Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

ESI own The Valley and have a commitment to buy the training ground within 6 months hmmmmmmmm

oohaahmortimer
oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,145
in General Charlton
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.


«13456

Comments

  • oohaahmortimer
    oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,145
    Why would they not buy it all in one hit , seems a strange one 
    or just a cash flow problem 🤷‍♂️

    Get your excuses lined up 

    Roland still involved fffs 

    keep the Roland Out button !! 


  • hoof_it_up_to_benty
    hoof_it_up_to_benty Posts: 22,443
    Does seem strange.
  • Stu_of_Kunming
    Stu_of_Kunming Posts: 17,117
    Very worrying, if true.
  • Fumbluff
    Fumbluff Posts: 10,126

  • Cafc43v3r
    Cafc43v3r Posts: 21,600
    So they have just bought Baton then.  This could get messy. 
  • Chunes
    Chunes Posts: 17,347
    edited January 2020
    Well well well...

    I pointed out the owner's plans were shared by Bowyer. He said they were for us to become a stable Championship club first and then push on from there. That is no lofty megabucks plan that some on here have been pushing. 

    I was told that was a "smokescreen" and not a fact. Probably to hide the fact they have serious, serious cash and are going to splash it to get us back to the premier league next year.

    I'm not going to say I told you so.

    Actually, I am. I TOLD YOU SO.

    I'm glad this has happened, some people need a bloody reality check.
  • BigRedEvil
    BigRedEvil Posts: 11,071
    Never easy following Charlton. At least it's the training ground rather than the Valley 
  • redbuttle
    redbuttle Posts: 1,977
    Stu_of_Kunming said:
    Very worrying, if true.
    Here we go. Perhaps one of the conditions of purchase was that some work was completed within 6 months. 
  • oohaahmortimer
    oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,145
    redbuttle said:
    Stu_of_Kunming said:
    Very worrying, if true.
    Here we go. Perhaps one of the conditions of purchase was that some work was completed within 6 months. 
    Hopefully but if there was such a caveat why wouldn’t that have been added to the article 
  • Stu_of_Kunming
    Stu_of_Kunming Posts: 17,117
    redbuttle said:
    Stu_of_Kunming said:
    Very worrying, if true.
    Here we go. Perhaps one of the conditions of purchase was that some work was completed within 6 months. 
    Surely you'd just insist on taking the price of the work off what you pay, rather than leave RD owning part of the club still.

    I'm very much against RD owning any stake in our club, it would appear, if the article is correct, that he still does.
  • Sponsored links:



  • Jon_CAFC_
    Jon_CAFC_ Posts: 563
    redbuttle said:
    Stu_of_Kunming said:
    Very worrying, if true.
    Here we go. Perhaps one of the conditions of purchase was that some work was completed within 6 months. 
    Or it could be a wise move, didn’t Roland piss off the rugby club and they began legal proceedings? Perhaps waiting for Roland to sort that mess out before purchasing? Clean title isn’t just about loans it could also mean they don’t want to fix rolands mess
  • Pedro45
    Pedro45 Posts: 5,820
    edited January 2020
    Cafc43v3r said:
    So they have just bought Baton then.  This could get messy. 
    No. Baton own both CA Football and Holdings companies. The Holding co own the Valley and Training ground. More likely just a delay so they can concentrate on footballing priorities and then complete in the summer at agreed price.
  • oohaahmortimer
    oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,145
    Guessing time
    Maybe  if we stay up they then pay £5m for it 
    And if we’re relegated they pay £1m for it 
    a bit like when Roland took over I think he was gonna pay £4m less if we got relegated I think to the spivs 
  • Cafc43v3r
    Cafc43v3r Posts: 21,600
    Pedro45 said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    So they have just bought Baton then.  This could get messy. 
    No. Baton own both CA Football and Holdings companies. The Holding co own the Valley and Training ground. More likely just a delay so they can concentrate on footballing priorities and then complete in the summer at agreed price.
    But this means that the legal entity that ties the property and the football club has been split up. 
  • Stu_of_Kunming
    Stu_of_Kunming Posts: 17,117
    Cafc43v3r said:
    Pedro45 said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    So they have just bought Baton then.  This could get messy. 
    No. Baton own both CA Football and Holdings companies. The Holding co own the Valley and Training ground. More likely just a delay so they can concentrate on footballing priorities and then complete in the summer at agreed price.
    But this means that the legal entity that ties the property and the football club has been split up. 
    How is that even possible without the trust being notified under the terms of the ACV?
  • oohaahmortimer
    oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,145
    Someone on twatter ask Crawley for some clarification or more meat to the bones 
    the nosey fuckers that are Charlton fans in the words of Marvin Gaye want to know what’s going on , what’s going on 
  • Chris_from_Sidcup
    Chris_from_Sidcup Posts: 36,010
    Seems a bit bizarre. 

    So they've paid 50m+ (or whatever the price was) and don't actually own everything?
  • DOUCHER
    DOUCHER Posts: 7,898
    Jon_CAFC_ said:
    redbuttle said:
    Stu_of_Kunming said:
    Very worrying, if true.
    Here we go. Perhaps one of the conditions of purchase was that some work was completed within 6 months. 
    Or it could be a wise move, didn’t Roland piss off the rugby club and they began legal proceedings? Perhaps waiting for Roland to sort that mess out before purchasing? Clean title isn’t just about loans it could also mean they don’t want to fix rolands mess
    This would be my guess 
  • CharltonKerry
    CharltonKerry Posts: 2,958
    edited January 2020
    Just a silly thought, I wonder if Roland is asking to much for a bit of land that can only be used as a training ground or similar, and has no chance of generating money by converting into houses etc. Wonder if new owners might be considering purchasing a new training ground and developing this, thus leaving Roland with a nice piece of useless real estate. No surely to much to ask for. 

    My guess Roland has to sort the legal dispute out with the rugby club, which seems the obvious answer.
  • Cafc43v3r
    Cafc43v3r Posts: 21,600
    Stu_of_Kunming said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    Pedro45 said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    So they have just bought Baton then.  This could get messy. 
    No. Baton own both CA Football and Holdings companies. The Holding co own the Valley and Training ground. More likely just a delay so they can concentrate on footballing priorities and then complete in the summer at agreed price.
    But this means that the legal entity that ties the property and the football club has been split up. 
    How is that even possible without the trust being notified under the terms of the ACV?
    If the training ground was slit off, the owner of the Valley would still be the holdings company.  So nothing changed to notify? 
  • Sponsored links:



  • CheshireAddick
    CheshireAddick Posts: 1,305
    Stu_of_Kunming said:
    redbuttle said:
    Stu_of_Kunming said:
    Very worrying, if true.
    Here we go. Perhaps one of the conditions of purchase was that some work was completed within 6 months. 
    Surely you'd just insist on taking the price of the work off what you pay, rather than leave RD owning part of the club still.

    I'm very much against RD owning any stake in our club, it would appear, if the article is correct, that he still does.
    That's why ESI need to be clear in their communications to the fans. If they are happy for something as fundamental as this is communicated via the local press then i think it should be on the OS as an official announcement. 

    Let's not forget they are still in the 'building trust' stage of their relationship with the fans (whichever they have been very good at so far).
  • Athletico Charlton
    Athletico Charlton Posts: 14,273
    Selling taylor and nor owning the training ground is an inglorious start indeed on the face of it and no amount of PR changes that.
  • supaclive
    supaclive Posts: 6,514
    edited January 2020
    Chunes said:
    Well well well...

    I pointed out the owner's plans were shared by Bowyer. He said they were for us to become a stable Championship club first and then push on from there. That is no lofty megabucks plan that some on here have been pushing. 

    I was told that was a "smokescreen" and not a fact. Probably to hide the fact they have serious, serious cash and are going to splash it to get us back to the premier league next year.

    I'm not going to say I told you so.

    Actually, I am. I TOLD YOU SO.

    I'm glad this has happened, some people need a bloody reality check.
    Or the legal dispute needs clearing up
    Or they needed to own the club in time for the transfer window
    Or they don't see the need to whack out £Xm now when they can in 6 months' time 

    Wait and see.
  • Scoham
    Scoham Posts: 37,376
    Chris_from_Sidcup said:
    Seems a bit bizarre. 

    So they've paid 50m+ (or whatever the price was) and don't actually own everything?
    Maybe they’ve only paid something like £30m?
  • supaclive
    supaclive Posts: 6,514
    Athletico Charlton said:
    Selling taylor and nor owning the training ground is an inglorious start indeed on the face of it and no amount of PR changes that.
    Taylor WANTS to leave.  Take £3-5m or lose him for nothing?

    That LITERALLY makes no sense.  You have on your hands a sulking player not wanting to be there.
  • Bedsaddick
    Bedsaddick Posts: 24,735
    What’s clear is that there needs to be a press conference so they can tell the fans what their plans are and to answer questions  . It seems odd that there hasn’t been one already . 
  • SoundAsa£
    SoundAsa£ Posts: 22,477
    Chris_from_Sidcup said:
    Seems a bit bizarre. 

    So they've paid 50m+ (or whatever the price was) and don't actually own everything?
    Who says they spent £50,000,000..........no one knows!
  • oohaahmortimer
    oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,145
    supaclive said:
    Athletico Charlton said:
    Selling taylor and nor owning the training ground is an inglorious start indeed on the face of it and no amount of PR changes that.
    Taylor WANTS to leave.  Take £3-5m or lose him for nothing?

    That LITERALLY makes no sense.  You have on your hands a sulking player not wanting to be there.
    Who’s gonna pay £3-£5m now when they can pay him a signing on fee of half that in 6 months, maybe someone desperate will (that should be us ! )

    Is this the same sulking player who when his big money move to Brentford in the summer didn’t go through played out of his boots for us before and after injury . 
  • iamdan
    iamdan Posts: 2,421
    edited January 2020
    .

Categories

“Marketplace”