that's worrying....but still it seems the club is being proactive....however the stock market over here in the US has been hit with sub prime mortgage lenders going bust and finance companies are tighteneing their belts...they are no longer handing out risky loans...any of that going on over there?
No 2 for me. We have quite a strong balance sheet in that we own high valued fixed assets so the only thing I can see from this is that the main investors are looking to cut and run, and who can blame them after what they've done for this club.
i don't think it is a case they want to cut and run, i just think the main figures .(Murray, Whitehead, Chappell) have put in over the years all they really can justify doing so, and none are in a position now where they can keep underwriting any shortfall, or provide additional investment necessary to really push the club on.
The delisting from the AIM on 2nd July was the first step to making the club more attractive for this sort of approach.
I have incredible faith still though that the main figures who are all "proper charlton" will, if we do sell, ensure that the club goes into the hands of people who are good for the club rather than who they get the most cash out of.
Maybe i am living in dreamland but i really hope if and when it happens this is the case.
I think they are just looking for a way of securing the long-term debt of the club on the most attractive terms. Of course one of the way's to do this is to bring in additional investors. These investors do not necessarily need to take the club over. What it does say is that the existing board are unwilling to put the finances in from their own resources.
[quote][cite]Posted By: bingaddick[/cite] What it does say is that the existing board are unwilling to put the finances in from their own resources.[/quote]
I suppose the other option would be a bond payment secured against long-term guaranteed income (ie. ticket sales), but that would be a very dangerous move in my eyes giving there is no guarantee on our league position future, and the set up of our support is by no means long-term guaranteed.
The club will either attract someone genuinely looking for a club to build into a prem side (ego/football sense), or to a company who will be attracted by the property value and position of the training ground and Valley.
The article itself is pretty bare of content to be honest apart from saying that the group have been appointed as advisors.
The last paragraph says "Until last year, the club's shares were listed on Aim and despite it no longer being a public company the business must still comply with the junior market's code - often a reason for appointing advisers."
which could indicate that this story is much ado about nothing, although I could be being hopelessly naive.
[cite]Posted By: kigelia[/cite]which could indicate that this story is much ado about nothing, although I could be being hopelessly naive.
My hunch is you are being naive. It looks to me as if we are putting ourselves out there. Some board members have said before at public meetings 'if there is anyone out there...etc', this appears a more serious and more public way about going about it.
As suggested in the article, the timing does seem strange.
Happy to be corrected if i'm taking this more seriously than i should be.
[cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]I suppose the other option would be a bond payment secured against long-term guaranteed income (ie. ticket sales), but that would be a very dangerous move in my eyes giving there is no guarantee on our league position future, and the set up of our support is by no means long-term guaranteed.
The club will either attract someone genuinely looking for a club to build into a prem side (ego/football sense), or to a company who will be attracted by the property value and position of the training ground and Valley.
A bond issue against future ticket sales? No...you are tieing up future revenues to pay short-term debt. That might be ok if you were buying an asset with the money - say the ground, but not to cover spending shortfalls. Chelsea took out a massive Eurobond loan - £75m to fund their ground improvements and build a squad and look where it got them, and we have been down that road before ourselves.
I see this as the first shots that maybe the club is quietly being put up for sale, not a panic sale, but Murray and co know that to compete in the Premiership you need deeper pockets than they have, even collectively. If we get promoted then we'll be back to being a good little well run club, with a balanced budget but having to take chances on the likes of JFH, or to sign players like Song, Carson on loan for a season and that means finishing in mid-table will realistically be our best chance.
The problem with valuing a club like Charlton is that our greatest asset - the Valley and the training ground are pretty untouchable unless you can find a way to sell and then lease back the ground. Selling them for housing is out of the question unless you can buy/build a better stadium elsewhere for considerably less, although that was an option around the time of the London Dome.
The club have issued a statement to the stock exchange though today...not saying anymore - but made one nonetheless....
Charlton Athletic Statement re. Press Comment
2007-08-16 04:34 (New York)
RNS Number:2185C
Charlton Athletic PLC
16 August 2007
Charlton Athletic Plc
16 August 2007
STRATEGIC REVIEW
The board of Charlton Athletic Plc ("Charlton" or the "Company") notes todayʌs
press speculation in relation to its strategic direction.
The board of Charlton confirms that it has retained Seymour Pierce Limited to
consider a range of strategic options, which may or may not lead to an offer
for the Company.
A further announcement will be made in due course, as appropriate.
Contacts and enquiries:
Seymour Pierce Limited 020 7107 8000
Keith Harris
Douglas Harmer
In accordance with Rule 2.10 of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers
(the ʌCity Codeʌ), Charlton announces that it has the following securities
in issue:
Ordinary Shares of 50p each 63,895,923
Dealing disclosure requirements
Under the provisions of Rule 8.3 of the Code, if any person is, or becomes,
ʌinterestedʌ (directly or indirectly) in 1 per cent. or more of any class of
ʌrelevant securitiesʌ of Charlton, all ʌdealingsʌ in any ʌrelevant securitiesʌ
of that company (including by means of an option in respect of, or a derivative
referenced to, any such ʌrelevant securitiesʌ) must be publicly disclosed by no
later than 3.30 p.m. (London time) on the Business Day following the date of
the relevant transaction. This requirement will continue until the date on which
the Offer becomes, or is declared, unconditional as to acceptances, lapses or
is otherwise withdrawn or on which the ʌoffer periodʌ otherwise ends. If two or
more persons act together pursuant to an agreement or understanding, whether
formal or informal, to acquire an ʌinterestʌ in ʌrelevant securitiesʌ of
Charlton, they will be deemed to be a single person for the purpose of Rule 8.3.
Under the provisions of Rule 8.1 of the Code, all ʌdealingsʌ in ʌrelevant
securitiesʌ of Charlton by an offeror or Charlton, or by any of their
respective ʌassociatesʌ, must be disclosed by no later than 12.00 noon (London
time) on the London business day following the date of the relevant
transaction.
A disclosure table, giving details of the companies in whose ʌrelevant
securitiesʌ ʌdealingsʌ should be disclosed, and the number of such securities
in issue, can be found on the Panelʌs website at www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk.
ʌInterests in securitiesʌ arise, in summary, when a person has long economic
exposure, whether conditional or absolute, to changes in the price of
securities. In particular, a person will be treated as having an ʌinterestʌ by
virtue of the ownership or control of securities, or by virtue of any option in
respect of, or derivative referenced to, securities.
Terms in quotation marks are defined in the Code, which can also be found on the
Panelʌs website. If you are in any doubt as to whether or not you are required
to disclose ʌdealingʌ under Rule 8, you should consult the Panel.
This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange
Well, it's obviously serious, but who knows what's in their heads? Maybe it's better to seek out potential partners/ buyers now, before the relegation shit really hits the fan - there's a telling line in the Telegraph:
Earlier this week, George Burley, the Southampton manager, admitted that the sales of Gareth Bale and Chris Baird had been made to avoid the threat of administration in the club's third year outside the Premier League and first without parachute payments.
At least at this early stage, we can pull out if we go back up, or we'll have identified the *really* committed if Murray wanted to sell up or take a step back.
I find all this Alarming, I thought with the huge reduction in our wage Bill, the sale of players & reduction in staff we would not be looking at bad year on year losses. Looking at that I think that is what the Board fear in two years time.
Wouldn't the club be considered naive if they didnt look into such options, Murray et al have all put in so much and nowt wrong with looking at new finance options.
Would such a takeover ultimately change the fundamental fabric of the club? Probably... Its unlikely that we would be taken over by people with the belief, care and affection that our current board have for our club, but whose to say they couldnt do as good a job?
just seems a very strange timing, firstly the fact the season has just started, and secondly with financial and credit markets a probably at their most stretched for a very long time.
Just had a call from my son .. "according to teletext we are being sold!"
Whether we are or not, this is the impression that most supporters will now have ... and most do not access forums such as ours to discuss it further.
I can understand why Murray & co are looking for further options, and I know they will always have the clubs interest at heart ... but as AFKA has said, it does seem to be very strange timing.
I don't know if there is such a thing as good timing in a case like this. If Charlton had made the statement in June/July would we have picked up the players we did? Would they want to join a club with an uncertain financial future? Would Pards have stayed? Would we have gotten so many season ticket renewals?
It seems that we've got the squad up to size and the final year's figures are being calculated and that is why the announcement is being made now.
[quote][cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]just seems a very strange timing, firstly the fact the season has just started, and secondly with financial and credit markets a probably at their most stretched for a very long time.[/quote]
It might put a bit of a dampener on the way the club performs on the pitch, but I think the market turmoil is co-incidental.
Maybe one of the major shareholders/directors wants out (for whatever reason) and Murray etc cannot afford/don't want to buy his shares and therefore they have decided to look at other options?
but is basically true (IMO). Why not approach Bernie Ecclestone. A local lad and rumoured to be trying to buy QPR with some Italian gezzer. Got the money so why not.
Comments
I see only two things from this:
1. We are looking for new investment to fit into the framework we have got
OR
2. And what i really see from it, we are looking for a new owner.
The well from the current board, appears to have run dry.
It's a 2. for me as well i'm afraid.
Maybe the peoples republic of china can take us over !!
The delisting from the AIM on 2nd July was the first step to making the club more attractive for this sort of approach.
Maybe i am living in dreamland but i really hope if and when it happens this is the case.
Where does it say that?
more from Telegraph
Blimey
The club will either attract someone genuinely looking for a club to build into a prem side (ego/football sense), or to a company who will be attracted by the property value and position of the training ground and Valley.
The last paragraph says "Until last year, the club's shares were listed on Aim and despite it no longer being a public company the business must still comply with the junior market's code - often a reason for appointing advisers."
which could indicate that this story is much ado about nothing, although I could be being hopelessly naive.
My hunch is you are being naive. It looks to me as if we are putting ourselves out there. Some board members have said before at public meetings 'if there is anyone out there...etc', this appears a more serious and more public way about going about it.
As suggested in the article, the timing does seem strange.
Happy to be corrected if i'm taking this more seriously than i should be.
A bond issue against future ticket sales? No...you are tieing up future revenues to pay short-term debt. That might be ok if you were buying an asset with the money - say the ground, but not to cover spending shortfalls. Chelsea took out a massive Eurobond loan - £75m to fund their ground improvements and build a squad and look where it got them, and we have been down that road before ourselves.
I see this as the first shots that maybe the club is quietly being put up for sale, not a panic sale, but Murray and co know that to compete in the Premiership you need deeper pockets than they have, even collectively. If we get promoted then we'll be back to being a good little well run club, with a balanced budget but having to take chances on the likes of JFH, or to sign players like Song, Carson on loan for a season and that means finishing in mid-table will realistically be our best chance.
The problem with valuing a club like Charlton is that our greatest asset - the Valley and the training ground are pretty untouchable unless you can find a way to sell and then lease back the ground. Selling them for housing is out of the question unless you can buy/build a better stadium elsewhere for considerably less, although that was an option around the time of the London Dome.
Charlton Athletic Statement re. Press Comment
2007-08-16 04:34 (New York)
RNS Number:2185C
Charlton Athletic PLC
16 August 2007
Charlton Athletic Plc
16 August 2007
STRATEGIC REVIEW
The board of Charlton Athletic Plc ("Charlton" or the "Company") notes todayʌs
press speculation in relation to its strategic direction.
The board of Charlton confirms that it has retained Seymour Pierce Limited to
consider a range of strategic options, which may or may not lead to an offer
for the Company.
A further announcement will be made in due course, as appropriate.
Contacts and enquiries:
Seymour Pierce Limited 020 7107 8000
Keith Harris
Douglas Harmer
In accordance with Rule 2.10 of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers
(the ʌCity Codeʌ), Charlton announces that it has the following securities
in issue:
Ordinary Shares of 50p each 63,895,923
Dealing disclosure requirements
Under the provisions of Rule 8.3 of the Code, if any person is, or becomes,
ʌinterestedʌ (directly or indirectly) in 1 per cent. or more of any class of
ʌrelevant securitiesʌ of Charlton, all ʌdealingsʌ in any ʌrelevant securitiesʌ
of that company (including by means of an option in respect of, or a derivative
referenced to, any such ʌrelevant securitiesʌ) must be publicly disclosed by no
later than 3.30 p.m. (London time) on the Business Day following the date of
the relevant transaction. This requirement will continue until the date on which
the Offer becomes, or is declared, unconditional as to acceptances, lapses or
is otherwise withdrawn or on which the ʌoffer periodʌ otherwise ends. If two or
more persons act together pursuant to an agreement or understanding, whether
formal or informal, to acquire an ʌinterestʌ in ʌrelevant securitiesʌ of
Charlton, they will be deemed to be a single person for the purpose of Rule 8.3.
Under the provisions of Rule 8.1 of the Code, all ʌdealingsʌ in ʌrelevant
securitiesʌ of Charlton by an offeror or Charlton, or by any of their
respective ʌassociatesʌ, must be disclosed by no later than 12.00 noon (London
time) on the London business day following the date of the relevant
transaction.
A disclosure table, giving details of the companies in whose ʌrelevant
securitiesʌ ʌdealingsʌ should be disclosed, and the number of such securities
in issue, can be found on the Panelʌs website at www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk.
ʌInterests in securitiesʌ arise, in summary, when a person has long economic
exposure, whether conditional or absolute, to changes in the price of
securities. In particular, a person will be treated as having an ʌinterestʌ by
virtue of the ownership or control of securities, or by virtue of any option in
respect of, or derivative referenced to, securities.
Terms in quotation marks are defined in the Code, which can also be found on the
Panelʌs website. If you are in any doubt as to whether or not you are required
to disclose ʌdealingʌ under Rule 8, you should consult the Panel.
This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange
END
I would like to read on but i just cant get past this statement.
At least at this early stage, we can pull out if we go back up, or we'll have identified the *really* committed if Murray wanted to sell up or take a step back.
Pards stop spending money now !
Would such a takeover ultimately change the fundamental fabric of the club?
Probably...
Its unlikely that we would be taken over by people with the belief, care and affection that our current board have for our club, but whose to say they couldnt do as good a job?
Whether we are or not, this is the impression that most supporters will now have ... and most do not access forums such as ours to discuss it further.
I can understand why Murray & co are looking for further options, and I know they will always have the clubs interest at heart ... but as AFKA has said, it does seem to be very strange timing.
It seems that we've got the squad up to size and the final year's figures are being calculated and that is why the announcement is being made now.
But when is the right time to go on sale?
It might put a bit of a dampener on the way the club performs on the pitch, but I think the market turmoil is co-incidental.
Maybe one of the major shareholders/directors wants out (for whatever reason) and Murray etc cannot afford/don't want to buy his shares and therefore they have decided to look at other options?
...which can't help matters.