Charlton are in complete control of their stadium.
Even is we didn't sell our rights to them we would have only ever had 50% of it.
You're trying to suggest two situations are similar when they are worlds apart.
Not really... Having a guarantor on the rent deal is one thing because of the instability of your tenant. 'Forcing' someone to be a guarantor on 'other revenues' goes to show how little they thought of the club and it's future development.
On a previous point - If a company has to put in place guarantors in respect to a rental deal and other arrangements it just goes to show how shit for the club the deal was in the first place.