When RD goes - the sooner the better, of course - what will the club end up owing him in debts and how can we keep track of what this figure is? Until proven otherwise, I'm assuming RD is asset stripping the club, just like he did at Standard Liege.
We are simply a vehicle for a test. His desire to prove he can make football clubs work differently. And to top it all off, the club is paying for the privilege of being part of that experiment. Great.
When RD goes - the sooner the better, of course - what will the club end up owing him in debts and how can we keep track of what this figure is? Until proven otherwise, I'm assuming RD is asset stripping the club, just like he did at Standard Liege.
Is it safe to assume that all the cash injected by Staprix to cover the ongoing operating losses are actually loans? In which case, the longer Duchatelet owns the club the bigger the debt until Charlton ends up totally unsaleable like Bolton.
Its like he's tying more and more concrete weights around our ankles and threatening to kick us off the end of the pier if we don't behave.
As usual, its more about what they don't say than what they do say:-
"his investment has also ensured that Charlton is currently free of any bank debt."
So, is it investment or are actually Charlton up to their eyeballs in Staprix debt?
"his investment has also ensured that Charlton is free of any bank debt and Mr Duchalet now benefits from the debt carried by the club rather than NatWest"
Only a small part in the document but we all know the new ticketing system is sh*t!
They are seriously understating the utility of the old system and hence the benefit of the new one. It needed updating and the work was done, but it stalled because the spivs wouldn't put the money into it. However, to suggest that the club didn't have the data previously is laughable. How did it regularly contact supporters based on their purchase history then, including the main season-ticket mail-out?
Sounds like an interesting session. A few bits have jumped out at me:
Roland Duchâtelet himself has consistently invested in the club. Since the takeover two years ago, he has invested £25 million of his money.
Will be interesting to see this reflected in the company accounts next month. Something tells me his "investment" has lumbered us with some pretty nasty surprises for the future. He hasn't done this out of love for the club, he's a businessman and understandably has no emotional attachment himself - and that's fine and understandable.
Like any investment though, he expects a return - and to sell his investment as though it's better than other means is a tad disingenuous.
Importantly, he has financed the structural loss which almost all Championship clubs have and his investment has also ensured that Charlton is currently free of any bank debt.
This is peculiar, because surely a mortgage is considered "Bank Debt"; it's still a commitment to a financial institute that can be defaulted on, and presents a liability to The Club for the future. I'm sure we still have current mortgages?
Roland Duchâtelet is passionate about improving Charlton Athletic and takes an active interest in the running of the club. He also has full faith in the CEO and her management team to grow and develop this club in what is one of the most competitive and difficult leagues in world football.
This, sadly, was one of the most disappointing things I've read in a long time. Combined with the bit where it says Roland has no interest in selling. Disheartening to say the least.
"What we do not allow on banners is: ................... anything that we may feel is controversial to either of the teams or their ownerships; ............."
As usual, its more about what they don't say than what they do say:-
"his investment has also ensured that Charlton is currently free of any bank debt."
So, is it investment or are actually Charlton up to their eyeballs in Staprix debt?
It's an investment, not a GIFT Mr Duchalet. It increases the club's liabilities. After we have dropped to the Conference League and your investment has increased the value of your real estate, it has benefited no one else but you Mr Duchalet.
I am sick and tired of his £21m being seen as justification for being able to f*ck up our club when he's just moving his money around for his own benefit. Will somebody please make this point when it is next pushed down our throats.
How much more bullshit does this ownership think we can take.
The most laughable part of the 'statement' is probably the following:
"The day-to-day running of the club is the responsibility of the Senior Management Team, which is led by our CEO. This team has a wealth of experience within governing bodies, Premier League and Football League clubs and blue chip companies."
"What we do not allow on banners is: ................... anything that we may feel is controversial to either of the teams or their ownerships; ............."
If banners are err...banned - then maybe CARD should start getting T-Shirts printed up that we could all wear (like wearable banners) with the same message - that would send a clear message when we all take our coats off!!
The Club could have cleared that one up as soon as information on this 'call centre' was in the public domain. I'm also surprised no one on here with links to CACT cleared up the situation either.
The most laughable part of the 'statement' is probably the following:
"The day-to-day running of the club is the responsibility of the Senior Management Team, which is led by our CEO. This team has a wealth of experience within governing bodies, Premier League and Football League clubs and blue chip companies."
An unfair criticism. More than 50% of the SMT have watched a Premier League match on Sky in the past two years and Squirrel Face has worked (albeit as an intern) at a big company with glass doors and a flagpole, so that counts.
Thought his was interesting comment "No-one recently has been removed from the ground for having a banner."
The devil is in the detail. Were they physically thrown out onto Harvey Gardens or removed from the stand, hence not the ground? If the latter, then the statement is accurate if misleading.
The Club could have cleared that one up as soon as information on this 'call centre' was in the public domain. I'm also surprised no one on here with links to CACT cleared up the situation either.
Responsibility for public health (anti-smoking campaigns, etc) was transferred from the NHS to local councils in 2013. CACT is contracted to run certain public health functions for Greenwich Council, which includes calling members of the public, and has chosen to do this from The Valley.
Thought his was interesting comment "No-one recently has been removed from the ground for having a banner."
The devil is in the detail. Were they physically thrown out onto Harvey Gardens or removed from the stand, hence not the ground? If the latter, then the statement is accurate if misleading.
Its typical of they way they 'communicate' and just like a lawyer. Factually correct, but disingenuous at best.
You may have answered your own question there cafc-west.
How about getting a load of small cards/stiff paper printed with one or two large words on them such as "Roland Out" etc. At a given time everyone can hold up the card/paper. The club have laid on something like this before i.e. Curbs last game and we all know it is done in stadiums around the world to spell out large words, tributes etc.
Small enough to conceal from stewards, large enough to have an effect when held up in unison. Plus they can be re-used if saved.
The most laughable part of the 'statement' is probably the following:
"The day-to-day running of the club is the responsibility of the Senior Management Team, which is led by our CEO. This team has a wealth of experience within governing bodies, Premier League and Football League clubs and blue chip companies."
An unfair criticism. More than 50% of the SMT have watched a Premier League match on Sky in the past two years and Squirrel Face has worked (albeit as an intern) at a big company with glass doors and a flagpole, so that counts.
Comments
(Alternatively, that's implying that the incident was down to a verbal altercation which occurred? )
Seriously what's the point? They need to go and they need to go fast.
I promise you now Roland the fans will make your hobby untenable.
Its like he's tying more and more concrete weights around our ankles and threatening to kick us off the end of the pier if we don't behave.
I'm surprised she didn't just role out the powerpoint again
Like any investment though, he expects a return - and to sell his investment as though it's better than other means is a tad disingenuous. This is peculiar, because surely a mortgage is considered "Bank Debt"; it's still a commitment to a financial institute that can be defaulted on, and presents a liability to The Club for the future. I'm sure we still have current mortgages? This, sadly, was one of the most disappointing things I've read in a long time. Combined with the bit where it says Roland has no interest in selling. Disheartening to say the least.
The Nazi approach.
I am sick and tired of his £21m being seen as justification for being able to f*ck up our club when he's just moving his money around for his own benefit. Will somebody please make this point when it is next pushed down our throats.
How much more bullshit does this ownership think we can take.
"The day-to-day running of the club is the responsibility of the Senior Management Team, which is led by our CEO. This team has a wealth of experience within governing bodies, Premier League and Football League clubs and blue chip companies."
The Club could have cleared that one up as soon as information on this 'call centre' was in the public domain. I'm also surprised no one on here with links to CACT cleared up the situation either.
How about getting a load of small cards/stiff paper printed with one or two large words on them such as "Roland Out" etc. At a given time everyone can hold up the card/paper. The club have laid on something like this before i.e. Curbs last game and we all know it is done in stadiums around the world to spell out large words, tributes etc.
Small enough to conceal from stewards, large enough to have an effect when held up in unison. Plus they can be re-used if saved.