Was a great listen! Looking forward to the vermin sending a pathetic letter to the EFL about the TV money. 'we're the true owners so we order you to divert the money to us not the TS regime - immediately'.
That was a great listen. I love Thomas Sandgaard. Regarding Jordan and White. It's the classic good guy/bad guy routine. Jim White is all about promoting his show with 'edge'. Simon Jordan is the common sense behind the pairing. I actually like the way they interact. I wouldn't fret. Thomas Sandgaard has it all under control and knows exactly what is going on with Jim White/Talksport. He himself is using the exposure to highlight that he wants to get involved in eradicating this vermin from English football. We are very lucky to have Thomas Sandgaard as our owner. Pinch yourselves.
Jim White is a pathetic little man. Just listened to the interview and he was so desperate for TS to be worried or to take the threats seriously . He's gutter press and nothing more than a gossipmonger.
Simon Jordan on the other hand is impressive and incredibly clued up.
I lie the part where Jordan was moaning about the media and White reminded him that Jordan called White a pipsqueak (I think), back when he owned Palace
I love the bit about Burnley, dickhead White asks SJ, saying "the takeover has gone a bit quiet at the moment", to which SJ comes back sharp as a knife with, "well your mate Chris Farnell is involved isn't he", absolutely priceless, White just shut up like a clam
I find it extremly worrying with the fact how much I despised Simon Jordan back in the day and now he's turning out to be one of my favourite pundits. Thought his comments about the owership is spot on.
In a world full of Jim White’s, thank god for Simon Jordan.
Very interested in the libellous claim that Sandgaard hasn’t put any money in and is funding the club with player sales. We’ll see if there’s a lawsuit for that.
Is it libellous or inaccurate ?
We’ve had fairly big windfalls from the Bonne sale + the Grant sell on and the salary cap reduces the ability to spend so it might be that Sandgaard hasn’t actually needed to invest funds yet. No issues with that from my perspective.
I’d say libellous, unless TS is lying about us being days away from administration before the deal was done, he must have pumped some money in.
He also had money in escrow before the takeover was completed, so it’s a pretty safe bet that at least £1 of this has been used for general maintenance/ those new lawnmowers he’s purchased. Not to mention shipping costs of the Zynex medical devices
Yes we’ve had income from player sales but it’s not even a half truth to assert that Sandgaard hasn’t put any money in and is relying on the clubs cash.
Right but I don’t think that relying on the clubs cash is a negative thing. A club living off of its own means is a sustainable model, that’s exactly what I want.
What is nonsense is for any of the parties who have recently been involved to try and suggest that they would have had a better operating model for us, they wouldn’t.
Definitely not a negative thing, it’s a sustainable business model and I’m all for it - it’s just not exactly true.
The libel comes in because Farnell is using the biggest sports station around to spin that Thomas Sandgaard hasn’t put any money in and is using player sales to keep the club afloat. That’s defamation of character and could impact the club’s or Sandgaard’s future business.
I repeat.....I am not altogether 100% certain that White meant to say Sandgaard when referring to not having put any money in.....I think maybe he meant to say Elliott. Might be wrong, but the moment he said it I immediately thought he’s got the names mixed up. Anyone else think the same?
I disagree, I think 100 % he was talking about TS. I read your post hours before I was able to listen so was waiting for it & I have no doubt in my mind that I think the opposite, doesn't mean I'm right of course :-)
In a world full of Jim White’s, thank god for Simon Jordan.
Very interested in the libellous claim that Sandgaard hasn’t put any money in and is funding the club with player sales. We’ll see if there’s a lawsuit for that.
Is it libellous or inaccurate ?
We’ve had fairly big windfalls from the Bonne sale + the Grant sell on and the salary cap reduces the ability to spend so it might be that Sandgaard hasn’t actually needed to invest funds yet. No issues with that from my perspective.
I’d say libellous, unless TS is lying about us being days away from administration before the deal was done, he must have pumped some money in.
He also had money in escrow before the takeover was completed, so it’s a pretty safe bet that at least £1 of this has been used for general maintenance/ those new lawnmowers he’s purchased. Not to mention shipping costs of the Zynex medical devices
Yes we’ve had income from player sales but it’s not even a half truth to assert that Sandgaard hasn’t put any money in and is relying on the clubs cash.
Right but I don’t think that relying on the clubs cash is a negative thing. A club living off of its own means is a sustainable model, that’s exactly what I want.
What is nonsense is for any of the parties who have recently been involved to try and suggest that they would have had a better operating model for us, they wouldn’t.
Definitely not a negative thing, it’s a sustainable business model and I’m all for it - it’s just not exactly true.
The libel comes in because Farnell is using the biggest sports station around to spin that Thomas Sandgaard hasn’t put any money in and is using player sales to keep the club afloat. That’s defamation of character and could impact the club’s or Sandgaard’s future business.
I repeat.....I am not altogether 100% certain that White meant to say Sandgaard when referring to not having put any money in.....I think maybe he meant to say Elliott. Might be wrong, but the moment he said it I immediately thought he’s got the names mixed up. Anyone else think the same?
I disagree, I think 100 % he was talking about TS. I read your post hours before I was able to listen so was waiting for it & I have no doubt in my mind that I think the opposite, doesn't mean I'm right of course :-)
He will have been talking about TS, because that’s the line they are feeding people.
When will Jim Shite wake up and realise that Farnell & Co are feeding him shit
That's not Talksport's agenda though.
Talksport are a commercial radio station and their mission is to create revenue by selling advertising.
To sell more advertising, they need to get more listeners. One way to get more listeners is to create drama, conflict and sensationalise interviews.
It's not about impartial reporting. It's about getting interviewees to rise to the bait and generate that sense of drama.
We shouldn't be wasting our time listening to the likes of Jim White and Talkshite radio. Remember, their only mission is to sell more advertising.
Spot on Oggy. It's showbusiness, White and Jordan are a double act. White has got a show to sell and Jordan is happy because he gets to be the voice of reason. I'm glad that Jordan doesn't let any feelings towards CAFC get in the way of that, but by the same token I'm not about to make him my new best friend. And to be fair, he does know something about football club ownership (primarily how to fail)
Just listen to TS on there and if you don’t fall in love then you’re a better more controlled person than I am , There’s a real genuine danger that I’m gonna cheat on SCP with TS and there’s something I never thought possible .
In a world full of Jim White’s, thank god for Simon Jordan.
Very interested in the libellous claim that Sandgaard hasn’t put any money in and is funding the club with player sales. We’ll see if there’s a lawsuit for that.
Is it libellous or inaccurate ?
We’ve had fairly big windfalls from the Bonne sale + the Grant sell on and the salary cap reduces the ability to spend so it might be that Sandgaard hasn’t actually needed to invest funds yet. No issues with that from my perspective.
I’d say libellous, unless TS is lying about us being days away from administration before the deal was done, he must have pumped some money in.
He also had money in escrow before the takeover was completed, so it’s a pretty safe bet that at least £1 of this has been used for general maintenance/ those new lawnmowers he’s purchased. Not to mention shipping costs of the Zynex medical devices
Yes we’ve had income from player sales but it’s not even a half truth to assert that Sandgaard hasn’t put any money in and is relying on the clubs cash.
Right but I don’t think that relying on the clubs cash is a negative thing. A club living off of its own means is a sustainable model, that’s exactly what I want.
What is nonsense is for any of the parties who have recently been involved to try and suggest that they would have had a better operating model for us, they wouldn’t.
Definitely not a negative thing, it’s a sustainable business model and I’m all for it - it’s just not exactly true.
The libel comes in because Farnell is using the biggest sports station around to spin that Thomas Sandgaard hasn’t put any money in and is using player sales to keep the club afloat. That’s defamation of character and could impact the club’s or Sandgaard’s future business.
I repeat.....I am not altogether 100% certain that White meant to say Sandgaard when referring to not having put any money in.....I think maybe he meant to say Elliott. Might be wrong, but the moment he said it I immediately thought he’s got the names mixed up. Anyone else think the same?
I disagree, I think 100 % he was talking about TS. I read your post hours before I was able to listen so was waiting for it & I have no doubt in my mind that I think the opposite, doesn't mean I'm right of course :-)
He will have been talking about TS, because that’s the line they are feeding people.
You may have already addressed this Airman, but always appreciated your take on things - what's your views on this rumour, and why do you think they are trying to feed the press it (especially if its something easily debunked).
White is a presenter not a journalist for starters, and Wireless radio who own TalkSport like the sort of shock jock get the lines ringing type of stuff he does. What the lawyers and compliance team won't like is him riffing like he did off a text message from Farnell.
White is a presenter not a journalist for starters, and Wireless radio who own TalkSport like the sort of shock jock get the lines ringing type of stuff he does. What the lawyers and compliance team won't like is him riffing like he did off a text message from Farnell.
He is embarrassing to listen to especially when he thinks he's being controversial. He's invariably ill informed, smug and full of tedious anecdotes.
White is a presenter not a journalist for starters, and Wireless radio who own TalkSport like the sort of shock jock get the lines ringing type of stuff he does. What the lawyers and compliance team won't like is him riffing like he did off a text message from Farnell.
Yes, saying controversial things/a load of bollocks, generates lots of social media interest, retweeting etc
Comments
Paticularly enjoyed White's embarassed reaction to Jordan's remarks about Farnell.
It is clear that Farnell feeds him and I suspect our friend Nicko as well.
Simon Jordan on the other hand is impressive and incredibly clued up.
at the moment", to which SJ comes back sharp as a knife with, "well your mate Chris Farnell is involved isn't he", absolutely priceless, White just shut up like a clam
Hats off to Jordan too, he absolutely hammered the nail there. Fair play.
It's showbusiness, White and Jordan are a double act.
White has got a show to sell and Jordan is happy because he gets to be the voice of reason.
I'm glad that Jordan doesn't let any feelings towards CAFC get in the way of that, but by the same token I'm not about to make him my new best friend.
And to be fair, he does know something about football club ownership (primarily how to fail)
I wonder what SJ thinks of him?
Which means Farnell has feed him stuff I assume.
I hope Jordan is allowed to speak back to him.