By
his standards the latest communiqué from our absent, deranged owner is almost coherent.
But the bar is of course remarkably low, so the fact that the post on the club
site can at least be followed and interpreted, and represents some basic desire
to actually communicate actual information to stakeholders (ie fans), should not send
us into raptures, especially as the message seems decidedly mixed. At least the
obligatory gratuitous insults of fans are limited and can more easily be
ignored than with previous attempts.
The
comment that post-Wembley a “delay” to concluding a sale is “frustrating” is at
face value reassuring, although it is followed by the reminder (as if we needed
one) that “I have been trying to sell the club for two years now”. Then we do
descend into befuddled territory. “Many English football clubs are for sale and
many of those have been for a long time”. OK. But then: “The main reason is
that nearly all Championship club owners face huge yearly losses”, and “it has
become unaffordable for nearly anyone to own a football club in the
Championship, meaning it is not easy to find a suitable buyer”. Please correct
me if I’m wrong, but I thought that for all but two weeks of those two years we
were a League One club. So not exactly a reason for failure to conclude a sale,
let’s just say a smokescreen for an enduring inability to find a buyer for the
club willing to meet Roland’s price.
There
is some more stupidity. “A specific issue in relation to the sale of Charlton
is that while a club in London is very attractive, the value of land and
buildings is high because the stadium and the training ground are located in
London. This wouldn’t be a problem for rich enough acquirers ...”. Well, it
wouldn’t be a problem either if the current owner – who on the basis of that
argument could be said to have bought our club on the cheap – didn’t value the
asset on the basis of land prices that can never be applied. Value the asset
correctly and this isn’t a problem. Just another smokescreen for Duchatelet
demanding too high a price.
And
as if to make sure his ‘argument’ is circular, the statement says that “the
fact Charlton are now back in the Championship should increase our chances of
being sold”. Why exactly? After all, he says that the losses in the
Championship make it “not easy” to find a suitable buyer (exactly why an owner
who has proven so unsuitable should think he might have a worthwhile opinion on
who might be a suitable successor we can gloss over for now). On that basis
victory at Wembley, in his own words, makes it more difficult to sell our club.
The reason given is that we are now one step closer to the Premiership. Now
please don’t tell me that Duchatelet is asking the same price for the club that
he would have been had we not won promotion. So, here too, it is just price,
nothing else.
The
practical obstacle to a sale in the form of ex-directors loans is cited and
clearly is material. Just that it us utterly incompetent that a solution to
that problem was not agreed at least in principle shortly after Duchatelet said
he wanted to sell. After all, nobody in their right mind would say ‘I want to
sell but there’s this problem’ – and be saying exactly the same thing two years
later.
So
we take comfort from the fact that something is going on, that there are
interested potential buyers, and wait. How long for, anyone’s guess (days,
weeks, months). Rather less encouraging is what was said about Lee Bowyer’s
situation. I had been hoping that the absence to date of agreement on a new
contract for him might reflect that a sale of the club was imminent, that in
such a situation a responsible owner might not be entering into new contracts,
might even be prevented from doing so by due diligence. Not so. And to that
extent reading between the lines is not positive for the chances of a sale in
the near future – unless of course Roland is bluffing. Only the other parties
can make a call on that one.
Apparently
Bowyer “has done a fantastic job” and therefore talks about improving his
contract “are scheduled for next week”. Let’s not forget that Sir Chris was
described in positive terms when offered a new ‘contract’ by Duchatelet before
he rejected it and found himself sacked at the first available opportunity (the
FA Cup defeat at Sheffield Utd). On this front too we can only wait to see what
will happen. Bowyer agreeing a new contract would obviously be a real positive
and the assumption is that he would like to stay if the contract is fair and he
has a reasonable stab at building a competitive squad for next season.
And
on that front, after pointing out that “I want to bring the yearly losses to a
more reasonable level”, Roland gets confused again. “Operating on a small
budget will limit our chances of promotion to the Premier League”. Indeed. “Does
it mean we have no chance? No.” Indeed.
Not a ball has been kicked, everything is possible. “Does it mean we will be
relegated? Not at all”. If he is saying does this mean relegation is a
certainty, it doesn’t take a mathematician to point out that if you have a
chance of promotion, however small, you cannot have a 100% chance of being
relegated.
If
Duchatelet means can we avoid relegation, for sure it’s possible. Will we is
another question. And nobody can put a figure on our chances at this stage with
any confidence. The mood should be good on the back of a great day at Wembley
and if we keep Bowyer (and Jackson) we have a good chance of retaining the
spirit in the dressing room that made the difference. But there were 18 players
in the squad for that game and only half of them are still with the club. If we
are to be competitive on a small budget, as things stand Bowyer and his people
are going to have their work cut out to get some bargains and good loan
signings (as well as getting them approved by a kid with a laptop).
“In
the meantime owner and fans are stuck together. Please make the best of it”. The
statement in a fashion marks the end of our Wembley celebration time as
attention turns to what happens next. We have been trying to make the best of
it for some years now. Please sell our club.
BA, always a good read, thanks.
ReplyDeleteI'd put most of this missive down to "managing expectations", in important areas of next seasons results and sale of the club.
I'm concerned he mentions the triggering of a clause in Lee Bowyers contract for an extension- it sounds abit like news management , so if Lee doesn't sign- lets say because theres no recognition in his salary for his achievement- Duchalet can say " we tried.....(not very hard)" . Sounds like we won't have long to wait to hear the outcome of Lees' contract talks.
So water poured on the flames of a great season? I am hoping not...... keep the faith COYA
PS Does he actually spend money on CAFC or is the money loaned by him ( to be paid back with interest)
Thanks Sysiphus. Fair points. Believe he lends the money to the club so presumably there are some tax advantages (for someone who says he values transparency!) but wherever the amounts sit they will have to be written off in any sale. What seems to me truly sad is the condescending tone, the explanations from above to lesser beings, except that everyone sees through the holes and he fools no-one but himself. Let's keep the dancing shoes on standby.
ReplyDelete