WHERE WILL THE MONEY COME FROM ?

With regards to the 'Broker' here is another site reporting the same thing.

http://www.eufootball.biz/Legal/8450-ca ... ortly.html

Not really clear Carl in fairness. All sorts of websites make claims especially regarding football, any chance of checking regulations?

will do Steve

Cheers

Strange how the Chopra payments are under control and the Hudson ones are not, i would have thought knowing Riddler the way he was would have been financed possibly the same way etc.

Think this may be a red herring I can't find anything relating to non payment of finance brokers resulting in a transfer embargo - here is rule 44.2.3 of the the football League:-

If a Club is in default of payments due to another Club under a transfer or
compensation agreement the Board shall place an embargo on the registration of
transfers by such defaulting Club until such time as the agreement is honoured.
The Board shall also apply any transfer or compensation fee proceeds received for
transmission to the defaulting Club, together with any payment of monies which
would otherwise be payable to the defaulting Club, in settlement of the defaulting
Club’s overdue transfer or compensation fee commitment to any other Club or
Clubs pro-rata

Think this may be a red herring I can't find anything relating to non payment of finance brokers resulting in a transfer embargo - here is rule 44.2.3 of the the football League:-

If a Club is in default of payments due to another Club under a transfer or
compensation agreement the Board shall place an embargo on the registration of
transfers by such defaulting Club until such time as the agreement is honoured.
The Board shall also apply any transfer or compensation fee proceeds received for
transmission to the defaulting Club, together with any payment of monies which
would otherwise be payable to the defaulting Club, in settlement of the defaulting
Club’s overdue transfer or compensation fee commitment to any other Club or
Clubs pro-rata

Thats the way i thought it was. Cheers for that.

"Daya"][="ihatealiens"]Think this may be a red herring I can't find anything relating to non payment of finance brokers resulting in a transfer embargo - here is rule 44.2.3 of the the football League:-

If a Club is in default of payments due to another Club under a transfer or
compensation agreement the Board shall place an embargo on the registration of
transfers by such defaulting Club until such time as the agreement is honoured.
The Board shall also apply any transfer or compensation fee proceeds received for
transmission to the defaulting Club, together with any payment of monies which
would otherwise be payable to the defaulting Club, in settlement of the defaulting
Club’s overdue transfer or compensation fee commitment to any other Club or
Clubs pro-rata

Thats the way i thought it was. Cheers for that.[/quote]



this embargo also means that you cant resign existing players to new contracts either.

Think this may be a red herring I can't find anything relating to non payment of finance brokers resulting in a transfer embargo - here is rule 44.2.3 of the the football League:-

If a Club is in default of payments due to another Club under a transfer or
compensation agreement the Board shall place an embargo on the registration of
transfers by such defaulting Club until such time as the agreement is honoured.
The Board shall also apply any transfer or compensation fee proceeds received for
transmission to the defaulting Club, together with any payment of monies which
would otherwise be payable to the defaulting Club, in settlement of the defaulting
Club’s overdue transfer or compensation fee commitment to any other Club or
Clubs pro-rata

Thats the way i thought it was. Cheers for that.

Poses the question though - why are we still under a transfer embargo?

With regards to the 'Broker' here is another site reporting the same thing.

http://www.eufootball.biz/Legal/8450-ca ... ortly.html

Carl the broker thing has been reported by several souces, it just seems odd that the money is apparently owed to a broker rather than a lender.

Maybe Tony the word 'Broker' is wrong but even the club have issued statements recently stating it has 'football creditors' to settle with.

We are in agreement Carl, although it seems to me IHA might be closer to the truth with his Red Herring comment.

this embargo also means that you cant resign existing players to new contracts either.

Steve, if thats the case (and I've no reason to doubt it is), surely it would make sense for the Malaysians to get the outstanding payments up to date in order to secure their assets and protect their value?

["LlwyncelynBlue"]["steve davies"]

this embargo also means that you cant resign existing players to new contracts either.

Steve, if thats the case (and I've no reason to doubt it is), surely it would make sense for the Malaysians to get the outstanding payments up to date in order to secure their assets and protect their value?[/quote]



thats what im hoping this meeting will sort out this weekend.
the fact that whitley is flying out for a face to face is good news i mean after all they could have shut us down by e.mail or fax

If we are not under an embargo then I would have expected the club to announce it. Thank you Aliens for finding the clause but as you say what is the truth in all this ?

But we need to get back to the original question, who will pay the required money ( a couple of million now and more than £15million in 5 or so months ?

Although it is owed to a broker it is still a football debt ain't it?

Not sure, thats why i asked the question, I would have thought a broker would have been the same as a bank, a broker just takes more risk and charges higher interest? If it's a broker then surely Charlton have been paid by the broker? Maybe someone can throw some light on this.

It is classed as a football matter because if not and there was a loophole, every transfer would go through a third party broker if only as a token transaction and that would make a mockery of embargo's and the restrictions in place to stop clubs living beyond their means.

has any one thought of using Wong.com I believe it's only 2,430% APR only slightly higher than the Deal Ridsdale done with that Ray Ransom bloke.

["LlwyncelynBlue"]["steve davies"]

this embargo also means that you cant resign existing players to new contracts either.

Steve, if thats the case (and I've no reason to doubt it is), surely it would make sense for the Malaysians to get the outstanding payments up to date in order to secure their assets and protect their value?

thats what im hoping this meeting will sort out this weekend.
the fact that whitley is flying out for a face to face is good news i mean after all they could have shut us down by e.mail or fax [/quote]


Steve, Whitelys a wanker mate whatever Borley tells you, was not long ago he was a big Ridders fan, backing him with all his fire alarm bollocks even though the head of security and london fire service disagreed to the Ridsdales false claims to duck a 5k bet! that really is how low the bloke goes! As for Whitley... no backbone and i for one have no faith in him at all. He seems to back whoever pays the wedge at the time.

If we are not under an embargo then I would have expected the club to announce it. Thank you Aliens for finding the clause but as you say what is the truth in all this ?

But we need to get back to the original question, who will pay the required money ( a couple of million now and more than £15million in 5 or so months ?

Carl, only time will tell and its clearly in the Malaysians hands, they may have a few options or not , who knows?

If we are not under an embargo then I would have expected the club to announce it. Thank you Aliens for finding the clause but as you say what is the truth in all this ?

But we need to get back to the original question, who will pay the required money ( a couple of million now and more than £15million in 5 or so months ?

As you originally said and I agree we may well have to sell at least one player pretty soon to aleviate any short term cash flow problem and to avoid any more court cases. A deal really must be nailed down with Sam/Langstone and quickly. I suspect there may very well be still more cutting back of staff at the CCS. If PMG really want out then a negotiated settlement figure needs sorting out quickly and amicably for the good of the club. The situation we are in can't be allowed to drag on and on its got to come to a head and soon.

There is another scenario...

Had the Malaysians paid everything off and got the club looking
hunky-dory it would have weakened their hand when dealing with the
creditors!!

Leaving everything up in the air also leaves some of our creditors with
squeaky bums!!!....

and easier to deal with!!

There is a reason why TG and Vincent Tan have not bought the club outright but no-one bar themselves know the reason, even though they have invested £6.5million they have not shown that they are ready and willing to takeover the club, lock and stock.

This situation is still puzzling but I wonder if I have a possible explanation to what is going on?

Based on TLG's blog figures the Malaysians currently hold just under 40% of the issued shares.

Further to this there is a significant unissued shareholding worth £5.2m set aside for conversion of debt into equity by the likes of PMG, Michael Isaacs, Steve Borley and possibly Sam Hammam. Full use of these shares would reduce the Malaysians shareholding to just above 30%.

There is another 34,468,568 unissued shares which the Directors have the authority to allot in response to future investment opportunities. That amount is 22% of the total shares.

Vincent Tan has a mortgage charge against the clubs assets for monies he has already loaned the club. It is likely that by 2013 VT & TG will be owed around £30m for their debt repayments and refinancing of CCFC.

If they converted that £30m for the remaining shares they would gain 52% of the club. Each share would have cost them 1.1p (as opposed to the current 15.69p a share).

They would then be in a position to buy the other 48% of shares using the drag along option and in theory could offer 1.1p a share which would mean the original £5.2m of debt would have been settled for £35,000 plus they would have gained the rest of the clubs equity.

My figures are probably wrong but the principle idea does exists for the Malaysians to obtain the club on the cheap should they so wish.

There is another scenario...

Had the Malaysians paid everything off and got the club looking
hunky-dory it would have weakened their hand when dealing with the
creditors!!

Leaving everything up in the air also leaves some of our creditors with
squeaky bums!!!....

and easier to deal with!!

But the creditors will also be aware that there is multi million pounds to be paid out very soon or the club is literally going backwards Dave.

My money is on another investor or player sales.

Another Malaysian Company I thinks!

Think this may be a red herring I can't find anything relating to non payment of finance brokers resulting in a transfer embargo - here is rule 44.2.3 of the the football League:-

If a Club is in default of payments due to another Club under a transfer or
compensation agreement the Board shall place an embargo on the registration of
transfers by such defaulting Club until such time as the agreement is honoured.
The Board shall also apply any transfer or compensation fee proceeds received for
transmission to the defaulting Club, together with any payment of monies which
would otherwise be payable to the defaulting Club, in settlement of the defaulting
Club’s overdue transfer or compensation fee commitment to any other Club or
Clubs pro-rata

Operative words in red, it's very specific it does not matter where the money comes from, the bottom line is City have not paid the broker so the broker does not pay Charlton so in effect we are in default to Charlton, end of story Football related

So the broker didnt broke, he lent? Whats the difference then between any other loan? Do the FA support these type of brokers/lenders and give them a priveledge over other type of loaness?

There is another scenario...

Had the Malaysians paid everything off and got the club looking
hunky-dory it would have weakened their hand when dealing with the
creditors!!

Leaving everything up in the air also leaves some of our creditors with
squeaky bums!!!....

and easier to deal with!!

But the creditors will also be aware that there is multi million pounds to be paid out very soon or the club is literally going backwards Dave.

I agree Carl. But had TG come in a month back, cleared the HMRC bill, sorted the wages
and stuck a few quid in the transfer kitty the garden would have looked a lot more
rosy.

"hang on mate, you've just spent 10m on X,Y and Z... so you can afford to give me
70p in the pound on what you owe me too"... kind of thing

Im shit at explaining what i mean (and usually wrong anyway )

There is another scenario...

Had the Malaysians paid everything off and got the club looking
hunky-dory it would have weakened their hand when dealing with the
creditors!!

Leaving everything up in the air also leaves some of our creditors with
squeaky bums!!!....

and easier to deal with!!

Yep thats my take on the matter, reduce the potential debt as much as possible before a full take over...........

Carl the Malaysians will pay the money when they have too..............

There is another scenario...

Had the Malaysians paid everything off and got the club looking
hunky-dory it would have weakened their hand when dealing with the
creditors!!

Leaving everything up in the air also leaves some of our creditors with
squeaky bums!!!....

and easier to deal with!!

Yep thats my take on the matter, reduce the potential debt as much as possible before a full take over...........

Carl the Malaysians will pay the money when they have too..............

That's what I've said a couple of times too.

They know what their doing, and it would be pretty stupid to go splashing the cash and paying off every creditor straight away (Although it would be nice!)
They're going to be negotiating with all creditors and coming to agreements to try and stabilise the club.

["Tony Blue Williams"][carlccfc"]There is a reason why TG and Vincent Tan have not bought the club outright but no-one bar themselves know the reason, even though they have invested £6.5million they have not shown that they are ready and willing to takeover the club, lock and stock.[
This situation is still puzzling but I wonder if I have a possible explanation to what is going on?

Based on TLG's blog figures the Malaysians currently hold just under 40% of the issued shares.

Further to this there is a significant unissued shareholding worth £5.2m set aside for conversion of debt into equity by the likes of PMG, Michael Isaacs, Steve Borley and possibly Sam Hammam. Full use of these shares would reduce the Malaysians shareholding to just above 30%.

There is another 34,468,568 unissued shares which the Directors have the authority to allot in response to future investment opportunities. That amount is 22% of the total shares.

Vincent Tan has a mortgage charge against the clubs assets for monies he has already loaned the club. It is likely that by 2013 VT & TG will be owed around £30m for their debt repayments and refinancing of CCFC.

If they converted that £30m for the remaining shares they would gain 52% of the club. Each share would have cost them 1.1p (as opposed to the current 15.69p a share).

They would then be in a position to buy the other 48% of shares using the drag along option and in theory could offer 1.1p a share which would mean the original £5.2m of debt would have been settled for £35,000 plus they would have gained the rest of the clubs equity.

My figures are probably wrong but the principle idea does exists for the Malaysians to obtain the club on the cheap should they so wish.[/quote]



tony

this is in fact the scenario that i think and hope is being played out.
the malaysians have the whip hand its as simple as that

So any ideas on what the projected spend due to running costs and wages etc will be by December and how on earth is the Club going to generate an income stream to fund this , with or without Langston's debt which also HAS to be settled by then ?

Do we still allegedly owe £1.5m to Sunderland for Chopra.............?

Do we still allegedly owe £1.5m to Sunderland for Chopra.............?

we owe some but the embargo is just for the money owed to Charlton .

Would we be entitled to any compensation if DJ goes to Fulham? I understand he is on around £750,000 a year so perhaps it makes sense.

He owes us nothing, and with the general uncertainty around the club no-one could blame him. If the best players are going, why not have a clean sweep, sort out the debts, do our best do hold on to Championship status and rebuild.

Just a thought - could Langston offer the money back into the club as an investment?
No cash injection, but maybe Sam back and PMG out?

Just a thought - could Langston offer the money back into the club as an investment?
No cash injection, but maybe Sam back and PMG out?

What good would no cash injection do?

Also , to get PMG out of any involvement with the club would mean repaying them about £8m (they haven`t converted £2.7m of it into shares yet) plus another couple of £m to acquire their shares at the issue price of 15p.

So you are suggesting Sam Hammam comes back without putting any money into the club .For whose benefit would that be?

Keith