To the people getting on Rick Everitt's back - would you rather not know any of this information? Just because they are the new owners, doesn't mean that no questions should be asked. What he posted wasn't positive or negative, it's just a fact. Don't shoot the messenger as they say.
I dont think Rick is having a go. It's useful information.
We dont yet have the full picture about the ownership. The fact that the ex directors loans still exist is an interesting piece of the puzzle. I am not sure yet what the full picture is yet but it will be useful to know when it does come out.
Completely agree. I find all the background information both fascinating and interesting to understand the structure of the deal. Can't affect it - but I think its useful to possibly understand some of their thinking.
from interview with MS by CAST : 'While on the subject of the takeover, I ask Southall to clarify the structure of the deal. He confirms that ESI now own Charlton Athletic Football Club Limited and have a “legal obligation” within the next six months to complete the purchase of Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited, where the freehold of both the training ground and The Valley sit as assets.'
so don't own The Valley or Training Ground...… yet.
"While on the subject of the takeover, I ask Southall to clarify the structure of the deal. He confirms that ESI now own Charlton Athletic Football Club Limited and have a “legal obligation” within the next six months to complete the purchase of Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited, where the freehold of both the training ground and The Valley sit as assets. “Our first conversation with Roland’s representative was in mid to late August – you can’t even buy a house in three months. There is no need at all for fans to get concerned.” He is being true to his stated aims of openness and honesty, though given this club’s history, even a temporary separation of the footballing side from the assets will make some supporters jittery."
According to this interview ESI haven't yet bought the training ground or the Valley.
That might explain why the directors loans, which are secured on the Valley, haven't been paid yet.
Whether people are worried about ESI not yet owning the Valley and Sparrows Lane is another matter but this interview does seem to contradict what was said earlier by ESI that they had bought the Valley but not yet SL.
The interview also proves that Matt reads this thread as he used a house buying analogy.
There does seem to be a bit of an undercurrent of dislike of this mob in some quarters, because they haven't done any of about 200 very important things, after just a few working days into ownership
They did job 1. Replace Roland. And Job 2. Replace Leko with equal or better. Job 3. Could be Maddison, Taylor or Bowyer's deals
"While on the subject of the takeover, I ask Southall to clarify the structure of the deal. He confirms that ESI now own Charlton Athletic Football Club Limited and have a “legal obligation” within the next six months to complete the purchase of Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited, where the freehold of both the training ground and The Valley sit as assets. “Our first conversation with Roland’s representative was in mid to late August – you can’t even buy a house in three months. There is no need at all for fans to get concerned.” He is being true to his stated aims of openness and honesty, though given this club’s history, even a temporary separation of the footballing side from the assets will make some supporters jittery."
According to this interview ESI haven't yet bought the training ground or the Valley.
That might explain why the directors loans, which are secured on the Valley, haven't been paid yet.
Whether people are worried about ESI not yet owning the Valley and Sparrows Lane is another matter but this interview does seem to contradict what was said earlier by ESI that they had bought the Valley but not yet SL.
The interview also proves that Matt reads this thread as he used a house buying analogy.
You cam't even get a manager to sign a new contract in 3 months when it was a priority so no chance of buying a football ground in that time.
For me it's not about being keen on ESI however I am being cautious as they have not done anything of real substance to win me over. Yes they have bought Roland out but today's news that they do not own The Valley when they said they did and the old director's loans have not been settled still leaves me with concerns.
I am sure once LB signs his new contract and we get a few decent championship standard players in to fend off relegation I will feel better, and that feeling will be increased when the news does finally break that ESI own The Valley & The Training Ground but until then I will return from my boycott paying on a match by match basis with no monies being paid up front i.e. a season ticket.
from interview with MS by CAST : 'While on the subject of the takeover, I ask Southall to clarify the structure of the deal. He confirms that ESI now own Charlton Athletic Football Club Limited and have a “legal obligation” within the next six months to complete the purchase of Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited, where the freehold of both the training ground and The Valley sit as assets.'
so don't own The Valley or Training Ground...… yet.
ESI have confirmed they own The Valley as part of their takeover and have a commitment to buy the club’s training ground within the next six months.
That's from the SLP piece that was mainly about Taylor not signing the contract. Both versions can't be true.
from interview with MS by CAST : 'While on the subject of the takeover, I ask Southall to clarify the structure of the deal. He confirms that ESI now own Charlton Athletic Football Club Limited and have a “legal obligation” within the next six months to complete the purchase of Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited, where the freehold of both the training ground and The Valley sit as assets.'
so don't own The Valley or Training Ground...… yet.
ESI have confirmed they own The Valley as part of their takeover and have a commitment to buy the club’s training ground within the next six months.
That's from the SLP piece that was mainly about Taylor not signing the contract. Both versions can't be true.
I would believe the Trust interview more than an article in the SLP. The extract above in bold confirms they do not own The Valley or the Training Ground but have a legal obligation to do so within six months.
from interview with MS by CAST : 'While on the subject of the takeover, I ask Southall to clarify the structure of the deal. He confirms that ESI now own Charlton Athletic Football Club Limited and have a “legal obligation” within the next six months to complete the purchase of Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited, where the freehold of both the training ground and The Valley sit as assets.'
so don't own The Valley or Training Ground...… yet.
ESI have confirmed they own The Valley as part of their takeover and have a commitment to buy the club’s training ground within the next six months.
That's from the SLP piece that was mainly about Taylor not signing the contract. Both versions can't be true.
I would believe the Trust interview more than an article in the SLP. The extract above in bold confirms they do not own The Valley or the Training Ground but have a legal obligation to do so within six months.
I know that, and agree the trust interview is more believable, but Cawley wouldn't say "ESI have confirmed" if ESI hadn't confirmed.
I'm fine with the fact the wording says they have a legal obligation to buy The Valley and Sparrows Lane.
Concern would only have been if had been said as an option to buy both.
I see no issue here.
This is how I took it.
But I'm genuinely intrigued to see why others are concerned? Maybe I've missed something.
Separating ownership of the club and ground hasn't gone too well previously at Charlton. See 1985 to 1992.
But there is a legal obligation to purchase in six months which could be in the club's next tax year ie 2 July 2020.
It does beg the questions "why?" and "Why did MS say that we'd bought the Valley?"
NB asking questions is NOT the same as hating the new owners, wetting the bed or having a "meltdown". It's a question.
MS explained why already though didn't he? Because they wanted to be in control of the footballing side in time for January, rather than waiting until they own everything, as if they'd done that, we'd probably be in League One after another January with RD.
All for negativity when it’s warranted, but feel going straight for the new owners throats after barely 3 weeks in charge is not something we should be doing.
Do you really think that posting a status about the ownership of Charlton's most important non-playing assets is "going straight for the new owners' throats" @Laddick01? I think @airmanbrown has highlighted a very pertinent issue. He's not going for anyone's throats.
I'm fine with the fact the wording says they have a legal obligation to buy The Valley and Sparrows Lane.
Concern would only have been if had been said as an option to buy both.
I see no issue here.
This is how I took it.
But I'm genuinely intrigued to see why others are concerned? Maybe I've missed something.
Separating ownership of the club and ground hasn't gone too well previously at Charlton. See 1985 to 1992.
But there is a legal obligation to purchase in six months which could be in the club's next tax year ie 2 July 2020.
It does beg the questions "why?" and "Why did MS say that we'd bought the Valley?"
NB asking questions is NOT the same as hating the new owners, wetting the bed or having a "meltdown". It's a question.
MS explained why already though didn't he? Because they wanted to be in control of the footballing side in time for January, rather than waiting until they own everything, as if they'd done that, we'd probably be in League One after another January with RD.
No, he said quite clearly they hadn't bought the training ground for those reasons. That's the first record of him saying they don't own the Valley. ESI confirmed via the SLP that they owned the Valley.
I'm fine with the fact the wording says they have a legal obligation to buy The Valley and Sparrows Lane.
Concern would only have been if had been said as an option to buy both.
I see no issue here.
This is how I took it.
But I'm genuinely intrigued to see why others are concerned? Maybe I've missed something.
Separating ownership of the club and ground hasn't gone too well previously at Charlton. See 1985 to 1992.
But there is a legal obligation to purchase in six months which could be in the club's next tax year ie 2 July 2020.
It does beg the questions "why?" and "Why did MS say that we'd bought the Valley?"
NB asking questions is NOT the same as hating the new owners, wetting the bed or having a "meltdown". It's a question.
MS explained why already though didn't he? Because they wanted to be in control of the footballing side in time for January, rather than waiting until they own everything, as if they'd done that, we'd probably be in League One after another January with RD.
But he said it was the training ground that hadn't been bought. He didn't mention the Valley.
There does seem to be a bit of an undercurrent of dislike of this mob in some quarters, because they haven't done any of about 200 very important things, after just a few working days into ownership
Dislike or distrust so far ? The priority when they came in so we were told was to get get LB signed up on a long term deal & discussions had been held as far back as October. We are now halfway through January, transfer targets are asking questions as to how long LB will be here. As an ex agent MS should be aware that players would be asking this question & still we're waiting for LB to sign.
We were told that ESI had bought the club & The Valley with a commitment to purchase SL within 6 months. It now turns out that we haven't bought The Valley after all. So he's lied about the Valley. What other lies will we be told ?
Mr Chairman, give me a ring when the things that you have promised have actually been completed. See you in league one.
I'm fine with the fact the wording says they have a legal obligation to buy The Valley and Sparrows Lane.
Concern would only have been if had been said as an option to buy both.
I see no issue here.
This is how I took it.
But I'm genuinely intrigued to see why others are concerned? Maybe I've missed something.
Separating ownership of the club and ground hasn't gone too well previously at Charlton. See 1985 to 1992.
But there is a legal obligation to purchase in six months which could be in the club's next tax year ie 2 July 2020.
It does beg the questions "why?" and "Why did MS say that we'd bought the Valley?"
NB asking questions is NOT the same as hating the new owners, wetting the bed or having a "meltdown". It's a question.
MS explained why already though didn't he? Because they wanted to be in control of the footballing side in time for January, rather than waiting until they own everything, as if they'd done that, we'd probably be in League One after another January with RD.
No, he said quite clearly they hadn't bought the training ground for those reasons. That's the first record of him saying they don't own the Valley. ESI confirmed via the SLP that they owned the Valley.
I'm fine with the fact the wording says they have a legal obligation to buy The Valley and Sparrows Lane.
Concern would only have been if had been said as an option to buy both.
I see no issue here.
This is how I took it.
But I'm genuinely intrigued to see why others are concerned? Maybe I've missed something.
Separating ownership of the club and ground hasn't gone too well previously at Charlton. See 1985 to 1992.
But there is a legal obligation to purchase in six months which could be in the club's next tax year ie 2 July 2020.
It does beg the questions "why?" and "Why did MS say that we'd bought the Valley?"
NB asking questions is NOT the same as hating the new owners, wetting the bed or having a "meltdown". It's a question.
MS explained why already though didn't he? Because they wanted to be in control of the footballing side in time for January, rather than waiting until they own everything, as if they'd done that, we'd probably be in League One after another January with RD.
But he said it was the training ground that hadn't been bought. He didn't mention the Valley.
True, but it's obviously for the same reason if both sit under Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited.
Comments
from interview with MS by CAST : 'While on the subject of the takeover, I ask Southall to clarify the structure of the deal. He confirms that ESI now own Charlton Athletic Football Club Limited and have a “legal obligation” within the next six months to complete the purchase of Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited, where the freehold of both the training ground and The Valley sit as assets.'
so don't own The Valley or Training Ground...… yet.
"While on the subject of the takeover, I ask Southall to clarify the structure of the deal. He confirms that ESI now own Charlton Athletic Football Club Limited and have a “legal obligation” within the next six months to complete the purchase of Charlton Athletic Holdings Limited, where the freehold of both the training ground and The Valley sit as assets. “Our first conversation with Roland’s representative was in mid to late August – you can’t even buy a house in three months. There is no need at all for fans to get concerned.” He is being true to his stated aims of openness and honesty, though given this club’s history, even a temporary separation of the footballing side from the assets will make some supporters jittery."
According to this interview ESI haven't yet bought the training ground or the Valley.
That might explain why the directors loans, which are secured on the Valley, haven't been paid yet.
Whether people are worried about ESI not yet owning the Valley and Sparrows Lane is another matter but this interview does seem to contradict what was said earlier by ESI that they had bought the Valley but not yet SL.
The interview also proves that Matt reads this thread as he used a house buying analogy.
Concern would only have been if had been said as an option to buy both.
I see no issue here.
This is how I took it.
But I'm genuinely intrigued to see why others are concerned? Maybe I've missed something.
Not guilty.
But there is a legal obligation to purchase in six months which could be in the club's next tax year ie 2 July 2020.
It does beg the questions "why?" and "Why did MS say that we'd bought the Valley?"
NB asking questions is NOT the same as hating the new owners, wetting the bed or having a "meltdown". It's a question.
And Job 2. Replace Leko with equal or better.
Job 3. Could be Maddison, Taylor or Bowyer's deals
I am sure once LB signs his new contract and we get a few decent championship standard players in to fend off relegation I will feel better, and that feeling will be increased when the news does finally break that ESI own The Valley & The Training Ground but until then I will return from my boycott paying on a match by match basis with no monies being paid up front i.e. a season ticket.
That's from the SLP piece that was mainly about Taylor not signing the contract. Both versions can't be true.
We were told that ESI had bought the club & The Valley with a commitment to purchase SL within 6 months. It now turns out that we haven't bought The Valley after all. So he's lied about the Valley. What other lies will we be told ?
Mr Chairman, give me a ring when the things that you have promised have actually been completed. See you in league one.
That was Matt Southall's words in the 'Meet Matt Southall..' video put out by the club.