If the new owners want a clean title it’s only because they want the sole charge on the assets perfectly reasonable
RD should pay the directors loans
if he doesn’t then walk away why is the Land so pivotal to the process of your interested in the land more than the fact it’s a football club and one that you will never make a profit out of until you reach the premier league then you have to question why are you buying it
fire and frying pan
Re-posted here from another thread:
Could it be that RD is playing a new game?
Trying to get ... or embarrass ... the ex-directors to accept a big discount - then he decides he doesn’t want to sell and takes the opportunity to obtain finance (or seek other opportunities) using the land as collateral?
I wouldn’t be surprised if he sees the land as his big chance to make money, and is using the proposed buyers as pawns in his game.
Far-fetched? Maybe. But nothing would surprise me with this individual.
My view is that new owners want clear title because they are paying a lot of money and so want clear and uncomplicated ownership.
Why buy a house and allow the previous owners free access to the downstairs toilet?
There is no reason to think that wanting clear title means loans or if it does that means dodgy. Charlton took out a loan (mortgage) to build the new north stand for example.
We don't even know who the potential new owners are beyond Muir, who we know could buy the club on his own.
The problem here is all Roland. He needs to sort the bonds but hasn't so is now playing games to shift blame.
And it's not just the ex-directors being blamed.
Small budget? EFLs fault
Bowyer deal not signed. Bowyer won't trigger the extension.
It's everyone's fault other than Duchatelet's, as ever.
As for support the team Bowyer knows the players perform better with positive support than without so he encourages it. It also engages the fan base, which is great.
But it is a marginal gain. No matter how much we cheered Parker he wouldn't be as good as Taylor.
In the championship others will have bigger, more expensive and talented squads AND loud crowds.
We need to compete with the squad, the scouting, the tactics, the coaching, the injuries, the talent.
Support alone won't be enough. It will help and it should be the norm but it's only a marginal part of success as otherwise England would win the world cup and Leeds the Champions League
I hate the cryptic stuff it’s like trying to decider the da Vinci code
You do realise that the da Vinci Code was a work of fiction. The stuff coming out on this forum and others is nothing like that. Oh ..... hang on a minute.
1674 England and the Netherlands sign the Treaty of Westminster, ending the Third Anglo-Dutch War. just adding the usual bollox a little earlier than usual.
If Bowyer stays there is no question in my mind that I get down there and support him and the boys. If Bowyer leaves though, all bets are off as far as I'm concerned.
1674 England and the Netherlands sign the Treaty of Westminster, ending the Third Anglo-Dutch War. just adding the usual bollox a little earlier than usual.
Surprise suprise , roland is full of it. I swear he just makes it up as he goes along. The more this unravels the more it seems that Roland has no intention of selling.
When was Roland quoted as saying he didn't want promotion ? He may have said that and I may have missed it. He may even have thought it, without saying it. But I'm just saying I don't recall him saying that.
I do recall Dave White amongst others saying that's what they thought (and may well be right).
For the last few seasons some high ranking members of staff have been saying the the club will be easier to sell when we are in the championship. I don't think so
Only if there is some very wealthy Kazakhstani who wants to launder some dirty money in a London located football team who see's we are one division away from the promised land of the premier and is prepared to pay over the odds. (EG prince Andrews house when he was paid 2 million more than the asking price on the house he was given by the Queen !)
I'm not suggesting that all kazakh oligarchs are iffy or they expected air miles Andy to act quid pro quo, but the fact they never moved into the house was strange !
My view is that new owners want clear title because they are paying a lot of money and so want clear and uncomplicated ownership.
Why buy a house and allow the previous owners free access to the downstairs toilet?
There is no reason to think that wanting clear title means loans or if it does that means dodgy. Charlton took out a loan (mortgage) to build the new north stand for example.
We don't even know who the potential new owners are beyond Muir, who we know could buy the club on his own.
The problem here is all Roland. He needs to sort the bonds but hasn't so is now playing games to shift blame.
And it's not just the ex-directors being blamed.
Small budget? EFLs fault
Bowyer deal not signed. Bowyer won't trigger the extension.
It's everyone's fault other than Duchatelet's, as ever.
As for support the team Bowyer knows the players perform better with positive support than without so he encourages it. It also engages the fan base, which is great.
But it is a marginal gain. No matter how much we cheered Parker he wouldn't be as good as Taylor.
In the championship others will have bigger, more expensive and talented squads AND loud crowds.
We need to compete with the squad, the scouting, the tactics, the coaching, the injuries, the talent.
Support alone won't be enough. It will help and it should be the norm but it's only a marginal part of success as otherwise England would win the world cup and Leeds the Champions League
For the last few seasons some high ranking members of staff have been saying the the club will be easier to sell when we are in the championship. I don't think so
There are no high ranking members of staff at Charlton.
Seems we are back to micro analysing details without anyone really knowing whether those details are the real issue or not.
Weve been in a similar round to this about 6 or 7 times over the last two years. I’ve absolutely no idea why some people wrap themselves up so much in it.
Probably because many of us realise that just chanting “support the team” isn’t much use in the medium term unless the owner does so as well.
Well, Bowyer and the team seemed to think that supporting the team was was of considerable use to them.I don't recall them commenting on the use of 17,000 pages of gossip and conjecture on a Charlton forum... I think we can all agree the owner is of little use at all.
Yes, in L1 where Charlton will always be competitive because about two thirds of the division are perennial strugglers. In the Championship that won’t cut it for very long, as a series of small clubs have found out.
I think you may need to clarify this, because it reads that there is no point Charlton fans supporting the team above L1.
No, it means that it won’t of itself enable the team to be successful. Some people seem to think that asking questions and exploring what is going on is somehow exclusive of or detracts from “supporting the team”. However as Redskin himself points out, Bowyer and the team are oblivious to this discussion.
You can, if you want, stick your fingers in your ears and join RD is his delusion that having the lowest budget in the division (according to Bowyer) doesn’t mean we can’t get promoted. You can ignore the fact that teams with Charlton’s likely budget usually go down. But shouting louder at matches still won’t be a solution.
Jesus wept, you can be fully aware of the negligence of the owner and the damage being inflicted on the club and still support the team without thinking it's a solution to the problems.
Of course you can - and I did, all over the country last season. I was responding to AFKA who has been arguing (see above) that more people should go to matches and that discussing the takeover situation is pointless, to paraphrase. Obviously it’s entirely open to anyone what they do, I just find it a bit odd for the owner of a message board to argue that such discussion is pointless.
I don't think AFKA was saying not to discuss the takeover. Without speaking for him my interpretation of the point he was making was a very similar viewpoint to mine in that it does seem for about the umpteenth time we're all arguing with each other over whether a price has really been agreed or not and have The Aussies got the money? And I make AFKA correct it does almost feel like we are picking over quotes from the last 12 months where no doubt there is a mixture of spin, truth and lies in there and frankly it does get tedious and tiresome to keep re-reading it over and over.
There's probably an easier solution out there which would be to create a flow chart of all the possible theories that have been discussed over the last two years, 1672 pages and 51k comments to save reading the same arguments over and over again.
Point is that things are moving, of which RD’s statement is one aspect, and there is some solid information coming into the public domain, with more likely to follow. So it’s not the case that we are simply going over old ground at all. Even if it feels like it!
Is that your ex Directors statement, or is there something else on the horizon?
Seems we are back to micro analysing details without anyone really knowing whether those details are the real issue or not.
Weve been in a similar round to this about 6 or 7 times over the last two years. I’ve absolutely no idea why some people wrap themselves up so much in it.
Probably because many of us realise that just chanting “support the team” isn’t much use in the medium term unless the owner does so as well.
Well, Bowyer and the team seemed to think that supporting the team was was of considerable use to them.I don't recall them commenting on the use of 17,000 pages of gossip and conjecture on a Charlton forum... I think we can all agree the owner is of little use at all.
Yes, in L1 where Charlton will always be competitive because about two thirds of the division are perennial strugglers. In the Championship that won’t cut it for very long, as a series of small clubs have found out.
I think you may need to clarify this, because it reads that there is no point Charlton fans supporting the team above L1.
No, it means that it won’t of itself enable the team to be successful. Some people seem to think that asking questions and exploring what is going on is somehow exclusive of or detracts from “supporting the team”. However as Redskin himself points out, Bowyer and the team are oblivious to this discussion.
You can, if you want, stick your fingers in your ears and join RD is his delusion that having the lowest budget in the division (according to Bowyer) doesn’t mean we can’t get promoted. You can ignore the fact that teams with Charlton’s likely budget usually go down. But shouting louder at matches still won’t be a solution.
Jesus wept, you can be fully aware of the negligence of the owner and the damage being inflicted on the club and still support the team without thinking it's a solution to the problems.
Of course you can - and I did, all over the country last season. I was responding to AFKA who has been arguing (see above) that more people should go to matches and that discussing the takeover situation is pointless, to paraphrase. Obviously it’s entirely open to anyone what they do, I just find it a bit odd for the owner of a message board to argue that such discussion is pointless.
I don't think AFKA was saying not to discuss the takeover. Without speaking for him my interpretation of the point he was making was a very similar viewpoint to mine in that it does seem for about the umpteenth time we're all arguing with each other over whether a price has really been agreed or not and have The Aussies got the money? And I make AFKA correct it does almost feel like we are picking over quotes from the last 12 months where no doubt there is a mixture of spin, truth and lies in there and frankly it does get tedious and tiresome to keep re-reading it over and over.
There's probably an easier solution out there which would be to create a flow chart of all the possible theories that have been discussed over the last two years, 1672 pages and 51k comments to save reading the same arguments over and over again.
Point is that things are moving, of which RD’s statement is one aspect, and there is some solid information coming into the public domain, with more likely to follow. So it’s not the case that we are simply going over old ground at all. Even if it feels like it!
Is that your ex Directors statement, or is there something else on the horizon?
Seems we are back to micro analysing details without anyone really knowing whether those details are the real issue or not.
Weve been in a similar round to this about 6 or 7 times over the last two years. I’ve absolutely no idea why some people wrap themselves up so much in it.
Probably because many of us realise that just chanting “support the team” isn’t much use in the medium term unless the owner does so as well.
Well, Bowyer and the team seemed to think that supporting the team was was of considerable use to them.I don't recall them commenting on the use of 17,000 pages of gossip and conjecture on a Charlton forum... I think we can all agree the owner is of little use at all.
Yes, in L1 where Charlton will always be competitive because about two thirds of the division are perennial strugglers. In the Championship that won’t cut it for very long, as a series of small clubs have found out.
I think you may need to clarify this, because it reads that there is no point Charlton fans supporting the team above L1.
No, it means that it won’t of itself enable the team to be successful. Some people seem to think that asking questions and exploring what is going on is somehow exclusive of or detracts from “supporting the team”. However as Redskin himself points out, Bowyer and the team are oblivious to this discussion.
You can, if you want, stick your fingers in your ears and join RD is his delusion that having the lowest budget in the division (according to Bowyer) doesn’t mean we can’t get promoted. You can ignore the fact that teams with Charlton’s likely budget usually go down. But shouting louder at matches still won’t be a solution.
Jesus wept, you can be fully aware of the negligence of the owner and the damage being inflicted on the club and still support the team without thinking it's a solution to the problems.
Of course you can - and I did, all over the country last season. I was responding to AFKA who has been arguing (see above) that more people should go to matches and that discussing the takeover situation is pointless, to paraphrase. Obviously it’s entirely open to anyone what they do, I just find it a bit odd for the owner of a message board to argue that such discussion is pointless.
I don't think AFKA was saying not to discuss the takeover. Without speaking for him my interpretation of the point he was making was a very similar viewpoint to mine in that it does seem for about the umpteenth time we're all arguing with each other over whether a price has really been agreed or not and have The Aussies got the money? And I make AFKA correct it does almost feel like we are picking over quotes from the last 12 months where no doubt there is a mixture of spin, truth and lies in there and frankly it does get tedious and tiresome to keep re-reading it over and over.
There's probably an easier solution out there which would be to create a flow chart of all the possible theories that have been discussed over the last two years, 1672 pages and 51k comments to save reading the same arguments over and over again.
Point is that things are moving, of which RD’s statement is one aspect, and there is some solid information coming into the public domain, with more likely to follow. So it’s not the case that we are simply going over old ground at all. Even if it feels like it!
Is that your ex Directors statement, or is there something else on the horizon?
SoapBoxSam, I think you'll find Andrew built the house from scratch. Nicknamed Tesco Towers because it resembled their supermarkets. Now razed to the ground after being derelict for years. How he hasn't been investigated for complicity in money laundering is scandalous.
Seems we are back to micro analysing details without anyone really knowing whether those details are the real issue or not.
Weve been in a similar round to this about 6 or 7 times over the last two years. I’ve absolutely no idea why some people wrap themselves up so much in it.
Probably because many of us realise that just chanting “support the team” isn’t much use in the medium term unless the owner does so as well.
Well, Bowyer and the team seemed to think that supporting the team was was of considerable use to them.I don't recall them commenting on the use of 17,000 pages of gossip and conjecture on a Charlton forum... I think we can all agree the owner is of little use at all.
Yes, in L1 where Charlton will always be competitive because about two thirds of the division are perennial strugglers. In the Championship that won’t cut it for very long, as a series of small clubs have found out.
I think you may need to clarify this, because it reads that there is no point Charlton fans supporting the team above L1.
No, it means that it won’t of itself enable the team to be successful. Some people seem to think that asking questions and exploring what is going on is somehow exclusive of or detracts from “supporting the team”. However as Redskin himself points out, Bowyer and the team are oblivious to this discussion.
You can, if you want, stick your fingers in your ears and join RD is his delusion that having the lowest budget in the division (according to Bowyer) doesn’t mean we can’t get promoted. You can ignore the fact that teams with Charlton’s likely budget usually go down. But shouting louder at matches still won’t be a solution.
Jesus wept, you can be fully aware of the negligence of the owner and the damage being inflicted on the club and still support the team without thinking it's a solution to the problems.
Of course you can - and I did, all over the country last season. I was responding to AFKA who has been arguing (see above) both that more people should go to matches and that discussing the takeover situation is pointless, to paraphrase. Obviously it’s entirely open to anyone what they do, I just find it a bit odd for the owner of a message board to argue that such discussion is pointless.
A resolution to the ownership situation is far more likely to assist Bowyer than extra support and while we certainly can’t deliver it we can expose lies and contradictions in Duchatelet’s position so that they don’t gain any traction.
i also wonder where “support the team” gets us if Bowyer isn’t retained, because of the ownership situation. Or will it just move on to Johnnie Jackson, Jose Riga or anyone else who turns up?
Ah. That question I posed on Friday is asked yet again with still no clear cut indications as to how Lifers might react should Bow reject a derisory offer and decide to walk....followed by the out of contract players.
It's certainly not something I want to dwell upon but with the end of June getting ever closer, sadly, it needs to be considered IMO.
Yes, this will still be "our" club , but maybe in name only.
And with a new manager stepping into the unknown, with meagre resources at his disposal, it's likely we would be on a hiding to nothing on the hallowed turf, week after week....
Wearing black & white, frequent chanting against the Rat and possibly displaying protest banners would probably be the limit of an individual's show of anger. Would we be so depressed about the situation that most might either sit numbed to the core, silently in their seats , or indeed find something more positive to do on Saturday afternoons ?
The stuffing would be knocked out of yours truly for sure.
So, once again, I ask, how would YOU react if the unthinkable happens ?
It would be like a complete punch in the gut. The only thing that has held this club together over the last year has been Bowyer and what he and his management team have created. I’d still go, but, depending on who we get in, it would just revert back to how it felt under Duchatelet from the second full season onwards
N01R4M you are forgetting that RD is also putting a value on the land which ignores British planning laws. He thinks that building a hotel at St Truiden, by being a bigwig to the council, the same applies over here. The reality is the Valley will only ever be a football stadium unless CAFC voluntarily relocate.
No, I'm not forgetting that. It is one of the factors underlying my suspicion Roland has spent the past 5 years trying to find ways to circumvent the planning laws relating to development at The Valley and Sparrows Lane.
In St-T, Rowland's initial planning request for the old farmhouse opposite Stayen was to turn it into accomodation for young players. This was rejected, but eventually he got permission to turn it into a boutique hotel & events venue. (Which is well overdue for opening. Anyone booked rooms yet?!)
I wonder whether Roland tried to do something similar at SL, where I understand his revised plan for the academy incorporated hotel-style accommodation for young players (presumably those he would be shipping in from the Network?) This was presumably passed by planning as it was for sport-related purposes.
But suppose he had a longer term plan of saying it was no longer needed for its original purpose, so he wanted to be able to let some of the rooms on a commercial basis? I'm sure he could spin it initially as being for youth sport groups attending sporting events in the capital, and then gradually widen the catchment of customers... If realisation dawned that this ruse was not going to work for him in England, it could explain why no start was made on the actual buildings.
We know there is evidence of some investigations being made into the possibility of redeveloping the Jimmy Seed, but including flats for sale rather than increasing the seating capacity, and also into the possibility of building flats on part of the carpark. So I am certain that at least initially he had the intention of incorporating commercial ventures into the ground - just that his inadequate Due Diligence did not reveal the full extent of the difficulties in achieving a financially beneficial outcome.
If I remember, Rat did not even do the due diligence and didn't know about the loans until after he bought? What a numbskull. Now he wants those who kept the club afloat to eat his mistake?
If the Australians take over I will be first in line for buying season tickets.
Listen mate, Over the last two years they have spent too much time with their hands in their pockets ball tampering and will surely take us down, under the present "who's got 2 million to join our Aussie consortium" idea of taking over a football club. Aussie rules ok, but they seem stuck between a big rock and a hard place. We keep boomeranging between the Ex directors loans and the high Price. Despite Duchatelet being a Drongo, he's outback and a recluse from the valley. Strewth this Sale of Charlton is taking longer than a roo on the hop from Sydney to Perth. G'day
“Blimey Skippy, Roland’s tripped and fallen down a well? Tell ya what let’s leave the drongo to drown!”
Comments
Why buy a house and allow the previous owners free access to the downstairs toilet?
There is no reason to think that wanting clear title means loans or if it does that means dodgy. Charlton took out a loan (mortgage) to build the new north stand for example.
We don't even know who the potential new owners are beyond Muir, who we know could buy the club on his own.
The problem here is all Roland. He needs to sort the bonds but hasn't so is now playing games to shift blame.
And it's not just the ex-directors being blamed.
Small budget? EFLs fault
Bowyer deal not signed. Bowyer won't trigger the extension.
It's everyone's fault other than Duchatelet's, as ever.
As for support the team Bowyer knows the players perform better with positive support than without so he encourages it. It also engages the fan base, which is great.
But it is a marginal gain. No matter how much we cheered Parker he wouldn't be as good as Taylor.
In the championship others will have bigger, more expensive and talented squads AND loud crowds.
We need to compete with the squad, the scouting, the tactics, the coaching, the injuries, the talent.
Support alone won't be enough. It will help and it should be the norm but it's only a marginal part of success as otherwise England would win the world cup and Leeds the Champions League
If Bowyer leaves though, all bets are off as far as I'm concerned.
If you look carefully
The couple on the bridge
Are both Robson Green
(HMHB)
I'm sure there's a clue there as to who our new owners will be.
I'm not suggesting that all kazakh oligarchs are iffy or they expected air miles Andy to act quid pro quo, but the fact they never moved into the house was strange !
Why not just tell us now?
life without Bowyer would be terrible
In St-T, Rowland's initial planning request for the old farmhouse opposite Stayen was to turn it into accomodation for young players. This was rejected, but eventually he got permission to turn it into a boutique hotel & events venue. (Which is well overdue for opening. Anyone booked rooms yet?!)
I wonder whether Roland tried to do something similar at SL, where I understand his revised plan for the academy incorporated hotel-style accommodation for young players (presumably those he would be shipping in from the Network?) This was presumably passed by planning as it was for sport-related purposes.
But suppose he had a longer term plan of saying it was no longer needed for its original purpose, so he wanted to be able to let some of the rooms on a commercial basis? I'm sure he could spin it initially as being for youth sport groups attending sporting events in the capital, and then gradually widen the catchment of customers... If realisation dawned that this ruse was not going to work for him in England, it could explain why no start was made on the actual buildings.
We know there is evidence of some investigations being made into the possibility of redeveloping the Jimmy Seed, but including flats for sale rather than increasing the seating capacity, and also into the possibility of building flats on part of the carpark. So I am certain that at least initially he had the intention of incorporating commercial ventures into the ground - just that his inadequate Due Diligence did not reveal the full extent of the difficulties in achieving a financially beneficial outcome.
If he for example only wants to pay them 50% then RD is delaying the takeover for the sake of £1.32m.
Even if the clubs losses are cut to say £6m a season, the takeover dragging on another 3 months means he may have to put another £1.5m into the club.
He’s likely to get £30m+ by selling the club and potentially further payments if we’re experience any success on the pitch.
Have the other directors agreed to be paid a % of their loan and therefore RD is refusing to pay any of them off in full?