It wasnt Hulyer who nearly f**ked the club up. We were pot less and he stepped in. I dont remember to many people moaning about him when he was in charge.
If the press had supported the Simonsen deal rather than taking the piss it could have worked re increased gates etc. They didnt. They loved the two Argies going to Spurs and were all over that but first they just took the piss and said no why would a European Player of the year go to CHARLTON of all clubs. Then when he did they ignored it. Typical of our press then and now.
Hulyer was a Charlton fan he gave us (all to briefly) the only chance we will ever see at The Valley a Europen Footballer of The Year actually playing for Charlton.
Goonerhater - at last, someone who remembers it for what it was. Hulyer was a dreamer, but he did nearly pull it off. I think someone like Danepak nearlly sponsored the whole thing, and it could have all been so different. We were going down the tubes anyway at that time. Hulyer lost his house and a lot more in the process. It does smack a little of Goldberg, however, this was a true Charlton fan who had a dream. These days we have a Man City supporter at the helm, so not the same.
Some people on here need to study the history a bit more, we weren't formed in 1998....
How can you lot slag him off, I agree with Goonerhater. Hulyer done what he thought was the best, he was a genuine fan who wanted Charlton to get back to the top. He was too late with the Keegan bid and that alone would have put a huge amount on the gate. It could have worked but it didn't............he tried his best!
masicat, I think it'smyball was being ironic and he most likely didn't mean to insult you or the question....I think he meant who cares about Hulyer....rather than the actual question.
It was a facinating time to be a Charlton time and seeing Simmo grace the Valley pitch was something I'll never forget, so I'm grateful to Hulyer for that. I'd be very interested to know what he's up to these days and hope that he recovered from his losses.
As one who remembers both Michael Gliksten and Mark Hulyer here's my tenpenneth.
I was as fed up as anybody when we sold our steady conveyor belt of talent during the sixties and devastated when Len Glover went and Michael Gliksten was not my favourite person back then. However one grows up and learns more about the reality of the world. Michael Gliksten became chairman at the age of 23 or thereabouts and was still in his twenties when he sold all his players. How many of us can put our hands on our hearts and honestly say we would be capable of running a struggling second tier football club at that age? I'm pretty sure I couldn't have done it and would probably have cocked up equally.
Hulyer was similar, in that he was mid twenties, and was a fan. I look on him (and did at the time) as akin to somebody who got his certificate for swimming one width of Woolwich baths without armbands and then decided, in the euphoria, to try and swim the English channel. A totally unrealistic aspiration and so it was with Mark. A successful small businessman who took a giant step out of his league. No malice in his motives whatsoever but just a young man in his twenties who thought himself capable of more than he was.
Again there are no doubt a few of us who fall (fell) (have fallen) into that category.
In his thirties if he's 66 - he was going out with a schoolmates mum and he was suddenly mascot virtually every week - the fall out of his actions accelerated the disasters that followed but could be argued, prevented a slow and dull death - all part of our rich history. Better to be King for a day than schmuck for a lifetime - or maybe not?
As one who remembers both Michael Gliksten and Mark Hulyer here's my tenpenneth.
I was as fed up as anybody when we sold our steady conveyor belt of talent during the sixties and devastated when Len Glover went and Michael Gliksten was not my favourite person back then. However one grows up and learns more about the reality of the world. Michael Gliksten became chairman at the age of 23 or thereabouts and was still in his twenties when he sold all his players. How many of us can put our hands on our hearts and honestly say we would be capable of running a struggling second tier football club at that age? I'm pretty sure I couldn't have done it and would probably have cocked up equally.
Hulyer was similar, in that he was mid twenties, and was a fan. I look on him (and did at the time) as akin to somebody who got his certificate for swimming one width of Woolwich baths without armbands and then decided, in the euphoria, to try and swim the English channel. A totally unrealistic aspiration and so it was with Mark. A successful small businessman who took a giant step out of his league. No malice in his motives whatsoever but just a young man in his twenties who thought himself capable of more than he was.
Again there are no doubt a few of us who fall (fell) (have fallen) into that category.
This is a balanced and sensible viewpoint.
The club had become the living dead before Hulyer turned up. There was a complete team of ex Charlton players applying their trade in the top flight at the same time, many of which have been mentioned and contrary to one comment that supporters didn't care in those days, I would disagree because the majority had voted with their abscence.
Attendancies were at a low and the atmosphere at times was like a morgue. The media treated us as a joke club and again before Hulyer, we got the tag of a small nothing club, this was gained by our lack of ambition and selling every young player (Kieth Peacock the only exception) as well as any player brought in who increased in value.
History proves it was a blessing in disguise Hulyer coming along because it finally shook the club up and ended the malaise even though it nearly ended the club. When we finally capitualted and it was headline sport story on the main TV news, it felt like someone in the family had been suffering with a terminal illness for 25 years and it was a relief to think that the pain had come to an end.
Under Hulyer we had made a couple of decent signings before Simonsen (Carl Harris comes to mind) and had just beaten Leeds away 1-2.
Typicall Charlton luck at the time, first match after Simonsen's signing threw up opponents managed by Malcolm Allison. My memory might be wrong but I seem to remember Simonsen was not properly match fit, with a winning team it might have been sensible having Simonsen on the bench to bring on latter for impact and keeping the returning fans happy. Anyway who knows, we lost after a late second half fightback. Had we won it might have kept the momentum and more fans returing to help the finances.
I spoke to Mark Hulyer many years later and mentioned this to him, but he said finances dictated that he had to have Simonsen playing day 1.
We were a joke club, but IMO the worst time from that point of view was around 73-74, where the decline appeared terminal. It's why I'll always recall the 74-75 promotion season fondly - we were going in the right direction again.
With Hulyer/Simonsen, I think the club expected more of an uplift (on & off the pitch) from the Simonsen signing - but we were moving into an era where crowds were pretty awful generally (Chelsea got 14,000 for their home game with us that season), In that climate any big gamble was going to have an uncertain payback.
All this with the benefit of hindsight of course, but honestly at the time Hulyer never looked like he knew what he was doing, and it wasn't clear whether he really was a successful businessman. The slightly spivvy looks din't add to his credibility
When we were being "wound up" in the High Court I went up there to watch one day, met Mark Hulyer and his brother, went for a "few" and ended up having a great day with a really nice bloke who spoke about Charlton with the same feeling as I do.
We were a joke club, but IMO the worst time from that point of view was around 73-74, where the decline appeared terminal. It's why I'll always recall the 74-75 promotion season fondly - we were going in the right direction again.
With Hulyer/Simonsen, I think the club expected more of an uplift (on & off the pitch) from the Simonsen signing - but we were moving into an era where crowds were pretty awful generally (Chelsea got 14,000 for their home game with us that season), In that climate any big gamble was going to have an uncertain payback.
All this with the benefit of hindsight of course, but honestly at the time Hulyer never looked like he knew what he was doing, and it wasn't clear whether he really was a successful businessman. The slightly spivvy looks din't add to his credibility
Totally agree, the early 70's was the era of the move to potential move Milton Keynes, mid-table Div 3, 800 watching us at Rochdate & the "Village Idiots" outburst. That was the low water mark. Things then looked up for a while with the Flanagan/Hales teams, then descended into total farce with Hulyer/Simonson/Shipments of rubber/African Chief/NASL hook-ups/groundsharing/Danish ice-hockey players. Hulyer at least brought an air of activity to the Valley. The sale of our best players over this period, Hales/Flash/Elliot/Walsh were necessary to keep the circus running. I never really blamed Michael glikstein for that, as I think he loved the club. The damage was 1940/50's when the crowds were huge but his father/uncle failed to re-invest in team/stadium. Something which would have taken the club to another level.
That said, if they had re-invested we wouldn't have our rich & varied history!
He was without doubt the worst thing that ever happened to our club. Full of swank,wank, false promises, false companies, hidden debts and trying to spend beyond his own means, the banks means and CAFC means. Correct if I am wrong but Hulyer started us on the slippery slope with separating the club from the Valley in his deals with Glikstein which eventually led us to bankruptcy and no Valley. I hate the man for what he done but i don't wish him ill but he is NOT on my Christmas card list and if i knew his address I would send him a bouncing cheque for the fun of it. Take that !!!!
I think it was Gliksten who separated the club from the ground, selling the club to Hulyer but retaining the ground, I wonder why he did that...
I think Michael Gliksten's motivation was a bit more complicated than that. If he had wanted simply to develop the land he had his opportunity when Charlton walked out in 1985 and whatever position the council had taken on that it would have been up to a planning inspector to decide. When he was persuaded that Martin Simons et al were not in the business of using The Valley for property development he sold it back to the club for a fair price. He did not want to sell it to Sunley's for reasons that should be obvious.
As for Mark Hulyer, he didn't have the money to buy the land and agreed a rent that he couldn't meet.
Airman, were there not several applications for planning permission for The Valley turned down? I viagly remember the Gliksteins having quite a few attempts to build something while we were playing up the road. Could be wrong, the memory's not good these days ; )
Panic Posted on 07/03/2008 15:06 Do we own the freehold on Sparrows Lane?
Aledgedly Mark Hulyer has made a packet in the US (500m)- I picked up a story in the US some (8??) years back that the Miami Dolphins were going to invite him on the board but he declined saying his only sporting love was Charlton.
This was posted on the Valley Floyd Road Messageboard a few years ago. I had a relative living in USA a while back and he read an interview in a newspaper over there with Mark Hulyer who had sold two internet companies or sites for the figure mentioned above. He was asked because of his sporting background was he going to buy a Sports Franchise in the US and he answered no. I would only be interested in Charlton Athletic in England. Or words to that effect.
Never forgot that I had read the same information that I had been told about him as had told the relative that he was making it up. Then a couple of weeks later I was convinced it was him sitting behind me in the covered end. Did not mention that to anyone at the time as I thought they would think that I had lost the plot.
Bringing Simmo to Charlton galvanised the club.Unfortunately Simmo was carrying an injury.Hulyer was confident but young and rash.I dont thick he meant to swindle the club.He loved Charlton and I'm not sure now but didn't he take Lennie on?
Any chance we could get him along as a guest speaker at some stage? What a great night that would be
I'd think he might make an excellent interviewee for Choice rather than getting a grilling at a public meeting. That way, we would get to hear his side of the story. There'd be no risk of him facing someone who might be hostile and if he wanted he could vet all the questions in advance.
Mark Hulyer is my Dad's cousin. Last we heard was that he was in Australia and had been there for some time. I've never met him myself and I'm not too sure if he is still there.
Comments
Goonerhater - at last, someone who remembers it for what it was. Hulyer was a dreamer, but he did nearly pull it off. I think someone like Danepak nearlly sponsored the whole thing, and it could have all been so different. We were going down the tubes anyway at that time. Hulyer lost his house and a lot more in the process. It does smack a little of Goldberg, however, this was a true Charlton fan who had a dream. These days we have a Man City supporter at the helm, so not the same.
Some people on here need to study the history a bit more, we weren't formed in 1998....
How can you lot slag him off, I agree with Goonerhater. Hulyer done what he thought was the best, he was a genuine fan who wanted Charlton to get back to the top. He was too late with the Keegan bid and that alone would have put a huge amount on the gate. It could have worked but it didn't............he tried his best!
It was the Gliksteins that ruined this club
masicat, I think it'smyball was being ironic and he most likely didn't mean to insult you or the question....I think he meant who cares about Hulyer....rather than the actual question.
Least ways, that's how I read it.
As one who remembers both Michael Gliksten and Mark Hulyer here's my tenpenneth.
I was as fed up as anybody when we sold our steady conveyor belt of talent during the sixties and devastated when Len Glover went and Michael Gliksten was not my favourite person back then. However one grows up and learns more about the reality of the world. Michael Gliksten became chairman at the age of 23 or thereabouts and was still in his twenties when he sold all his players. How many of us can put our hands on our hearts and honestly say we would be capable of running a struggling second tier football club at that age? I'm pretty sure I couldn't have done it and would probably have cocked up equally.
Hulyer was similar, in that he was mid twenties, and was a fan. I look on him (and did at the time) as akin to somebody who got his certificate for swimming one width of Woolwich baths without armbands and then decided, in the euphoria, to try and swim the English channel. A totally unrealistic aspiration and so it was with Mark. A successful small businessman who took a giant step out of his league. No malice in his motives whatsoever but just a young man in his twenties who thought himself capable of more than he was.
Again there are no doubt a few of us who fall (fell) (have fallen) into that category.
The club had become the living dead before Hulyer turned up. There was a complete team of ex Charlton players applying their trade in the top flight at the same time, many of which have been mentioned and contrary to one comment that supporters didn't care in those days, I would disagree because the majority had voted with their abscence.
Attendancies were at a low and the atmosphere at times was like a morgue. The media treated us as a joke club and again before Hulyer, we got the tag of a small nothing club, this was gained by our lack of ambition and selling every young player (Kieth Peacock the only exception) as well as any player brought in who increased in value.
History proves it was a blessing in disguise Hulyer coming along because it finally shook the club up and ended the malaise even though it nearly ended the club. When we finally capitualted and it was headline sport story on the main TV news, it felt like someone in the family had been suffering with a terminal illness for 25 years and it was a relief to think that the pain had come to an end.
Under Hulyer we had made a couple of decent signings before Simonsen (Carl Harris comes to mind) and had just beaten Leeds away 1-2.
Typicall Charlton luck at the time, first match after Simonsen's signing threw up opponents managed by Malcolm Allison. My memory might be wrong but I seem to remember Simonsen was not properly match fit, with a winning team it might have been sensible having Simonsen on the bench to bring on latter for impact and keeping the returning fans happy. Anyway who knows, we lost after a late second half fightback. Had we won it might have kept the momentum and more fans returing to help the finances.
I spoke to Mark Hulyer many years later and mentioned this to him, but he said finances dictated that he had to have Simonsen playing day 1.
We were a joke club, but IMO the worst time from that point of view was around 73-74, where the decline appeared terminal. It's why I'll always recall the 74-75 promotion season fondly - we were going in the right direction again.
With Hulyer/Simonsen, I think the club expected more of an uplift (on & off the pitch) from the Simonsen signing - but we were moving into an era where crowds were pretty awful generally (Chelsea got 14,000 for their home game with us that season), In that climate any big gamble was going to have an uncertain payback.
All this with the benefit of hindsight of course, but honestly at the time Hulyer never looked like he knew what he was doing, and it wasn't clear whether he really was a successful businessman. The slightly spivvy looks din't add to his credibility
Totally agree, the early 70's was the era of the move to potential move Milton Keynes, mid-table Div 3, 800 watching us at Rochdate & the "Village Idiots" outburst. That was the low water mark. Things then looked up for a while with the Flanagan/Hales teams, then descended into total farce with Hulyer/Simonson/Shipments of rubber/African Chief/NASL hook-ups/groundsharing/Danish ice-hockey players. Hulyer at least brought an air of activity to the Valley. The sale of our best players over this period, Hales/Flash/Elliot/Walsh were necessary to keep the circus running. I never really blamed Michael glikstein for that, as I think he loved the club. The damage was 1940/50's when the crowds were huge but his father/uncle failed to re-invest in team/stadium. Something which would have taken the club to another level.
That said, if they had re-invested we wouldn't have our rich & varied history!
I viagly remember the Gliksteins having quite a few attempts to build something while we were playing up the road.
Could be wrong, the memory's not good these days ; )
When you say "we" who do you mean
I'm sure he'd love to re-live the time he took the club into bankruptcy and damn nearly into insolvency.
I'm sure he'd love to re-live the time he took the club into bankruptcy and damn nearly into insolvency.
If I recall corectly, didn't Simonsen hang up his boots after leaving us and moved to the states to star in a TV show called Mork & Mindy?Panic Posted on 07/03/2008 15:06
Do we own the freehold on Sparrows Lane?
Aledgedly Mark Hulyer has made a packet in the US (500m)- I picked up a story in the US some (8??) years back that the Miami Dolphins were going to invite him on the board but he declined saying his only sporting love was Charlton.
This was posted on the Valley Floyd Road Messageboard a few years ago. I had a relative living in USA a while back and he read an interview in a newspaper over there with Mark Hulyer who had sold two internet companies or sites for the figure mentioned above. He was asked because of his sporting background was he going to buy a Sports Franchise in the US and he answered no. I would only be interested in Charlton Athletic in England. Or words to that effect.
Never forgot that I had read the same information that I had been told about him as had told the relative that he was making it up. Then a couple of weeks later I was convinced it was him sitting behind me in the covered end. Did not mention that to anyone at the time as I thought they would think that I had lost the plot.
Mark Hulyer was 28 years old when he took over Charlton Athletic in June 1982.
Will have to check with Miss R Riley, but that would make him 57 years old.