Charlski?

Would you be happy with Red Army investors? They are good owners of Chelski, Readinski and Bourneski so if they had some financial backing would they be a poor option?

Those who say they would be unhappy..... what are the other options?.....Charlton Supporters Trust?



AllHell

 

Nothing mor appropriate for the Reds than Red owners in my opinion.

We'll keep the Red Flag flying here!!

 

So long as they're not mercenaries who are Russian into this.

 

Surely it's impossible to say unless you know who they are and their intentions?

 

Agree jeffers'ears, we need to know who they are, why they want to buy into us & the long term plan. I hate the present set up of not knowing who actually owns CAFC. Personally I'm happy to risk being a plaything of an obscenely rich Russian, done Chelsea no harm. And the fair play rules should, I assume, stop us paying silly wages only for the Russian to get bored & stop pumping the money in.

 

Voted yes because at least then we'd probably know who owns the club.

 

For anyone wanting to take over a club, Charlton seems an ideal target:
(1) Unlike (say) Reading or Bournemouth, there is a huge population within reasonable travelling distance, so there is no limit to how big the club could become. We were once one of the biggest eight clubs in the country and could be again.
(2) We already have a fine stadium, a flourishing youth scheme, and an excellent communal image.
(3) We are a London club, so the owners can treat their friends and business contacts to the sophisticated highlife. (What Russians and Arabs consider sophisticated, that is).

 

I agree, if we are to sell we Moscow with the right people, i wouldn't want us Putin the position where we are chucked away penniless

 

Yup, couldn't agree more.... and as long as they are decent oweners and we don't become a laughing stock like QPR or Blackburn I'm ok with that!

 

The deal is dead in the water, the plug was pulled on Friday.

 

Blimey! That was quick! Was the plug ever in?

 

The story was that dd had been going on for a couple of weeks. The plug was pulled by Charltons bankers not the prospective buyers. I wonder why it was leaked to the Sunday press, and by whom, when the deal was dead?

 

For someone who doesn't really understand that side of business, is anyone able to elaborate on why the Charlton bankers would pull out?

 

Without knowing the detail of the transaction, i would guess that the bankers were asked to replace their existing bank guarantee from jimenez, slater and the british virgin islands company with one from the prospective new owners. They will have done some due diligence of their own on the strength of such a guarantee and decided that it was risky, or they couldnt pass the KYC test (know your client).
If the buyers do not have existing banking arrangements in the uk, the banks will undertake scrutiny to ensure that they are not going to be part of something like a money laundering process or even that the buyers are who they say they are. If anyone knows the full names of our current owners it will be our bankers.

 

Please take your nonsense drivel elsewhere Acworth...

 

For some complete moron who has no idea about anything, how come folk on here know full details of a due diligence process to buy out the club (breaking confidentiality, surely) and its breakdown, but nobody seems to know who owns the club?

As SVC says it's possible that the bankers know who the owners are, if someone knows. If they maybe think the current owners are better than the Russians, who am I to disagree...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GmCtci6cen8

An excellent point well made

 

And to explain my no vote, i'm one of those "lil ol charlton" bovril types.

I have no idea who owns the club, which saddens me. It is one of the reasons why i paid a membership to the supporters trust.

I can sort of understand the suspicions on this forum about the timing of the ST launch. The exclusive tone of Charlton Life puts me off.

As a twenty something i wasn't there during the back to the Valley campaign, but it strikes a chord with me.

To close my post pub ramble, i'd rather support a poor, honest club than a successful one owned by a possible criminal

 

Well we're certainly poor, don't know about honest. Anyway it's all hypothetical now, and the debate now is who should partner Kermit against Welling- Smith, Pigott or Azeez?

 

Foreign owners like this are always a risk - will you get an "Abramovich" or someone like the guy at Hearts