions
To be clear, you are bringing Murray into it, not me. My definition would apply to Jimenez and Cash, as evidenced by the Khakshouri court case.
Nevertheless I suggest waiting to see what comes out, if it does. Varney and Kavanagh resigned as directors in 2012 for a reason.
If Richard Murray is shady now, it's at the unreliable, questionable end of the meaning of the word not where Jimenez and slater may or not hang out. Unless proven otherwise.
So many of the issues holding up the sale are not RD’s fault as it’s turned out. Had he done DD he would have walked away, and the club would have gone into administration. (Maybe for the better as people are saying)
This takeover may be the best thing that’s happened to the club for many years. So many major problems have been, or are being, sorted out. It’s unbelievable really. For whatever reason the Aussies have stuck with it. You can see why other bidders walked away.
Without new owners the club might struggle to survive right now. RD is cutting every cost to the bone. If the Aussies were to walk now, what do you think he would do? Cut and run I’d say. Fire sale? It wouldn’t be pretty, that’s for sure.
Care to share what you know ???
Made promise not to, but I’m sure it will be revealed. Someone like Airman will pull all the threads together and explain it properly. I don’t think I fully understand it if I’m honest. Or maybe GM perhaps. He’ll know all about it having sat through all the meetings.
Am I the only person who hasn't got a clue who GM is?
Who is he or is this just code for someone?
Glenn Medeiros, something changed his love for us as his consortium pulled out before all the Blue Peter presenters got involved.
Shady as fuck, but still think we would be in the prem now had the cash not been pulled... Bloke was a crook but had football contacts in abundance
I think an objective view of that would need to look at the influence Jimenez actually exerted when the funding was there. Neither the funding nor the influence was great as you might suppose, and when he did intervene - Alonso, Clarke - it didn’t necessarily play out well.
Being grateful to RD for "saving" the club from almost certain administration is like the story of the guy who fell through a trapdoor and was miraculously "saved" from breaking both his legs by the noose round his neck.
But we keep being told that there was nobody else interested in buying us.........
Being grateful to RD for "saving" the club from almost certain administration is like the story of the guy who fell through a trapdoor and was miraculously "saved" from breaking both his legs by the noose round his neck.
But we keep being told that there was nobody else interested in buying us.........
So many of the issues holding up the sale are not RD’s fault as it’s turned out. Had he done DD he would have walked away, and the club would have gone into administration. (Maybe for the better as people are saying)
This takeover may be the best thing that’s happened to the club for many years. So many major problems have been, or are being, sorted out. It’s unbelievable really. For whatever reason the Aussies have stuck with it. You can see why other bidders walked away.
Without new owners the club might struggle to survive right now. RD is cutting every cost to the bone. If the Aussies were to walk now, what do you think he would do? Cut and run I’d say. Fire sale? It wouldn’t be pretty, that’s for sure.
Terrifying that our clubs in this country have been permitted to get into this state over the years. Ugly stuff.
Does this vindicate some of the stuff Murray has been saying over the years I wonder? i. e. has he been made aware of this mess from the cash era historically or is this all coming to the fore for the first time?
Wonder if the mess will ever be truly unravelled and revealed to us.
Maybe not because even the journalist types like Airman would find it difficult to be impartial because having been inside the Charlton tent, he knows where the bodies are burried, but having been caught in the knife throwing may find it difficult to give an unbiased view on the shenanigans.
The timeline and major players covers the period from Murray selling to Jimenez, Slater and Cash to the quick sale to Duchatelet to the elephants pregnancy of the current impasse.
Other than Peter Varney, their just seems too many shady characters (I reserve judgement on the Aussie guys) involved and the big losers are the fans, you and me that have seen us go from a well run Premier club to a comedy third tier club who could fall even further down the football pyramid if the myriad of technical issues aren't resolved very soon.
An independent transparent review of The stated period would be interesting to know so we could learn and move on but too many people may go mute for that too happen.
Wasn't it Varney who was heavily involved in bringing the Spivs into the club in the first place?
I don’t think that makes him a shady character, though, does it? That would be someone who was knowingly complicit in dishonest behaviour.
No, but it was a pretty bad judgement call though. I wouldn't call Murray throughout this period a shady character either, but someone who made a number of bad decisions
To be clear, you are bringing Murray into it, not me. My definition would apply to Jimenez and Cash, as evidenced by the Khakshouri court case.
Nevertheless I suggest waiting to see what comes out, if it does. Varney and Kavanagh resigned as directors in 2012 for a reason.
Given the elapsed time what did Varney and Kavanagh publicly say as to why they resigned back in 2012?
But if the takeover is being held up because of what the spivs did, why hasn't RD done something about it, he has had 4 years, was he hoping it would go away, or some idiot like him would buy Charlton without doing DD?
But if the takeover is being held up because of what the spivs did, why hasn't RD done something about it, he has had 4 years, was he hoping it would go away, or some idiot like him would buy Charlton without doing DD?
My source is that he simply stuck his fingers in his ears, duct taped his eyes and repeated " I want to know NOTHING !" ad infinitum whilst his niece lovingly stroked his hand .....
Comments
Charlton fans don't listen to the careless Whisper.
So, in the end, taxpayers all lose out, too...
Morally, the PL could easily deduct some TV money from newly promoted clubs who had gone into administration during the previous 5 years say and give it to charity or perhaps a central fund to help compensate future small businesses that suffer due to football clubs defaulting on their debts.
My local Woolworths closed one day and re-opened the next as a very similar shop (admittedly different name).
I don't see how keeping the shop empty until the new owners paid off previous debts would have helped anybody! (Customers , staff, taxpayers, local community ….?).
Even suppliers who may have lost some money have a replacement source of income instead of a permanently empty shop.
Don't really see how a football club is any different to Woolies in this respect.
Nevertheless I suggest waiting to see what comes out, if it does. Varney and Kavanagh resigned as directors in 2012 for a reason.
Unless proven otherwise.
*just after DD ended
**Duncan Dares
I believe Sue is the one who's always stuffing her cake hole.
Weird indeed.
How many 15 year old boys answer "no" to that question?
There will nothing on the OS