Sandgaard will eventually need further investment from outside if he’s losing a million pounds per month like Duchatelet was.
Duchatelet had the advantage of selling assets to other clubs like Gomez, Lookman, Grant etc.
Sandgaard does not have that luxury as there is no one in the current squad that would be sold for a million plus at present. The only fallback is a possible sell on fee if Nick Pope ever left Burnley for a 20 million plus fee. (20 percent sell on fee)
However would Barclay be that individual to invest when Sandgaard does not own the Valley or Soarrows Lane.
Why would you want to own a stake (likely a minority stake) in a football club that loses millions, is two promotions from the Premier League and doesn’t own its principle real estate assets?
Why would you want to own a stake (likely a minority stake) in a football club that loses millions, is two promotions from the Premier League and doesn’t own its principle real estate assets?
Maybe Barclay fancies playing bass in Sandgaard's new band ... "Led Balloon"?
Is this a tactical tweet to curry favour with the fanbase i.e. "look at the ambition he has/ get Barclay on board as an investor/ our owner" and perhaps leverage any resultant supporter pressure and exploit the current critical feeling out there on social media.
Or am I'm just looking into it too much and it's an innocuous tweet from someone who has an interest in our club and thinks it would be a good signing?!!
Probably the latter as is normally the case with such things!
Barclay threw his hat into the ring and never fully took it back. TS previously has said he's open to investment so you never know.
Barclay didnt proceed further because he said he didnt want to purchase the club without buying The Valley and SL.....iirc
Might be different though if he was only a minority shareholder or suchlike
Not entirely truthful to end the story there. He backed out because he didn't want to pay the price that was being demanded to include the Valley & SL. Not just because he didn't want to purchase the club without them.
Why would you want to own a stake (likely a minority stake) in a football club that loses millions, is two promotions from the Premier League and doesn’t own its principle real estate assets?
If Barclay is seeing the negative social media postings from fans, who knows if he's contacted TS with a proposition, or possiblythe other way round? It's not beyond all realms.
Seem to remember from reading up on him before, that he and his family are very private when it comes to dough and business.
Comments
You know it makes sense
But I'm DEFINITELY not ITK.
Duchatelet had the advantage of selling assets to other clubs like Gomez, Lookman, Grant etc.
Sandgaard does not have that luxury as there is no one in the current squad that would be sold for a million plus at present. The only fallback is a possible sell on fee if Nick Pope ever left Burnley for a 20 million plus fee. (20 percent sell on fee)
However would Barclay be that individual to invest when Sandgaard does not own the Valley or Soarrows Lane.
Just think we will always pick the shit n sugar sandwich in the football all you can eat buffet!
Might be different though if he was only a minority shareholder or suchlike
Or am I'm just looking into it too much and it's an innocuous tweet from someone who has an interest in our club and thinks it would be a good signing?!!
Probably the latter as is normally the case with such things!
He meant "Charlton Life should offer Wilshire a line"
Has he responded to anyone asking him about his interest in CAFC or is he being Koi about it?
Seem to remember from reading up on him before, that he and his family are very private when it comes to dough and business.
I can see you are casting your net far to see what sort of catch you can achieve...