From one of the links above, lets hope the situation remains the same ( 12 years down the line )
A row between Greenwich Council and Charlton Athletic Football Club could see dreams of an extended 31,000 seater Valley Stadium delayed even further Planning consent to transform The Valley stadium into a 31,000 seater venue was given back in 2005 - but, a new row over the club's plans to build flats at the back of the site could 'derail' the entire project.
Charlton Athletic's Chief Executive Peter Varney says the flats were 'integral to the funding of the project.' The Club says the local authority refused to remove a condition which meant the new flats would have to be used by Charlton - and not sold to members of the public.
Its suggested without the sale of nine new flats at the back of the stadium the whole project would prove too expensive. "integral to the funding of the project" Peter Varney, CAFC Chief Executive 'Denied the opportunity' Peter Varney conceded they'd "received planning permission for the general east stand development." But, referring to the flats said "we do not wish to be denied the opportunity to sell the properties on a leasehold basis in the future." "When council members visited the site, I believe everyone was impressed not only by the plans, but more importantly by proposed improvements to the Lansdowne Mews roadway and road lighting." "Poor living environment" Greenwich Council who granted permission for the overall redevelopment in June 2005 said removing the conditions on the new flats would 'result in a use that is not ancillary nor environmentally compatible with the existing land use of the stadium." They suggested this "would give rise to a poor living environment by reason of poor outlook and noise and disturbance, thereby detrimental to the amenities of future occupiers."
I believe the league managers had their do last night. Maybe that will have provided some impetus for something. I assume Karl Robinson would have been there.
My heart goes out to anyone who had to share a table with him. As well as talking bollocks, he strikes me as the sort of bloke who sends food flying all over the place when he's eating.
I want as many of these over the summer to replace your often excellent pre-match views posts.....One of the sad things about the season ending for me
From one of the links above, lets hope the situation remains the same ( 12 years down the line )
A row between Greenwich Council and Charlton Athletic Football Club could see dreams of an extended 31,000 seater Valley Stadium delayed even further Planning consent to transform The Valley stadium into a 31,000 seater venue was given back in 2005 - but, a new row over the club's plans to build flats at the back of the site could 'derail' the entire project.
Charlton Athletic's Chief Executive Peter Varney says the flats were 'integral to the funding of the project.' The Club says the local authority refused to remove a condition which meant the new flats would have to be used by Charlton - and not sold to members of the public.
Its suggested without the sale of nine new flats at the back of the stadium the whole project would prove too expensive. "integral to the funding of the project" Peter Varney, CAFC Chief Executive 'Denied the opportunity' Peter Varney conceded they'd "received planning permission for the general east stand development." But, referring to the flats said "we do not wish to be denied the opportunity to sell the properties on a leasehold basis in the future." "When council members visited the site, I believe everyone was impressed not only by the plans, but more importantly by proposed improvements to the Lansdowne Mews roadway and road lighting." "Poor living environment" Greenwich Council who granted permission for the overall redevelopment in June 2005 said removing the conditions on the new flats would 'result in a use that is not ancillary nor environmentally compatible with the existing land use of the stadium." They suggested this "would give rise to a poor living environment by reason of poor outlook and noise and disturbance, thereby detrimental to the amenities of future occupiers."
Politically it's very different - the country and especially London is in a housing crisis. Councils are doing all they can to get out new homes as fast as they can.
I believe the league managers had their do last night. Maybe that will have provided some impetus for something. I assume Karl Robinson would have been there.
My heart goes out to anyone who had to share a table with him. As well as talking bollocks, he strikes me as the sort of bloke who sends food flying all over the place when he's eating.
I want as many of these over the summer to replace your often excellent pre-match views posts.....One of the sad things about the season ending for me
Ha, cheers for the compliment! Read somewhere else on here that Fat Karl's on holiday at the moment, so presumably he's busy lowering in the tone at some posh hotel in the Caribbean at the moment.
We've got a summer of bullshits about missed transfer targets, how hard he's got the players working, etc to look forward to, so I'm sure I'll be taking out my anger on my keyboard again before too long!
In other news... Cooks have ascertained that potatoes can be sliced into small strips and fried in oil. This discovery could realise a basic, yet satisfying snack.
How many chips though? That's the key question in this imminent take over debacle that everyone chooses to overlook.
From one of the links above, lets hope the situation remains the same ( 12 years down the line )
A row between Greenwich Council and Charlton Athletic Football Club could see dreams of an extended 31,000 seater Valley Stadium delayed even further Planning consent to transform The Valley stadium into a 31,000 seater venue was given back in 2005 - but, a new row over the club's plans to build flats at the back of the site could 'derail' the entire project.
Charlton Athletic's Chief Executive Peter Varney says the flats were 'integral to the funding of the project.' The Club says the local authority refused to remove a condition which meant the new flats would have to be used by Charlton - and not sold to members of the public.
Its suggested without the sale of nine new flats at the back of the stadium the whole project would prove too expensive. "integral to the funding of the project" Peter Varney, CAFC Chief Executive 'Denied the opportunity' Peter Varney conceded they'd "received planning permission for the general east stand development." But, referring to the flats said "we do not wish to be denied the opportunity to sell the properties on a leasehold basis in the future." "When council members visited the site, I believe everyone was impressed not only by the plans, but more importantly by proposed improvements to the Lansdowne Mews roadway and road lighting." "Poor living environment" Greenwich Council who granted permission for the overall redevelopment in June 2005 said removing the conditions on the new flats would 'result in a use that is not ancillary nor environmentally compatible with the existing land use of the stadium." They suggested this "would give rise to a poor living environment by reason of poor outlook and noise and disturbance, thereby detrimental to the amenities of future occupiers."
Politically it's very different - the country and especially London is in a housing crisis. Councils are doing all they can to get out new homes as fast as they can.
Fancy telling Sadiq Khan that? He's not approving much new housing....12-18 months from now and there will be a lot of builders and developers laying people off
Getting back on track. Does no transfers or any solid rumours mean that Takeover talks are happening? Just asking.
Some clubs reveal their free signings as soon as they sign a pre-contract agreement, we always seem to wait until July 1st like Matt Taylor, so we may have to wait until then to judge if this window has been as disappointing as all the rest under RD.
That year we announced Hollands and Pritchard at the end of May who both became free agents on 1st July.
Pritchard I thought was unattached but Hollands you are right about and usual I am a big fool.
Getting back on track. Does no transfers or any solid rumours mean that Takeover talks are happening? Just asking.
IMHO no.
It could be but it doesn't mean it is. It's still early days, the play-offs haven't finished and lots of players and managers, including ours, are on holiday.
Some deals have been done and announced at other clubs but not many. /blockquote>
may be not many, but other clubs are signing players whilst we sit idly by.
To date the following clubs have signed players:
Gillingham Port vale MK Dons Peterboro x 2 Fleetwood x 2 Bury x 3 Northampton x 3
and that doesn't include 2 teams that got relegated (Coventry & Chesterfield) & one that got promoted (Sheff U) who have are signed at least 2 each.
Perhaps the 2 players in the stand for the Swindon match had got there early for the Pokeman game.
Getting back on track. Does no transfers or any solid rumours mean that Takeover talks are happening? Just asking.
IMHO no.
It could be but it doesn't mean it is. It's still early days, the play-offs haven't finished and lots of players and managers, including ours, are on holiday.
Some deals have been done and announced at other clubs but not many. /blockquote>
may be not many, but other clubs are signing players whilst we sit idly by.
To date the following clubs have signed players:
Gillingham Port vale MK Dons Peterboro x 2 Fleetwood x 2 Bury x 3 Northampton x 3
and that doesn't include 2 teams that got relegated (Coventry & Chesterfield) & one that got promoted (Sheff U) who have are signed at least 2 each.
Perhaps the 2 players in the stand for the Swindon match had got there early for the Pokeman game.
I'm no Colin but how do we know we are sitting "idly by". OK, we may find it hard to think Meire is working hard but that not the same as sitting idly by.
Every summer you do this. "panic, panic, another club have signed more players than us in May so that means we'll sign no one ever".
I have little or no faith in this regime's ability to deliver a viable squad and I suspect Tarbuck has realised he's been lied to about the budget and that the budget he does have includes all those "legacy" players but FFS it's still May.
but we were told this close season it would be different. Both KR & KM assured us that we were going to be doing some business early, hoping to sign 2 or 3 players BEFORE he went on holiday & that pre-season was also going to start a week earlier so that the players were going to be fit & ready for the start of the season - hard to do all that if you don't sign players until July. I know its late May, but whilst we wait the best players are being signed up.
but we were told this close season it would be different. Both KR & KM assured us that we were going to be doing some business early, hoping to sign 2 or 3 players BEFORE he went on holiday & that pre-season was also going to start a week earlier so that the players were going to be fit & ready for the start of the season - hard to do all that if you don't sign players until July. I know its late May, but whilst we wait the best players are being signed up.
In other news... Cooks have ascertained that potatoes can be sliced into small strips and fried in oil. This discovery could realise a basic, yet satisfying snack.
How many chips though? That's the key question in this imminent take over debacle that everyone chooses to overlook.
Yes, indeed. Value for money, chaps. I'm reminded of a troupe of young dancers. They were all siblings and their surmame was, perhaps a little unusually, Chipps. Simon, Rebecca, David and Katherine Chipps. They were known as The Four Teen Chipps. As I recall, their father was employed in the maintenance of subterranean heating systems.
From one of the links above, lets hope the situation remains the same ( 12 years down the line )
A row between Greenwich Council and Charlton Athletic Football Club could see dreams of an extended 31,000 seater Valley Stadium delayed even further Planning consent to transform The Valley stadium into a 31,000 seater venue was given back in 2005 - but, a new row over the club's plans to build flats at the back of the site could 'derail' the entire project.
Charlton Athletic's Chief Executive Peter Varney says the flats were 'integral to the funding of the project.' The Club says the local authority refused to remove a condition which meant the new flats would have to be used by Charlton - and not sold to members of the public.
....
Greenwich Council who granted permission for the overall redevelopment in June 2005 said removing the conditions on the new flats would 'result in a use that is not ancillary nor environmentally compatible with the existing land use of the stadium." They suggested this "would give rise to a poor living environment by reason of poor outlook and noise and disturbance, thereby detrimental to the amenities of future occupiers."
As far as I can remember, those flats would have had access via Lansdowne Mews, but that land's since been sold (and is where the new flats are being built).
That last quote's rather poignant considering some of the old crap Greenwich has given planning permission for since then.
If Roland sells, then it must be to owners who can afford his price, and be able to fund losses of 8-9 million pounds a year for at least the next 4-5 years if they what to get the club into the premiership.
Ummmm.... we are already losing that much per year.
I don't know what drugs you are using, but Watford and Leicester lost £100 million to get to the PL. Brighton's owner spend £200 million to get there. Leeds has lost £60 million the last 4 years and is not there yet.
The fact... and it is a fact based on recent historical data... it will take many multiples of the club purchase price to get to the PL from where we are.
Which is why I am not for the Aussie takeover. If they are struggling to raise the money to buy the club, then they sure don't have the cash to get us promoted.
Red Bull, on the other hand, has two clubs that qualified for the Champions league this year. At least we would not have to worry about whether the owners are broke. And if the rumours of not buying the ground have ANY credibility, then add "stupid" to the list for the Aussie buyers, too.
How much did Bournemouth spend to go through the divisions and to finish 8th in the PL?
Well whatever it was it'll cost us much more because now you have to compete with relegated championship sides who've just picked up 100m the season before and are now getting 30m a year in parachute payments. I genuinely don't think we're too far off (say 2 more seasons) from the relegated clubs being the championship top 3 the following season.
Couldn't bring myself to "like" this comment but I definitely agree with it. This is coming and the PL will be all but a closed shop within 5 years with the mega disparity in income combined with things like EPPP stripping the football league of any quality for any period of time. Football is shit and we timed our fall from the top table exceptionally badly.
If Roland sells, then it must be to owners who can afford his price, and be able to fund losses of 8-9 million pounds a year for at least the next 4-5 years if they what to get the club into the premiership.
Ummmm.... we are already losing that much per year.
I don't know what drugs you are using, but Watford and Leicester lost £100 million to get to the PL. Brighton's owner spend £200 million to get there. Leeds has lost £60 million the last 4 years and is not there yet.
The fact... and it is a fact based on recent historical data... it will take many multiples of the club purchase price to get to the PL from where we are.
Which is why I am not for the Aussie takeover. If they are struggling to raise the money to buy the club, then they sure don't have the cash to get us promoted.
Red Bull, on the other hand, has two clubs that qualified for the Champions league this year. At least we would not have to worry about whether the owners are broke. And if the rumours of not buying the ground have ANY credibility, then add "stupid" to the list for the Aussie buyers, too.
How much did Bournemouth spend to go through the divisions and to finish 8th in the PL?
Well whatever it was it'll cost us much more because now you have to compete with relegated championship sides who've just picked up 100m the season before and are now getting 30m a year in parachute payments. I genuinely don't think we're too far off (say 2 more seasons) from the relegated clubs being the championship top 3 the following season.
Couldn't bring myself to "like" this comment but I definitely agree with it. This is coming and the PL will be all but a closed shop within 5 years with the mega disparity in income combined with things like EPPP stripping the football league of any quality for any period of time. Football is shit and we timed our fall from the top table exceptionally badly.
In other news... Cooks have ascertained that potatoes can be sliced into small strips and fried in oil. This discovery could realise a basic, yet satisfying snack.
How many chips though? That's the key question in this imminent take over debacle that everyone chooses to overlook.
Yes, indeed. Value for money, chaps. I'm reminded of a troupe of young dancers. They were all siblings and their surmame was, perhaps a little unusually, Chipps. Simon, Rebecca, David and Katherine Chipps. They were known as The Four Teen Chipps. As I recall, their father was employed in the maintenance of subterranean heating systems.
Only a fool would want to buy Charlton at the moment. Thanks to KM we have a number of players on ridiculous contracts , who wants to take them on ? The club is worth about £1 with the ongoing losses any new owners will be saddled with. Have a good summer but don't have any expectations for next season unless we can fill the subs bench with You tubers
Yes, that's right, in that only a fool would agree to meet Roland's full asking price in that situation. Anybody else would work hard to inform Roland that they were not paying for his ridiculous mistakes.
As such the asking price would either have to be reduced by an equivalent amount and/or Roland's debts would have to be written off. The skill of any potential buyer would be in getting a compromise between Roland's demands and a realistic price. It is that which is likely to be the difficult thing to achieve IMO.
I was absolutely convinced it was going to happen a few weeks ago and now I just dont know what to think. Its all so so frustrating and meanwhile my son grows up and his childhood slips away. I despise, and I choose my words carefully, KM and RD
I am torn between desperately wanting them to sell and concern that the deal might include Duchatelet keeping the Valley. Wouldn't it be nice if it could just be a clean sale to a decent owner.
I think we should all just accept that the club's not for sale, they have learnt from their mistakes, whoever they pick as manager is the right man who we all need to give a chance to for at least the next two transfer windows.
Stop moaning, stop protesting and support the club as it could be worse.
I despatwtly want Duchatelet to sell, if he keeps the Valley that will require more protests because it's wrong, but a sale of the playing side of the club would be a positive development pretty much no matter who bought it.
A clean sale to a well offnowner would be ideal, but I'm more interested in ensuring the club continuea to exist than in an ideal starting point.
Comments
A row between Greenwich Council and Charlton Athletic Football Club could see dreams of an extended 31,000 seater Valley Stadium delayed even further
Planning consent to transform The Valley stadium into a 31,000 seater venue was given back in 2005 - but, a new row over the club's plans to build flats at the back of the site could 'derail' the entire project.
Charlton Athletic's Chief Executive Peter Varney says the flats were 'integral to the funding of the project.'
The Club says the local authority refused to remove a condition which meant the new flats would have to be used by Charlton - and not sold to members of the public.
Its suggested without the sale of nine new flats at the back of the stadium the whole project would prove too expensive.
"integral to the funding of the project"
Peter Varney, CAFC Chief Executive
'Denied the opportunity'
Peter Varney conceded they'd "received planning permission for the general east stand development." But, referring to the flats said "we do not wish to be denied the opportunity to sell the properties on a leasehold basis in the future."
"When council members visited the site, I believe everyone was impressed not only by the plans, but more importantly by proposed improvements to the Lansdowne Mews roadway and road lighting."
"Poor living environment"
Greenwich Council who granted permission for the overall redevelopment in June 2005 said removing the conditions on the new flats would 'result in a use that is not ancillary nor environmentally compatible with the existing land use of the stadium."
They suggested this "would give rise to a poor living environment by reason of poor outlook and noise and disturbance, thereby detrimental to the amenities of future occupiers."
We've got a summer of bullshits about missed transfer targets, how hard he's got the players working, etc to look forward to, so I'm sure I'll be taking out my anger on my keyboard again before too long!
Its the same as the last 4 years
I'm reminded of a troupe of young dancers. They were all siblings and their surmame was, perhaps a little unusually, Chipps. Simon, Rebecca, David and Katherine Chipps.
They were known as The Four Teen Chipps. As I recall, their father was employed in the maintenance of subterranean heating systems.
That last quote's rather poignant considering some of the old crap Greenwich has given planning permission for since then.
How sad dous that make me feel
As such the asking price would either have to be reduced by an equivalent amount and/or Roland's debts would have to be written off. The skill of any potential buyer would be in getting a compromise between Roland's demands and a realistic price. It is that which is likely to be the difficult thing to achieve IMO.
Stop moaning, stop protesting and support the club as it could be worse.
A clean sale to a well offnowner would be ideal, but I'm more interested in ensuring the club continuea to exist than in an ideal starting point.