"We" Owe Staprix £38m
Comments
-
We knew this didn't we ?
Telegraph a month or so back: "It is understood that he paid between £14 and £18 million for Charlton two years ago but, with loans totalling £44.1 million according to the last published accounts, any new investor would perhaps now need an initial outlay in excess of £50 million"0 -
We're screwed, even if Duchàtelet decides to sell, who will buy at that price or even £40m if they negotiate a deal - game overHenry Irving said:
Which is the number Richard Murray was quoted as having given to fans.NorthStandUltra said:So essentially it's going to cost someone £50 million plus to buy Charlton from Duchàtelet - £50 million for a League One club!?!
1 -
I assume it's £38m if they just have to clear the amount RD is "owed", but yeah, ain't nobody paying that price !NorthStandUltra said:So essentially it's going to cost someone £50 million plus to buy Charlton from Duchàtelet - £50 million for a League One club!?!
0 -
If only I knew of somebody who had a spare £50m ...0
-
£38m plus the £7m to Murray/Directors so it's £50m minimum & that's if RD decided to cut his losses & take back everything he's owed, if he's greedy, he'd want more so you could easily go over £50m for a L1 clubse9addick said:
I assume it's £38m if they just have to clear the amount RD is "owed", but yeah, ain't nobody paying that price !NorthStandUltra said:So essentially it's going to cost someone £50 million plus to buy Charlton from Duchàtelet - £50 million for a League One club!?!
1 -
I think that £7m has been passed onto successive buyers on the promise if would be repaid when we get back to the Prem (lol) so probably you'd just be talking about the £38m as a minimum.NorthStandUltra said:
£38m plus the £7m to Murray/Directors so it's £50m minimum & that's if RD decided to cut his losses & take back everything he's owed, if he's greedy, he'd want more so you could easily go over £50m for a L1 clubse9addick said:
I assume it's £38m if they just have to clear the amount RD is "owed", but yeah, ain't nobody paying that price !NorthStandUltra said:So essentially it's going to cost someone £50 million plus to buy Charlton from Duchàtelet - £50 million for a League One club!?!
I guess its inconsequential either way as no ones buying, whether it's £38m or £50m.
I really think these financial results should be read and understood by all, AFC Charlton may be the only solution.3 -
This is bad. He hasn't been owner for a long time, we'll soon find ourselves like Bolton, owing shit tonnes to some ones estate and completely broke.
Quasi equity my arse.1 -
Also - these are just the accounts to June 2015 (I wonder if they include the Gomez fee ?) so there's no telling how much worse it's got over this season.2
-
From Twitter...how can they do it...they are in more debt than us I think?
BREAKING: #Leeds United reported to have buyer in wings: http://the72.co.uk/49686/mp-opens-leeds-united-second-bidder-debate/ …: @WACCOE @LeedsUnited_MAD @lufcstats @WeAreLeeds19190 -
This really reads like the road to administration.se9addick said:
Breaking even ? By the sounds of these results he'll never, ever, break even regardless of season ticket money.Stu_of_Kunming said:
That's exactly why it will work, it delays him breaking even, Strapix' money is still real money.se9addick said:It also convinces me even more that a season ticket boycott will have no effect, he'll just make up the shortfall with more loans from Staprix.
Conversely it seems like any gaps in the finances are plugged by additional Staprix "loans" which;
a) make it more likely that he'll struggle to find someone willing to buy the club (assuming he'll want them to clear the amount outstanding to Staprix as part of the purchase price), and;
b) means he's taking more out of the club through his tasty 3% interest charge
This is an absolute mess and I don't really know what the end is. I don't see who would buy us for a minimum of £37m (assuming he isn't going to write off the money he's owed or delay payment of it) and I don't think he'd put us into admin and lose everything so it seems we're just stuck with him.
Given that the businesses that suffer the most in that circumstance will generally be both small and local, should CARD/the wider Charlton fanbase not be advising them to deal with the regime on a cash only basis? Though I accept that there will be costs to suppliers if the regime choose to go elsewhere...
This would a) really piss off the club and b) mean that smaller businesses would be less affected by administration.
Spot the eejit....3 -
Sponsored links:
-
No, I can't see administration as it would probably involve Roland (who is our main creditor I'm guessing) writing off a chunk of his money and he's never going to do that.NornIrishAddick said:
This really reads like the road to administration.se9addick said:
Breaking even ? By the sounds of these results he'll never, ever, break even regardless of season ticket money.Stu_of_Kunming said:
That's exactly why it will work, it delays him breaking even, Strapix' money is still real money.se9addick said:It also convinces me even more that a season ticket boycott will have no effect, he'll just make up the shortfall with more loans from Staprix.
Conversely it seems like any gaps in the finances are plugged by additional Staprix "loans" which;
a) make it more likely that he'll struggle to find someone willing to buy the club (assuming he'll want them to clear the amount outstanding to Staprix as part of the purchase price), and;
b) means he's taking more out of the club through his tasty 3% interest charge
This is an absolute mess and I don't really know what the end is. I don't see who would buy us for a minimum of £37m (assuming he isn't going to write off the money he's owed or delay payment of it) and I don't think he'd put us into admin and lose everything so it seems we're just stuck with him.
Given that the businesses that suffer the most in that circumstance will generally be both small and local, should CARD/the wider Charlton fanbase not be advising them to deal with the regime on a cash only basis? Though I accept that there will be costs to suppliers if the regime choose to go elsewhere...
This would a) really piss off the club and b) mean that smaller businesses would be less affected by administration.
Spot the eejit....1 -
This is what I was afraid of. Duchatelet's 'investment' will leave us worse off than Bolton, playing shite League 2 football in an empty stadium.
Is it wrong of me to wish a 69 year old man would hurry up and die?3 -
This. The long-term business plan for RD at Charlton.se9addick said:
Breaking even ? By the sounds of these results he'll never, ever, break even regardless of season ticket money.Stu_of_Kunming said:
That's exactly why it will work, it delays him breaking even, Strapix' money is still real money.se9addick said:It also convinces me even more that a season ticket boycott will have no effect, he'll just make up the shortfall with more loans from Staprix.
Conversely it seems like any gaps in the finances are plugged by additional Staprix "loans" which;
a) make it more likely that he'll struggle to find someone willing to buy the club (assuming he'll want them to clear the amount outstanding to Staprix as part of the purchase price), and;
b) means he's taking more out of the club through his tasty 3% interest charge
This is an absolute mess and I don't really know what the end is. I don't see who would buy us for a minimum of £37m (assuming he isn't going to write off the money he's owed or delay payment of it) and I don't think he'd put us into admin and lose everything so it seems we're just stuck with him.0 -
Another good reason not to give him your season ticket cash I would have thought.0
-
Massimo actively wants to sell I think, he just hasn't had a buyer that is willing to pay as much as he wants.Redmidland said:From Twitter...how can they do it...they are in more debt than us I think?
BREAKING: #Leeds United reported to have buyer in wings: http://the72.co.uk/49686/mp-opens-leeds-united-second-bidder-debate/ …: @WACCOE @LeedsUnited_MAD @lufcstats @WeAreLeeds1919
Leeds' operating loss is only £2m, ours is more than double that. How they've achieved that I'm not sure as they don't own their stadium or training ground.1 -
They do. It's in the notes.se9addick said:Also - these are just the accounts to June 2015 (I wonder if they include the Gomez fee ?) so there's no telling how much worse it's got over this season.
0 -
I haven't actually seen the accounts - how much are they saying we got for Gomez ?PassItToLeaburn said:
They do. It's in the notes.se9addick said:Also - these are just the accounts to June 2015 (I wonder if they include the Gomez fee ?) so there's no telling how much worse it's got over this season.
0 -
The opposite I think.Hartleypete said:Another good reason not to give him your season ticket cash I would have thought.
0 -
Roland has form for doing this sort of stuff.The_President said:His endgame is becoming more evident. Same as what happened at STVV - just re-read Dreke's posts - he'll run the club down and start to build up other business empire such as Hotel, shops,entertainment etc and sell the club, get rent paid for the ground etc. - he might not be owning us at some point in the future , but he will still have his boot around our throats.
No one wanting to make Charlton compete in the Championship would be behaving in the way this owner and his cronies are. The football is irrelevant to them. So are we.
His plans do not include success for Charlton as a football team. You only have to ask why Lookman got 7 minutes on the pitch in a must win game on Tuesday night.
The man is an effing nightmare as an owner of a football club. We have to do everything we can to try and remove his grubby claws from Charlton Athletic.
8 -
Turnover down by 8%. Operating loss up by 9%. They can only claim a reduction in losses due to the cheap sale of one of England's finest defensive prospects. These guys don't come along every year so it is not sustainable to assume the same going forward.
Also interesting to note that tickets and matchday activities are 43% of turnover (and not one third).
We all know that the accounts for this year will look significantly worse and for next year significantly worse again.2 -
Sponsored links:
-
The accounts should show whether any interest on those loans has been paid to Staprix. If it isn't it lends substance to the suggestion it's quasi equity - although, the exit strategy is still key to what this money really is.
A hotel and entertainment stuff isn't going to work at the Valley. The location is all wrong from a pure business perspective. Accommodation would be of more interest to the Council, but it will need to be affordable to work at Charlton, it would need to focus on the rental market to affect break even and on that basis payback won't arrive any time soon (unless the capital cost would be another loan never serviced - none of this makes any business sense whatsoever). It would also presumably require a change of use approval from the Council, although I have no idea how likely that is to succeed.
Roland's experiment has failed. He bought the wrong club for so many reasons.7 -
Average attendance last year was 16,707PassItToLeaburn said:Turnover down by 8%. Operating loss up by 9%. They can only claim a reduction in losses due to the cheap sale of one of England's finest defensive prospects. These guys don't come along every year so it is not sustainable to assume the same going forward.
Also interesting to note that tickets and matchday activities are 43% of turnover (and not one third).
We all know that the accounts for this year will look significantly worse and for next year significantly worse again.
This year we're at 15,552 and imagine that will drop in the remaining games.
Assuming a £25 ticket that means ticket revenue is down by £28,875 PER GAME.
23 home games a season means that ticket revenue will be down by £664,125 this season.0 -
Can anyone make the accounts available?0
-
-
They've also been including comps and discounted Uni of Greenwich tickets in that number.Leeds_Addick said:
Average attendance last year was 16,707PassItToLeaburn said:Turnover down by 8%. Operating loss up by 9%. They can only claim a reduction in losses due to the cheap sale of one of England's finest defensive prospects. These guys don't come along every year so it is not sustainable to assume the same going forward.
Also interesting to note that tickets and matchday activities are 43% of turnover (and not one third).
We all know that the accounts for this year will look significantly worse and for next year significantly worse again.
This year we're at 15,552 and imagine that will drop in the remaining games.
Assuming a £25 ticket that means ticket revenue is down by £28,875 PER GAME.
23 home games a season means that ticket revenue will be down by £664,125 this season.0 -
Interest for that year owed to Staprix amounted to £955k0
-
And £351,000 for 2014. That is a total of £1,346,000 in two years!NorthStandUltra said:Interest for that year owed to Staprix amounted to £955k
0 -
JesusNorthStandUltra said:Interest for that year owed to Staprix amounted to £955k
0 -
I'd be interested to know what anyone with more financial knowledge than me thinks about the fact that much of the Staprix interest is only in the Baton 2010 (parent company) accounts.
I don't see the point of this unless 1) it's to circumvent FFP rules (although I doubt if it does) or 2) the board thinks people will only look at CAFC Ltd and ignore Baton.
Incidentally, it's worth bearing in mind that this is as of June last year. He'll have accrued at least another £750k of interest since then and the debt figure will be much higher.1
