If a shareholder's loan does NOT bear an interest charge then it will almost certainly be deemed to be equity in the event of a winding up. This would place the shareholder's equity & his loan at the bottom of the list to receive any distributions from the liquidation of any assets. Hence shareholders loans almost always pay notional interest, to ensure this doesn't happen. In the real world however, shareholder's loans are quasi-equity & will never be repaid until the shareholder exits the business. The interest is notional as it is never actually paid to the shareholder but just rolled up into his outstanding loan amount. This is totally standard practice & there is nothing sinister in it.
That's the answer I was looking for, thank you.
Or at least it will be unless the interest shows up in the accounts...
We are trying to get to the bottom of how exactly he has exited Standard. The Socios speak bitterly of him emptying the bank account of €30m but stop short of saying he did anything illegal. That sounds to me like he had loaned Standard the money, and recalled it when he exited. It is also now increasingly said that Venanzi didn't have anything like the money to meet RDs asking price, so he has quietly done a deal with him. It may involve RD getting a cut of player sales as part of the repayment terms.
I think it is important to get to the bottom of the Standard sale, because it will tell us a lot about what he will look for in selling us.
He took €20m out a couple of years ago in the form of dividends. He did the same for €10m a few months before the sale was complete.
I do think there is a question mark over this exit, not least because it seemed as if the new guy and RD were at loggerheads, not least over Tony Watt's fee Yet our first paid for transfer since was from Liege. Hmm...
If a shareholder's loan does NOT bear an interest charge then it will almost certainly be deemed to be equity in the event of a winding up. This would place the shareholder's equity & his loan at the bottom of the list to receive any distributions from the liquidation of any assets. Hence shareholders loans almost always pay notional interest, to ensure this doesn't happen. In the real world however, shareholder's loans are quasi-equity & will never be repaid until the shareholder exits the business. The interest is notional as it is never actually paid to the shareholder but just rolled up into his outstanding loan amount. This is totally standard practice & there is nothing sinister in it.
"...there is nothing sinister in it."
...except that it makes any notional sale price paid for the club higher.
No, it doesn't. The existence or not of any shareholder loans will not change the selling price at all. As Alwaysneil says, the club is only worth what somebody else is prepared to pay for it. Some or all of the loans (including the rolled up interest) will just have to be written off at the time of sale, if the price is lower. Shareholder loans are quasi-equity & are not actually expected to be repaid.
But if you have an owner who doesn't want to sell (as recently quoted), RD will expect the loans repaid in full, and will not write anything off.
How much do you think he would have accepted from the Varney investors for the club as a minimum? The £14m he paid, or the £14m he paid plus all of the money he has "invested" since?
My view is that he will want everything back, including 3% p.a interest. If we say that is £14m plus £9m (again, quoting...) then any potential buyer would require an offer to be made of at least £27m (and that's just of RD sells at no loss and no profit other than the Staprix interest rate). You can add to that any losses made over the last two years (at least £6m), and then anything invested so far into the academy (up to £12m) and pitch/stadium (£2.5m) and all of a sudden the asking price is close to £40m.
It would be lovely if we could get RD to write off all of these loans and accept a minimal offer for the club but that simply will not happen.
£50m had been rumoured. It would make sense at that price if RD wanted to exit. His loans have been in the order of £15m, he bought the club for £18m, and he's parted with at least part of that £12m. It would get him out with a modest profit.
The POTY cup that has been used for years belongs to CASC.
But there is no CASC.
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The POTY cup that has been used for years belongs to CASC.
But there is no CASC.
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The suggested participation of the community trust is also a complete red herring. I have worked with the trust extensively so I know there are plenty of good people involved, but quite a few of them are not Charlton fans. My suspicion is that she wants to turn it into a staff event. I can't really see what possible other relevance CACT has, except to fill it with people other than the supporters who usually attend.
If a shareholder's loan does NOT bear an interest charge then it will almost certainly be deemed to be equity in the event of a winding up. This would place the shareholder's equity & his loan at the bottom of the list to receive any distributions from the liquidation of any assets. Hence shareholders loans almost always pay notional interest, to ensure this doesn't happen. In the real world however, shareholder's loans are quasi-equity & will never be repaid until the shareholder exits the business. The interest is notional as it is never actually paid to the shareholder but just rolled up into his outstanding loan amount. This is totally standard practice & there is nothing sinister in it.
That's the answer I was looking for, thank you.
Or at least it will be unless the interest shows up in the accounts...
Rikofold, the interest will still be charged in the accounts. It just won't actually be paid to him. There would be no point, as he would just have to pay it straight back as part of his subsidising the monthly losses. If the club was making a profit however......
The POTY cup that has been used for years belongs to CASC.
But there is no CASC.
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The suggested participation of the community trust is also a complete red herring. I have worked with the trust extensively so I know there are plenty of good people involved, but quite a few of them are not Charlton fans. My suspicion is that she wants to turn it into a staff event. I can't really see what possible other relevance CACT has, except to fill it with people other than the supporters who usually attend.
Divide & rule. She doesn't want the supporters to be getting on with the players and likely snubbing her.
The POTY cup that has been used for years belongs to CASC.
But there is no CASC.
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The suggested participation of the community trust is also a complete red herring. I have worked with the trust extensively so I know there are plenty of good people involved, but quite a few of them are not Charlton fans. My suspicion is that she wants to turn it into a staff event. I can't really see what possible other relevance CACT has, except to fill it with people other than the supporters who usually attend.
Divide & rule. She doesn't want the supporters to be getting on with the players and likely snubbing her.
The POTY cup that has been used for years belongs to CASC.
But there is no CASC.
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The suggested participation of the community trust is also a complete red herring. I have worked with the trust extensively so I know there are plenty of good people involved, but quite a few of them are not Charlton fans. My suspicion is that she wants to turn it into a staff event. I can't really see what possible other relevance CACT has, except to fill it with people other than the supporters who usually attend.
I'll tell you what it is, it's a false equation that "the community of Charlton Athletic" = "the Community Trust". She's talked about CACT since the start in these terms.
Until someone gets through to her that the former is all of us supporters, scattered far and wide, whereas the latter represents the impact of the club on its community, whether Charlton or not, I think we're lost.
The POTY cup that has been used for years belongs to CASC.
But there is no CASC.
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The suggested participation of the community trust is also a complete red herring. I have worked with the trust extensively so I know there are plenty of good people involved, but quite a few of them are not Charlton fans. My suspicion is that she wants to turn it into a staff event. I can't really see what possible other relevance CACT has, except to fill it with people other than the supporters who usually attend.
I'll tell you what it is, it's a false equation that "the community of Charlton Athletic" = "the Community Trust". She's talked about CACT since the start in these terms.
Until someone gets through to her that the former is all of us supporters, scattered far and wide, whereas the latter represents the impact of the club on its community, whether Charlton or not, I think we're lost.
I think she probably does know but it suits her to talk about it in the way she does as it fits her 'agenda'
The POTY cup that has been used for years belongs to CASC.
But there is no CASC.
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The suggested participation of the community trust is also a complete red herring. I have worked with the trust extensively so I know there are plenty of good people involved, but quite a few of them are not Charlton fans. My suspicion is that she wants to turn it into a staff event. I can't really see what possible other relevance CACT has, except to fill it with people other than the supporters who usually attend.
I'll tell you what it is, it's a false equation that "the community of Charlton Athletic" = "the Community Trust". She's talked about CACT since the start in these terms.
Until someone gets through to her that the former is all of us supporters, scattered far and wide, whereas the latter represents the impact of the club on its community, whether Charlton or not, I think we're lost.
I think she probably does know but it suits her to talk about it in the way she does as it fits her 'agenda'
There is an ongoing false claim that somehow the work of CACT is carried out by CAFC as if they are a subsidiary of CAFC. It's a separate organisation. The club don't fund CACT and there is no CAFC board member on the trust board or vice versa.
The POTY cup that has been used for years belongs to CASC.
But there is no CASC.
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The suggested participation of the community trust is also a complete red herring. I have worked with the trust extensively so I know there are plenty of good people involved, but quite a few of them are not Charlton fans. My suspicion is that she wants to turn it into a staff event. I can't really see what possible other relevance CACT has, except to fill it with people other than the supporters who usually attend.
I'll tell you what it is, it's a false equation that "the community of Charlton Athletic" = "the Community Trust". She's talked about CACT since the start in these terms.
Until someone gets through to her that the former is all of us supporters, scattered far and wide, whereas the latter represents the impact of the club on its community, whether Charlton or not, I think we're lost.
I think she probably does know but it suits her to talk about it in the way she does as it fits her 'agenda'
There is an ongoing false claim that somehow the work of CACT is carried out by CAFC as if they are a subsidiary of CAFC. It's a separate organisation. The club don't fund CACT and there is no CAFC board member on the trust board or vice versa.
It's not quite that simple, since the club does contribute its identity (in return for the goodwill generated), free match tickets, player appearances, and, at Sparrows Lane, accommodation. I'm not aware that the trust pays rent there. But I agree that CAFC management is not involved in the governance and delivery of CACT (indeed the previous chairman threatened it on occasion) and that Meire can take no credit for its work whatsoever.
It doesn't really. The club is worth whatever someone is prepared to pay. If he wants to sell, and buyers think it's only worth £30m, he has to write off some of the debt same as he would an equity investment
We are trying to get to the bottom of how exactly he has exited Standard. The Socios speak bitterly of him emptying the bank account of €30m but stop short of saying he did anything illegal. That sounds to me like he had loaned Standard the money, and recalled it when he exited. It is also now increasingly said that Venanzi didn't have anything like the money to meet RDs asking price, so he has quietly done a deal with him. It may involve RD getting a cut of player sales as part of the repayment terms.
I think it is important to get to the bottom of the Standard sale, because it will tell us a lot about what he will look for in selling us.
It's a fair point to try and qualify but where could a club like Standard suddenly have got a cash war chest of €30M from? It can surely only be as a result of the sale of players or those purchasing the club from him agreed to pay up his loan account in cash to create their own loan account or brought in an external source of loan funding. I can't see any other way he could do it thus it would have to have formed part of his exit sale price agreement.
If he doesn't want to sell, then he won't sell for any price. Discussions about price are only valid if he DOES want to sell.
This is right. Even though we may not like him or what he is doing to put club he is chucking in a big chunk of money via Staprix.
It seems to me (and this is not my area of expertise) that the biggest concern for our club is that he turns out to be a man of straw and that his financial interest/value in Staprix suddenly becomes compromised and Staprix require the loans to our club to be returned causing the club either to be sold for enough money or forcing it into administration?
Perhaps the financial wizards on here can give a view on this?
Just out of interest, if CAFC owe Staprix say EUR 30,000,000 - does this increase the value of Staprix by EUR 30,000,000 because it's technically something they can "cash in", and thus an asset?
If so, does this mean that Roland has essentially "injected EUR30,000,000" in to the club (no idea how, I can't see that myself.) - but due to the way he's funded it, his actual net-worth as an individual is exactly the same?
In fact, due to the interest at which we owe the money to Staprix (and thus Roland), his net worth on paper is increasing by injecting that money in to CAFC?
Sorry @ross1, not a criticism of your statement, but, are the players are told what they can and can't do in their spare time ?
They would need permission to attend anything as an employee of the club. So depending on what they were attending and in what capacity, yes.
Blimey, thanks @iainment , didn't realize that. The jokes about North Korea may be not so funny now.......
Pretty standard condition nowadays. I work for a social housing organisation and if I was found to be purporting to represent them in public I could be disciplined.
If he doesn't want to sell, then he won't sell for any price. Discussions about price are only valid if he DOES want to sell.
This is right. Even though we may not like him or what he is doing to put club he is chucking in a big chunk of money via Staprix.
It seems to me (and this is not my area of expertise) that the biggest concern for our club is that he turns out to be a man of straw and that his financial interest/value in Staprix suddenly becomes compromised and Staprix require the loans to our club to be returned causing the club either to be sold for enough money or forcing it into administration?
Perhaps the financial wizards on here can give a view on this?
I think this is an unlikely scenario. If he did that, even assuming he could, clearly the club could not meet the obligation so would be insolvent. He is down the list of creditors and wouldn't get anywhere near the value. Besides, Katrien says there's lots of interest so there's always the option of selling if he wanted to liquidate his interest in the club.
If he doesn't want to sell, then he won't sell for any price. Discussions about price are only valid if he DOES want to sell.
This is right. Even though we may not like him or what he is doing to put club he is chucking in a big chunk of money via Staprix.
It seems to me (and this is not my area of expertise) that the biggest concern for our club is that he turns out to be a man of straw and that his financial interest/value in Staprix suddenly becomes compromised and Staprix require the loans to our club to be returned causing the club either to be sold for enough money or forcing it into administration?
Perhaps the financial wizards on here can give a view on this?
I think this is an unlikely scenario. If he did that, even assuming he could, clearly the club could not meet the obligation so would be insolvent. He is down the list of creditors and wouldn't get anywhere near the value. Besides, Katrien says there's lots of interest so there's always the option of selling if he wanted to liquidate his interest in the club.
The bit where they shrug and talk about hiring managers in good faith really REALLY irritates me.
Where is the 'good faith' in not bothering to find us a proper manager for over two months? What 'good faith' can they have possibly had in a guy that had never managed at a level even close to the championship? Someone that had given his stamp of approval on several players that they are now trying to shift on loan deals, because they can't cut it? That isn't good faith at all, it is complete wilful negligence.
"I am sorry I tried to administer this suppository with a large cactus, it was done in good faith..."
Totally agree 100%
By no measure could the interim manager be considered in any way qualified even on a temporary basis. His CV was more threadbare than a tramps underpants.
So "in good faith" they decided that somebody who was managing (unsuccesfully a Belgian Third Division side) was the right person to take on the role of managing a club in one of the top ten league's in Europe. It's utterly preposterous even if he had been assisting Riga a year or so before.
This approach makes complete fools of all of us.
I always believe in the old adage "when in hole stop digging".
An appropriate response would just to accept that they have made a number of mistakes due to underestimating the requirements of the Championship and therefore they will always look at a manager/head coach who has either experience of managing/coaching in the UK or who has a proven track record of managing/coaching in an a higher ranked European league outside the UK.
Had a chance to watch some of it (too painful to watch it all).
It is good that it is on video. It's a brave and open thing to do and it lets people see what is said and not said by both sides so well done the club on that.
I'm not sure tht KM, TK or some other staff come out of it very well. Many questions are dodged or answers fudged and as @MartinCAFC says above there are very few firm actions arising. It appears as if the staff just want to get it out of the way.
I did think Felicity looked a bit shocked with Ian Wallis @killerjerrylee said he wasn't going to be involved in a Saturday event as it seemed as if they had assumed he and Jean @Fanny Fanackapan would just go along with what was suggested (which was very vague given that it is only 12 weeks away). The bottom line was "The players don't want to do it on a Sunday so everything has to change.
I thought @rikofold did very well to try and pin them down and hold them to account although they did as much as they could to not answer the questions or dodge them. The "we didn't speak to Varney as the club isn't for sale" but "we didn't speak to him because we didn't know what he was offering" doublethink was one of many examples. I thought he did as much as he could and his tongue must have been painful at the end so much biting of it had taken place
Most of the club staff continue to see the fans as the enemy who have nothing to offer unless they want their free labour (player of the year) and as an incovineince to be got over rather than a invaluable resource and knowledge bank. If they did they would be making firm action points.
As an example of how dysfunctional the senior management team is it is perfect.
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The POTY cup that has been used for years belongs to CASC.
But there is no CASC.
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The suggested participation of the community trust is also a complete red herring. I have worked with the trust extensively so I know there are plenty of good people involved, but quite a few of them are not Charlton fans. My suspicion is that she wants to turn it into a staff event. I can't really see what possible other relevance CACT has, except to fill it with people other than the supporters who usually attend.
I'll tell you what it is, it's a false equation that "the community of Charlton Athletic" = "the Community Trust". She's talked about CACT since the start in these terms.
Until someone gets through to her that the former is all of us supporters, scattered far and wide, whereas the latter represents the impact of the club on its community, whether Charlton or not, I think we're lost.
I think she probably does know but it suits her to talk about it in the way she does as it fits her 'agenda'
There is an ongoing false claim that somehow the work of CACT is carried out by CAFC as if they are a subsidiary of CAFC. It's a separate organisation. The club don't fund CACT and there is no CAFC board member on the trust board or vice versa.
The POTY cup that has been used for years belongs to CASC.
But there is no CASC.
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
In theory the event would be stronger with full cooperation between the fans and the club. It's hard to escape the suspicion that the club want to change it regardless of how the fans feel about it. I think they're perhaps missing the point, but it was made very well on the night by Vern and in particular Ian.
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
The suggested participation of the community trust is also a complete red herring. I have worked with the trust extensively so I know there are plenty of good people involved, but quite a few of them are not Charlton fans. My suspicion is that she wants to turn it into a staff event. I can't really see what possible other relevance CACT has, except to fill it with people other than the supporters who usually attend.
I'll tell you what it is, it's a false equation that "the community of Charlton Athletic" = "the Community Trust". She's talked about CACT since the start in these terms.
Until someone gets through to her that the former is all of us supporters, scattered far and wide, whereas the latter represents the impact of the club on its community, whether Charlton or not, I think we're lost.
I think she probably does know but it suits her to talk about it in the way she does as it fits her 'agenda'
There is an ongoing false claim that somehow the work of CACT is carried out by CAFC as if they are a subsidiary of CAFC. It's a separate organisation. The club don't fund CACT and there is no CAFC board member on the trust board or vice versa.
It's not quite that simple, since the club does contribute its identity (in return for the goodwill generated), free match tickets, player appearances, and, at Sparrows Lane, accommodation. I'm not aware that the trust pays rent there. But I agree that CAFC management is not involved in the governance and delivery of CACT (indeed the previous chairman threatened it on occasion) and that Meire can take no credit for its work whatsoever.
I think the answer is contained in these three seperate posters, It is a fans/supporters event. But to me this about KM and co wanting to control the event. Ian and Vernon gave there opinion regarding the day, I just do not understand why the club want to 'micromanage' this at arms length?
The museum is an excellent example if another is needed,of what fans can do, besides the 5 years that Jean and Ian have done this, that 'the fans' are quite capable of organizing this event, but it is a lot easier with the clubs support. If Roland is such a keen supporter of being 'involved', I hope to see him attending. You never know then he might be enlightened by his own experience of the event.
The CARD estimate of the media space that the anti-RD campaign (£100,000) has had is telling.
Could you ever put a monetary cost on the goodwill to CAFC lost by Katrien Meire's management of the company? The best example's coming up now - Football For A Fiver. In the past, loads of us have gone out and put posters up in local shops, handed out flyers and spread the word on social media. Nobody's going to do that this year. And that's going to cost RD and KM dear.
The club's stance on the POTY event this year has resonance with the stuff like house music in crossbars, or the disaster of the open day when Bob Peeters arrived, or cheerleaders, or dare I say it the sofa, or the pre match kids events. There is very little awareness from the club regarding what goes down well with fans. What some great minds at Charlton think of as innovative and creative, be that the way the big screen is used, the mascots, pitch hire adverts, miserably walking around the perimeter pre-match halfheartedly swaying flags, is at best all hit and miss, with only about a 2% hit rate. I have no clue as to who comes up with 'ideas' at the club, but I am certain these ideas are never road tested to any degree, or suggested to fans. It all smacks to me like the Apprentice contestant with the loudest voice and biggest ego shoving their stupid idea down the throats of everybody else and brooking no argument.
Mind you if they dreamed up some crowd pleasing event involving laundry baskets it might have potential, at least that idea has been road tested.
When the cheerleaders were first suggested at a meeting several members of staff said that it would be a bad idea and not only had we tried it before but it was to much like Palace.
However, a couple of key members of staff pressed ahead with it and one even asked what is the problem with palace..!!
Once the event had finished and they received negative feedback they looked puzzled.
I find things line this strange, especially as some senior management believe that they fully understand what the customer wants.
As this is supposed to be an event for the fans, don't invite Km or any of the begin hierarchy. Jason Euell could come as a representative of the club/management/staff.
Comments
Or at least it will be unless the interest shows up in the accounts...
I do think there is a question mark over this exit, not least because it seemed as if the new guy and RD were at loggerheads, not least over Tony Watt's fee Yet our first paid for transfer since was from Liege. Hmm...
The nearest to that would be the Fans' Forum with representative members of any remaining Supporter Groups.
And we organised the event for the past 5 years " on behalf of the fans' Forum".
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms.
Until someone gets through to her that the former is all of us supporters, scattered far and wide, whereas the latter represents the impact of the club on its community, whether Charlton or not, I think we're lost.
It seems to me (and this is not my area of expertise) that the biggest concern for our club is that he turns out to be a man of straw and that his financial interest/value in Staprix suddenly becomes compromised and Staprix require the loans to our club to be returned causing the club either to be sold for enough money or forcing it into administration?
Perhaps the financial wizards on here can give a view on this?
The jokes about North Korea may be not so funny now.......
If so, does this mean that Roland has essentially "injected EUR30,000,000" in to the club (no idea how, I can't see that myself.) - but due to the way he's funded it, his actual net-worth as an individual is exactly the same?
In fact, due to the interest at which we owe the money to Staprix (and thus Roland), his net worth on paper is increasing by injecting that money in to CAFC?
By no measure could the interim manager be considered in any way qualified even on a temporary basis. His CV was more threadbare than a tramps underpants.
So "in good faith" they decided that somebody who was managing (unsuccesfully a Belgian Third Division side) was the right person to take on the role of managing a club in one of the top ten league's in Europe. It's utterly preposterous even if he had been assisting Riga a year or so before.
This approach makes complete fools of all of us.
I always believe in the old adage "when in hole stop digging".
An appropriate response would just to accept that they have made a number of mistakes due to underestimating the requirements of the Championship and therefore they will always look at a manager/head coach who has either experience of managing/coaching in the UK or who has a proven track record of managing/coaching in an a higher ranked European league outside the UK. Brilliantly put @henryirving
POTY has always been an event for the fans, that's the point of it. By its very definition it's surely best organised by the fans with the club's full support, in particular for its accommodation and the availability of the coaches and the players. The DNC contract creates added pain, but that's just a reality to be overcome one way or another.
It would be so much better if the commercial manager offered her support to the organising committee rather than effect a takeover, once again, with the promise of consultation but clearly only on the club's own terms. I think the answer is contained in these three seperate posters, It is a fans/supporters event. But to me this about KM and co wanting to control the event.
Ian and Vernon gave there opinion regarding the day, I just do not understand why the club want to 'micromanage' this at arms length?
The museum is an excellent example if another is needed,of what fans can do, besides the 5 years that Jean and Ian have done this, that 'the fans' are quite capable of organizing this event, but it is a lot easier with the clubs support. If Roland is such a keen supporter of being 'involved', I hope to see him attending. You never know then he might be enlightened by his own experience of the event.
Could you ever put a monetary cost on the goodwill to CAFC lost by Katrien Meire's management of the company? The best example's coming up now - Football For A Fiver. In the past, loads of us have gone out and put posters up in local shops, handed out flyers and spread the word on social media. Nobody's going to do that this year. And that's going to cost RD and KM dear.
The club's stance on the POTY event this year has resonance with the stuff like house music in crossbars, or the disaster of the open day when Bob Peeters arrived, or cheerleaders, or dare I say it the sofa, or the pre match kids events. There is very little awareness from the club regarding what goes down well with fans.
What some great minds at Charlton think of as innovative and creative, be that the way the big screen is used, the mascots, pitch hire adverts, miserably walking around the perimeter pre-match halfheartedly swaying flags, is at best all hit and miss, with only about a 2% hit rate.
I have no clue as to who comes up with 'ideas' at the club, but I am certain these ideas are never road tested to any degree, or suggested to fans. It all smacks to me like the Apprentice contestant with the loudest voice and biggest ego shoving their stupid idea down the throats of everybody else and brooking no argument.
Mind you if they dreamed up some crowd pleasing event involving laundry baskets it might have potential, at least that idea has been road tested.
However, a couple of key members of staff pressed ahead with it and one even asked what is the problem with palace..!!
Once the event had finished and they received negative feedback they looked puzzled.
I find things line this strange, especially as some senior management believe that they fully understand what the customer wants.