Quote: Trustafox "Charlton have a new owner as of 13/14 season. Last financial reports were done before that. Club's holding companies have -£11m and +12m. Owner is worth half a billion.
Last season Addicks used Bartercard to install 5000 new seats in stadium and relay the pitch. All done as a trade off for sponsorship, all VAT paid is reclaimed by the club in cash, so no VAT on any of those improvements. Excellent sponsor.
But yeah, slate away.'"
Me stating Charlton was a badly run club was an aside to the sponsor issue, with regards to BC claiming they weren't. A club losing millions per season is not well run just because the owner has deep pockets. Are Chelsea well run because they lose millions every year and are propped up by a rich man? What happens if the owner walks away? What happens if the owner loads debt on the club or takes ownership of assets like the ground to cover the investment?
And I see your point about the seats and the pitch, but why couldn't they have had that done and paid cash of they'd had a sponsor paying them cash? How do you know if they got best value using this payment method rather than cash?
Has the tax man signed off on that VAT arrangement, as if you read about BC you'll see a common complaint is the salesmen claim it'll all be VAT free but the tax office think differently! (Insert own joke about football club's dealings with the tax man here.)
If you read my other post explaining how BC works I've said it might not be a bad thing to get paid this way, if the club has the right circumstances to spend the credits and the person signing the deal has read the small print.
