The only takeover gossip I heard was that interested parties could buy the whole lot (ground and team) unless humiliatingly stupid money was demanded, but it is complicated by the ‘one club two guv’nors’ situation we are in. Negotiation would be (and I have no idea whatsoever if anything at all has happened) very difficult. I also heard that the interested party is credible and not chancers. I absolutely have no idea who it could be.
The only takeover gossip I heard was that interested parties could buy the whole lot (ground and team) unless humiliatingly stupid money was demanded, but it is complicated by the ‘one club two guv’nors’ situation we are in. Negotiation would be (and I have no idea whatsoever if anything at all has happened) very difficult. I also heard that the interested party is credible and not chancers. I absolutely have no idea who it could be.
Isn’t that the issue though, that RD does indeed want stupid money for the property?
Red Robin was played last night. It had a sense of normal about it.
I didn't hear ATV played before or after kick off.
Is that a small sign Sandgaard is no longer lost in his own world and or has decided to sell?
Has the sound system been given an upgrade finally? London Calling was blaring before kick off as was the Red, Red Robin. Felt like it got the crowd going from the off and the decent football on the pitch helped carry it on!
Really concerned about the Academy cuts. My partners son played in a tournament for Brighton U11's about a month ago, Charlton were a no show. On the plus side, the football this season is definitely a massive improvement on last.
The only takeover gossip I heard was that interested parties could buy the whole lot (ground and team) unless humiliatingly stupid money was demanded, but it is complicated by the ‘one club two guv’nors’ situation we are in. Negotiation would be (and I have no idea whatsoever if anything at all has happened) very difficult. I also heard that the interested party is credible and not chancers. I absolutely have no idea who it could be.
I don't doubt your gossip / source but personally I don't really see this as a complex problem to negotiate (ordinarily).
It is after all only 2 parties to negotiate with and bottom-line will be cash amounts for both of them.
The difficulty may simply remain the apparent eccentricity of RD in his demands / expectations but there will always be a price and one assumes the point RD feels he has recouped enough of his previous losses he would sell?
The only takeover gossip I heard was that interested parties could buy the whole lot (ground and team) unless humiliatingly stupid money was demanded, but it is complicated by the ‘one club two guv’nors’ situation we are in. Negotiation would be (and I have no idea whatsoever if anything at all has happened) very difficult. I also heard that the interested party is credible and not chancers. I absolutely have no idea who it could be.
Strictly speaking, the 'Club' only has one guv'nor, TS, who pays rent to a third party in RD. The Club can therefore be sold without the consent of RD as the lease agreement would pass to the new owner on sale.
Why not buy the Club and deal with RD later as we're contracted to play at the Valley for the next 12 years, which is what TS planned to do and seemed to make sense at the time.
Our underachieving in L1 at present is largely of TS's making in my view, not RD's. Imo, we just need someone more competent to do what TS tried to, only make a better fist of it. I say again, the priority must be to get out of L1.
Drinking coffee at work, settling down and browsing my phone.
Out of nowhere I hear a drum pattern in my head...followed by a
ADDICKS TO VICTORY!
I sort of thought...what was that? That just came out of nowhere.
Am I now all of a sudden an enthusiastic Charlton supporter, where only last week I was moaning and suggesting the club is on its way to the grave. Then just after one game I've u-turned like never before.
Starting from September 2023, my work schedule will be changing. If the price is right and in the north stand, I may consider a season ticket.
I like football and Charlton ...when the football and the football only...is what does the talking!!
Was the budget increased to achieve CAT 1? I assume so and having failed to gain this is this not just a little leveling up due to this. I can imagine Steve Avory has a lack of suitors and would be off if he felt an injustice was occurring.
How much value does the 12 year lease actually have if any. Does anyone know if that value can be calculated at all?
You can thank @carly burn for this, posted on this thread on the 8th October:
"I believe the total rent liability adds up to £7.578 million over 15 years paid in different instalments. So roughly just over half a million £ a year."
Edit. @DagenhamAddick - Having just seen @Lordflashheart's reply, I'm not sure you were wanting to know the liability, but I'll leave it here anyway.
Especially on a property that will likely be under water in 10-15 years. Let RD keep his valueless swamp and build a new one somewhere else, on higher ground.
How much value does the 12 year lease actually have if any. Does anyone know if that value can be calculated at all?
You can thank @carly burn for this, posted on this thread on the 8th October:
"I believe the total rent liability adds up to £7.578 million over 15 years paid in different instalments. So roughly just over half a million £ a year."
That’s a liability i.e. a cost to whoever is the lessee, or in other words the tenant, who ultimately in this case is TS
The lease has no value to a 3rd party like, say, me / my bank as a lender
Only long leases have a value to lend against, ideally greater than 125 years - mortgage providers generally will not provide a mortgage on a leasehold property, normally a flat, if it’s less than 70 years
So, he can’t borrow against The Valley - RD could, as a 12 year lease, with I assume no break clauses, has a value to me as a lender if the freehold of The Valley was charged as security
That said, as a tenant covenant (i.e. the financial strength of the tenant) I wouldn’t lend, as CAFC is a poor covenant (loss making, reliant on its owner to survive etc etc)
In other words, if I lent, then CAFC goes bust, there is no longer any rent to cover the loan payments
I would also have a massive Loan to Value problem - when you get a bank valuation, you get 3 values - Market Value, which is value based upon the property with the benefit of the lease - Vacant Possession Value, which is the value of the property if there was no lease i.e. no tenant / no income, and Reinstatement Value, which is cost to rebuild if the place burned down for example
There will be a huge difference between Market Value and Vacant Possession Value, as what alternative use does The Valley have ?? It’s pretty limited isn’t it
Also cost to rebuild will be mind bogglingly expensive
How much value does the 12 year lease actually have if any. Does anyone know if that value can be calculated at all?
You can thank @carly burn for this, posted on this thread on the 8th October:
"I believe the total rent liability adds up to £7.578 million over 15 years paid in different instalments. So roughly just over half a million £ a year."
That’s a liability i.e. a cost to whoever is the lessee, or in other words the tenant, who ultimately in this case is TS
The lease has no value to a 3rd party like, say, me / my bank as a lender
Only long leases have a value to lend against, ideally greater than 125 years - mortgage providers generally will not provide a mortgage on a leasehold property, normally a flat, if it’s less than 70 years
So, he can’t borrow against The Valley - RD could, as a 12 year lease, with I assume no break clauses, has a value to me as a lender if the freehold of The Valley was charged as security
That said, as a tenant covenant (i.e. the financial strength of the tenant) I wouldn’t lend, as CAFC is a poor covenant (loss making, reliant on its owner to survive etc etc)
In other words, if I lent, then CAFC goes bust, there is no longer any rent to cover the loan payments
I would also have a massive Loan to Value problem - when you get a bank valuation, you get 3 values - Market Value, which is value based upon the property with the benefit of the lease - Vacant Possession Value, which is the value of the property if there was no lease i.e. no tenant / no income, and Reinstatement Value, which is cost to rebuild if the place burned down for example
There will be a huge difference between Market Value and Vacant Possession Value, as what alternative use does The Valley have ?? It’s pretty limited isn’t it
Also cost to rebuild will be mind bogglingly expensive
Sorry to have put you to all that trouble as it was my fault for misinterpreting the question rather than not understanding the principles involved in the valuation of leases.
How much value does the 12 year lease actually have if any. Does anyone know if that value can be calculated at all?
You can thank @carly burn for this, posted on this thread on the 8th October:
"I believe the total rent liability adds up to £7.578 million over 15 years paid in different instalments. So roughly just over half a million £ a year."
That’s a liability i.e. a cost to whoever is the lessee, or in other words the tenant, who ultimately in this case is TS
The lease has no value to a 3rd party like, say, me / my bank as a lender
Only long leases have a value to lend against, ideally greater than 125 years - mortgage providers generally will not provide a mortgage on a leasehold property, normally a flat, if it’s less than 70 years
So, he can’t borrow against The Valley - RD could, as a 12 year lease, with I assume no break clauses, has a value to me as a lender if the freehold of The Valley was charged as security
That said, as a tenant covenant (i.e. the financial strength of the tenant) I wouldn’t lend, as CAFC is a poor covenant (loss making, reliant on its owner to survive etc etc)
In other words, if I lent, then CAFC goes bust, there is no longer any rent to cover the loan payments
I would also have a massive Loan to Value problem - when you get a bank valuation, you get 3 values - Market Value, which is value based upon the property with the benefit of the lease - Vacant Possession Value, which is the value of the property if there was no lease i.e. no tenant / no income, and Reinstatement Value, which is cost to rebuild if the place burned down for example
There will be a huge difference between Market Value and Vacant Possession Value, as what alternative use does The Valley have ?? It’s pretty limited isn’t it
Also cost to rebuild will be mind bogglingly expensive
Sorry to have put you to all that trouble as it was my fault for misinterpreting the question rather than not understanding the principles involved in the valuation of leases.
If I was running the club, I wouldn't bother with U11, U12 or U13 football in terms of the academy. I would affiliate with and support a number of local grass roots teams and develop the younger players through them. It might even be a good idea to form a Charlton league. That might involve subsidising players whose families don't have the money etc... But also ensuring the coaching these clubs provide is top notch.
If I was running the club, I wouldn't bother with U11, U12 or U13 football in terms of the academy. I would affiliate with and support a number of local grass roots teams and develop the younger players through them. It might even be a good idea to form a Charlton league. That might involve subsidising players whose families don't have the money etc... But also ensuring the coaching these clubs provide is top notch.
Would also make for better psychological, social and even technical development, if my reading of No Hunger in Paradise is correct.
Our current best youngster was with Chelsea at that age. It is all about trawling at that age for most clubs and the standard of coaching is not that high in many cases anyway.
Well my son was with the Tottenham academy as well as the herts football development centre which was run by Norwich City and then Crystal Palace with access to top coaches and I have managed at grass roots level. I don't pretend to know it all, but I have enough experience to take a view. Right or wrong.
I think there are a small number of 10 to 13 year olds the club will want to manage and have on their books, but this could be done within alternative structures. And the really good ones can of course play or be coached at higher age levels.
How much value does the 12 year lease actually have if any. Does anyone know if that value can be calculated at all?
You can thank @carly burn for this, posted on this thread on the 8th October:
"I believe the total rent liability adds up to £7.578 million over 15 years paid in different instalments. So roughly just over half a million £ a year."
That’s a liability i.e. a cost to whoever is the lessee, or in other words the tenant, who ultimately in this case is TS
The lease has no value to a 3rd party like, say, me / my bank as a lender
Only long leases have a value to lend against, ideally greater than 125 years - mortgage providers generally will not provide a mortgage on a leasehold property, normally a flat, if it’s less than 70 years
So, he can’t borrow against The Valley - RD could, as a 12 year lease, with I assume no break clauses, has a value to me as a lender if the freehold of The Valley was charged as security
That said, as a tenant covenant (i.e. the financial strength of the tenant) I wouldn’t lend, as CAFC is a poor covenant (loss making, reliant on its owner to survive etc etc)
In other words, if I lent, then CAFC goes bust, there is no longer any rent to cover the loan payments
I would also have a massive Loan to Value problem - when you get a bank valuation, you get 3 values - Market Value, which is value based upon the property with the benefit of the lease - Vacant Possession Value, which is the value of the property if there was no lease i.e. no tenant / no income, and Reinstatement Value, which is cost to rebuild if the place burned down for example
There will be a huge difference between Market Value and Vacant Possession Value, as what alternative use does The Valley have ?? It’s pretty limited isn’t it
Also cost to rebuild will be mind bogglingly expensive
I suspect the VP would be higher personally and that that is what drives RDs valuation. All about "hope value".
Comments
I didn't hear ATV played before or after kick off.
Is that a small sign Sandgaard is no longer lost in his own world and or has decided to sell?
I absolutely have no idea who it could be.
Has the sound system been given an upgrade finally? London Calling was blaring before kick off as was the Red, Red Robin. Felt like it got the crowd going from the off and the decent football on the pitch helped carry it on!
On the plus side, the football this season is definitely a massive improvement on last.
It is after all only 2 parties to negotiate with and bottom-line will be cash amounts for both of them.
The difficulty may simply remain the apparent eccentricity of RD in his demands / expectations but there will always be a price and one assumes the point RD feels he has recouped enough of his previous losses he would sell?
Why not buy the Club and deal with RD later as we're contracted to play at the Valley for the next 12 years, which is what TS planned to do and seemed to make sense at the time.
Our underachieving in L1 at present is largely of TS's making in my view, not RD's. Imo, we just need someone more competent to do what TS tried to, only make a better fist of it. I say again, the priority must be to get out of L1.
Out of nowhere I hear a drum pattern in my head...followed by a
ADDICKS TO VICTORY!
I sort of thought...what was that? That just came out of nowhere.
Am I now all of a sudden an enthusiastic Charlton supporter, where only last week I was moaning and suggesting the club is on its way to the grave. Then just after one game I've u-turned like never before.
Starting from September 2023, my work schedule will be changing. If the price is right and in the north stand, I may consider a season ticket.
I like football and Charlton ...when the football and the football only...is what does the talking!!
"I believe the total rent liability adds up to £7.578 million over 15 years paid in different instalments. So roughly just over half a million £ a year."
Edit. @DagenhamAddick - Having just seen @Lordflashheart's reply, I'm not sure you were wanting to know the liability, but I'll leave it here anyway.
The lease has no value to a 3rd party like, say, me / my bank as a lender
Only long leases have a value to lend against, ideally greater than 125 years - mortgage providers generally will not provide a mortgage on a leasehold property, normally a flat, if it’s less than 70 years
So, he can’t borrow against The Valley - RD could, as a 12 year lease, with I assume no break clauses, has a value to me as a lender if the freehold of The Valley was charged as security
That said, as a tenant covenant (i.e. the financial strength of the tenant) I wouldn’t lend, as CAFC is a poor covenant (loss making, reliant on its owner to survive etc etc)
In other words, if I lent, then CAFC goes bust, there is no longer any rent to cover the loan payments
I would also have a massive Loan to Value problem - when you get a bank valuation, you get 3 values - Market Value, which is value based upon the property with the benefit of the lease - Vacant Possession Value, which is the value of the property if there was no lease i.e. no tenant / no income, and Reinstatement Value, which is cost to rebuild if the place burned down for example
There will be a huge difference between Market Value and Vacant Possession Value, as what alternative use does The Valley have ?? It’s pretty limited isn’t it
Also cost to rebuild will be mind bogglingly expensive
I think there are a small number of 10 to 13 year olds the club will want to manage and have on their books, but this could be done within alternative structures. And the really good ones can of course play or be coached at higher age levels.