Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Watt to remain at The Valley (ed. GONE Blackburn to get much needed game time again)
Comments
-
It's not so long ago that Tony Cottee played in all four divisions in a single season. I think someone might have done it more recently than him too.Chris_from_Sidcup said:JS5 said:Can he actually play for anyone else? Thought u can't play for 3 different teams a season! If so and we've rejected there loan he has to stay! X
Poyet played for West ham and MK Dons, then came on loan to us so that can't be right.0 -
I used to watch Standard Liege when Watt was in the team. He obviously wanted out, so he just basically went through motions. I feel sure if he is included in our team again, he will just go through the motions once again.0
-
The loans to the old board are the subject of a legal agreement that sets out the priorities. The mortgage debt on the north stand having been repaid, they now have the first legal charge over The Valley, etc.RedChaser said:
I bow to your more in depth knowledge of the accounts however the Staprix bank debt is highly likely to be secured by a debenture or fixed charge over that companies assets and then as you say the former directors loans are similarly secured, whether they rank before the bank is unlikely to be the case.Airman Brown said:
Loans are from Staprix - I don't think he needs a charge on the assets as he owns and controls them. He does rank behind the £7m owed to the old board, but I don't think there is any other debt now apart from day to day credit on trading. The former bank debt will now sit with Staprix.RedChaser said:
Highly likely it'll be shown in the accounts as Directors loans or from one of the companies he owns in the group. And no doubt those loans are secured on the fixed assets albeit behind existing charges to banks / other secured creditors. If not which would be rather careless of him, then he has to wait for a willing buyer to repay the 'personal debt'.stonemuse said:
Still not convinced he has spent much anyway ...isn't it all now debt owed by the club back to RD?RedChaser said:
Serves him right...........oh hang in a minute it's only pocket change to RD, Damn!ShootersHillGuru said:
Well we are fucked then. Any club wanting Watt know they have us over a barrel and won't pay anywhere near £2 million. If we don't spend at least that on some players we will be relegated by the end of February.The Red Robin said:Dr Kish reckons our January activity is dependent on selling Watt for £2M.
Very clever Roland. Relegation won't cost you much will it.
Since he gets to determine the terms of any sale with the purchaser, I'm not sure why making a charge on the assets would be of any value?
Regarding him taking a charge on the assets it depends what sale price is agreed and he may be prepared accept less and just do what the former directors have done to protect their debt if he hasn't done so already (assuming he has made loans in his personal capacity to cover the running losses).
Not sure if you're suggesting otherwise, but I'm confident RD won't get in ahead of the old board in the debt hierarchy (and so are they), whatever he does with Staprix. Otherwise the agreement would be worthless and would have been with the BVI company as owner too.0 -
Sad but trueWeegie Addick said:
Tel, you are missing my point. It is not about needing the cash - it is about needing to prove he is right. He has set KM a budget target. (Remember she once mentioned having a target budget for player sales?) 30 June is the day of reckoning, after which it all gets totted up and reported. If we don't sell Watt or Lookman till the summer, that leaves a hole in this year's books. To them, it is simply a numbers game.TelMc32 said:
Melexis N.V. paid a dividend of £21.3m (€1.30 div x 21,644,399 shares) to their majority shareholder (Xtrion) on October 22nd. I suspect Roland (Xtrion) can struggle through without having to worry too much about a fee for Tony Watt!Weegie Addick said:
Financial year end is 30 June so that will be the budget cut-off.Airman Brown said:
Can still be sold in the summer, so that doesn't quite stack up for me. It's unlikely the megalomaniac has a cashflow problem. More likely an excuse to sell Lookman.The Red Robin said:Dr Kish reckons our January activity is dependent on selling Watt for £2M.
0 -
A bit like the entire team is now.Loup086 said:I used to watch Standard Liege when Watt was in the team. He obviously wanted out, so he just basically went through motions. I feel sure if he is included in our team again, he will just go through the motions once again.
0 -
At the Bromley meeting immediately after Curbishley left, Murray insinuated that Graham had applied for the job.The Red Robin said:George Graham always said he didn't care if he didn't like a player, he'd pick him if he was going to win him football matches. He wasn't a bad manager was he?
Bet we would have stayed up that season.2 -
.
Ok @Airman Brown so if are you saying the previous bank borrowing was repaid by Staprix who took over the debt against a charge over the land and buildings (if it is a debenture it would also cover current assets such as debtors) this makes sense and the former directors have been given priority for their £7m. In which case I agree that RD couldn't get ahead of them in the pecking order.Airman Brown said:
The loans to the old board are the subject of a legal agreement that sets out the priorities. The mortgage debt on the north stand having been repaid, they now have the first legal charge over The Valley, etc.RedChaser said:
I bow to your more in depth knowledge of the accounts however the Staprix bank debt is highly likely to be secured by a debenture or fixed charge over that companies assets and then as you say the former directors loans are similarly secured, whether they rank before the bank is unlikely to be the case.Airman Brown said:
Loans are from Staprix - I don't think he needs a charge on the assets as he owns and controls them. He does rank behind the £7m owed to the old board, but I don't think there is any other debt now apart from day to day credit on trading. The former bank debt will now sit with Staprix.RedChaser said:
Highly likely it'll be shown in the accounts as Directors loans or from one of the companies he owns in the group. And no doubt those loans are secured on the fixed assets albeit behind existing charges to banks / other secured creditors. If not which would be rather careless of him, then he has to wait for a willing buyer to repay the 'personal debt'.stonemuse said:
Still not convinced he has spent much anyway ...isn't it all now debt owed by the club back to RD?RedChaser said:
Serves him right...........oh hang in a minute it's only pocket change to RD, Damn!ShootersHillGuru said:
Well we are fucked then. Any club wanting Watt know they have us over a barrel and won't pay anywhere near £2 million. If we don't spend at least that on some players we will be relegated by the end of February.The Red Robin said:Dr Kish reckons our January activity is dependent on selling Watt for £2M.
Very clever Roland. Relegation won't cost you much will it.
Since he gets to determine the terms of any sale with the purchaser, I'm not sure why making a charge on the assets would be of any value?
Regarding him taking a charge on the assets it depends what sale price is agreed and he may be prepared accept less and just do what the former directors have done to protect their debt if he hasn't done so already (assuming he has made loans in his personal capacity to cover the running losses).
Not sure if you're suggesting otherwise, but I'm confident RD won't get in ahead of the old board in the debt hierarchy (and so are they), whatever he does with Staprix. Otherwise the agreement would be worthless and would have been with the BVI company as owner too.
The original point raised by Stonemuse was that he hasn't actually spent much money but of course he has indirectly through Staprix as majority shareholder in lifting the bank mortgage. It will be interesting to see the clubs latest accounts to see how the ongoing losses are being funded which if by Staprix they will be covered by by the existing charge or whether by unsecured directors (personal) loans from RD. However this would not be a sensible move as he would rank not only behind the former directors and Staprix but behind the preferential creditors in line with all other creditors in the event if a winding up.1 -
Harriot left wing - bags of pace.OhEddieYouds said:
All I am suggesting is that we play 442 (the most common formation in football) with players who are good enough going forward. Most 442 teams have two strikers, two wide men and one centre mid who can create. That why other teams have shots and score goals. Its not working with the current 433 set up where we have one stranded striker, wingers who cant beat championship full backs and a team that doesn't look like scoring from the min we kick off is it?Scoham said:
Two wingers, two strikers and JBG? That's even more attacking than the unbalanced teams KF was putting out.OhEddieYouds said:Both those teams would get relegated in my opinion. We need more players to survive. If I was Riga I would be looking to do the following with my first 11:
Henderson (although we could do with him saving more)
Solly...Johnson....Bauer....THD
Diarra
New winger New winger
JBG
New big striker Watt
Cousins, Lookman & Vetokele would also get alot of game time and be rotated with the midfielders / strikers as required.
If we got some wingers in who brought some excitement / service to our game I even think big Mak might score once a month.
Lookman - right wing? I think he can play there.
Solly & Fox overlapping wing backs as long as Harriot & Lookman do their defensive duties if they are overlapped.
Watt & Mak up front with JBG in the hole/and to pick up any scraps from the edge of the box and a bit deeper.
That leaves one midfielder/play breaker required - a decent ball winner - Diarra?
Big question mark over Harriot & Lookman being able to defend - maybe the two full backs would not need to overlap that often if CH & AL habitually running fast at full backs?
Diarra drops in front of the two CD's when not in possession.
0 -
Would've been a no brainer for one season at least. Since when were we too good for George Graham? And since when was Dowie better?! Richard Murray...ElfsborgAddick said:
At the Bromley meeting immediately after Curbishley left, Murray insinuated that Graham had applied for the job.The Red Robin said:George Graham always said he didn't care if he didn't like a player, he'd pick him if he was going to win him football matches. He wasn't a bad manager was he?
Bet we would have stayed up that season.4 -
What thread is the dad who took his kid into the dressing room?Goonerhater said:Watt supposedly had a bust up with either Luzon or JBG . One is gone and the other clearly don't give a shit so Watt going ain't improved his effort or attitude.
The team spirit is non existent and has been for months. That's not down to Watt. Any player clumped by an opponent or gets shit from a ref and your on your own --- not a murmur from the other 10 so called team mates.
Look at the video of the dressing room pre Hudds or read the thread about the Dad who took his son into the dressing room against Hull---- like a morgue except the dead are faster than Johnson.
JR's first job drop all the players who clearly don't give a shit and make the point u stand little chance of going somewhere better if you can't even get in this team and no chance of going to the EUROs if your attitude is shit.
Watt needs a last chance assuming we arnt 100% comited to selling him.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Reading Curb's blog. Blimey, I know he got well paid but it's a ridiculous lifestyle. No wonder he always had bags under his eyes. Surely, no way he could work like that now?2
-
I'm assuming he is due back at Sparrows Lane today?0
-
@Dizzle Here you go; http://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/comment/2374068/#Comment_2374068Dizzle said:
What thread is the dad who took his kid into the dressing room?Goonerhater said:Watt supposedly had a bust up with either Luzon or JBG . One is gone and the other clearly don't give a shit so Watt going ain't improved his effort or attitude.
The team spirit is non existent and has been for months. That's not down to Watt. Any player clumped by an opponent or gets shit from a ref and your on your own --- not a murmur from the other 10 so called team mates.
Look at the video of the dressing room pre Hudds or read the thread about the Dad who took his son into the dressing room against Hull---- like a morgue except the dead are faster than Johnson.
JR's first job drop all the players who clearly don't give a shit and make the point u stand little chance of going somewhere better if you can't even get in this team and no chance of going to the EUROs if your attitude is shit.
Watt needs a last chance assuming we arnt 100% comited to selling him.1 -
Cheers @RedChaser1
-
Pretty sure it would take those boys the entire 45 minutes to build up enough speed to overlap their winger.purdis said:
Harriot left wing - bags of pace.OhEddieYouds said:
All I am suggesting is that we play 442 (the most common formation in football) with players who are good enough going forward. Most 442 teams have two strikers, two wide men and one centre mid who can create. That why other teams have shots and score goals. Its not working with the current 433 set up where we have one stranded striker, wingers who cant beat championship full backs and a team that doesn't look like scoring from the min we kick off is it?Scoham said:
Two wingers, two strikers and JBG? That's even more attacking than the unbalanced teams KF was putting out.OhEddieYouds said:Both those teams would get relegated in my opinion. We need more players to survive. If I was Riga I would be looking to do the following with my first 11:
Henderson (although we could do with him saving more)
Solly...Johnson....Bauer....THD
Diarra
New winger New winger
JBG
New big striker Watt
Cousins, Lookman & Vetokele would also get alot of game time and be rotated with the midfielders / strikers as required.
If we got some wingers in who brought some excitement / service to our game I even think big Mak might score once a month.
Lookman - right wing? I think he can play there.
Solly & Fox overlapping wing backs as long as Harriot & Lookman do their defensive duties if they are overlapped.
Watt & Mak up front with JBG in the hole/and to pick up any scraps from the edge of the box and a bit deeper.
That leaves one midfielder/play breaker required - a decent ball winner - Diarra?
Big question mark over Harriot & Lookman being able to defend - maybe the two full backs would not need to overlap that often if CH & AL habitually running fast at full backs?
Diarra drops in front of the two CD's when not in possession.
Plus I'm afraid that line-up is almost Fraeye-esque in its lack of balance. They'd get torn apart. You've got two strikers there, neither of whom are hugely known for their tracking back. Then you've got a striker at right midfield who regardless of if he tries to track back will always be looking to go forward first, so his full back will be exposed. If you're then expecting the full backs to bomb forward all the time it'll be a ghost town defensively down that flank. If you want your full backs to overlap then you need to make sure that you've got the right balance to ensure cover is always available. For instance when Powell played 442 we always had two central midfielders who knew how to scrap as well as play, and one of the wide midfielders would usually be a re-purposed central midfielder, like Pritchard or Jackson. We almost never played with two out and out wingers as it left us susceptible to getting caught out and we weren't clinical enough to be able to offset that. Add to that you're playing Gudmundsson as part of a midfield two we'd get absolutely overrun through the middle as Johann isn't able to do the dirty work or hold himself in the right positions to control the middle. It would just be the opposition passing round Diarra and then cutting open our woeful defence.5 -
Watt didn't play on Saturday (the final game of his loan spell) but Cardiff won 3-1 at Wolves so they didn't appear to miss him...1
-
I'm not aware of Staprix having a legal charge, although I'll have a look. The bank debt was associated with one, but I am assuming Staprix loaned the club the money to pay it down. In any event, we'll learn more from the 14/15 accounts in the next two months.RedChaser said:.
Ok @Airman Brown so if are you saying the previous bank borrowing was repaid by Staprix who took over the debt against a charge over the land and buildings (if it is a debenture it would also cover current assets such as debtors) this makes sense and the former directors have been given priority for their £7m. In which case I agree that RD couldn't get ahead of them in the pecking order.Airman Brown said:
The loans to the old board are the subject of a legal agreement that sets out the priorities. The mortgage debt on the north stand having been repaid, they now have the first legal charge over The Valley, etc.RedChaser said:
I bow to your more in depth knowledge of the accounts however the Staprix bank debt is highly likely to be secured by a debenture or fixed charge over that companies assets and then as you say the former directors loans are similarly secured, whether they rank before the bank is unlikely to be the case.Airman Brown said:
Loans are from Staprix - I don't think he needs a charge on the assets as he owns and controls them. He does rank behind the £7m owed to the old board, but I don't think there is any other debt now apart from day to day credit on trading. The former bank debt will now sit with Staprix.RedChaser said:
Highly likely it'll be shown in the accounts as Directors loans or from one of the companies he owns in the group. And no doubt those loans are secured on the fixed assets albeit behind existing charges to banks / other secured creditors. If not which would be rather careless of him, then he has to wait for a willing buyer to repay the 'personal debt'.stonemuse said:
Still not convinced he has spent much anyway ...isn't it all now debt owed by the club back to RD?RedChaser said:
Serves him right...........oh hang in a minute it's only pocket change to RD, Damn!ShootersHillGuru said:
Well we are fucked then. Any club wanting Watt know they have us over a barrel and won't pay anywhere near £2 million. If we don't spend at least that on some players we will be relegated by the end of February.The Red Robin said:Dr Kish reckons our January activity is dependent on selling Watt for £2M.
Very clever Roland. Relegation won't cost you much will it.
Since he gets to determine the terms of any sale with the purchaser, I'm not sure why making a charge on the assets would be of any value?
Regarding him taking a charge on the assets it depends what sale price is agreed and he may be prepared accept less and just do what the former directors have done to protect their debt if he hasn't done so already (assuming he has made loans in his personal capacity to cover the running losses).
Not sure if you're suggesting otherwise, but I'm confident RD won't get in ahead of the old board in the debt hierarchy (and so are they), whatever he does with Staprix. Otherwise the agreement would be worthless and would have been with the BVI company as owner too.
The original point raised by Stonemuse was that he hasn't actually spent much money but of course he has indirectly through Staprix as majority shareholder in lifting the bank mortgage. It will be interesting to see the clubs latest accounts to see how the ongoing losses are being funded which if by Staprix they will be covered by by the existing charge or whether by unsecured directors (personal) loans from RD. However this would not be a sensible move as he would rank not only behind the former directors and Staprix but behind the preferential creditors in line with all other creditors in the event if a winding up.0 -
Welcome back Tony(hopefully).1
-
Watt needs a good kick up the kyber. Don't know whether Riga can do that but maybe his teammates could help. Tired of these overpaid prima donnas crying all the way to the bank.
Hopefully as a professional player he might roll his sleeves up and play his socks off for the cause. The fans and the rest of the team would love it.3 -
Now Matt Tees that is someone who we need. Those were the days when i used to enjoy watching Charlton. Watching the first team is like have root Canal treatment.4
- Sponsored links:
-
Sorry @Weegie Addick I hadn't missed your point, I should have been clearer though. Totally get that he is Belgium football's answer to George Osborne and is determined to stick to plan A, as there isn't a plan B despite there being options that could be considered.Weegie Addick said:
Tel, you are missing my point. It is not about needing the cash - it is about needing to prove he is right. He has set KM a budget target. (Remember she once mentioned having a target budget for player sales?) 30 June is the day of reckoning, after which it all gets totted up and reported. If we don't sell Watt or Lookman till the summer, that leaves a hole in this year's books. To them, it is simply a numbers game.TelMc32 said:
Melexis N.V. paid a dividend of £21.3m (€1.30 div x 21,644,399 shares) to their majority shareholder (Xtrion) on October 22nd. I suspect Roland (Xtrion) can struggle through without having to worry too much about a fee for Tony Watt!Weegie Addick said:
Financial year end is 30 June so that will be the budget cut-off.Airman Brown said:
Can still be sold in the summer, so that doesn't quite stack up for me. It's unlikely the megalomaniac has a cashflow problem. More likely an excuse to sell Lookman.The Red Robin said:Dr Kish reckons our January activity is dependent on selling Watt for £2M.
I was just highlighting the loose change which must be weighing him down a little at the moment!!
2 -
He's returning to training tomorrow! Come on Riga sort him out.1
-
a - how do you know?BR7_addick said:He's returning to training tomorrow! Come on Riga sort him out.
b - why tomorrow? Why not today?
0 -
a - Cawley replied to someone I know on Twitter.Swisdom said:
a - how do you know?BR7_addick said:He's returning to training tomorrow! Come on Riga sort him out.
b - why tomorrow? Why not today?
b - Ask Cawley. Ask Cawley.6 -
Bet Murray wishes he'd thought of the "...but every new manager has been the right decision" quote!!!ElfsborgAddick said:
At the Bromley meeting immediately after Curbishley left, Murray insinuated that Graham had applied for the job.The Red Robin said:George Graham always said he didn't care if he didn't like a player, he'd pick him if he was going to win him football matches. He wasn't a bad manager was he?
Bet we would have stayed up that season.0 -
Probably got to spend today travelling back and sorting himself back out at his flat. He's probably going to need a good chat with Riga before he even kicks a football at SL tomorrow also.Swisdom said:
a - how do you know?BR7_addick said:He's returning to training tomorrow! Come on Riga sort him out.
b - why tomorrow? Why not today?0 -
And/or sober up from a weekend on the pish...Atletico Addick said:
Probably got to spend today travelling back and sorting himself back out at his flat. He's probably going to need a good chat with Riga before he even kicks a football at SL tomorrow also.Swisdom said:
a - how do you know?BR7_addick said:He's returning to training tomorrow! Come on Riga sort him out.
b - why tomorrow? Why not today?5 -
"Jose Riga will play a central role in deciding the future of Tony Watt, News Shopper understands.
The Scottish striker will return to Charlton tomorrow morning following his loan spell at Cardiff."
http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/sport/14212146.Charlton_Athletic_boss_to_have_big_say_on_Watt___s_future/4 -
Great news - Riga is no fool - even if the owner, Fraeye and our CEO are.4
