Methven "one of the really useful things about Brener and Friedman is not only have they run a football club together, but have been through ups and downs with that, and have tried things that didn’t work"
What club was that? I know about Brener and Dallas,Houston, but can't find any association of Friedman with any sporting organisations?
This is something I also really struggled to find any kind of link with was Friedman and any kind of sports. I couldn't see him listed anywhere as a minority owner of the Houston Dynamo when Brener owned it.
‘ Well, I don’t really think this is being done for a return on investment’ ’ if they wanted to make a return on investment, my goodness me there are easier ways to do it than this.’
first time I’ve read the interview , at least they’re not in cloud cuckoo land and understand there’s not a hope in hells chance of making dough out of us but why bother buying us to tinker along with a guff squad of complete nothingness that has probably a 10 to 1 shot at promotion if we’re lucky . genuinely pointless, unless some miracle signings are lined up this next week .
‘ Well, I don’t really think this is being done for a return on investment’ ’ if they wanted to make a return on investment, my goodness me there are easier ways to do it than this.’
first time I’ve read the interview , at least they’re not in cloud cuckoo land and understand there’s not a hope in hells chance of making dough out of us but why bother buying us to tinker along with a guff squad of complete nothingness that has probably a 10 to 1 shot at promotion if we’re lucky . genuinely pointless, unless some miracle signings are lined up this next week .
Because for the larger investors it has cost them very little in the scheme of things. And Methven would have been pressing the Bowyer season on them when we went up with a squad threadbare of any real quality until a few decent loans came along.
Thing is, if there is a further cash call on investors then Methven would need to find his bit to retain the stake. Is he able? If not then our man in charge has a vested interest in selling players / cutting costs even if the billionaires wanted to splash out more.
Simply. The club cannot, in it's current state, reduce operating losses from £8m to £2m and keep the same level of overhead with respect to staffing, players, ground costs etc
If it maximised everything and we had a good cuprun (LOL!), got great sponsorship deals done, we MIGHT reduce the costs by, what, £2m.
So a £6m loss. Lets say I'm underestimating them and we do £2m better
A £4m loss. Dobson and CBT out of contract. Another season in League 1.
Thing is, if there is a further cash call on investors then Methven would need to find his bit to retain the stake. Is he able? If not then our man in charge has a vested interest in selling players / cutting costs even if the billionaires wanted to splash out more.
Would he ? As I understand it he received his 5% of shares for putting the deal together, I think it's very probable that he wouldn't be liable to invest any money in the future.
The thing that confuses me, is that even though this may represent a small investment on behalf of the wealthier shareholders, is the likely losses they will have to endure in the short and medium turn, to make a profit in the long run.
For all the talk of balancing the books and whatever Methven has said can be achieved to ‘break even’ (however fanciful that is), surely they don’t invest to ‘break even’, and to make a return will require a fair chunk of money on their part, none of it guaranteed to provide a return at any point.
I’m only making this post based on the last few pages discussing what CM may have told them as to how much they would need to put in. Surely, as successful business people they could’ve seen right through any ‘break even’ talk and had an awareness that this is probably a throw a lot of money at it and we may get lucky.
Even the likes of Millwall/Luton who we would probably swap places with in a heartbeat, run at quite a loss (obvs not sure how Luton’s promotion to the Prem changes this, but Millwall are good example of a well run club, losing a lot of money). I can’t fathom how any serious group of investors would assume Charlton will be an exception to the rule.
I can certainly see that it’s become a bit vogue to invest/own a club in the Ryan Reynolds era and perhaps this is part and parcel of the modern day investors’ diverse portfolio, even if we don’t offer them a return. But even if you factor in player sales from decent prospects like Leaburn or whoever, everything points toward net loss, unless they really put some money in which means higher losses initially and a small chance of getting to the Prem and making it.
Football ownership in the modern era baffles me to be honest
The "owners" believe that CAFC can be promoted by being better run, bringing in 3-4 new signings, 3-4 loans, and slashing the wage bill / getting rid of expensive flops.
I imagine the pitch continues by saying, that if it doesn't happen this season, they can sell off some promising youngsters and you won't need to put any more money in and don't worry, with another 3- 4 excellent signings and 3-4 loans next season, we'll definitely go up and at that time your £12m total investment for buying CAFC for us all will now be worth at least £30-£40m and we'll only be one more division away from the Premier League.
"Look at what I did at Sunderland - and Ipswich back this up - we'd only be 1 season away from untold riches and believe me it can be done. Luton have shown it, Sunderland are pushing for it, Coventry nearly made it".
Isn't unimaginable. Except, CAFC have expensive subs, 10 years of poor management and a significant requirement for another 4 or 5 players to stand any chance of that - and usually, let's say 90% of the time, you need to spend REAL money to get out of this division. Luton, Plymouth and Coventry are outliers.
I have very little idea about business and finances, but this bunch of owners are just another mob of chancers and snake oil salespeople.
If they were serious we would have had 2-3 decent signings and not be at the bottom of the table.
Give it up until Xmas but if no sign of improvement, I think I will be pretty much done with the club…. It breaks my heart!!
I don't think so, or not all of them maybe. It’s more that they've been sold snake oil, IMO. They've been made certain promises or at the very least been told certain things hence the sudden need to "balance books" so that they don't realise what bunkum they were pitched.
And to be fair, we've had 2 to 3 decent signings - May, Camara, Edun are decent signings. Taylor and Jones could end up being decent.
However, losing Rak Saki back to Palace and seeing Fraser, Leaburn and Aneke injured means that isn't enough - not at all - we needed probably 8 - 10 players for this season.
If money is put in as loans it doesn’t need to be on an equal basis - except that with no guarantee of repayment it’s a big risk.
I think the ineptitude of Thomas Sandgaard and previous allows people to overstate the improvement possible in business performance without conclusive evidence it’s hogwash.
The thing that confuses me, is that even though this may represent a small investment on behalf of the wealthier shareholders, is the likely losses they will have to endure in the short and medium turn, to make a profit in the long run.
I would assume that the losses for the next x years have been factored into the sums initially invested. I would be very worried if that is not the case and I doubt the EFL would have authorised their ownership if, on a worse case basis (no promotion and an increase in losses), annual capital injections were required from investors to maintain solvency.
It's when losses carry on after the next x years that the un-budgeted losses for the ensuing years mean the chickens come home to roost.
The investors will not have anticipated taking dividends from profits, (a continuing loss will have been assumed) just a profit on selling their shares on the assumption that the club has a higher value after promotion(s). That higher value in turn depends on the club not racking up a pile of debt through borrowings.
The borrowings will rack up if the cash initially put up by the investors runs out earlier because budgeted losses are exceeded. More cash is required and instead of the investors putting up cash in the form of equity, as initially, it is injected in the form of loans - ie debt - the Duchatalet method.
Debt brings with it the greater risk of hitting FFP limits as cash injected as debt does not count as revenue but counts as expenditure when used to meet costs. Cash in the form of equity is not revenue, but effectively has the same effect as revenue under FPP, so allows higher spending than via debt .... I digress.
Methven "one of the really useful things about Brener and Friedman is not only have they run a football club together, but have been through ups and downs with that, and have tried things that didn’t work"
What club was that? I know about Brener and Dallas,Houston, but can't find any association of Friedman with any sporting organisations?
It's ok Money is available Dean and Andy don't want just anybody in By the end of August we'll be in an untenable league position I genuinely give up It simply isn't good enough People that think they're cleverer than the rest of the league are being shown up to be clueless.
This sits with Methven, Scott, Rodwell and Lanigan. They've had eight months of being in or around the shower of shit we've got.
Will be interesting to learn the dynamics of our huge ownership consortium. Americans culturally have a pretty cold attitude to hiring / firing head coaches, yet Holden was Methven & Rodwell’s man that they wanted in and who they we’re probably waxing lyrical about in their sales pitches.
If the major American investors are showing any sort of interest in how the club is doing (no evidence of that yet) I’d expect pressure being put on Charlie Boy & Rodwell
Duchatelet is still around in the background unfortunately - preventing a decent takeover, with ludicrous assets price & leaving us with different clueless management teams, who think that a team can be successful with no significant investment & playing youngsters, whether they are ready or not.
Genuinely be better off in administration than this never ending succession of absolute chancers/wasters. I'm genuinely sick of this new lot already. They can fuck off.
Will be interesting to learn the dynamics of our huge ownership consortium. Americans culturally have a pretty cold attitude to hiring / firing head coaches, yet Holden was Methven & Rodwell’s man that they wanted in and who they we’re probably waxing lyrical about in their sales pitches.
If the major American investors are showing any sort of interest in how the club is doing (no evidence of that yet) I’d expect pressure being put on Charlie Boy & Rodwell
Starting to doubt if those Americans even know they've invested
Genuinely be better off in administration than this never ending succession of absolute chancers/wasters. I'm genuinely sick of this new lot already. They can fuck off.
What's to stop another group of chancers/incompetents getting hold of us from administration?
I'm fairly certain someone sold Charlton's soul to the devil to get Palace relegated with that Jon Fortune goal and we've been posting for it ever since
Comments
This is something I also really struggled to find any kind of link with was Friedman and any kind of sports. I couldn't see him listed anywhere as a minority owner of the Houston Dynamo when Brener owned it.
’ if they wanted to make a return on investment, my goodness me there are easier ways to do it than this.’
first time I’ve read the interview , at least they’re not in cloud cuckoo land and understand there’s not a hope in hells chance of making dough out of us but why bother buying us to tinker along with a guff squad of complete nothingness that has probably a 10 to 1 shot at promotion if we’re lucky .
genuinely pointless, unless some miracle signings are lined up this next week .
And Methven would have been pressing the Bowyer season on them when we went up with a squad threadbare of any real quality until a few decent loans came along.
The club cannot, in it's current state, reduce operating losses from £8m to £2m and keep the same level of overhead with respect to staffing, players, ground costs etc
If it maximised everything and we had a good cuprun (LOL!), got great sponsorship deals done, we MIGHT reduce the costs by, what, £2m.
So a £6m loss. Lets say I'm underestimating them and we do £2m better
A £4m loss. Dobson and CBT out of contract. Another season in League 1.
What IS the chuffin point?
For all the talk of balancing the books and whatever Methven has said can be achieved to ‘break even’ (however fanciful that is), surely they don’t invest to ‘break even’, and to make a return will require a fair chunk of money on their part, none of it guaranteed to provide a return at any point.
I’m only making this post based on the last few pages discussing what CM may have told them as to how much they would need to put in. Surely, as successful business people they could’ve seen right through any ‘break even’ talk and had an awareness that this is probably a throw a lot of money at it and we may get lucky.
I can certainly see that it’s become a bit vogue to invest/own a club in the Ryan Reynolds era and perhaps this is part and parcel of the modern day investors’ diverse portfolio, even if we don’t offer them a return. But even if you factor in player sales from decent prospects like Leaburn or whoever, everything points toward net loss, unless they really put some money in which means higher losses initially and a small chance of getting to the Prem and making it.
I imagine the pitch continues by saying, that if it doesn't happen this season, they can sell off some promising youngsters and you won't need to put any more money in and don't worry, with another 3- 4 excellent signings and 3-4 loans next season, we'll definitely go up and at that time your £12m total investment for buying CAFC for us all will now be worth at least £30-£40m and we'll only be one more division away from the Premier League.
"Look at what I did at Sunderland - and Ipswich back this up - we'd only be 1 season away from untold riches and believe me it can be done. Luton have shown it, Sunderland are pushing for it, Coventry nearly made it".
Isn't unimaginable. Except, CAFC have expensive subs, 10 years of poor management and a significant requirement for another 4 or 5 players to stand any chance of that - and usually, let's say 90% of the time, you need to spend REAL money to get out of this division. Luton, Plymouth and Coventry are outliers.
However, losing Rak Saki back to Palace and seeing Fraser, Leaburn and Aneke injured means that isn't enough - not at all - we needed probably 8 - 10 players for this season.
I think the ineptitude of Thomas Sandgaard and previous allows people to overstate the improvement possible in business performance without conclusive evidence it’s hogwash.
https://x.com/bbcsport/status/1695138106339377482?s=46&t=PRgt_6QdRFwhs17CYoSLqw
It's when losses carry on after the next x years that the un-budgeted losses for the ensuing years mean the chickens come home to roost.
The investors will not have anticipated taking dividends from profits, (a continuing loss will have been assumed) just a profit on selling their shares on the assumption that the club has a higher value after promotion(s). That higher value in turn depends on the club not racking up a pile of debt through borrowings.
The borrowings will rack up if the cash initially put up by the investors runs out earlier because budgeted losses are exceeded. More cash is required and instead of the investors putting up cash in the form of equity, as initially, it is injected in the form of loans - ie debt - the Duchatalet method.
Debt brings with it the greater risk of hitting FFP limits as cash injected as debt does not count as revenue but counts as expenditure when used to meet costs. Cash in the form of equity is not revenue, but effectively has the same effect as revenue under FPP, so allows higher spending than via debt .... I digress.
Money is available
Dean and Andy don't want just anybody in
By the end of August we'll be in an untenable league position
I genuinely give up
It simply isn't good enough
People that think they're cleverer than the rest of the league are being shown up to be clueless.
This sits with Methven, Scott, Rodwell and Lanigan. They've had eight months of being in or around the shower of shit we've got.