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

The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)

13873883903923932265

Comments

  • Thank fuck them to must be sleeping Thay need to bye a phone each and call each other.
  • cafc-west said:

    DA9 said:

    Robinson said that he, Gallen and Murray I believe, all convened at the o2 on Wednesday, so it’s FACT we are moving to the peninsula, irrefutable and glaringly obvious.

    I heard something yesterday, but then again I was walking through Berkeley Square.

    Wibble

    Was it a Nightingale...?
    Unlikely, they are summer visitors from Africa (so not the sort of bird Wet Spam would be interested in obviously) and don't pitch up in the UK until April. In addition, they have unassuming brownish legs and beaks and don't have a head tuft. In that regard, much like a Robin. But not like Charlton's grotesque mashup mascot.
  • JamesSeed said:

    According to a Belgian poster on another site, Roland mentioned on a minor chat show that he was busy selling all of his football clubs.

    I'll never complain about the quality of the guests on Graham Norton or Jonathan Ross again.
    Come on CE, you cant just come on and say that and then disappear ! - makes it look like its a load of bollox.
    I answered you, take a look.

    NB I don't know why you are going on about the Peninsula, because unless I'm mistaken, there is no longer the land available to build a medium/large stadium. I can't remember the detail, but that boat sailed some years ago IIRC.
    Maybe its gone beyond that now CE, in as much as i can see how blinkered,insular and small-minded some/most fans are - its almost as if The Valley is a shrine, and is ours forever more. I cant stand it that people cant see progress, to me, its so obvious, its on our doorstep, it can only be good for the club and the fans and yet it seems most fans want to stick to their old routine , their old worship place, and are just not prepared to look at the 'bigger picture', and shout down anybody who thinks differently, - it drives me crazy tbh. To me its so obviously a move that could move us up to a new level - an opportunity to have sponsors like Citibank,HSBC,State Street instead of Betdag,Titan lifts (sorry ) and Andrews air conditioning - its just plainly obvious ffs !!!!!!!!!
    its an opportunity that i bet someone like Berylson is watching closely, especially in their situation with their ground.

    I really, really dont get it.
    Agreed, I don't think you do get it at all. I'll have one last attempt.

    THERE IS NO LONGER A PENINSULA OPTION (unless I am mistaken).
    ffs.

    'UNLESS I AM MISTAKEN' - means you dont FUCKING KNOW.
    Are you drunk ?

    I'm 99% certain I've read more than once that the land that was available no longer is.

    I've read documents saying that the option a few years back was limited to a stadium with a maximum capacity @10,000.

    This news is so old I can't be 100% sure as I have a poor memory and I don't like to say I'm 100% certain if I'm not.
    Have you read all the posts???

    This has morphed into a general discussion about the dinosaur attitude of Charlton fans generally.
    We all know/understand/appreciate/are aware that the Peninsular option *might* and i stress *might* not be available - but my gripe is with the negative attitude of fans towards any such move should it arise.
    Maybe if you had taken the time to read it fully you might have been able to come on here with a more erudite message rather than blurting out your big-i-am capital letters or accuse people of being drunk !
    If fans are against the move @The_President , then that's just the way it is. Move on.
    Try and work out why the gates are down. Maybe it's not just to do with the location? They were big before, there's no reason they can't be substantially increased again. You need to offer a decent product, a club and a team to believe in, and trams [oops, I've just blown it....]
    @JamesSeed - you've given me an open goal .... trams it is, then. Charlton was the centre of the London tram scene. The Central Repair Depot alongside the railway line to Angerstein Wharf was the main maintenance facility for the entire London Transport system. Access was via a short side turning called Felltram Way, which is still there today. As the trams were withdrawn from service they were scrapped in Penhall Road, near the Barrier. For several years after the system finally closed on 5 July 1952 the CRD remained open for the large fleet of trolleybuses, but they too went the way of the trams, being withdrawn over the period 1959-1962. The tram routes which served Charlton were the 36, 38, and 40. Another route in the vicinity was the 58 to Blackwall Tunnel via Blackwall Lane. Lastly, not a tram but nonetheless a fixed route, was the guided busway planned to shuttle between the Millenium Dome and Charlton Station during the Millenium Exhibition, but the system never worked and the rubber-tyred vehicles only operated as conventional buses during their brief period of service.

    Psst - has he gone??!!
    @GlassHalfFull Permission to use this in my book?
  • You could get The Valley to 40,000 no sweat. We'd have to become pretty successful to warrant crowds above that.

    I stand corrected, but I believe the board under Murray looked into the redevelopment but were sceptical that our gates would increase sufficently to justify it.
  • There was an obvious porky in Mrs F post ?? She would never run out of wine at her mansion because she has young men working a night shift and "treading the grapes" down at Fanny's cellar. (This is not a euphemism)

  • @JamesSeed - you're very welcome!!
  • Wow I'm glad I don't read any of the comments on this thread

  • Nice one, Mr P!! Trams put a smile on every face ....

    A bonus :
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc9gtJndKE4&t=29s

    Wonderful piece of film making.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Addickted said:

    To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.

    As a Luddite dinosaur, I don’t think he does in any way shape or form. Clubs move grounds primarily for two reasons 1. they have outgrown over a consistent period their existing one or 2. their old ground has fallen into such disrepair or in need of modernisation that it would cost too much money to address without further benefits.

    Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.

    In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.

    Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.

    Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.

    This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.

    What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.

    And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.

    Got that off my chest :-)
    Post of the year. Promote, promote!
  • Addickted said:

    Addickted said:

    Addickted said:

    To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.

    As a Luddite dinosaur, I don’t think he does in any way shape or form. Clubs move grounds primarily for two reasons 1. they have outgrown over a consistent period their existing one or 2. their old ground has fallen into such disrepair or in need of modernisation that it would cost too much money to address without further benefits.

    Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.

    In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.

    Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.

    Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.

    This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.

    What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.

    And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.

    Got that off my chest :-)
    Can't argue with any of that.

    However, I felt the point that @The_President was making if that we want to successfully compete at the very highest level of football then it's unlikely that The Valley would be able to support that without massive re-development and the subsequent investment in local infra structure to support 40K fans turning up three times a month.

    Thankfully, the likes of Red Bull won't be our new owners and therefore the whole argument is hypothetical.
    Massive redevelopment and investment in local infrastructure is also required at Morden Wharf. The spivs identified a timescale of eight or nine years in 2012-13 (in part because of planning and land ownership issues) in a process that hasn’t even started - nobody is moving to the peninsula in the foreseeable future, whether a move has any merits or not.

    The spiv ownership collapsed in part because it was not clear that a peninsula scheme with a stadium could ever be delivered. Hard nosed major investors looked at it and walked away because they were not persuaded it could be stacked up.
    I'm sure there are more sites that are viable rather than just the peninsula though.
    Yes, we could move into Wembley, become RB London and have big crowds and trophies.

    That would be OK for the President.

    It wouldn't be ok for me.

    There just isn't a business case for moving to a new stadium in SE London now or in the near future.

    The resale value of the valley land wouldn't cover the costs of a new ground and the increased income potential could more easily be achieved by rebuilding the Valley.

    I'm not saying we can never leave but the new has to be a significant benefit above the current to make it viable or justifiable.

    More importantly, it just ain't happening.

    Let's cross that bridge when and if we ever get to it.

    We haven't even got rid of Duchatelet yet.

    Keep your eye on the prize.
    Thank you Sir Henry Irvine. I now have hotel California running around my brain.
  • Mrkinski said:

    Thank the Lord - our resident President has gone to bed.

    No I havnt, I've been watching Monty Python on YouTube and walking around talking like Michael Palin.
  • edited February 2018
    Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?
  • Surely most of the income generated in the Premier league is in the tv deals? Unless you are competing at the very top level (man u, man c etc) then the size of the stadium doesn't matter. So at no point in the foreseeable future do we need to move.
    You could also argue that West Ham's recent move has ripped the soul out of that club.
    That said I wouldn't want an owner who would look to settle for things as they are League 1 / lower end Championship club because financially that isn't sustainable.
  • Scoham said:

    JamesSeed said:

    Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?

    Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml

    image
    Scoham said:

    JamesSeed said:

    Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?

    Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml

    image
    Scoham said:

    JamesSeed said:

    Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?

    Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml

    image
    Where's the tower block ??? Fake news.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Scoham said:

    JamesSeed said:

    Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?

    Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml

    image
    Scoham said:

    JamesSeed said:

    Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?

    Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml

    image
    Scoham said:

    JamesSeed said:

    Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?

    Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml

    image
    Where's the tower block ??? Fake news.
    Didn't we have plans for a bowling alley (Got knocked back?) and Bartrams as it is now was open daytimes and evenings but didn't get the trade. Although I used it, when I lived in Charlton it was nearly always empty. Which is why imo after seeing what the owner had done in St Truiden is was never going to work.
  • Can the East Stand go any higher with those houses that have been built behind it?
  • Supporters and numbers that’s my game !
    We’d have to be knocking on the champions league door every season forever to sustain crowds above 30k imo
    We just don’t have it , the floaters will float in initially and float back out as it all becomes a bit boring and samey to those not dyed in the wool .
    Our home numbers dwindled towards the last few seasons of Prem football yes it wasn’t the most riveting .
    I believe no matter how successful we are and I’m up for someone coming in and buying Messi , Ronaldo , Kermorgant installing SCP etc and winning the Prem , Champions League etc and we’d only need a decent facelift of The Valley to get the capacity up a few thousand .
    40k would not be needed unless we wanted 10k of away fans to fill up the ground .
    More importantly would this lead to a consistent decent away following , probably not .

    I’m reluctant to get dragged into this bollocks but I’m not so sure.

    Ok here goes. Should it ever happen that a Charlton team gets back to the Premier League we already know that filling The Valley as is will not be a problem. Up the ante a bit to include a Charlton team consistently doing well over a number of years and the 27,000 becomes consolidated with local yoof aligning with us rather than with the other options. The fan base genuinely grows. Up the ante yet again to those mega rich owners who bring top four football with all that brings then it’s certain that The Valley capacity would no longer be adequate. In fact it would hinder the club. I’m sure some small capacity increase would be possible but we already know that would be very difficult and impossible for a bigger increase. I’m guessing that pulling down the current stadium and starting again would be the only option to push up the crowds to levels worth the effort and cost. I doubt that would be possible on the current site. You can also add to the mix the massive local increase in housing which would swell local interest and crowd potential for a successful premier league club.

    Now I realise it’s all bollocks but I just want to say. Never say never. As Henry as already said we’ve reinvented ourselves before and we probably will need to again if we want to thrive and prosper.



  • iaitch said:

    Can the East Stand go any higher with those houses that have been built behind it?

    I don't think
    it can, I remember it had to stay below garden level. Also remember having problem at ground level, hence the walkway in front of the stand.
  • Hasn’t Airman already told us previously that evacuation issues would now be a problem in doing very much with the east and Jimmy Seed stand because of the housing developments.
  • edited February 2018
    Here's me thinking I live in another world, i then read the last few pages of this thread
  • clb74 said:

    Here's me thinking I live in another world, i then read the last few pages of this thread

    You do.
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!