Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

New Article: Roland Duchatelet - A theory.

13

Comments

  • There's two things that bother me about Roland.

    The first is that I get this constant feeling that his overriding view is a stubborn one; that everyone has told him he can't run a football team without making a loss and he's out to prove them wrong. Fun for him probably, but the downside is that it means we're not going to go anywhere fast with the cuts that come in every season and the margins are fine enough in this league that we'll always have to fear relegation. Like with everything Roland-related I have no evidence for this.

    The other thing that has frustrated me at the start of this season is the fact that we don't seem to be building. Not in a broad sense. We seem to spend too long not acknowledging gaps in the squad and then by the time we address one hole another leak has sprung. The only way Roland's slow, sensible progression works is if we keep building up the squad. The theory is probably sound: get in useful players (Henderson, Vetokele, Gudmundsson) on good length deals, get through the season, sell an asset from the academy (Joe Gomez) and then buy in more useful players (Bauer, Makienok, Ba). That could work, we could find that four/five years down the line we have a proper promotion squad made up of fairly experienced Championship players. Along the way if we don't have the right academy players maybe we sell one of the assets (Gudmundsson, Vetokele etc) at a profit to fund the incomings. As long as the scouting is sound Roland's cosmopolitan revolution could bear fruit without costing the world.

    That's where the problems spring up and there's two: firstly the scattergun scouting. For every Gudmundsson and Vetokele there's been a Polish Pete and a Reza. For every good negotiation on a Gomez fee there's been the gifting of Morrison. We're not consistent enough in our scouting and we waste too much on players like Nego and Lepoint when we can't afford to if we want to keep costs down. The other problem that's really frustrated me this summer is the outgoings outnumbering the incomings. Last summer we were down to bare bones thanks primarily to Slater and Jimenez. Poyet, Hamer and various others were allowed to run their contracts down and we had a rebuilding job on. The squad not being big enough was a sad reality of a tumultuous previous ownership. This season though we've let far too many go. Failed loans (in the sense that they provide us with a short-term effect rather than extended stability - Buyens and Bulot not coming back and leaving gaps in the first 11) and extensive departures (every single senior centre half we had last season - assuming Bikey lumbers off) mean that while the club have finally addressed the issue of our lack of physical presence up front it's hard to focus on that while our first choice back line includes a 34 year old central midfielder. We've signed a centre half who would have complemented last season's central defence a season too late. What rumours we've heard are about a possible new goalkeeper when we've released our utility right back/right mid and our first choice right back has well known injury problems. Eagles, Wilson, Ben Haim, Gomez Johnson, Bikey, Bulot, Buyens, Church and Tucudean might not all have been brilliant but in an already too small squad they have to be replaced. If we have to cover those absences we'll be where we were last season with possibly a little bit more quality. There's no sense of growth this summer, just more repairs.

    I might be too early with this comment and we may see five more quality players brought in in the right positions but I doubt it'll be that way. Maybe next summer will be different but no matter how you look at it the Roland experiment doesn't ever seem to quite deliver


    Spot on, and well put , I really wish Katrien/ Roland could read this and allay our fears.

  • Yes, the problem is we might see those 5 players signed but most of us don't believe we will. That trust has not been gained.
  • Losses have been met with player sales, really?
  • razil said:

    Losses have been met with player sales, really?

    An assumption. May not be like for like but who knows any figures anyway?

  • I think it would show in the accounts if we were breaking even which is what is being assumed
  • razil said:

    Losses have been met with player sales, really?

    That's not what I said. "seasons' losses are mainly recouped against player sales" As you say, the accounts will show the picture.

  • Mainly is still a big amount and would mean big player sales every year, sorry to call you out on it.

    Thing is if it were achievable then it would make the strategy understandable, but it isn't particulalry without ffp.
  • Sponsored links:


  • - but it isn't particulalry without ffp."
    Sorry, you've lost me now. I have to admit my understanding of FFP is not the best. How does "without ffp" make the strategy unachievable?
  • razil said:

    Mainly is still a big amount and would mean big player sales every year, sorry to call you out on it.

    Thing is if it were achievable then it would make the strategy understandable, but it isn't particulalry without ffp.

    We have just sold Joe Gomez. Alongside loan fees and the Poyet settlement the transfer revenue for last season will be close to £5M which is more than double the last few years. It's an increase of £3M which goes against typical losses of £6M

    Is this repeatable? Well we have a number of players who might fetch a fee next January or next summer. In particular I would venture that Vetokele would cover an entire seasons losses if he finds his shooting boots.

    FFP loss limits being doubled certinaly doesn't help, not least because of the inflationary impact on player wages.

    The strategy is not that hard to understand if you forget about being a fan for a minute! He is bringing in young players from around Europe and offering players like Gudmundsson (and now Bauer and Makienok) a chance to play in the English second tier. In addition they take on older players on short term deals to ensure survival.

    If they make it and show promise then their next contract will be worth a fortune... if they sign with us for long enough (like Watt Bauer and Vetokele) then there's a chance our club will make a turn on a fee.

    What is not at all clear is whether M.Duchatelet is inclined to spend the money on fees and wages to take us into the top eight. Bigger losses but a shot at the play-offs and the sales value of the squad is surely enhanced.

    The losses at our club were low for last season. What surprises me is that someone who was chair or the supporters Trust for two years doesn't recognise what is happening in terms of sustainability of our club.

    Many, many clubs in the Championship are losing £10m a year and a few like Bolton and Reading will be running out of parachute payments soon. Our league position improved last season and our losses reduced. If this is repeated in 2015-16 through a better squad and higher player sales then we have a club that has a future.

    What perplexes people is that RD refuses to engage with anyone. His managers, Luzon and Meire are singing from the same hymn sheet right now, spinning a tale that we are looking for a few more players and to rise up the league.

    I expect many fans wish that we would sign high calibre replacements for the talent which has left asap. Ultimately we want to see us have a crack at attaining 76 points and a trip to Wembley - not much to ask is it?!
  • razil said:

    we knew where we stood, and better still we had charlton people running the club and then a legend managing it, for better or worse, even with them two who were running it after their plans went awry

    now no one know what the fk is really going on, we are the play thing of billionaire with very shallow pockets, a social or football experiment, massive turn off in my book

    But we didn't know where we stood. We fell out of the premiership a long time back know and its pretty much been a trap door to hell until the last few seasons. Imho the financial security and longer term view of the owners is very welcome. Not saying they couldn't have done a lot better, but things could be a hell of a lot worse. We are doing ok.
  • Agree 100% with Razil, shame previous owners plans went awry.
    Don't like this network and shame we have to sell our best young players so soon.
    Hope Cousins is not the next one to leave!
  • razil said:

    we knew where we stood, and better still we had charlton people running the club and then a legend managing it, for better or worse, even with them two who were running it after their plans went awry

    now no one know what the fk is really going on, we are the play thing of billionaire with very shallow pockets, a social or football experiment, massive turn off in my book

    But we didn't know where we stood. We fell out of the premiership a long time back know and its pretty much been a trap door to hell until the last few seasons. Imho the financial security and longer term view of the owners is very welcome. Not saying they couldn't have done a lot better, but things could be a hell of a lot worse. We are doing ok.
    We could be doing a lot worse and he did buy the club when it was in trouble but then again that was the same justification used for dismissing any criticism of the Slater/Jimenez/Cash regime.

    There has been a lot of good things happen under RD but a few bad things as well as some strange decisions.

    He's better than the Spivs, which isn't hard.

    But how long will that mean he and his running of the club is put beyond criticism by some.

    He's the man in charge now so what happens and doesn't happen is down to him.
  • edited July 2015
    When we started last season, we were missing a couple of key players (most notably another forward) and it was obvious to pretty much everyone that this was the case. Whether he liked it or not, this sent out the message that Roly wasn't interested in putting together a serious push for promotion; it appeared more that he had adopted the 'wait and see' approach, which nearly blew up in his face. Was this because he was already considering getting rid of one of his clubs and so did not feel committed enough to his various football projects?

    Unfortunately, apart from a couple of encouraging acquisitions, we find ourselves in deja vu territory this season, only as has been pointed out above, we have lost an even greater number of players this close season, so there are even more gaps to fill than there was last year.

    So, IMHO, we will have a clear indication of Roly's attitude to his football project and his intentions for CAFC by the time of the first fixture. If we are in the same position as last year (i.e still with a thin squad) when we kick off to QPR, then we will know that he is not serious about promotion and that he is merely attempting to make some kind of point (either to himself, or to other) about running a club sustainably and that this is what it is all about, not reaching the premiership pot of gold. If he achieves this, then presumably he will feel vindicated and then rapidly lose interest and get shot of us, just like he has done with Standard.

    Now, if his plan is successful, he will undoubtedly leave us in a much superior state (financially, at least) than which he found us (not that difficult, I know, but undeniably progress of sorts). However, it may mean that we may have to adjust our expectations on the pitch accordingly and realise that promotion chasing is unlikely to materialise under RD. The next month will be very revealing, I think.
  • razil said:

    we knew where we stood, and better still we had charlton people running the club and then a legend managing it, for better or worse, even with them two who were running it after their plans went awry

    now no one know what the fk is really going on, we are the play thing of billionaire with very shallow pockets, a social or football experiment, massive turn off in my book

    But we didn't know where we stood. We fell out of the premiership a long time back know and its pretty much been a trap door to hell until the last few seasons. Imho the financial security and longer term view of the owners is very welcome. Not saying they couldn't have done a lot better, but things could be a hell of a lot worse. We are doing ok.
    We could be doing a lot worse and he did buy the club when it was in trouble but then again that was the same justification used for dismissing any criticism of the Slater/Jimenez/Cash regime.

    There has been a lot of good things happen under RD but a few bad things as well as some strange decisions.

    He's better than the Spivs, which isn't hard.

    But how long will that mean he and his running of the club is put beyond criticism by some.

    He's the man in charge now so what happens and doesn't happen is down to him.
    Totally agree, and no problem with critcism, but happy to accept the downs if overall we are moving forward; which i believe we are.
  • Roland Duchatelet is a complicated character. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. One time student activist, hugely successful businessman who Wiki describes as billionaire. Senator in Belgium for three years and one time leader of his own political "social liberalist" party Vivant.

    I seem to remember that around the time of his takeover of Charlton he was quoted as saying "communities need football clubs and that football is an important part of social fabric" or at least words to that effect.

    I don't think Mr. Duchatelet is bothered whether or not Charlton are playing in the Premier League.

    Why then did he buy the football club ? So here's my theory.

    I think we are part of a philanthropic social experiment. I think he bought us because under the last ownership we were in serious financial trouble and he saw us as a needy, albeit timely for his purposes cause rather than as either a toy or an investment opportunity. He doesn't seem at least to me like he has an ego that he wants to flaunt to the footballing world.

    I don't think he wants to spend fortunes but feels able to spend enough on infrastructure like pitch , training ground facilities and ground maintenance in order to put us on a stable footing going forward with the potential to be more self financing than ever before. He's doing the groundwork. A successful academy attracting good young players who see Charlton as a way of breaking through where year on year as the success of the academy grows we produce more players able to progress into the first team and yes, sold to help the club pay its way. Supplemented by astute foreign signings that are showcased in the Championship and short term improve the team but can also be sold for a profit. The greater that success then the greater the clubs.

    I believe he sees his network idea as an aid to making his clubs able to break even. A network of friendly clubs able where possible to help each other out. Not a pyramid of clubs in the competitive sense but by nature of the network some clubs are higher up the football food chain than others. Polish Pete an example of a player brought in in the hope of success at Charlton but his failure was St. Truidens success. Better than him sitting in our reserves or being sold at a great loss.

    He sees his role is streamlining the football clubs providing a legacy of sustainability and perhaps if there is an ego involved at all then it is to prove to himself that football can be run and sustained by community clubs like Charlton whilst remaining competitive in or around their natural level. Should success breed success then all well and good.

    I don't think he will or has any intention of selling Charlton until he sees it all come to fruition or that is patently obvious that it cannot work. How long that takes is anyone's guess but looking at his model succeeding would surely take ten to fifteen years.

    During that time I think we are as a football club likely to be frustrating and exciting in equal measure. Financially secure and building towards a sustainable future rather than either short or long term success on the pitch. We know from the early Murray years that a well run second tier club can punch above its weight. Get the financial support structure right and progress can be made.

    It's a theory that I'm fairly sure will attract a lot of ridicule and perhaps that's justified. In support of it I can see no other really plausible reason for a slightly eccentric billionaire that doesn't actually like football much buying a football club in another country that he rarely visits without either wanting to hit the Premier League jackpot of which I see no real evidence. How easy would it be for a man of his wealth to "go for it" ?

    I'll get my tin hat and wait for the inevitable.

    There you go, you put your opinion in there and base the rest of your article on your unsubstantiated guess work.
    But of a waste of time really!
  • Greenie said:

    Roland Duchatelet is a complicated character. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. One time student activist, hugely successful businessman who Wiki describes as billionaire. Senator in Belgium for three years and one time leader of his own political "social liberalist" party Vivant.

    I seem to remember that around the time of his takeover of Charlton he was quoted as saying "communities need football clubs and that football is an important part of social fabric" or at least words to that effect.

    I don't think Mr. Duchatelet is bothered whether or not Charlton are playing in the Premier League.

    Why then did he buy the football club ? So here's my theory.

    I think we are part of a philanthropic social experiment. I think he bought us because under the last ownership we were in serious financial trouble and he saw us as a needy, albeit timely for his purposes cause rather than as either a toy or an investment opportunity. He doesn't seem at least to me like he has an ego that he wants to flaunt to the footballing world.

    I don't think he wants to spend fortunes but feels able to spend enough on infrastructure like pitch , training ground facilities and ground maintenance in order to put us on a stable footing going forward with the potential to be more self financing than ever before. He's doing the groundwork. A successful academy attracting good young players who see Charlton as a way of breaking through where year on year as the success of the academy grows we produce more players able to progress into the first team and yes, sold to help the club pay its way. Supplemented by astute foreign signings that are showcased in the Championship and short term improve the team but can also be sold for a profit. The greater that success then the greater the clubs.

    I believe he sees his network idea as an aid to making his clubs able to break even. A network of friendly clubs able where possible to help each other out. Not a pyramid of clubs in the competitive sense but by nature of the network some clubs are higher up the football food chain than others. Polish Pete an example of a player brought in in the hope of success at Charlton but his failure was St. Truidens success. Better than him sitting in our reserves or being sold at a great loss.

    He sees his role is streamlining the football clubs providing a legacy of sustainability and perhaps if there is an ego involved at all then it is to prove to himself that football can be run and sustained by community clubs like Charlton whilst remaining competitive in or around their natural level. Should success breed success then all well and good.

    I don't think he will or has any intention of selling Charlton until he sees it all come to fruition or that is patently obvious that it cannot work. How long that takes is anyone's guess but looking at his model succeeding would surely take ten to fifteen years.

    During that time I think we are as a football club likely to be frustrating and exciting in equal measure. Financially secure and building towards a sustainable future rather than either short or long term success on the pitch. We know from the early Murray years that a well run second tier club can punch above its weight. Get the financial support structure right and progress can be made.

    It's a theory that I'm fairly sure will attract a lot of ridicule and perhaps that's justified. In support of it I can see no other really plausible reason for a slightly eccentric billionaire that doesn't actually like football much buying a football club in another country that he rarely visits without either wanting to hit the Premier League jackpot of which I see no real evidence. How easy would it be for a man of his wealth to "go for it" ?

    I'll get my tin hat and wait for the inevitable.

    There you go, you put your opinion in there and base the rest of your article on your unsubstantiated guess work.
    But of a waste of time really!
    My time.

  • Greenie said:

    Roland Duchatelet is a complicated character. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. One time student activist, hugely successful businessman who Wiki describes as billionaire. Senator in Belgium for three years and one time leader of his own political "social liberalist" party Vivant.

    I seem to remember that around the time of his takeover of Charlton he was quoted as saying "communities need football clubs and that football is an important part of social fabric" or at least words to that effect.

    I don't think Mr. Duchatelet is bothered whether or not Charlton are playing in the Premier League.

    Why then did he buy the football club ? So here's my theory.

    I think we are part of a philanthropic social experiment. I think he bought us because under the last ownership we were in serious financial trouble and he saw us as a needy, albeit timely for his purposes cause rather than as either a toy or an investment opportunity. He doesn't seem at least to me like he has an ego that he wants to flaunt to the footballing world.

    I don't think he wants to spend fortunes but feels able to spend enough on infrastructure like pitch , training ground facilities and ground maintenance in order to put us on a stable footing going forward with the potential to be more self financing than ever before. He's doing the groundwork. A successful academy attracting good young players who see Charlton as a way of breaking through where year on year as the success of the academy grows we produce more players able to progress into the first team and yes, sold to help the club pay its way. Supplemented by astute foreign signings that are showcased in the Championship and short term improve the team but can also be sold for a profit. The greater that success then the greater the clubs.

    I believe he sees his network idea as an aid to making his clubs able to break even. A network of friendly clubs able where possible to help each other out. Not a pyramid of clubs in the competitive sense but by nature of the network some clubs are higher up the football food chain than others. Polish Pete an example of a player brought in in the hope of success at Charlton but his failure was St. Truidens success. Better than him sitting in our reserves or being sold at a great loss.

    He sees his role is streamlining the football clubs providing a legacy of sustainability and perhaps if there is an ego involved at all then it is to prove to himself that football can be run and sustained by community clubs like Charlton whilst remaining competitive in or around their natural level. Should success breed success then all well and good.

    I don't think he will or has any intention of selling Charlton until he sees it all come to fruition or that is patently obvious that it cannot work. How long that takes is anyone's guess but looking at his model succeeding would surely take ten to fifteen years.

    During that time I think we are as a football club likely to be frustrating and exciting in equal measure. Financially secure and building towards a sustainable future rather than either short or long term success on the pitch. We know from the early Murray years that a well run second tier club can punch above its weight. Get the financial support structure right and progress can be made.

    It's a theory that I'm fairly sure will attract a lot of ridicule and perhaps that's justified. In support of it I can see no other really plausible reason for a slightly eccentric billionaire that doesn't actually like football much buying a football club in another country that he rarely visits without either wanting to hit the Premier League jackpot of which I see no real evidence. How easy would it be for a man of his wealth to "go for it" ?

    I'll get my tin hat and wait for the inevitable.

    There you go, you put your opinion in there and base the rest of your article on your unsubstantiated guess work.
    But of a waste of time really!
    Surely that describes 95% of all posts on here? What is your point?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Greenie said:

    Roland Duchatelet is a complicated character. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. One time student activist, hugely successful businessman who Wiki describes as billionaire. Senator in Belgium for three years and one time leader of his own political "social liberalist" party Vivant.

    I seem to remember that around the time of his takeover of Charlton he was quoted as saying "communities need football clubs and that football is an important part of social fabric" or at least words to that effect.

    I don't think Mr. Duchatelet is bothered whether or not Charlton are playing in the Premier League.

    Why then did he buy the football club ? So here's my theory.

    I think we are part of a philanthropic social experiment. I think he bought us because under the last ownership we were in serious financial trouble and he saw us as a needy, albeit timely for his purposes cause rather than as either a toy or an investment opportunity. He doesn't seem at least to me like he has an ego that he wants to flaunt to the footballing world.

    I don't think he wants to spend fortunes but feels able to spend enough on infrastructure like pitch , training ground facilities and ground maintenance in order to put us on a stable footing going forward with the potential to be more self financing than ever before. He's doing the groundwork. A successful academy attracting good young players who see Charlton as a way of breaking through where year on year as the success of the academy grows we produce more players able to progress into the first team and yes, sold to help the club pay its way. Supplemented by astute foreign signings that are showcased in the Championship and short term improve the team but can also be sold for a profit. The greater that success then the greater the clubs.

    I believe he sees his network idea as an aid to making his clubs able to break even. A network of friendly clubs able where possible to help each other out. Not a pyramid of clubs in the competitive sense but by nature of the network some clubs are higher up the football food chain than others. Polish Pete an example of a player brought in in the hope of success at Charlton but his failure was St. Truidens success. Better than him sitting in our reserves or being sold at a great loss.

    He sees his role is streamlining the football clubs providing a legacy of sustainability and perhaps if there is an ego involved at all then it is to prove to himself that football can be run and sustained by community clubs like Charlton whilst remaining competitive in or around their natural level. Should success breed success then all well and good.

    I don't think he will or has any intention of selling Charlton until he sees it all come to fruition or that is patently obvious that it cannot work. How long that takes is anyone's guess but looking at his model succeeding would surely take ten to fifteen years.

    During that time I think we are as a football club likely to be frustrating and exciting in equal measure. Financially secure and building towards a sustainable future rather than either short or long term success on the pitch. We know from the early Murray years that a well run second tier club can punch above its weight. Get the financial support structure right and progress can be made.

    It's a theory that I'm fairly sure will attract a lot of ridicule and perhaps that's justified. In support of it I can see no other really plausible reason for a slightly eccentric billionaire that doesn't actually like football much buying a football club in another country that he rarely visits without either wanting to hit the Premier League jackpot of which I see no real evidence. How easy would it be for a man of his wealth to "go for it" ?

    I'll get my tin hat and wait for the inevitable.

    There you go, you put your opinion in there and base the rest of your article on your unsubstantiated guess work.
    But of a waste of time really!
    Surely that describes 95% of all posts on here? What is your point?
    FFS really?
    Read what he wrote and how and what he based his while post on, he has no idea, of course RD wants us in the prem, only a complete tit would buy a championship football club with millions of their own dough, invest further millions and not want it to be a success. RD is an incredibly successful business man, he has made his fortune his way.
    But as usual the Charlton busy bodies demand that they be involved in a mans business, whose success in business far out ways the success that they have had in their lives, and when they are not privy to RDs plans they have to constantly snipe and come out with utter nonsense because they've not been invited to the party. It's draining it really is.
  • Greenie said:

    Greenie said:

    Roland Duchatelet is a complicated character. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. One time student activist, hugely successful businessman who Wiki describes as billionaire. Senator in Belgium for three years and one time leader of his own political "social liberalist" party Vivant.

    I seem to remember that around the time of his takeover of Charlton he was quoted as saying "communities need football clubs and that football is an important part of social fabric" or at least words to that effect.

    I don't think Mr. Duchatelet is bothered whether or not Charlton are playing in the Premier League.

    Why then did he buy the football club ? So here's my theory.

    I think we are part of a philanthropic social experiment. I think he bought us because under the last ownership we were in serious financial trouble and he saw us as a needy, albeit timely for his purposes cause rather than as either a toy or an investment opportunity. He doesn't seem at least to me like he has an ego that he wants to flaunt to the footballing world.

    I don't think he wants to spend fortunes but feels able to spend enough on infrastructure like pitch , training ground facilities and ground maintenance in order to put us on a stable footing going forward with the potential to be more self financing than ever before. He's doing the groundwork. A successful academy attracting good young players who see Charlton as a way of breaking through where year on year as the success of the academy grows we produce more players able to progress into the first team and yes, sold to help the club pay its way. Supplemented by astute foreign signings that are showcased in the Championship and short term improve the team but can also be sold for a profit. The greater that success then the greater the clubs.

    I believe he sees his network idea as an aid to making his clubs able to break even. A network of friendly clubs able where possible to help each other out. Not a pyramid of clubs in the competitive sense but by nature of the network some clubs are higher up the football food chain than others. Polish Pete an example of a player brought in in the hope of success at Charlton but his failure was St. Truidens success. Better than him sitting in our reserves or being sold at a great loss.

    He sees his role is streamlining the football clubs providing a legacy of sustainability and perhaps if there is an ego involved at all then it is to prove to himself that football can be run and sustained by community clubs like Charlton whilst remaining competitive in or around their natural level. Should success breed success then all well and good.

    I don't think he will or has any intention of selling Charlton until he sees it all come to fruition or that is patently obvious that it cannot work. How long that takes is anyone's guess but looking at his model succeeding would surely take ten to fifteen years.

    During that time I think we are as a football club likely to be frustrating and exciting in equal measure. Financially secure and building towards a sustainable future rather than either short or long term success on the pitch. We know from the early Murray years that a well run second tier club can punch above its weight. Get the financial support structure right and progress can be made.

    It's a theory that I'm fairly sure will attract a lot of ridicule and perhaps that's justified. In support of it I can see no other really plausible reason for a slightly eccentric billionaire that doesn't actually like football much buying a football club in another country that he rarely visits without either wanting to hit the Premier League jackpot of which I see no real evidence. How easy would it be for a man of his wealth to "go for it" ?

    I'll get my tin hat and wait for the inevitable.

    There you go, you put your opinion in there and base the rest of your article on your unsubstantiated guess work.
    But of a waste of time really!
    Surely that describes 95% of all posts on here? What is your point?
    FFS really?
    Read what he wrote and how and what he based his while post on, he has no idea, of course RD wants us in the prem, only a complete tit would buy a championship football club with millions of their own dough, invest further millions and not want it to be a success. RD is an incredibly successful business man, he has made his fortune his way.
    But as usual the Charlton busy bodies demand that they be involved in a mans business, whose success in business far out ways the success that they have had in their lives, and when they are not privy to RDs plans they have to constantly snipe and come out with utter nonsense because they've not been invited to the party. It's draining it really is.
    The contradiction in this post is gold. C'mon pal, don't snipe at someone and call it draining, then do the exact same thing yourself, which is have an opinion on your guesswork. You have a differing opinion to him, if you find it draining then stear clear from divulging into the subject on this forum.
    Good grief!
    You really can't see the difference can you?
  • I think the theory part of this thread is the bit to hang on to. It might not be the best thread for those not wanting to read other people's theories!
  • I think the theory part of this thread is the bit to hang on to. It might not be the best thread for those not wanting to read other people's theories!

    Exactamundo, I don't agree with what a lot of people say on here and if I don't I won't snipe at them, I'll try to put my point across, if people disagree then so be it, that's the beauty of a forum.

    None of us except RD, who may not even really have a concrete plan himself, know what his plans are so essentially it is guesswork.

    And no, Greenie, I can't, tell me, what is the difference? You are guessing that he wants to be in the Prem because 'only a tit would buy a Championship football club and not want it to be a success'... who defines what success is to RD? He does - and you don't know what it is, so you are guessing. :smile:
  • edited July 2015
    When RD bought the club FFP was pushing chanpionship clubs towards nore sustainablr budgets, now thats gone, the only way to make money is to get to the prem, the alternative is to flog the talent, and keep us up til someone buys us, or there's a miracle... Or even less likely the now depleted network comes up with the goods
  • I wonder whether we should attempt to set a "success criteria", against which RD should be judged (and of course a timescale). Let me start, but please feel free to add to my list, or disagree:

    1. A new pitch (done)
    2. Upgrade of academy.
    3. Continuous improvement on the field (judged by league position, season on season).
    4. Continuous reduction of our losses, leading to financial solvency.
    5. Improved communication with the fans (not sure how we set a criterion for that).
    6. Promotion to the PL.
    7. Involvement of fans representative (criterion: membership of the board)?

    All to be achieved in full within six years?

    Over to you!
  • PeterGage said:

    I wonder whether we should attempt to set a "success criteria", against which RD should be judged (and of course a timescale). Let me start, but please feel free to add to my list, or disagree:

    1. A new pitch (done)
    2. Upgrade of academy.
    3. Continuous improvement on the field (judged by league position, season on season).
    4. Continuous reduction of our losses, leading to financial solvency.
    5. Improved communication with the fans (not sure how we set a criterion for that).
    6. Promotion to the PL.
    7. Involvement of fans representative (criterion: membership of the board)?

    All to be achieved in full within six years?

    Over to you!

    Tarting up the Valley, 'improved catering/matchday experienced etc'...think all the above are achievable with one exception...no 6. I doubt whether RD is willing to pump in enough money to achieve that within 6 years.
  • PeterGage said:

    I wonder whether we should attempt to set a "success criteria", against which RD should be judged (and of course a timescale). Let me start, but please feel free to add to my list, or disagree:

    1. A new pitch (done)
    2. Upgrade of academy.
    3. Continuous improvement on the field (judged by league position, season on season).
    4. Continuous reduction of our losses, leading to financial solvency.
    5. Improved communication with the fans (not sure how we set a criterion for that).
    6. Promotion to the PL.
    7. Involvement of fans representative (criterion: membership of the board)?

    All to be achieved in full within six years?

    Over to you!

    8. Squad overhaul every summer.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!