Any chance the mods could adopt the same approach as with post match comments - when those comments from people who were actually there are made bold. Could comments that have some real relevance to the "imminent takeover" be emboldened...? Would save a lot of time for those only looking for some kind of update on the situation.
In truth Westy, if you are looking for takeover news or updates, here isn’t the place to look. The Airman has said there is creditable evidence that a takeover may be happening and perhaps quite soon and I have no reason whatsoever not to believe him. This being the case then by now, non-disclosure agreements would have been signed and hence no news. The takeover may well fail for a variety of reasons or go ahead, that being the case a whole new thread of “It’s Happening” or “It’s Scuppered” will appear. Until then everything else is just noise. Just enjoy looking at pictures of Henners.
Let’s face it, this thread is going to carry on for the next dozen owners. As soon as we get a new one the race will be on to hate them and then we’ll be preying for another one.
Don't try to normalise Roland.
I’m not! When Richard Murray ran out of money we couldn’t wait to get a new owner in then when Slater ran out of money we couldn’t wait to get a new owner in.
The biggest difference, ironically, is that Roland hasn’t run out of money so he is, clearly, far from normal.
Anything short of a billionaire spend thrift with a desire to win the Champions League and there will be a fan (or fans) somewhere that will demand that we sign another striker or don’t sell another academy prospect. This is the way of football, and it’s not just at a charlton either.
We’ll have any new owner until he stops spending money and then we will have another one please, then another one, then another one.
You don't need a billionaire spendthrift. With the money that RD has spent since Jan 2014 he could have got us promoted to the Prem instead of getting us relegated to League 1. Unfortunately, because he sees himself as a visionary, he thought that he knew better so appointed various incompetents to make the major decisions and instead that money has been mostly squandered. The cycle does not have to be repeated.
In all fairness he is not the first football club owner that has run up debts of this size and failed to get into the Premier League. I also doubt that £50m would be enough these days. Most of the relegated teams have a £100m squad and £90m over three years parachute money.
Sadly your suggestion that £50m is enough to ensure promotion makes you sound like you think you are cleverer than all those that have failed with more money - something that is, exactly, what Roland has done. I know you didn't mean it like that but it does explain how there is so much debt outside of the Premier League with so many clubs aiming to get in - and there are only 20 places available and only three a season are up for grabs.
I might have been leaning on the side of excessive capital but let us not forget that there was a growing call for Curbishley to go as we wanted to push on back in the day. Right now all we want is Roland gone but soon enough we will be demanding, quite rightly, to get out of this crappy division, then once established in the Championship if the, then current, owner can't afford the (my best guess) £150m to get us promoted (without being very lucky or, you know, cleverer than everyone else) then this thread will be getting excited about a potential wealthier owner. I was never saying that I had a problem with it, just replying to someone that was talking about this discussion never seeming to stop - I don't think it will. There are already several huge takeover threads on here and I'm sure this won't be the last one.
Still only two days until the end of the week which was when VOTV said the takeover should (or was it could) be completed.
Let’s face it, this thread is going to carry on for the next dozen owners. As soon as we get a new one the race will be on to hate them and then we’ll be preying for another one.
Don't try to normalise Roland.
I’m not! When Richard Murray ran out of money we couldn’t wait to get a new owner in then when Slater ran out of money we couldn’t wait to get a new owner in.
The biggest difference, ironically, is that Roland hasn’t run out of money so he is, clearly, far from normal.
Anything short of a billionaire spend thrift with a desire to win the Champions League and there will be a fan (or fans) somewhere that will demand that we sign another striker or don’t sell another academy prospect. This is the way of football, and it’s not just at a charlton either.
We’ll have any new owner until he stops spending money and then we will have another one please, then another one, then another one.
With the money that RD has spent since Jan 2014 he could have got us promoted to the Prem
A bold quote. I'd be inclined to say that he could have run us a lot better, but getting to the premier league is now a whole different kettle of fish. If it was as easy as that, the likes of Leeds, Sheffield x 2, Forest, Fulham, Brum, Blackburn, Bolton, Wigan,Villa,Wolves,Norwich,QPR...........would have done it years ago!
Indeed. You need to be well-run and well-managed as well as well-financed, that's what's enabled the likes of Burnley, Huddersfield, Watford and Brighton to make it into the Premier League, and it's what's enabled Sheffield United to be sitting only 2 points behind a Wolves side with a budget that many Premier League clubs would be envious of.
When Roland arrived, we had the manager in place and we had a squad that had finished 9th the previous season and needed only minimal investment to become a proper Promotion Challenger. 7 of the players Roland inherited have subsequently appeared in the Premier League, Michael Morrison has been Player of the Year at Birmingham.
In my opinion, we were 3 or 4 players short of being a promotion contender when Roland arrived. He has definitely wasted enough money to comfortably cover the cost of at least that.
Any chance the mods could adopt the same approach as with post match comments - when those comments from people who were actually there are made bold. Could comments that have some real relevance to the "imminent takeover" be emboldened...? Would save a lot of time for those only looking for some kind of update on the situation.
...........'Until then everything else is just noise. Just enjoy looking at pictures of Henners'.
Any chance the mods could adopt the same approach as with post match comments - when those comments from people who were actually there are made bold. Could comments that have some real relevance to the "imminent takeover" be emboldened...? Would save a lot of time for those only looking for some kind of update on the situation.
In truth Westy, if you are looking for takeover news or updates, here isn’t the place to look. The Airman has said there is creditable evidence that a takeover may be happening and perhaps quite soon and I have no reason whatsoever not to believe him. This being the case then by now, non-disclosure agreements would have been signed and hence no news. The takeover may well fail for a variety of reasons or go ahead, that being the case a whole new thread of “It’s Happening” or “It’s Scuppered” will appear. Until then everything else is just noise. Just enjoy looking at pictures of Henners.
I always thought an NDA was a commitment not to make public any information the signatories find out as they go through the accounts and other stuff. It does not prevent signatories themselves or third parties revealing who has signed an NDA. Am I wrong?
There may also be a confidentiality clause or just that neither party wishes to make it public and so agree nto to discuss publically.
That way neither side loses face if it falls through.
Any chance the mods could adopt the same approach as with post match comments - when those comments from people who were actually there are made bold. Could comments that have some real relevance to the "imminent takeover" be emboldened...? Would save a lot of time for those only looking for some kind of update on the situation.
In truth Westy, if you are looking for takeover news or updates, here isn’t the place to look. The Airman has said there is creditable evidence that a takeover may be happening and perhaps quite soon and I have no reason whatsoever not to believe him. This being the case then by now, non-disclosure agreements would have been signed and hence no news. The takeover may well fail for a variety of reasons or go ahead, that being the case a whole new thread of “It’s Happening” or “It’s Scuppered” will appear. Until then everything else is just noise. Just enjoy looking at pictures of Henners.
I always thought an NDA was a commitment not to make public any information the signatories find out as they go through the accounts and other stuff. It does not prevent signatories themselves or third parties revealing who has signed an NDA. Am I wrong?
Just depends on the terms - it's ostensibly a contract so they can just put in a provision that no signatories can be disclosed by any other signatories of the NDA. Stuff leaks no matter how tight the terms though.
I've worked for 2 companies where sales have broken down, and in each case the potential buyer blamed the seller leaking the story for the break down, both times this was just an excuse. If the buyer wants to buy and the seller wants to sell, no leaks will derail the process.
This focus on KM is misplaced. She is obviously a very capable, although inexperienced, woman with many attributes that many businesses would be very happy to have on board. She was only appointed to the role because of some personal/family connection. The one appointment that RD got wrong, again and again, and the one that really scuppered his network model idea of running several football clubs in European leagues by recycling players and managers around, is that of first team head coach. If he had committed to hiring top tier experienced head coaches, from Europe or the UK, with a successful track record who could bring in their own coaching, medical and support staff, I feel sure his experience of owning Charlton would not have turned into such a nightmare. RD is solely to blame for those appointments. If he had appointed a proper football CEO with football experience you could apportion some of the blame to that CEO. The major damage to Charlton over the last 4 years has been the result of shit football manager appointments (jury still out on Robinson) not an inexperienced CEO.
Fortunately, a professional football club is not like other businesses. You can't do a "Ratners" on a football club. Much damage has been done to the 'Charlton' brand over the last 4 years or so but the fact remains they are still a professional football club in the third tier of the English football leagues, two promotions away from the Premiership, owning their own Premiership ready stadium and a Premiership standard training ground, with a hardcore fan base (although admittedly severely reduced), located in a part of London that will benefit from improved transport links and many new homes in the near future.
(Apologies if someone has already made this point..)
Disagree: RD's whole strategy is misplaced in the first place, thus whomever is coach will fail because
a) budgets are restrained unrealistically, rigid and self defeating b) players aren't commodities - network players simply don't settle well in other leagues/countries automatically, some don't even like different regions of England as we well know.. c) the first two would prevent any coach of decent level joining the club
Thus it is Il Duche's execution of his strategy before even hiring a coach that is the main flaw
To make a Network work, well go up the road to Watford and take a look. Perhaps if you are willing to invest sensibly in players you will have a chance, and then if you are lucky you may get some 2nd or 3rd chance players in the Network.
If you want to properly undertake the player farm approach which I assume is what you are getting it, not really sure the Network helps one iota, but lets think about that for a moment.
In that instance with a properly funded expanded academy, fans onside for the long haul, a first team that was competitive in the Championship, along with a pragmatic transfer budget to keep you at that level, then decent coaches who were proven and properly resourced, perhaps. But KM proved she is incapable of helping with that journey on a number of fronts.
Looking forward, my own personal view is that Charlton's USP for success in a very competitive game is its unique fan and club relationship.
With the fans fully invested with some kind of ownership we could be filling the ground eventually, and make best use of the resources we have as a club.
The current owners have taken that process so far in the wrong direction now, perhaps irreparably, perhaps for a generation, that any new owners will have to be very radical in their approach.
Let’s face it, this thread is going to carry on for the next dozen owners. As soon as we get a new one the race will be on to hate them and then we’ll be preying for another one.
Don't try to normalise Roland.
I’m not! When Richard Murray ran out of money we couldn’t wait to get a new owner in then when Slater ran out of money we couldn’t wait to get a new owner in.
The biggest difference, ironically, is that Roland hasn’t run out of money so he is, clearly, far from normal.
Anything short of a billionaire spend thrift with a desire to win the Champions League and there will be a fan (or fans) somewhere that will demand that we sign another striker or don’t sell another academy prospect. This is the way of football, and it’s not just at a charlton either.
We’ll have any new owner until he stops spending money and then we will have another one please, then another one, then another one.
You don't need a billionaire spendthrift. With the money that RD has spent since Jan 2014 he could have got us promoted to the Prem instead of getting us relegated to League 1. Unfortunately, because he sees himself as a visionary, he thought that he knew better so appointed various incompetents to make the major decisions and instead that money has been mostly squandered. The cycle does not have to be repeated.
In all fairness he is not the first football club owner that has run up debts of this size and failed to get into the Premier League. I also doubt that £50m would be enough these days. Most of the relegated teams have a £100m squad and £90m over three years parachute money.
Sadly your suggestion that £50m is enough to ensure promotion makes you sound like you think you are cleverer than all those that have failed with more money - something that is, exactly, what Roland has done. I know you didn't mean it like that but it does explain how there is so much debt outside of the Premier League with so many clubs aiming to get in - and there are only 20 places available.
I might have been leaning on the side of excessive capital but let us not forget that there was a growing call for Curbishley to go as we wanted to push on back in the day. Right now all we want is Roland gone but soon enough we will be demanding, quite rightly, to get out of this crappy division, then once established in the Championship if the, then current, owner can't afford the (my best guess) £150m to get us promoted (without being very lucky or, you know, cleverer than everyone else) then this thread will be getting excited about a potential wealthier owner. I was never saying that I had a problem with it, just replying to someone that was talking about this discussion never seeming to stop - I don't think it will. There are already several huge takeover threads on here and I'm sure this won't be the last one.
Still only two days until the end of the week which was when VOTV said the takeover should (or was it could) be completed.
Happy Days!
I don't think I said that £50m was enough to ensure promotion. I said that it could have got promotion not should have. If your point about parachute payments was correct then the relegated teams would immediately get promoted. We ourselves know that this isn't the case. Most teams that come down find themselves in a worse financial position than those that they are joining, due to overspending on players and their contracts while they were in the Prem. It tends only to be the well-run clubs that return immediately as we did in 2000 and Burnley did more recently, or bigger clubs like Newcastle who are simply out of place in the Championship.
I have a bad feeling. I hope I'm wrong as I'm not sure I could take another excited announcement followed by nothing. It would be too Charlton for even Charlton.
I think the point Red is trying to make is that appointing untried, untested coaches or managers will invariably lead to failure regardless. The most important position at any football club is first team coach. You appoint the very best available not take punts on cheap albeit enthusiastic alternatives. We have under RD appointed a catalogue of punts and documented failures. What you get is more failure. At least Robinson has a bit of a track record at this level.
What I believe is that there has been movement towards some kind of deal and that due diligence has been happening. However due diligence may have unearthed sticking points, and/or the price may be an issue in a gazumping/gazundering sense. My suspicion is that the £50 million debt to Staprix is a problem. Roland wants back what he paid for the club plus all his expenditure since then so he can exit his experiment scot free. Roland does not (it seems) want to bear the burden of the three years of running the club, and pay the price for astonishingly bad management in terms of player deals and the price of relegation on his watch. Plucking a figure from the air somewhat, I would suggest that for a loss making football club, with the fixed assets of the ground and the training ground as the benefit, the price ought to be no more than 25million and the purchaser takes on the ex director and present contract liabilities. It is pure speculation on my part but I think Roland will say he sustained the club and deserves his money back, but purchasers want to pay a realistic price based on what has happened under the Duchatelet ownership. Whether an agreement can be brokered by this Everton geezer is very much an unknown, and for that reason I don't believe anything will happen anytime soon. It is only playing success that fends off return trips to Belgium.
So Roland buys a classic car and then runs it into the ground to the extent that the engine needs replacing just to return it to the state that it was in when he bought it. He comes to sell the car but now the bodywork is f##ked too. Does he get the original cost plus the cost of the engine repairs? No, he doesn't because of the state of the bodywork means that it is worth less than the price at which he bought it. Get real Roland. Why should anyone else pay for your failures?
So Roland buys a classic car and then runs it into the ground to the extent that the engine needs replacing just to return it to the state that it was in when he bought it. He comes to sell the car but now the bodywork is f##ked too. Does he get the original cost plus the cost of the engine repairs? No, he doesn't because of the state of the bodywork means that it is worth less than the price at which he bought it. Get real Roland. Why should anyone else pay for your failures?
I Just hope when Roland finally does go, whenever that is, he ends up taking a 'huge bath' financially as a reward for honking off an entire fan base for the last four years.
So Roland buys a classic car and then runs it into the ground to the extent that the engine needs replacing just to return it to the state that it was in when he bought it. He comes to sell the car but now the bodywork is f##ked too. Does he get the original cost plus the cost of the engine repairs? No, he doesn't because of the state of the bodywork means that it is worth less than the price at which he bought it. Get real Roland. Why should anyone else pay for your failures?
All of that is true unless the car is so desirable that sooner or later someone will pay the price for it and/or if he is quite happy to keep the car and throw just enough money at it to drive is one weekend a month.
The sad truth is that when dealing with people that have so much money you can't force them to do anything they don't want to do. He could easily decide to sell all the players, The Valley and the training ground take a hit and get on with his life without the money he lost have any, real, consequence to him at all. I would image that a fair comparison would be if one of us owned an old car that we don't drive but we paid £2k for it and we have been offered £50 for it. My Mum has a BMW on her drive that she is never going to drive again and because no one is willing to pay her what she thinks it's worth it will sit there depreciating until she dies at which point I suspect I'll have to pay someone to tow it away. That is so illogical and irresponsible but my Mum doesn't need the £350 she has been offered for it enough to back down. She is not worth £800m.
I completely agree with you about your logic I just don't think that Roland, necessary, thinks like us.
I think the point Red is trying to make is that appointing untried, untested coaches or managers will invariably lead to failure regardless. The most important position at any football club is first team coach. You appoint the very best available not take punts on cheap albeit enthusiastic alternatives. We have under RD appointed a catalogue of punts and documented failures. What you get is more failure. At least Robinson has a bit of a track record at this level.
I don't think either Powell or Riga, and possibly even Peters could be called untried, untested coaches, but none were effectively supported, and all 'failed' /weren't retained.
I really don't understand the panic that it may have collapsed. Nowhere did the report say it would be done by now. I don't care how long it takes as long as it happens.
So Roland buys a classic car and then runs it into the ground to the extent that the engine needs replacing just to return it to the state that it was in when he bought it. He comes to sell the car but now the bodywork is f##ked too. Does he get the original cost plus the cost of the engine repairs? No, he doesn't because of the state of the bodywork means that it is worth less than the price at which he bought it. Get real Roland. Why should anyone else pay for your failures?
All of that is true unless the car is so desirable that sooner or later someone will pay the price for it and/or if he is quite happy to keep the car and throw just enough money at it to drive is one weekend a month.
The sad truth is that when dealing with people that have so much money you can't force them to do anything they don't want to do. He could easily decide to sell all the players, The Valley and the training ground take a hit and get on with his life without the money he lost have any, real, consequence to him at all. I would image that a fair comparison would be if one of us owned an old car that we don't drive but we paid £2k for it and we have been offered £50 for it. My Mum has a BMW on her drive that she is never going to drive again and because no one is willing to pay her what she thinks it's worth it will sit there depreciating until she dies at which point I suspect I'll have to pay someone to tow it away. That is so illogical and irresponsible but my Mum doesn't need the £350 she has been offered for it enough to back down. She is not worth £800m.
I completely agree with you about your logic I just don't think that Roland, necessary, thinks like us.
The problem with that argument is that the assets are worth more with the football club as a going concern. He isn't going to get the money he's wasted back easily from selling CAFC, but he'll get even less by conducting a fire sale of assets, as he is bound to have worked out. It's of no advantage to him to do so, even supposing there is a buyer for the land without planning consent for development.
Meanwhile, the debt ticks up. You can stall it for a while on relegation by selling off the better players and you can add some value to the business by getting promoted back to the Championship, but the costs of staying there will offset the extra revenue. The outcome is more and more debt and less and less chance of recovering it in a sale.
I think the point Red is trying to make is that appointing untried, untested coaches or managers will invariably lead to failure regardless. The most important position at any football club is first team coach. You appoint the very best available not take punts on cheap albeit enthusiastic alternatives. We have under RD appointed a catalogue of punts and documented failures. What you get is more failure. At least Robinson has a bit of a track record at this level.
I don't think either Powell or Riga, and possibly even Peters could be called untried, untested coaches, but none were effectively supported, and all 'failed' /weren't retained.
Even at the point where Powell was dismissed he was hardly experienced. As for Peeters and Riga i would suggest that both were punts. Massive punts.
So Roland buys a classic car and then runs it into the ground to the extent that the engine needs replacing just to return it to the state that it was in when he bought it. He comes to sell the car but now the bodywork is f##ked too. Does he get the original cost plus the cost of the engine repairs? No, he doesn't because of the state of the bodywork means that it is worth less than the price at which he bought it. Get real Roland. Why should anyone else pay for your failures?
All of that is true unless the car is so desirable that sooner or later someone will pay the price for it and/or if he is quite happy to keep the car and throw just enough money at it to drive is one weekend a month.
The sad truth is that when dealing with people that have so much money you can't force them to do anything they don't want to do. He could easily decide to sell all the players, The Valley and the training ground take a hit and get on with his life without the money he lost have any, real, consequence to him at all. I would image that a fair comparison would be if one of us owned an old car that we don't drive but we paid £2k for it and we have been offered £50 for it. My Mum has a BMW on her drive that she is never going to drive again and because no one is willing to pay her what she thinks it's worth it will sit there depreciating until she dies at which point I suspect I'll have to pay someone to tow it away. That is so illogical and irresponsible but my Mum doesn't need the £350 she has been offered for it enough to back down. She is not worth £800m.
I completely agree with you about your logic I just don't think that Roland, necessary, thinks like us.
The problem with that argument is that the assets are worth more with the football club as a going concern. He isn't going to get the money he's wasted back easily from selling CAFC, but he'll get even less by conducting a fire sale of assets, as he is bound to have worked out. It's of no advantage to him to do so, even supposing there is a buyer for the land without planning consent for development.
Meanwhile, the debt ticks up. You can stall it for a while on relegation by selling off the better players and you can add some value to the business by getting promoted back to the Championship, but the costs of staying there will offset the extra revenue. The outcome is more and more debt and less and less chance of recovering it in a sale.
You talk as someone who knows how Roland's mind works. Kingshill Addicks point is NOBODY knows how Roland's mind works. So however illogical something seems,it's more than likely fine and dandy in Roland's book!
I think the point Red is trying to make is that appointing untried, untested coaches or managers will invariably lead to failure regardless. The most important position at any football club is first team coach. You appoint the very best available not take punts on cheap albeit enthusiastic alternatives. We have under RD appointed a catalogue of punts and documented failures. What you get is more failure. At least Robinson has a bit of a track record at this level.
I don't think either Powell or Riga, and possibly even Peters could be called untried, untested coaches, but none were effectively supported, and all 'failed' /weren't retained.
Even at the point where Powell was dismissed he was hardly experienced. As for Peeters and Riga i would suggest that both were punts. Massive punts.
I've missed out on a whole evening of posts having just spent the entire evening driving back from Devon.
Was hoping a little more detail had leaked out but seems not.
Based on the likelihood that it's the Aussies we're talking about just how certain are we that their ownership would be a safe pair of hands ? All the talk of not having enough funds have persisted although I guess that at least must have changed.
I presume we know their business model and we know that they have ambition but is that enough ?
I would hate us to jump out of the frying pan straight into the fire.
Just saying.
These are my thoughts exactly.
What exactly is their business model?
Being overlooked hugely in the optimism of seeing this ownership go. The economics of football ownership particularly at this level are crazy in 2017....for all the bad under this mob we are a going concern and at least seem to have turned a corner football wise with more apparent autonomy with a manager who knows this league and some good signings in Fosu, Holmes etc whilst the CEO hasn't spoken publicly for yonks.
Many are praising these new speculated owners without knowing anything about them, their competence,their resources, their ambition and their agenda.
We would do well to revisit the takeover thread from 3 years ago when this mob rocked up and the same jubilation was being pumped all over the message board due to the relief of being able to see a glimmer of optimism after the Cash went with Jiminez and Slater.
IF a takeover even happens the new lot will have a lot to prove and whilst they should be supported and I hope we see a return to bumper crowds the scepticism will be their now for me for a good while until their is evidence that we've not gone from a bad situation to another or worse.
I am included in this, but I think so many people are so f***** off with the vermin the fans are of the view the next board cannot be any worse than the current ones and are prepared to sit back and wait.
So Roland buys a classic car and then runs it into the ground to the extent that the engine needs replacing just to return it to the state that it was in when he bought it. He comes to sell the car but now the bodywork is f##ked too. Does he get the original cost plus the cost of the engine repairs? No, he doesn't because of the state of the bodywork means that it is worth less than the price at which he bought it. Get real Roland. Why should anyone else pay for your failures?
All of that is true unless the car is so desirable that sooner or later someone will pay the price for it and/or if he is quite happy to keep the car and throw just enough money at it to drive is one weekend a month.
The sad truth is that when dealing with people that have so much money you can't force them to do anything they don't want to do. He could easily decide to sell all the players, The Valley and the training ground take a hit and get on with his life without the money he lost have any, real, consequence to him at all. I would image that a fair comparison would be if one of us owned an old car that we don't drive but we paid £2k for it and we have been offered £50 for it. My Mum has a BMW on her drive that she is never going to drive again and because no one is willing to pay her what she thinks it's worth it will sit there depreciating until she dies at which point I suspect I'll have to pay someone to tow it away. That is so illogical and irresponsible but my Mum doesn't need the £350 she has been offered for it enough to back down. She is not worth £800m.
I completely agree with you about your logic I just don't think that Roland, necessary, thinks like us.
The problem with that argument is that the assets are worth more with the football club as a going concern. He isn't going to get the money he's wasted back easily from selling CAFC, but he'll get even less by conducting a fire sale of assets, as he is bound to have worked out. It's of no advantage to him to do so, even supposing there is a buyer for the land without planning consent for development.
Meanwhile, the debt ticks up. You can stall it for a while on relegation by selling off the better players and you can add some value to the business by getting promoted back to the Championship, but the costs of staying there will offset the extra revenue. The outcome is more and more debt and less and less chance of recovering it in a sale.
You talk as someone who knows how Roland's mind works. Kingshill Addicks point is NOBODY knows how Roland's mind works. So however illogical something seems,it's more than likely fine and dandy in Roland's book!
While the workings of this man's mind may be a mystery to us all, I suspect endlessly losing millions of pounds is not something he enjoys and eventually the penny will drop. He has to cut his losses at some point, and that means selling the club. Eventually.
So Roland buys a classic car and then runs it into the ground to the extent that the engine needs replacing just to return it to the state that it was in when he bought it. He comes to sell the car but now the bodywork is f##ked too. Does he get the original cost plus the cost of the engine repairs? No, he doesn't because of the state of the bodywork means that it is worth less than the price at which he bought it. Get real Roland. Why should anyone else pay for your failures?
All of that is true unless the car is so desirable that sooner or later someone will pay the price for it and/or if he is quite happy to keep the car and throw just enough money at it to drive is one weekend a month.
The sad truth is that when dealing with people that have so much money you can't force them to do anything they don't want to do. He could easily decide to sell all the players, The Valley and the training ground take a hit and get on with his life without the money he lost have any, real, consequence to him at all. I would image that a fair comparison would be if one of us owned an old car that we don't drive but we paid £2k for it and we have been offered £50 for it. My Mum has a BMW on her drive that she is never going to drive again and because no one is willing to pay her what she thinks it's worth it will sit there depreciating until she dies at which point I suspect I'll have to pay someone to tow it away. That is so illogical and irresponsible but my Mum doesn't need the £350 she has been offered for it enough to back down. She is not worth £800m.
I completely agree with you about your logic I just don't think that Roland, necessary, thinks like us.
The problem with that argument is that the assets are worth more with the football club as a going concern. He isn't going to get the money he's wasted back easily from selling CAFC, but he'll get even less by conducting a fire sale of assets, as he is bound to have worked out. It's of no advantage to him to do so, even supposing there is a buyer for the land without planning consent for development.
Meanwhile, the debt ticks up. You can stall it for a while on relegation by selling off the better players and you can add some value to the business by getting promoted back to the Championship, but the costs of staying there will offset the extra revenue. The outcome is more and more debt and less and less chance of recovering it in a sale.
You talk as someone who knows how Roland's mind works. Kingshill Addicks point is NOBODY knows how Roland's mind works. So however illogical something seems,it's more than likely fine and dandy in Roland's book!
If no one can know Roland's mind, how do you know what would be find and dandy in his book?
I think the point Red is trying to make is that appointing untried, untested coaches or managers will invariably lead to failure regardless. The most important position at any football club is first team coach. You appoint the very best available not take punts on cheap albeit enthusiastic alternatives. We have under RD appointed a catalogue of punts and documented failures. What you get is more failure. At least Robinson has a bit of a track record at this level.
I don't think either Powell or Riga, and possibly even Peters could be called untried, untested coaches, but none were effectively supported, and all 'failed' /weren't retained.
Even at the point where Powell was dismissed he was hardly experienced. As for Peeters and Riga i would suggest that both were punts. Massive punts.
So Roland buys a classic car and then runs it into the ground to the extent that the engine needs replacing just to return it to the state that it was in when he bought it. He comes to sell the car but now the bodywork is f##ked too. Does he get the original cost plus the cost of the engine repairs? No, he doesn't because of the state of the bodywork means that it is worth less than the price at which he bought it. Get real Roland. Why should anyone else pay for your failures?
All of that is true unless the car is so desirable that sooner or later someone will pay the price for it and/or if he is quite happy to keep the car and throw just enough money at it to drive is one weekend a month.
The sad truth is that when dealing with people that have so much money you can't force them to do anything they don't want to do. He could easily decide to sell all the players, The Valley and the training ground take a hit and get on with his life without the money he lost have any, real, consequence to him at all. I would image that a fair comparison would be if one of us owned an old car that we don't drive but we paid £2k for it and we have been offered £50 for it. My Mum has a BMW on her drive that she is never going to drive again and because no one is willing to pay her what she thinks it's worth it will sit there depreciating until she dies at which point I suspect I'll have to pay someone to tow it away. That is so illogical and irresponsible but my Mum doesn't need the £350 she has been offered for it enough to back down. She is not worth £800m.
I completely agree with you about your logic I just don't think that Roland, necessary, thinks like us.
The problem with that argument is that the assets are worth more with the football club as a going concern. He isn't going to get the money he's wasted back easily from selling CAFC, but he'll get even less by conducting a fire sale of assets, as he is bound to have worked out. It's of no advantage to him to do so, even supposing there is a buyer for the land without planning consent for development.
Meanwhile, the debt ticks up. You can stall it for a while on relegation by selling off the better players and you can add some value to the business by getting promoted back to the Championship, but the costs of staying there will offset the extra revenue. The outcome is more and more debt and less and less chance of recovering it in a sale.
You talk as someone who knows how Roland's mind works. Kingshill Addicks point is NOBODY knows how Roland's mind works. So however illogical something seems,it's more than likely fine and dandy in Roland's book!
If no one can know Roland's mind, how do you know what would be find and dandy in his book?
I think the point Red is trying to make is that appointing untried, untested coaches or managers will invariably lead to failure regardless. The most important position at any football club is first team coach. You appoint the very best available not take punts on cheap albeit enthusiastic alternatives. We have under RD appointed a catalogue of punts and documented failures. What you get is more failure. At least Robinson has a bit of a track record at this level.
I don't think either Powell or Riga, and possibly even Peters could be called untried, untested coaches, but none were effectively supported, and all 'failed' /weren't retained.
Even at the point where Powell was dismissed he was hardly experienced. As for Peeters and Riga i would suggest that both were punts. Massive punts.
And just in case this thread is getting a little frustrating, a funny shaped vegetable (or is it a fruit? anyway we can all have a good ole CL argument over that one!)
I think the point Red is trying to make is that appointing untried, untested coaches or managers will invariably lead to failure regardless. The most important position at any football club is first team coach. You appoint the very best available not take punts on cheap albeit enthusiastic alternatives. We have under RD appointed a catalogue of punts and documented failures. What you get is more failure. At least Robinson has a bit of a track record at this level.
I don't think either Powell or Riga, and possibly even Peters could be called untried, untested coaches, but none were effectively supported, and all 'failed' /weren't retained.
Even at the point where Powell was dismissed he was hardly experienced. As for Peeters and Riga i would suggest that both were punts. Massive punts.
Personally I think Roland is a massive punt.
Oxford punt ?
I prefer berk. Purely because its usage became so common. It is, of course, rhyming slang. Berkeley Hunt being the full version. Anyway, Roland is a berk.
Comments
Sadly your suggestion that £50m is enough to ensure promotion makes you sound like you think you are cleverer than all those that have failed with more money - something that is, exactly, what Roland has done. I know you didn't mean it like that but it does explain how there is so much debt outside of the Premier League with so many clubs aiming to get in - and there are only 20 places available and only three a season are up for grabs.
I might have been leaning on the side of excessive capital but let us not forget that there was a growing call for Curbishley to go as we wanted to push on back in the day. Right now all we want is Roland gone but soon enough we will be demanding, quite rightly, to get out of this crappy division, then once established in the Championship if the, then current, owner can't afford the (my best guess) £150m to get us promoted (without being very lucky or, you know, cleverer than everyone else) then this thread will be getting excited about a potential wealthier owner. I was never saying that I had a problem with it, just replying to someone that was talking about this discussion never seeming to stop - I don't think it will. There are already several huge takeover threads on here and I'm sure this won't be the last one.
Still only two days until the end of the week which was when VOTV said the takeover should (or was it could) be completed.
Happy Days!
When Roland arrived, we had the manager in place and we had a squad that had finished 9th the previous season and needed only minimal investment to become a proper Promotion Challenger. 7 of the players Roland inherited have subsequently appeared in the Premier League, Michael Morrison has been Player of the Year at Birmingham.
In my opinion, we were 3 or 4 players short of being a promotion contender when Roland arrived. He has definitely wasted enough money to comfortably cover the cost of at least that.
That way neither side loses face if it falls through.
I've worked for 2 companies where sales have broken down, and in each case the potential buyer blamed the seller leaking the story for the break down, both times this was just an excuse. If the buyer wants to buy and the seller wants to sell, no leaks will derail the process.
Disagree: RD's whole strategy is misplaced in the first place, thus whomever is coach will fail because
a) budgets are restrained unrealistically, rigid and self defeating
b) players aren't commodities - network players simply don't settle well in other leagues/countries automatically, some don't even like different regions of England as we well know..
c) the first two would prevent any coach of decent level joining the club
Thus it is Il Duche's execution of his strategy before even hiring a coach that is the main flaw
To make a Network work, well go up the road to Watford and take a look. Perhaps if you are willing to invest sensibly in players you will have a chance, and then if you are lucky you may get some 2nd or 3rd chance players in the Network.
If you want to properly undertake the player farm approach which I assume is what you are getting it, not really sure the Network helps one iota, but lets think about that for a moment.
In that instance with a properly funded expanded academy, fans onside for the long haul, a first team that was competitive in the Championship, along with a pragmatic transfer budget to keep you at that level, then decent coaches who were proven and properly resourced, perhaps. But KM proved she is incapable of helping with that journey on a number of fronts.
Looking forward, my own personal view is that Charlton's USP for success in a very competitive game is its unique fan and club relationship.
With the fans fully invested with some kind of ownership we could be filling the ground eventually, and make best use of the resources we have as a club.
The current owners have taken that process so far in the wrong direction now, perhaps irreparably, perhaps for a generation, that any new owners will have to be very radical in their approach.
If your point about parachute payments was correct then the relegated teams would immediately get promoted. We ourselves know that this isn't the case. Most teams that come down find themselves in a worse financial position than those that they are joining, due to overspending on players and their contracts while they were in the Prem. It tends only to be the well-run clubs that return immediately as we did in 2000 and Burnley did more recently, or bigger clubs like Newcastle who are simply out of place in the Championship.
However due diligence may have unearthed sticking points, and/or the price may be an issue in a gazumping/gazundering sense.
My suspicion is that the £50 million debt to Staprix is a problem. Roland wants back what he paid for the club plus all his expenditure since then so he can exit his experiment scot free.
Roland does not (it seems) want to bear the burden of the three years of running the club, and pay the price for astonishingly bad management in terms of player deals and the price of relegation on his watch.
Plucking a figure from the air somewhat, I would suggest that for a loss making football club, with the fixed assets of the ground and the training ground as the benefit, the price ought to be no more than 25million and the purchaser takes on the ex director and present contract liabilities.
It is pure speculation on my part but I think Roland will say he sustained the club and deserves his money back, but purchasers want to pay a realistic price based on what has happened under the Duchatelet ownership.
Whether an agreement can be brokered by this Everton geezer is very much an unknown, and for that reason I don't believe anything will happen anytime soon.
It is only playing success that fends off return trips to Belgium.
He comes to sell the car but now the bodywork is f##ked too. Does he get the original cost plus the cost of the engine repairs? No, he doesn't because of the state of the bodywork means that it is worth less than the price at which he bought it.
Get real Roland. Why should anyone else pay for your failures?
The sad truth is that when dealing with people that have so much money you can't force them to do anything they don't want to do. He could easily decide to sell all the players, The Valley and the training ground take a hit and get on with his life without the money he lost have any, real, consequence to him at all. I would image that a fair comparison would be if one of us owned an old car that we don't drive but we paid £2k for it and we have been offered £50 for it. My Mum has a BMW on her drive that she is never going to drive again and because no one is willing to pay her what she thinks it's worth it will sit there depreciating until she dies at which point I suspect I'll have to pay someone to tow it away. That is so illogical and irresponsible but my Mum doesn't need the £350 she has been offered for it enough to back down. She is not worth £800m.
I completely agree with you about your logic I just don't think that Roland, necessary, thinks like us.
Meanwhile, the debt ticks up. You can stall it for a while on relegation by selling off the better players and you can add some value to the business by getting promoted back to the Championship, but the costs of staying there will offset the extra revenue. The outcome is more and more debt and less and less chance of recovering it in a sale.
Kingshill Addicks point is NOBODY knows how Roland's mind works.
So however illogical something seems,it's more than likely fine and dandy in Roland's book!