This is the charge for the bank overdraft to HSBC being formally released. It’s interesting but not significant, in that the overdraft facility hasn’t been used for some time.
In plain English, what exactly does that imply, Scoham?
Sorry to be dense.
Charge number 1, so the club doesn’t owe HSBC any money...probably hasn’t for a while - I thought Roland was funding the club - and nobody has previously got around to getting HSBC to release the charge- and it probably got queried when the due diligence was going on...that’s my guess anyway
Up till now the fixed charges that ex-directors have on the real estate has prevented Duchâtelet from selling the club and keeping the Valley, - at least that is my understanding.
If Duchâtelet is trying to settle all these charges and ex-directors are willing to comply, then we are truly f##ked
SE7 vol-a-vents don't appear to know anything by the way @Henry Irving. Seem reliant on press reports. Perksy is very quiet. Maybe she's moved to Sheffield.
Up till now the fixed charges that ex-directors have on the real estate has prevented Duchâtelet from selling the club and keeping the Valley, - at least that is my understanding.
If Duchâtelet is trying to settle all these charges and ex-directors are willing to comply, then we are truly f##ked
Companies house shows those charges are the ones numbered 3 to 9 and they are still in place. 1 & 2 were HSBC and Lombard North and they've been satisfied. The directors ones are 3 Derek Chappell, 4 David White 5 David Hughes 6 Sir Maurice Hatter 7 Richard Murray 8 56 Developments LLP (Robert and Helen Whitehand) 9 David Sumners
I don't see Roland setting up the debt he owes to himself as not being backed by the assets of the club. And no bank would set up debt that way. So what other debt could it be?
Debt that has a clause for example that the money "does not have to be paid off until the club is promoted" would qualify as a debenture.
I would not at all be surprised if the director debt is set up as a debenture. In other words, directors do not have recourse to sell off assets of the club if the debt falls through. The debt is simply dependent on the club's creditworthiness or promise.
Up till now the fixed charges that ex-directors have on the real estate has prevented Duchâtelet from selling the club and keeping the Valley, - at least that is my understanding.
If Duchâtelet is trying to settle all these charges and ex-directors are willing to comply, then we are truly f##ked
Companies house shows those charges are the ones numbered 3 to 9 and they are still in place. 1 & 2 were HSBC and Lombard North and they've been satisfied. The directors ones are 3 Derek Chappell, 4 David White 5 David Hughes 6 Sir Maurice Hatter 7 Richard Murray 8 56 Developments LLP (Robert and Helen Whitehand) 9 David Sumners
Companies House also shows that the HSBC charge has just been satisfied against the listing by giving the date. It’s just paperwork and nothing to do with repaying the ex-directors’ loans.
I'd say that unless one of the aussies has got up onto the meeting room table and laid down a large brown cable on Duchatalet's rep's notepad, things are still being negotiated and getting ever closer. Fingers crossed.
I thought you were ITK or are you finally admitting all your wind up dickery has been just that?
I know a certain amount as I get updates every now and then - mainly when I ask - if anything concrete or significant happens I will let u know - my info is never a wind up - I sometimes wind idiots up when they start
I'd say that unless one of the aussies has got up onto the meeting room table and laid down a large brown cable on Duchatalet's rep's notepad, things are still being negotiated and getting ever closer. Fingers crossed.
I thought you were ITK or are you finally admitting all your wind up dickery has been just that?
I know a certain amount as I get updates every now and then - mainly when I ask - if anything concrete or significant happens I will let u know - my info is never a wind up - I sometimes wind idiots up when they start
Do us all a favour then. Fucking ask what's going on!
Saw an article from today that stated RD intends to "rationalize" the club's expenditures to the level of "other League One clubs" which will include laying off non-playing staff. Cancelling the tour of the club was just the first step in this process.
Translation... he has no intention of aiming for promotion in any way whatsoever and plans to stay in this league until the club is sold with the goal of minimizing losses to himself.
Up till now the fixed charges that ex-directors have on the real estate has prevented Duchâtelet from selling the club and keeping the Valley, - at least that is my understanding.
If Duchâtelet is trying to settle all these charges and ex-directors are willing to comply, then we are truly f##ked
Companies house shows those charges are the ones numbered 3 to 9 and they are still in place. 1 & 2 were HSBC and Lombard North and they've been satisfied. The directors ones are 3 Derek Chappell, 4 David White 5 David Hughes 6 Sir Maurice Hatter 7 Richard Murray 8 56 Developments LLP (Robert and Helen Whitehand) 9 David Sumners
Companies House also shows that the HSBC charge has just been satisfied against the listing by giving the date. It’s just paperwork and nothing to do with repaying the ex-directors’ loans.
So what could that mean in relation to any takeover?
I'd say that unless one of the aussies has got up onto the meeting room table and laid down a large brown cable on Duchatalet's rep's notepad, things are still being negotiated and getting ever closer. Fingers crossed.
I thought you were ITK or are you finally admitting all your wind up dickery has been just that?
I know a certain amount as I get updates every now and then - mainly when I ask - if anything concrete or significant happens I will let u know - my info is never a wind up - I sometimes wind idiots up when they start
Do us all a favour then. Fucking ask what's going on!
If anything concrete or significant happens I won't have to ask
Saw an article from today that stated RD intends to "rationalize" the club's expenditures to the level of "other League One clubs" which will include laying off non-playing staff. Cancelling the tour of the club was just the first step in this process.
Translation... he has no intention of aiming for promotion in any way whatsoever and plans to stay in this league until the club is sold with the goal of minimizing losses to himself.
I haven't seen anything to convince me that RD is working towards rationalising club expenditure commensurate with a place in L1.
His actions make it very likely Charlton won't avoid relegation this season.
Up till now the fixed charges that ex-directors have on the real estate has prevented Duchâtelet from selling the club and keeping the Valley, - at least that is my understanding.
If Duchâtelet is trying to settle all these charges and ex-directors are willing to comply, then we are truly f##ked
Companies house shows those charges are the ones numbered 3 to 9 and they are still in place. 1 & 2 were HSBC and Lombard North and they've been satisfied. The directors ones are 3 Derek Chappell, 4 David White 5 David Hughes 6 Sir Maurice Hatter 7 Richard Murray 8 56 Developments LLP (Robert and Helen Whitehand) 9 David Sumners
Companies House also shows that the HSBC charge has just been satisfied against the listing by giving the date. It’s just paperwork and nothing to do with repaying the ex-directors’ loans.
So what could that mean in relation to any takeover?
It’s just housekeeping because the overdraft facility is no longer there, I assume.
I'd say that unless one of the aussies has got up onto the meeting room table and laid down a large brown cable on Duchatalet's rep's notepad, things are still being negotiated and getting ever closer. Fingers crossed.
I thought you were ITK or are you finally admitting all your wind up dickery has been just that?
I know a certain amount as I get updates every now and then - mainly when I ask - if anything concrete or significant happens I will let u know - my info is never a wind up - I sometimes wind idiots up when they start
We get an official statement months back which claimed 'price had been agreed', so what's been the main sticking point...
Up till now the fixed charges that ex-directors have on the real estate has prevented Duchâtelet from selling the club and keeping the Valley, - at least that is my understanding.
If Duchâtelet is trying to settle all these charges and ex-directors are willing to comply, then we are truly f##ked
Companies house shows those charges are the ones numbered 3 to 9 and they are still in place. 1 & 2 were HSBC and Lombard North and they've been satisfied. The directors ones are 3 Derek Chappell, 4 David White 5 David Hughes 6 Sir Maurice Hatter 7 Richard Murray 8 56 Developments LLP (Robert and Helen Whitehand) 9 David Sumners
Companies House also shows that the HSBC charge has just been satisfied against the listing by giving the date. It’s just paperwork and nothing to do with repaying the ex-directors’ loans.
So what could that mean in relation to any takeover?
It’s just housekeeping because the overdraft facility is no longer there, I assume.
Possibly but any purchaser would also want it removed.
What seems to be happening is that there was an Australian bid that Duchatelet is not happy with. All that is going on now makes sense if you have worked out by now what a complete cnut the man is. He wants too much money for the club and if he doesn't sell all bets should be off and we have to make him regret it. The detail of that going forwards is not for a public forum!
I'd say that unless one of the aussies has got up onto the meeting room table and laid down a large brown cable on Duchatalet's rep's notepad, things are still being negotiated and getting ever closer. Fingers crossed.
I thought you were ITK or are you finally admitting all your wind up dickery has been just that?
I know a certain amount as I get updates every now and then - mainly when I ask - if anything concrete or significant happens I will let u know - my info is never a wind up - I sometimes wind idiots up when they start
We get an official statement months back which claimed 'price had been agreed', so what's been the main sticking point...
Do you know..?
I'm told the aussies r now trying to pay less - this was before the konsa sale
Comments
If Duchâtelet is trying to settle all these charges and ex-directors are willing to comply, then we are truly f##ked
I don't see Roland setting up the debt he owes to himself as not being backed by the assets of the club. And no bank would set up debt that way. So what other debt could it be?
Debt that has a clause for example that the money "does not have to be paid off until the club is promoted" would qualify as a debenture.
I would not at all be surprised if the director debt is set up as a debenture. In other words, directors do not have recourse to sell off assets of the club if the debt falls through. The debt is simply dependent on the club's creditworthiness or promise.
Wouldn't be the first time the squad is padded up with cheap last minute loans either.
He got our last chief scout from the FIFA Xbox live forum and our last CEO from Tinder!
It would take him minutes to fill the gaps.
Translation... he has no intention of aiming for promotion in any way whatsoever and plans to stay in this league until the club is sold with the goal of minimizing losses to himself.
His actions make it very likely Charlton won't avoid relegation this season.
Do you know..?
I mean, if you agree a price to buy a house and the owner sells the garage to someone else before you complete... oh, sod it. I'm past caring.