Salmon Pants buys Charlton Athletic

Perryqhill said:
His idea, as he posted on an Oxford forum weeks before taking over here was to purchase an ailing L1 club for pennies, sort out finances/losses, minimal investment in the team to make them competitive and look at a quick promotion within 1 or 2 years and big sell on to new owners moving on a Championship club.

He admitted there was risk involved, but given it seems to be following the same theme I can only imagine the only thing he's learnt is to get promotion straight away and get rid as he simply hasn't got the financial clout or the humility to make anything work for the long term.
Click to expand...

So, he plans to follow exactly the same strategy that failed at Sunderland.

Except this time with a smaller club, in a bigger mess, less likely to go up without investment or a great manager and a lower upside.

What could possibly go wrong, eh?
 


Mint said:
I genuinely believe the past owners should be given a tiny little more credit than the pile on hatred from most....did they make mistakes? well aye of course but they did stabilise a club that could have easily dropped even further? to me, in my opinion, yes they did stabilise and got rid of the actual "con men"

And ill always remember the image of KLD (who most fans like and respect) giving Donald a big hug after we won the pizza cup

BTW im not called Stewart or Charlie...just have my eyes open to to reality
Click to expand...

Stabilise the club, by selling anything and anyone they could and cutting finances anywhere and everywhere, despite the fact we should have had something like 36m and 18m of parachutes available to us over that period?

All they did was short term cost cutting, the likes of any clown could have done. When their short term ways of trying to get a quick promotion and a quick sale failed, they just cut more costs and sold off more academy prospects, employing the likes of Phil Parkinson and almost tying theirselves in the process up with high interest rate loans which could have put the club at risk.

We came down and showed less ambition than other clubs like Ipswich and Wednesday who have also had financial issues in recent seasons, yet we should have had more comfortbale finances to deal many of the issues we had.
Mint said:
intothevalley.proboards.com

Message to all the bitter Sunderland fans out there | Into The Valley Forum

.....And the easily swayed fools who want to believe total strangers instead of waiting to see what happens....This is for the record is the truth of what happened during Charlie's time at Sunderland
intothevalley.proboards.com intothevalley.proboards.com
Click to expand...

Some of that may well be true. But the emphasis of them overseeing the reduction of 180m and the goodwill of Ellis is bollocks.

Several Player sales saw the amount owed come down during that period as well, with the Pickford money going towards the SBC loan (iirc it was about 82m on relegation before player sales) most of the quoted amounts are from falling from the PL, not when they took over before Methven etc arrived. A lot is also mentioned of the parachute payments, I think given we know they were used to purchase the club (and go towards debt eventually) there was another 9m which went from SAFC into the parent company which we weren't certain about and which wasn't cleared up (or rather wasn't for sometime).

Whatever Ellis was owed from SAFC simply wasn't recoverable by then, unless he put some actual effort into regaining PL status or managing the situation and the club into a better position. He could ask whatever he wanted but he hadn't maintained his asset and therefore SAFC was worth f*ck all due to debts and that's why them (or you) got the club for very little.

It was either rip the club apart and sell off assets (pretty much what he's made his money from) or sell at a massive loss. Either way only so much was recoverable. He was never going to do the former because he does seem to have an affinity with the club and it would likely tarnish his reputation further among his peers.

The issue many of us have are the lies, which unfolded from anytime they were asked about finances and what they tried to hide, the fact they clearly had no capital and had to sell anyone and everyone making it so small time and so short term, and also Methven being a condescending idiot underestimating the knowledge of the fans. The MSD loans and how they would he structured (yeah it wasnt actually MSD but i cant be arsed to google the exact company at the time), trying to sell the club to Campbell before they were even promoted and preparation for season 2 and then 3 in league one just showed how utterly clueless they were and nomatter how you dress it up or laugh at comments they were utter failures.

I fear for Charlton, I really do.
 
Last edited:
Perryqhill said:
Stabilise the club, by selling anything and anyone they could and cutting finances anywhere and everywhere, despite the fact we should have had something like 36m and 18m of parachutes available to us over that period?

All they did was short term cost cutting, the likes of any clown could have done. When their short term ways of trying to get a quick promotion and a quick sale failed, they just cut more costs and sold off more academy prospects, employing the likes of Phil Parkinson and almost tying theirselves in the process up with high interest rate loans which could have put the club at risk.

We came down and showed less ambition than other clubs like Ipswich and Wednesday who have also had financial issues in recent seasons, yet we should have had more comfortbale finances to deal many of the issues we had.


Some of that may well be true. But the emphasis of them overseeing the reduction of 180m and the goodwill of Ellis is bollocks.

Several Player sales saw the amount owed come down during that period as well, with the Pickford money going towards the SBC loan (iirc it was about 82m on relegation before player sales) most of the quoted amounts are from falling from the PL, not when they took over before Methven etc arrived. A lot is also mentioned of the parachute payments, I think given we know they were used to purchase the club (and go towards debt eventually) there was another 9m which went from SAFC into the parent company which we weren't certain about and which wasn't cleared up (or rather wasn't for sometime).

Whatever Ellis was owed from SAFC simply wasn't recoverable by then, unless he put some actual effort into regaining PL status or managing the situation and the club into a better position. He could ask whatever he wanted but he hadn't maintained his asset and therefore SAFC was worth f*ck all due to debts and that's why them (or you) got the club for very little.

It was either rip the club apart and sell off assets (pretty much what he's made his money from) or sell at a massive loss. Either way only so much was recoverable. He was never going to do the former because he does seem to have an affinity with the club and it would likely tarnish his reputation further among his peers.

The issue many of us have are the lies, which unfolded from anytime they were asked about finances and what they tried to hide, the fact they clearly had no capital and had to sell anyone and everyone making it so small time and so short term, and also Methven being a condescending idiot underestimating the knowledge of the fans. The MSD loans and how they would he structured (yeah it wasnt actually MSD but i cant be arsed to google the exact company at the time), trying to sell the club to Campbell before they were even promoted and preparation for season 2 and then 3 in league one just showed how utterly clueless they were and nomatter how you dress it up or laugh at comments they were utter failures.

I fear for Charlton, I really do.
Click to expand...

The Charlton fan is understandably trying to spin the story in the best possible light, but it simply isn't true.

Every report at the time stated that our debt was just under £140m and that Ellis Short had cleared the debt. The fact that Ellis had cleared the debt was confirmed by Short, Donald and Methven.

The club was supposed to cost Donald and Methven £40m, but that was structured. To quote Methven at the time:

‘The way in which Ellis has allowed us to do it is to pay some of the £40m in stages, to help us with the cash flow requirement this summer.

‘The reality when you do this kind of deal, and there is still money outstanding on the deal, is that the person who has that money outstanding will want to take security against something so that if the owners then didn’t pay, he would have something to cover his money.

‘That money is secured against parachute payments but that is just him making sure he gets the full value of the £40m from us.’
Click to expand...

So how could Methven and Donald have secured the money they owed to Short against the Parachute payments if those same parachute payments were already owed out as part of the debt to a bank?

Methven and Donald, secured the purchase of our club in instalments and paid the final instalment to Short using the parachute payments and in effect, bought our club with our own money.
 
FlashGordon said:
The Charlton fan is understandably trying to spin the story in the best possible light, but it simply isn't true.

Every report at the time stated that our debt was just under £140m and that Ellis Short had cleared the debt. The fact that Ellis had cleared the debt was confirmed by Short, Donald and Methven.

The club was supposed to cost Donald and Methven £40m, but that was structured. To quote Methven at the time:



So how could Methven and Donald have secured the money they owed to Short against the Parachute payments if those same parachute payments were already owed out as part of the debt to a bank?

Methven and Donald, secured the purchase of our club in instalments and paid the final instalment to Short using the parachute payments and in effect, bought our club with our own money.
Click to expand...

The club was only cosmetically debt free. Short had moved the last £25m into Drumaville to give that impression. Pure vanity from both sides of the deal. That was always intended to come from the club. Short's security wasn't the parachute - it was all of the club's assets, Ignore what they said after the takoever - it was all bollocks, apart from the Short getting £40m bit; it was £15m for the shares, and £25m to repay the loan he'd moved. At that point, the loan was secured on Short's assets, including the Hilton.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
The club was only cosmetically debt free. Short had moved the last £25m into Drumaville to give that impression. Pure vanity from both sides of the deal. That was always intended to come from the club. Short's security wasn't the parachute - it was all of the club's assets, Ignore what they said after the takoever - it was all bollocks, apart from the Short getting £40m bit; it was £15m for the shares, and £25m to repay the loan he'd moved. At that point, the loan was secured on Short's assets, including the Hilton.
Click to expand...

So you're suggesting that Donald and Methven only paid £15m for the club and the remaining about was to clear debt (which they used the parachute payments to do)?

They didn't steal money from the club, they just lied about how they purchased it for their own PR?
 
FlashGordon said:
So you're suggesting that Donald and Methven only paid £15m for the club and the remaining about was to clear debt (which they used the parachute payments to do)?

They didn't steal money from the club, they just lied about how they purchased it for their own PR?
Click to expand...
Methven (not Kildare) paid zero.
 
Secret Visage said:
Methven (not Kildare) paid zero.
Click to expand...
This is why I always had marginally more time for Donald. His money, his risk. Not as much of it as they may have claimed, but would have been him who had to cough up if shit hit fan. He seemed stupid and out of his depth, but sincere, not cynical.

Methven was a leech. Always has been. Can’t stand him. So glad he’s out of our club and my sympathies are with Charlton - a good club imo.
 
Last edited:
scott934 said:
This is the crux, it was all bollocks. So was FPP/MSD investing in Donald, so was the kidnapping of his kids, so was the piss take party stops here, so was the 'this is what good looks like'. Bollocks from the beginning, that too many of us believed.
Click to expand...
Mind FFP were, however they laughed at what they saw when they delved into it.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
The club was only cosmetically debt free. Short had moved the last £25m into Drumaville to give that impression. Pure vanity from both sides of the deal. That was always intended to come from the club. Short's security wasn't the parachute - it was all of the club's assets, Ignore what they said after the takoever - it was all bollocks, apart from the Short getting £40m bit; it was £15m for the shares, and £25m to repay the loan he'd moved. At that point, the loan was secured on Short's assets, including the Hilton.
Click to expand...
I wonder what the general consensus would have been if they’d just put this out there at the time instead of playing billy big bollocks.

A lot of people even now believe they pocketed the parachute payments, but in reality they were used to clear the last £25m of the clubs debt, and as such used as designed, to help relegated clubs adjust to the reality of relegation.

By telling lies in the very first press conference, it was always going to end in tears.
 

Back
Top