When you
are away from a screen for most of a day (there are too many distractions on
the Eurostar and TGV to get to Lyon, usually in the form of a bottle, to be
bothering about staying connected) there’s that keen sense of anticipation when
the next morning you check the club site. Is it Church, Fuller, Obika, Sordell –
or all of them. And we’re still waiting. So be it. As tomorrow morning we head
off to Italy (assuming I manage to squeeze all of my French partner Suzanne’s
shoes into the car), to some way up another bloody mountain there are other
things on my mind, such as will there be enough room for my spare pair of kacks
alongside Suzanne’s kitchen sink and her other essentials.
Travelling
inevitably gets more difficult with each passing year, not so much because the
bag over the shoulder seems heavier as one matures (it’s remotely possible I’ve
matured a little from my teenage years but I certainly haven’t aged) but
because the crankier you get the more situations arise to deepen the effect.
Last time I took the train to Lyon, I went for an FT and bottle of water at the
WH Smith’s shop inside the Eurostar terminal. It had a number of self-service
terminals, a couple of cash tills, and two assistants. ‘I prefer to use the
tills if you don’t mind’, says I. ‘Oh, we’re not using them today, but I can
show you how to use the self-service’. ‘No thanks’. ‘Why not?’ ‘Ask me in six
months when you don’t have a job any more’. This time around there was one assistant.
‘We’re not using the tills today because I’m on my own’. Enough said. As before
I said no thanks and put the items back.
I don’t
think I’m just a Luddite, it’s about two things. First, shedding more jobs at
this juncture for the economy isn’t great for the wider picture. Second, where is
any incentive to comply with a change which I don’t want? Will I get through the
process faster? No. Will my goods be cheaper as a result? Fat bloody chance. I
could benefit indirectly if the brain-dead fund manager overseeing my hopelessly
inadequate pension scheme has some retailers included, but for the time being
at least I’ll take the chance. Simple enough trade-off, I avoid going into WH
Smith’s (and will change supermarkets if the pressure to use self-service
machines increases).
If I’m
cranky this morning it’s Suzanne’s fault. I arrived at Part-Dieu at 19.00
French time last night, replete from the wine, but she needed to work late. So
I was obliged to have a second pastis in the bar while waiting to be picked up.
And there’s no uplifting news from the club site as yet.
The news
that Button has gone and that Smith is deemed surplus to requirements is a
little surprising but understandable. Button was given a chance last season and
didn’t take it, can’t have been enamoured with the prospect of warming the
bench for another season, and had the opportunity to drop down a flight but
presumably be first choice. Good luck to him, and to Smith, they both have the
time to rebuild. Presumably the club feels that Pope is ready to be called upon
and I’d be inclined to agree with Wyn Grant about us always being able to do an
emergency loan for another keeper if Hamer is out for a few weeks. I just hope
that being the undisputed number one has a positive rather than negative effect
on Hamer’s thinking as we certainly can’t afford him to be off song; he
acknowledged last season that being dropped gave him a necessary kick up the
backside.
Defence
sorted (barring any departures), forwards awaited, but if there’s one area that
could still use some adjustments it is midfield. Jackson, Gower, Hughes,
Pritchard, Green, Harriott, Stephens, Hollands, Dervitte if needed, may not be
a clear over-indulgence of personnel, especially if at the moment 4-5-1 is Plan
A, B, C, D etc (Pigott may be pressing for a start alongside Kermorgant but if
we started a game with both there’s no option for change on the bench); but I
still feel that Stephens and Hollands either play or, like Button and Smith,
look elsewhere. We are all led to believe that there are little or no funds
available, so savings where possible are desirable.
On that
front, I have no criticism of the owners if they feel unable/unwilling to invest
more in the team. I’m not writing the cheques. But if they do attract criticism
they have only themselves to blame. It’s a by-product of their failure to
communicate. It’s not enough to simply conclude that we have no money (or worse).
We know we are significantly loss-making, so the owners’ decision is what level
of losses are acceptable dependent on their ambitions and the confines of the
new rules. The last statement of intent was along the lines of ‘we aim to take
the club back to the Premiership’. Of course no timetable was, or could be,
suggested. But does that goal still stand? If it does, how would it square with
taking chances on Championship status by cutting the purse strings? My feeling
is that the owners would get significant goodwill and support if they were open
and honest about the financial planning and constraints rather than leaving up
to supporters to draw inferences from activity (or lack of). But they have
chosen to be secretive so cannot complain if these inferences are unfair (note:
if shortly after this is published we’ve signed Messi please ignore the above).
So for good
measure here’s another inference. There have been enough rumours of fresh
investment (Turkey, Russia etc) and hints that investment would be welcomed –
but an outright sale of the club not. Many moons ago I sold a company of mine
to a moron. He planned to do a further deal or two and make a decent return out
of his investment. Trouble was, each prospective deal fell flat because he was
too greedy, treating the other side as an obviously inferior, stupid, exploitable
bunch. The facts that they had made the money and were in a position to do
deals, and that for any deal to succeed there needs to be upside for the other
party too, didn’t seem to occur to him. I hope our owners do not share similar
traits. Also, why opposition to an outright sale? First principle of even
A-level Business Studies is that you never consider how much you have invested
in a project when deciding whether to continue/change. If it makes sense to go
on, fine; if circumstances have changed and a deal means you don’t recoup what
you have spent, that’s fine too.
Enough
meandering. Suffice to say that when we take the field at Bournemouth there
will be a small corner of northern Tuscany that is forever Charlton; when we
take on Middlesbrough – and give Mobray the spanking that his silly comments
after the last game deserve - that corner will have shifted to Piedmont; and
when we are repeating last season’s performance at Barnsley it will be back in
Lyon (ahead of the return to Blighty). Just where it will be when we take on Oxford
in the Capital One cup has to be a matter of indifference, unless we change the
habits of a lifetime and opt for a proper cup run.
I guess the
perhaps insensitive recent comments from a certain politician regarding the
north-east and fracking might provide an opportunity for a little taunting from
the Charlton crowd. Their fans must know that if fracking does take hold it
will start in their area – and end eventually around Watford. But you really
would think that a sensible politician would take the obvious opportunity to
redress any impression that they don’t care about the country outside London
and the South-East. I’m all in favour of one or two experimental fracking sites
and, to prove that we’re not anti-outside London, the clear choice would be to
nominate as the locations a couple of areas actually in London, places with no value,
character, social contribution etc. Do I need to spell it out? Selhurst and Bermondsey
perhaps? There would after all be nothing to lose and a good deal of potential
gain (in the event either that the whole thing works and makes money or these
areas disappear in a hole in the ground). Tough to choose between them though.
Perhaps best to go with Selhurst as if the part of Bermondsey I’ve in mind was
the one there would need to be some resources allocated to potential provisions
for the local intelligentsia, to head off the risk that a sudden shortage of
plumbers, electricians etc sends the costs of certain essentials in Blackheath
through the roof. And the Old Kent Road and its surroundings could be too close
for comfort; this isn’t so much Nambyism on my part, more like Nanma (not
anywhere near my area).
Oh come on, of course these are cheap shots. No complaints please. I’m out of the country and probably incommunicado for a
couple of weeks, unless we dip into some internet cafĂ©. I’ll be back when we’ve
nine points on the board and every gripe I’ve ever had has been dealt with.
4 comments:
The sad thing is this Squad is 3 player short of a capable promotion bid. I fear a decline like the Gliksten years in the 70's heading our way.
What a drunken crank you are. That poor girl.
An observation on takeover rumours and chat about current Board. It all feels like 209/2010 with old Board, they had about £8mn in bank debt a £7mn short term loan (now Ex Directors Loans) and a £14mn Convertible Bond., so around £29 mn of debt.
Now there is £5mn of Bank Debt ,followed by £7mn of secured loans by Ex Directors and then circa £17mn of unsecured debt by current Board, so debt around same £29 mn .
In 2010 Bond was written off by old Board and new owners took on the other £15 mn, what makes new Board believe their loan is any different from old Bond other that now in Championship rather than First Division, in both Leagues you have to fund losses.
That is the major hold up on a sale , debt too big with Championship Income and rising by £6 to £7mn a year?
Moving Stadium is smoke and mirrors, as incremental costs too large.
Sooner current owners realise their debt is no better than equity and reduce their asking price by at least £15 mn ,they will not find a buyer unless a super rich person who wants a plaything comes along.
Stick this up on Charlton Life if you want, but debate will go on and on , no buyer while debt so high.
Slater has lost plot, telling all not for sale but then chasing buyers like a bitch in heat.
Club on the edge and with annual running losses of £5mn or more and £30 mn of unsecured and secured debt they will not capture a buyer unless stupid or blind to cover their losses. Club probably worth £20 mn at absolute best which means Slater and co without security over Stadium and Training ground which Banks and Ex DIrectors have has loans that are equal to the equity everyone lost last time club in trouble, sooner he realises that sooner a sale happens.
Biggest question is why all old staff being sacked and why Richard Murray who employed the majority of them is doing nothing and backing overdraft and sitting back while club sinks further into debt, unless he is holding a buyer back to repurchase for a £1.
Debate.
Post a Comment