Thomas has said to me he has spent 15m of his own money since he has been at the club. He also says he has enough money to finance the club for decades. But will apply good business practices along the way.
Thomas has said to me he has spent 15m of his own money since he has been at the club. He also says he has enough money to finance the club for decades. But will apply good business practices along the way.
That is probably under the assumption things will turn around and investment in the longer term will come from player sales.
Thomas has said to me he has spent 15m of his own money since he has been at the club. He also says he has enough money to finance the club for decades. But will apply good business practices along the way.
Financing the club as it is, which is maintaining a consistent level of shitness? Or spending a lot more to get promotion?
Thomas has said to me he has spent 15m of his own money since he has been at the club. He also says he has enough money to finance the club for decades. But will apply good business practices along the way.
That's fine, and I'm all for 'good business practices'. But it doesn't tie in with the original aim of Premier League within 5 years.
Financing the Club for decades sounds like maintaining the status quo ... rather than speculating to achieve the stated ambition.
Sandgaard clearly underestimated the cost and difficulty involved. Next time that you chat with him, ask him to modify the ambitions please (the timescale at least) ... or recruit those 200 sales reps and get us out of League 1 before we all become Russian.
Thomas has said to me he has spent 15m of his own money since he has been at the club. He also says he has enough money to finance the club for decades. But will apply good business practices along the way.
So he said losses will be £8m this year so that’s £80m a decade unless he finds a miracle to reduce losses….
…. and he’ll be here for decades, yeah right! and based on the first 18 months what a poor prospect
The replies he gives are always very bullish. Other posters have pointed out that as CEO of a listed company that's the norm. It's all PR at the end of the day. One of the other things he has said which I've found quite interesting is this.
"As an example the various owners before Roland had managed to accumulate a Net Operating Loss of GBP 100 mill – “doing another Derby”
Is this accurate? I would not know. But I'm pretty sure that unless he sells up which he says he has no intention of doing then its gonna be an interesting journey for us all. I've even suggest he gives the club to the trust if he decides to call it quits. But he gave no response to that one:)
The replies he gives are always very bullish. Other posters have pointed out that as CEO of a listed company that's the norm. It's all PR at the end of the day. One of the other things he has said which I've found quite interesting is this.
"As an example the various owners before Roland had managed to accumulate a Net Operating Loss of GBP 100 mill – “doing another Derby”
Is this accurate? I would not know. But I'm pretty sure that unless he sells up which he says he has no intention of doing then its gonna be an interesting journey for us all. I've even suggest he gives the club to the trust if he decides to call it quits. But he gave no response to that one:)
Well, I'm all for an 'interesting journey' too. And I'm delighted with the commitment that Sandgaard appears to be expressing ... but ...
... he either needs to modify publicly the timescale and/or level of ambition because the original plan has clearly gone out the window
... or he needs to crank up the level of investment so that we can at least complete Step 1 of the 'interesting journey' (ie get into the Championship)
If he simply plans to roll along for decades as we are currently doing, he won't have many passengers remaining when the rickety old Charlton bus finally trundles into town.
The replies he gives are always very bullish. Other posters have pointed out that as CEO of a listed company that's the norm. It's all PR at the end of the day. One of the other things he has said which I've found quite interesting is this.
"As an example the various owners before Roland had managed to accumulate a Net Operating Loss of GBP 100 mill – “doing another Derby”
Is this accurate? I would not know. But I'm pretty sure that unless he sells up which he says he has no intention of doing then its gonna be an interesting journey for us all. I've even suggest he gives the club to the trust if he decides to call it quits. But he gave no response to that one:)
Over what period? The operating loss doesn't include player transfers or allow for money put in as loans or for shares and ultimately gifted to the club by former directors (and others) who were supporters. It's a good benchmark of how the business is trading year on year but it's a very long way from the full story over time.
Derby, as I understand it, accumulated debt by overpaying wages (and fees?) to get from the Championship to the Premier League.
When the spivis took over on December 31st, 2010, there was relatively little debt on the books - basically £7m on bank loans mainly for the Covered End redevelopment and the ex-director loans from 2009 only repayable in the PL. That is a far more meaningful starting point.
TS seems to believe that he could have run the club better in the Premier League, for example generated more commercial income, presumably including higher matchday revenue, but it's a quite a stretch for him to think he knows more about that than the board at the time. We know, for example, than whenever the board hiked matchday prices, invariably against advice, the club could not sell the tickets.
It's clear to me that TS thought - and may still think - that the club's commercial performance could be improved to a point where his investment would be limited and sufficient at that level. I think this is fanciful.
For absolutely understandable reasons questions and points you might want to make are filtered through the good folk who organise such meetings. If you wish to ask something or raise something using a particular form of words, and have some kind of follow up dialogue, the format of these meetings kind of precludes that. For understandable reasons. A simple Q and A can be a rather passive, even voyeuristic experience online but has value as a surface encounter. I was a fan of zoom stuff originally, but now find it somewhat frustrating as I would prefer to couch things in my own words, and have a chance to follow up in my own words. Zoom meetings are not as insightful as actual meetings in a shared space.
The replies he gives are always very bullish. Other posters have pointed out that as CEO of a listed company that's the norm. It's all PR at the end of the day. One of the other things he has said which I've found quite interesting is this.
"As an example the various owners before Roland had managed to accumulate a Net Operating Loss of GBP 100 mill – “doing another Derby”
Is this accurate? I would not know. But I'm pretty sure that unless he sells up which he says he has no intention of doing then its gonna be an interesting journey for us all. I've even suggest he gives the club to the trust if he decides to call it quits. But he gave no response to that one:)
Over what period? The operating loss doesn't include player transfers or allow for money put in as loans or for shares and ultimately gifted to the club by former directors (and others) who were supporters. It's a good benchmark of how the business is trading year on year but it's a very long way from the full story over time.
Derby, as I understand it, accumulated debt by overpaying wages (and fees?) to get from the Championship to the Premier League.
When the spivis took over on December 31st, 2010, there was relatively little debt on the books - basically £7m on bank loans mainly for the Covered End redevelopment and the ex-director loans from 2009 only repayable in the PL. That is a far more meaningful starting point.
TS seems to believe that he could have run the club better in the Premier League, for example generated more commercial income, presumably including higher matchday revenue, but it's a quite a stretch for him to think he knows more about that than the board at the time. We know, for example, than whenever the board hiked matchday prices, invariably against advice, the club could not sell the tickets.
It's clear to me that TS thought - and may still think - that the club's commercial performance could be improved to a point where his investment would be limited and sufficient at that level. I think this is fanciful.
I think this is probably correct. Historically it has been impossible for the Club to break even at any level below the Championship, partly due to the stadium running costs etc which are disproportionate to League 1 and League 2 status.
I think Sandgaard's perceived business model depends on maximising and improving revenue ... and this plays to his self-perception as an innovator/creative thinker and the stated approach of doing things differently to the usual British model.
All good so far, but you need to back up the ideas with a working strategy.
Filling (sic) the stadium with 'passing trade' from game to game isn't going to do it.
Trying to generate a worldwide fanbase while the team limps from defeat to defeat isn't going to do it.
Success (financial or otherwise) at any football club starts with an in-demand product. Get the team right, and the fans will come. Then the revenue follows.
Sandgaard is morphing into one of his own Zynex sales reps. "Here's the product. You need this. And it's great, and it will be worth so much more in the future."
"Umm ... actually, Thomas. No, thank you. I don't really like your product. Come back to me when you've improved it and then we'll talk."
I appreciate that this may not be of interest to most on a football forum, but I have been keen to identify if there are any parallels between the Sandgaard that we know in SE7 and the one that strides Englewood, Colorado as CEO of Zynex.
To that end, I dialled in to today's Zynex 4Q 2021 results broadcast. It was fascinating.
First, I should indicate that I have a wealth of background in the pharmaceutical/medical business. If 30 or more years with GlaxoSmithKline doesn't allow me to claim that ... well ...
Today's call revealed the following:
1) I found it oddly amateurish. Sandgaard fielded his CFO (Dan Moorhead) and his COO (Anna Lucsok) and all three read from prepared presentations. In my experience, confident and professional operators are happy to work from broad notes ... not rehearsed scripts
2) The COO (Anna Lucsok) is a mid-thirties something and is relatively recently promoted (Feb 21) after the previous incumbent (Joseph Papandrea) left the post. Nothing wrong with the exuberance of youth, but she sounds exactly as you might expect
3) I will need to check the figures, but I heard a predicted Total Revenue of $150 to 170M for 2022 .. and this is up 15 to 30% from last year
4) Net income was $8.9m ... up 398% from last year!
5) Zynex has about $42.6M in cash (up from $39.2M in 2020)
6) Future product strategy seems to hinge on the recent acquisition of Kestrel who offer a pulse oximeter. This is a device that monitors blood oxygen levels. Zynex paid $31M for this ... $16M in stocks (to the existing Kestrel Board members presumably) and a $16M loan (at 2.8% over three years).
The Q+A focussed heavily on 'in network' and 'out of network' revenue. I confess that I don't fully understand this (but I will find out), but it's clearly linked to the US Healthcare Insurance system. My guess is that anything 'in network' will represent assured income, but at a relatively low rate, whereas 'out of network' will be less secure, but more lucrative. Sandgaard was dismissive about any effects of this, arguing that the balance was OK because there is less hassle 'out of network'. This felt like an attempt to justify why 'in network' revenue may have dwindled.
The sales force recruitment (which I have previously mentioned on another thread) is a big deal for Zynex. Their profits are almost directly related to sales force strength. Current numbers are around 400 ... they hope for 500 this year ... and the overall medium-term target is 800.
Overall summary:
I didn't get a warm glow.
I looked for comparisons with Sandgaard's Zynex world to the one at The Valley. It feels to me as though he is a one-trick pony ... or, at least, a pony with a limited number of tricks.
He doesn't have a strong team around him. He is the main man, and probably enjoys/wants that. Bad news for us, I think.
He operates in a relatively small financial world. £1M per month at The Valley will make a huge dent in the Zynex profits.
I'll review things more carefully in the cold light of day ... and I would welcome comments from anyone who thinks I've misinterpreted things ... but, based on this, CAFC is not going anywhere fast.
Sorry!
Really Great Post. You've definitely provided some insight for me into TS's USA Operations. I had a gut feel it wasn't a huge operation and you've confirmed it.
The whole TS debate has become toxic, fans arguing amongst each other about the owner seems mad to me.
My opinion, I'm grateful he's stumping up the £8mill a season to fund my hobby. I think he has made some mistakes in appointing the wrong people. However, he's spent money on players, appointed JJ at the fans demand and seems to care about the club far more than our previous owners.
Ultimately his stewardship will be judged by the results on the pitch. On paper our squad looks good enough for a promotion push yet we are languishing nr the bottom of L1. Can the blame be pointed at TS ? He's not picking the team, deciding the tactics. The players we signed on paper look more than good enough to compete at this level.
I believe the tickets debacle is a bit of a red herring, if we were up there challenging for promotion no one would care.
My view of Season Tickets, Valley Gold etc is this...as a fan it's our job to do our bit to support the club, we can show our commitment to the cause by buying season tickets and if our budget allows a Valley Gold subscription too. Personally I'm not calculating the cheapest way to get to home games. I'll renew my season ticket and maintain my Valley Gold. If they can figure out a way to get more people buying season tickets (Obviously strong performances on the pitch are the best way to obtain this) through ticket give aways etc more power to their elbow. I would suggest the whole process was managed a little better.
I think this whole rebuilding process will take time, the club was gutted from top to bottom after years of underinvestment. I don't expect TS to turn this all around in 6 months. As @dave_rudd pointed out he's not the richest owner in L1.
My message to TS would be there are a large number of fans who appreciate the job he's done so far. There have been some bumps in the road, but I still believe a large majority support him in his endeavours.
this "meeting" will be a big test for CAST, while remaining polite to TS they need to be willing to articulate our questions with follow ups that do not let him off the hook, we need answers and this is our only chance to get them.
Please CAST find your metaphorical balls, we will be watching
this "meeting" will be a big test for CAST, while remaining polite to TS they need to be willing to articulate our questions with follow ups that do not let him off the hook, we need answers and this is our only chance to get them.
Please CAST find your metaphorical balls, we will be watching
Hence why a face to face meeting is required. Would like to see him read the room
The #1 question for me: He has said before that when it comes to transfer policy, it's about stability and not signing 10+ players each season. Does he recognise that the current core group of players are not good/motivated enough, and that we need to replace them at the end of the season?
The #1 question for me: He has said before that when it comes to transfer policy, it's about stability and not signing 10+ players each season. Does he recognise that the current core group of players are not good/motivated enough, and that we need to replace them at the end of the season?
That's a good question and is about where I feel. Maybe a few less than 10 this season, maybe 3-4 permies and 2-3 loans.
@Weegie Addick my question of possible please (I don't know how to pre-submit otherwise):
When Thomas arrived he made a statement along the lines of his business plan being top 6 play offs last season and hopefully promotion but not in the plan. Then promotion this season.
With this now clearly an impossibility how does the business plan re-set and how long do the finances allow him to continue underwriting the inevitable losses we suffer whilst in L1.
@Weegie Addick my question of possible please (I don't know how to pre-submit otherwise):
When Thomas arrived he made a statement along the lines of his business plan being top 6 play offs last season and hopefully promotion but not in the plan. Then promotion this season.
With this now clearly an impossibility how does the business plan re-set and how long do the finances allow him to continue underwriting the inevitable losses we suffer whilst in L1.
You can pre submit questions to secretary@castrust.org
Please could someone ask why was it deemed prudent to leave recruitment so late that the squad wasn't completed until 7 games in and took another 5-7 to get players fit. Why did we think we could give teams a 10-15 game headstart over us?
With the lack of appearences and reports of some of the loan players not being up to the necessary standard, who is suggesting these recruits?
What evidence is there of the success for the recruitment team when our squad is one of the weakest in memory with a number of players with long standing fitness issues? Does the black box need resetting and utilised with experienced football people?
Do Zynex employ people in senior positions who have little to no experience in that actual field? Can he explain the process he used to select the members of his band other than being friends with the members? Why that specific drummer etc? Why did he not choose someone from a school band? Does Mr Sandgaard think it is better to utilise the skills of experienced professionals?
Nothing of substance comes out at any of these sorts of Q&A's.
Whether that is because important questions that need answering urgently deliberately aren't submitted, or (more likely in this case) that the questions will simply be fudged/answered with waffle and spin.
Nothing of substance comes out at any of these sorts of Q&A's.
Whether that is because important questions that need answering urgently deliberately aren't submitted, or (more likely in this case) that the questions will simply be fudged/answered with waffle and spin.
Really hope to be proved wrong of course.
And then if the answers that are forthcoming are scrutinised people complain that that’s unfair too.
The commercial matchday revenues when we were in the Prem compared to what they are now are surely worlds apart and largely irrelevant if they ever were at that level?
I think it’s fair to say TS’s over enthusiasm has got the better of him (at the moment).
Absolute truth and honesty is hard to come by, I’m sure his intentions are good, and he means well, but sky high promises are always going to disappoint, I don’t think the ‘difficult questions’ will be asked or answered truthfully , because they are frankly embarrassing to ask, and embarrassing to admit we cocked up.
What I’d like to know is why Thomas thought Nigel didn’t work out, and what did / didn’t Happen last summer in the transfer window, and why does Thomas believe this summer will be any better if we don’t get good business done early?
The commercial matchday revenues when we were in the Prem compared to what they are now are surely worlds apart and largely irrelevant if they ever were at that level?
I’m sure it’s very easy to look at the books 20 years later and hypothesise but if you weren’t there, or even in the country, and you don’t know the context, and haven’t even been in football before, it would be presumptuous in the extreme to venture a public opinion.
The commercial matchday revenues when we were in the Prem compared to what they are now are surely worlds apart and largely irrelevant if they ever were at that level?
I’m sure it’s very easy to look at the books 20 years later and hypothesise but if you weren’t there, or even in the country, and you don’t know the context, and haven’t even been in football before, it would be presumptuous in the extreme to venture a public opinion.
As I said just can’t see how it was relevant, Championship maybe, but not Prem where tv money outstrips everything by a huge margin
Comments
Or spending a lot more to get promotion?
That's fine, and I'm all for 'good business practices'. But it doesn't tie in with the original aim of Premier League within 5 years.
Financing the Club for decades sounds like maintaining the status quo ... rather than speculating to achieve the stated ambition.
Sandgaard clearly underestimated the cost and difficulty involved. Next time that you chat with him, ask him to modify the ambitions please (the timescale at least) ... or recruit those 200 sales reps and get us out of League 1 before we all become Russian.
…. and he’ll be here for decades, yeah right! and based on the first 18 months what a poor prospect
"As an example the various owners before Roland had managed to accumulate a Net Operating Loss of GBP 100 mill – “doing another Derby”
Is this accurate? I would not know. But I'm pretty sure that unless he sells up which he says he has no intention of doing then its gonna be an interesting journey for us all. I've even suggest he gives the club to the trust if he decides to call it quits. But he gave no response to that one:)
Well, I'm all for an 'interesting journey' too. And I'm delighted with the commitment that Sandgaard appears to be expressing ... but ...
... he either needs to modify publicly the timescale and/or level of ambition because the original plan has clearly gone out the window
... or he needs to crank up the level of investment so that we can at least complete Step 1 of the 'interesting journey' (ie get into the Championship)
If he simply plans to roll along for decades as we are currently doing, he won't have many passengers remaining when the rickety old Charlton bus finally trundles into town.
Derby, as I understand it, accumulated debt by overpaying wages (and fees?) to get from the Championship to the Premier League.
When the spivis took over on December 31st, 2010, there was relatively little debt on the books - basically £7m on bank loans mainly for the Covered End redevelopment and the ex-director loans from 2009 only repayable in the PL. That is a far more meaningful starting point.
TS seems to believe that he could have run the club better in the Premier League, for example generated more commercial income, presumably including higher matchday revenue, but it's a quite a stretch for him to think he knows more about that than the board at the time. We know, for example, than whenever the board hiked matchday prices, invariably against advice, the club could not sell the tickets.
It's clear to me that TS thought - and may still think - that the club's commercial performance could be improved to a point where his investment would be limited and sufficient at that level. I think this is fanciful.
If you wish to ask something or raise something using a particular form of words, and have some kind of follow up dialogue, the format of these meetings kind of precludes that.
For understandable reasons.
A simple Q and A can be a rather passive, even voyeuristic experience online but has value as a surface encounter.
I was a fan of zoom stuff originally, but now find it somewhat frustrating as I would prefer to couch things in my own words, and have a chance to follow up in my own words.
Zoom meetings are not as insightful as actual meetings in a shared space.
I think this is probably correct. Historically it has been impossible for the Club to break even at any level below the Championship, partly due to the stadium running costs etc which are disproportionate to League 1 and League 2 status.
I think Sandgaard's perceived business model depends on maximising and improving revenue ... and this plays to his self-perception as an innovator/creative thinker and the stated approach of doing things differently to the usual British model.
All good so far, but you need to back up the ideas with a working strategy.
Filling (sic) the stadium with 'passing trade' from game to game isn't going to do it.
Trying to generate a worldwide fanbase while the team limps from defeat to defeat isn't going to do it.
Success (financial or otherwise) at any football club starts with an in-demand product. Get the team right, and the fans will come. Then the revenue follows.
Sandgaard is morphing into one of his own Zynex sales reps. "Here's the product. You need this. And it's great, and it will be worth so much more in the future."
"Umm ... actually, Thomas. No, thank you. I don't really like your product. Come back to me when you've improved it and then we'll talk."
The whole TS debate has become toxic, fans arguing amongst each other about the owner seems mad to me.
My opinion, I'm grateful he's stumping up the £8mill a season to fund my hobby. I think he has made some mistakes in appointing the wrong people. However, he's spent money on players, appointed JJ at the fans demand and seems to care about the club far more than our previous owners.
Ultimately his stewardship will be judged by the results on the pitch. On paper our squad looks good enough for a promotion push yet we are languishing nr the bottom of L1. Can the blame be pointed at TS ? He's not picking the team, deciding the tactics. The players we signed on paper look more than good enough to compete at this level.
I believe the tickets debacle is a bit of a red herring, if we were up there challenging for promotion no one would care.
My view of Season Tickets, Valley Gold etc is this...as a fan it's our job to do our bit to support the club, we can show our commitment to the cause by buying season tickets and if our budget allows a Valley Gold subscription too. Personally I'm not calculating the cheapest way to get to home games. I'll renew my season ticket and maintain my Valley Gold. If they can figure out a way to get more people buying season tickets (Obviously strong performances on the pitch are the best way to obtain this) through ticket give aways etc more power to their elbow. I would suggest the whole process was managed a little better.
I think this whole rebuilding process will take time, the club was gutted from top to bottom after years of underinvestment. I don't expect TS to turn this all around in 6 months. As @dave_rudd pointed out he's not the richest owner in L1.
My message to TS would be there are a large number of fans who appreciate the job he's done so far. There have been some bumps in the road, but I still believe a large majority support him in his endeavours.
Any update on the free away train travel?
Please CAST find your metaphorical balls, we will be watching
When Thomas arrived he made a statement along the lines of his business plan being top 6 play offs last season and hopefully promotion but not in the plan. Then promotion this season.
With this now clearly an impossibility how does the business plan re-set and how long do the finances allow him to continue underwriting the inevitable losses we suffer whilst in L1.
https://www.castrust.org/2022/02/last-call-for-sandgaard-qa-march-3rd/
BUT you can rest assured that we have already received a number of questions along those lines
Will it be recorded so others can catch up?
With the lack of appearences and reports of some of the loan players not being up to the necessary standard, who is suggesting these recruits?
What evidence is there of the success for the recruitment team when our squad is one of the weakest in memory with a number of players with long standing fitness issues? Does the black box need resetting and utilised with experienced football people?
Do Zynex employ people in senior positions who have little to no experience in that actual field? Can he explain the process he used to select the members of his band other than being friends with the members? Why that specific drummer etc? Why did he not choose someone from a school band? Does Mr Sandgaard think it is better to utilise the skills of experienced professionals?
(Ok, the last section was a little facetious)
Whether that is because important questions that need answering urgently deliberately aren't submitted, or (more likely in this case) that the questions will simply be fudged/answered with waffle and spin.
Really hope to be proved wrong of course.
Absolute truth and honesty is hard to come by, I’m sure his intentions are good, and he means well, but sky high promises are always going to disappoint, I don’t think the ‘difficult questions’ will be asked or answered truthfully , because they are frankly embarrassing to ask, and embarrassing to admit we cocked up.
What I’d like to know is why Thomas thought Nigel didn’t work out, and what did / didn’t Happen last summer in the transfer window, and why does Thomas believe this summer will be any better if we don’t get good business done early?