Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread v3.0 - DONE! - Methven interview in the Telegraph (p55)
Comments
-
I don't think it is any nefarious conspiracy, just fear we have another ownership who believe they are smarter then most others in the game and can bring us success without spending the required budget.
5 -
The 3 main shareholders, who own 66% between them, have said NOTHING since they were named. NOTHING. I've even forgotten their names as all I hear is Methven this & Methven that.IAgree said:DubaiCAFC said:
And they haven't put money in yet then??Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
They don't need to throw millions at it, they need to spend what is required to get us out of League One before the fans turn and season ticket dip below 5k next summerDubaiCAFC said:
Maybe years of being run badly, has a longer term effect? If a business is run so badly for many years, and has pre existing deals in place, it is going to take a while to resolve.SELR_addicks said:FFP and Sandgaard I'm sure.
They have a free year to cut costs and rely on youth while blaming the previous ownership.
They were never going to come in and throw millions and millions at it, that has been the message from the get go!
There is money to spend, and improvements have already been made to the club..
You always had a negative outlook on it from the start..
Players like May, Camara, Edun and Taylor were not cheap! close to a million spent on them 4..
Our new owners have gone awful quiet.
Its like we are a bastard child that is not being acknowledged.
Unless someone can post a link or an article where one of the "big 3" mentions that they own us.
10 -
I wonder if they are just fronting us ?? Obviously they must have passed the OADT and shown source & sufficiency of funds but that doesn't mean that they then have any further interest in us.JohnnyH2 said:Why the owners paid TS £12m for a loss making business with no fixed assets and its been dumped with players who are of no use and have 2 seasons left on contract will always be something that makes no sense to me.
1 -
Really? How much would a 30k capacity stadium in London cost. And what sites ?sam3110 said:If you still think this is a property play then you're off your nut. There are literally more than a dozen sites within a mile of The Valley that are easier, cheaper and quicker to build on1 -
See you've got the wrong end of the stick there already. People are claiming the long game is to run the club into the ground then build on the derelict Valley. Why would you need to build a new 30k seater stadium for a club that doesn't exist anymore? And if you're running it into the ground but we still exist, why would a new stadium need to be 30,000? If you're running it into the ground that much we can share with Welling, Ebbsfleet, Dartford, you name it. And if you're building a new ground you can fit a nice little 8-10k stadium in a much smaller footprint, maybe take over Meridian up on Hornfair Park or something? Or you can integrate it into the new Docklands 2.0 idea the government have. Loads of options, none of which will actually happen anyway because there's no property playRothko said:
Really? How much would a 30k capacity stadium in London cost. And what sites ?sam3110 said:If you still think this is a property play then you're off your nut. There are literally more than a dozen sites within a mile of The Valley that are easier, cheaper and quicker to build on4 -
The early signs aren't exactly promising are they?
We haven't heard a thing from the major shareholders.
We haven't heard a thing from anyone about the plans and ambitions. I'm not expecting to (nor do i want to) hear a Sandgaard-esque 'Europe in 5 years' but it would at least be good to hear something.
Squad is really light yet we haven't made a signing for 3 weeks. The only movement in the transfer department was the departure of the guy who negotiated the transfers.
The only recent rumours are Sessegnon who was with us last year and Dabo who failed a medical.
We've lost 4 in a row and are leaking goals.
Our injury list seems to grow each week.12 -
Fair enough, misinterpreting your original postsam3110 said:
See you've got the wrong end of the stick there already. People are claiming the long game is to run the club into the ground then build on the derelict Valley. Why would you need to build a new 30k seater stadium for a club that doesn't exist anymore? And if you're running it into the ground but we still exist, why would a new stadium need to be 30,000? If you're running it into the ground that much we can share with Welling, Ebbsfleet, Dartford, you name it. And if you're building a new ground you can fit a nice little 8-10k stadium in a much smaller footprint, maybe take over Meridian up on Hornfair Park or something? Or you can integrate it into the new Docklands 2.0 idea the government have. Loads of options, none of which will actually happen anyway because there's no property playRothko said:
Really? How much would a 30k capacity stadium in London cost. And what sites ?sam3110 said:If you still think this is a property play then you're off your nut. There are literally more than a dozen sites within a mile of The Valley that are easier, cheaper and quicker to build on0 -
Truly strange to buy something you have no interest in. If they purchased from what appeared in a catalogue, (the prospectus) you'd think they could send it back, claiming it doesn't fit.golfaddick said:
I wonder if they are just fronting us ?? Obviously they must have passed the OADT and shown source & sufficiency of funds but that doesn't mean that they then have any further interest in us.JohnnyH2 said:Why the owners paid TS £12m for a loss making business with no fixed assets and its been dumped with players who are of no use and have 2 seasons left on contract will always be something that makes no sense to me.0 -
I'll give them 2 weeks to make the promised signings and then for the major shareholders to make some statements.Chris_from_Sidcup said:The early signs aren't exactly promising are they?
We haven't heard a thing from the major shareholders.
We haven't heard a thing from anyone about the plans and ambitions. I'm not expecting to (nor do i want to) hear a Sandgaard-esque 'Europe in 5 years' but it would at least be good to hear something.
Squad is really light yet we haven't made a signing for 3 weeks. The only movement in the transfer department was the departure of the guy who negotiated the transfers.
The only recent rumours are Sessegnon who was with us last year and Dabo who failed a medical.
We've lost 4 in a row and are leaking goals.
Our injury list seems to grow each week.1 -
I'm interested in the signings, the statements would be drivel that PR Methven would tell them to say.Covered End said:
I'll give them 2 weeks to make the promised signings and then for the major shareholders to make some statements.Chris_from_Sidcup said:The early signs aren't exactly promising are they?
We haven't heard a thing from the major shareholders.
We haven't heard a thing from anyone about the plans and ambitions. I'm not expecting to (nor do i want to) hear a Sandgaard-esque 'Europe in 5 years' but it would at least be good to hear something.
Squad is really light yet we haven't made a signing for 3 weeks. The only movement in the transfer department was the departure of the guy who negotiated the transfers.
The only recent rumours are Sessegnon who was with us last year and Dabo who failed a medical.
We've lost 4 in a row and are leaking goals.
Our injury list seems to grow each week.3 - Sponsored links:
-
Methven will be the big loser here should things continue to go South I think.swordfish said:
Truly strange to buy something you have no interest in. If they purchased from what appeared in a catalogue, (the prospectus) you'd think they could send it back, claiming it doesn't fit.golfaddick said:
I wonder if they are just fronting us ?? Obviously they must have passed the OADT and shown source & sufficiency of funds but that doesn't mean that they then have any further interest in us.JohnnyH2 said:Why the owners paid TS £12m for a loss making business with no fixed assets and its been dumped with players who are of no use and have 2 seasons left on contract will always be something that makes no sense to me.
As Golfy said, The Friedman's and Breners are just being used as a bit of a front. They are in just to add weight to what is essentially Methvens project Yes they've put some money in,but it's minimal I reckon..
They were approached by Methven to put their names to it They were probably sceptical at first, even though the amount being asked for were very small change to them, The fact Methven was willing to match what they put in (which was probably very big change for him) made them think it might be worth the punt. They wouldn't have to get involved in the day to day running. And Charlie boy really knows what he's talking about.(;-))
The question is,did Methven give them assurances that they wouldn't have to put any more cash in the pot after their initial outlay?
The next two weeks will probably answer that.7 -
We appear to be the equivalent of my wife buying an outfit and then it sits in her wardrobe for 2 years and she never wears it.swordfish said:
Truly strange to buy something you have no interest in. If they purchased from what appeared in a catalogue, (the prospectus) you'd think they could send it back, claiming it doesn't fit.golfaddick said:
I wonder if they are just fronting us ?? Obviously they must have passed the OADT and shown source & sufficiency of funds but that doesn't mean that they then have any further interest in us.JohnnyH2 said:Why the owners paid TS £12m for a loss making business with no fixed assets and its been dumped with players who are of no use and have 2 seasons left on contract will always be something that makes no sense to me.13 -
As others have said all very concerning. I'm waiting until 1 September before formalizing my opinion, but I'm getting seriously worried.8
-
What I don't get is: why the principal investors have been silent.1
-
I care little for statements, I care about getting points.11
-
I'd have expected the principal investors to have been over to a game by now. All seems a bit odd.4
-
Why? A £2m quid investment amid a global portfolio of larger investments. I bet they haven't visited the mines or factories they have shares in?MarcusH26 said:I'd have expected the principal investors to have been over to a game by now. All seems a bit odd.5 -
a public utility with no competition and probably laden with masses of debt so not really comparableCafc43v3r said:
I have got shares in Yorkshire Water, I don't spend my Saturday afternoons visiting the sewage works.MarcusH26 said:I'd have expected the principal investors to have been over to a game by now. All seems a bit odd.4 -
Even Roland turned up for a game when he first bought us. It's pretty unusual for an owner to take over a club and then not want to go there, show your face, look around, see a game etc.Cardinal Sin said:
Why? A £2m quid investment amid a global portfolio of larger investments. I bet they haven't visited the mines or factories they have shares in?MarcusH26 said:I'd have expected the principal investors to have been over to a game by now. All seems a bit odd.
I don't personally care if they turn up to games or not though to be fair, even Sheikh Mansour has only been to 2 City games in 10-12 years. But you'd at least expect some kind of message from them on the official club channels. We've heard nothing and 95% of the fanbase don't know who they are or even what they look like.5 - Sponsored links:
-
It is of no interest to supporters who the owners/men in charge are, all we want is our club to be run properly.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Even Roland turned up for a game when he first bought us. It's pretty unusual for an owner to take over a club and then not want to go there, show your face, look around, see a game etc.Cardinal Sin said:
Why? A £2m quid investment amid a global portfolio of larger investments. I bet they haven't visited the mines or factories they have shares in?MarcusH26 said:I'd have expected the principal investors to have been over to a game by now. All seems a bit odd.
I don't personally care if they turn up to games or not though to be fair, even Sheikh Mansour has only been to 2 City games in 10-12 years. But you'd at least expect some kind of message from them on the official club channels. We've heard nothing and 95% of the fanbase don't know who they are or even what they look like.
No drinking with fans or going to horse racing with, just bring success.1 -
Agreed, but at least we may know that they are actual investors & not names used.ElfsborgAddick said:
I'm interested in the signings, the statements would be drivel that PR Methven would tell them to say.Covered End said:
I'll give them 2 weeks to make the promised signings and then for the major shareholders to make some statements.Chris_from_Sidcup said:The early signs aren't exactly promising are they?
We haven't heard a thing from the major shareholders.
We haven't heard a thing from anyone about the plans and ambitions. I'm not expecting to (nor do i want to) hear a Sandgaard-esque 'Europe in 5 years' but it would at least be good to hear something.
Squad is really light yet we haven't made a signing for 3 weeks. The only movement in the transfer department was the departure of the guy who negotiated the transfers.
The only recent rumours are Sessegnon who was with us last year and Dabo who failed a medical.
We've lost 4 in a row and are leaking goals.
Our injury list seems to grow each week.1 -
-
I remember saying it as a half-hearted joke, but it's actually more accurate. We are simply an investment fund for them, who were provided a prospectus and have opted to allocate a very small percentage of their funds to enter a different market, industry, location. They're probably after an annual summary, rather than a weekly eye on results, let alone a trip to the Valley.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Even Roland turned up for a game when he first bought us. It's pretty unusual for an owner to take over a club and then not want to go there, show your face, look around, see a game etc.Cardinal Sin said:
Why? A £2m quid investment amid a global portfolio of larger investments. I bet they haven't visited the mines or factories they have shares in?MarcusH26 said:I'd have expected the principal investors to have been over to a game by now. All seems a bit odd.
I don't personally care if they turn up to games or not though to be fair, even Sheikh Mansour has only been to 2 City games in 10-12 years. But you'd at least expect some kind of message from them on the official club channels. We've heard nothing and 95% of the fanbase don't know who they are or even what they look like.
Just my feeling.3 -
AndyG said:I’m no expert but I imagine it’s not just a case of throwing money around. I would think it’s more a case of spending the money on the right players. Nobody can say TS didn’t spend good money can they ? Unfortunately people had his pants down ala Kirk, DJ etc and not forgetting the sackable offence imo of paying money for dear old Chucks.
steps as I see it are.
identify the right player
convince him and his agent to join us
agree a fee
fight off other interested clubs
not an easy task and certainly not just getting the cheque book out unless your signing players with no other options
Dont forget the Danish striker who we pursued into a second transfer window0 -
You are following the wrong team for now then !seth plum said:I care little for statements, I care about getting points.
Of course you are right - nothing else much matters if we aren't winning now and again.0 -
A lot more now and again than at the momentvalleynick66 said:
You are following the wrong team for now then !seth plum said:I care little for statements, I care about getting points.
Of course you are right - nothing else much matters if we aren't winning now and again.1 -
This in spades.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Even Roland turned up for a game when he first bought us. It's pretty unusual for an owner to take over a club and then not want to go there, show your face, look around, see a game etc.Cardinal Sin said:
Why? A £2m quid investment amid a global portfolio of larger investments. I bet they haven't visited the mines or factories they have shares in?MarcusH26 said:I'd have expected the principal investors to have been over to a game by now. All seems a bit odd.
I don't personally care if they turn up to games or not though to be fair, even Sheikh Mansour has only been to 2 City games in 10-12 years. But you'd at least expect some kind of message from them on the official club channels. We've heard nothing and 95% of the fanbase don't know who they are or even what they look like.
I'm not expecting them to rock up at the next home match but surely a press release somewhere talking about why the bought us & their thoughts for the future.0 -
Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Even Roland turned up for a game when he first bought us. It's pretty unusual for an owner to take over a club and then not want to go there, show your face, look around, see a game etc.Cardinal Sin said:
Why? A £2m quid investment amid a global portfolio of larger investments. I bet they haven't visited the mines or factories they have shares in?MarcusH26 said:I'd have expected the principal investors to have been over to a game by now. All seems a bit odd.
I don't personally care if they turn up to games or not though to be fair, even Sheikh Mansour has only been to 2 City games in 10-12 years. But you'd at least expect some kind of message from them on the official club channels. We've heard nothing and 95% of the fanbase don't know who they are or even what they look like.
This is what I struggled to really get across , it's more despite the things about the SMT running the show that I'd still expect to have seen the main shareholders at a game. It doesn't bother me at all if they're there every week but one game and some kind of message feels like the minimum.
0 -
The other plots of land are not owned by Duchatelet. Duchatelet likely still wants all his money back to justify his decision. For all his talk of community, him being right overrides everything. He is potentially vindictive because of Charlton supporters vocalness in not recognising his genius & vision.sam3110 said:If you still think this is a property play then you're off your nut. There are literally more than a dozen sites within a mile of The Valley that are easier, cheaper and quicker to build onIMO, its mostly about the money & Duchalet being right. If he did got his money back, he would settle for that. If Charlton survived or not is immaterial. All that talk of community was & is absolute bollocks.The only way Duchatelet is getting his money back if Charlton gets a minted (prepared to make significant investment) takeover - maybe the owners after Methven- not this mob on current evidence, Charlton getting to the Premiership (not looking possible without significant investment - not this mob on current evidence or obliteration of the club & somehow unlikely releasing value of the land. Releasing value off the land appears difficult to achieve but Duchatelet continually refused to accept reality in his strategy.Duchatelet owning the Valley & Sparrows Lane is the ongoing obstacle to Charlton becoming successful again. The current situation leads to useless owner after useless owner, who somehow think they can make a quick buck, have a plan that no one has thought about (that doesn’t require significant investment), vultures picking the corpse or somehow that supporters are so blinded by loyalty that they will turn up to watch any half baked, fatally flawed product / team on the pitch.There is money to be made but that takes sustained investment & astute management to get a team to the Premiership.0
