I would like to ask a question and I ask this simply because I feel impotent, yes bring on the one liners lol, while watching our club slide into the quicksand of debt. The question is 'What ideas would lifers have to reduce the debt of the club ? A couple of rules though, it doesn't have to guarantee success on the playing field but it must have some feasibility. I think there are enough Brains on here to come up with some answers.
Employ professional business management with relevant experience and let them manage?
No brainer. Like needing a football person as CEO.
Zynex currently have 17% of their shares sold short. Someone has a very large bet that his company isn't worth the $9 a share it's currently trading at.
Zynex currently have 17% of their shares sold short. Someone has a very large bet that his company isn't worth the $9 a share it's currently trading at.
And there was a time, all we did was show up and watch the football.
Zynex currently have 17% of their shares sold short. Someone has a very large bet that his company isn't worth the $9 a share it's currently trading at.
And there was a time, all we did was show up and watch the football.
Then they moved the home matches to Selhurst Park and some of us realised that wasn’t enough.
"expect to pay him back" is not "of course he will be paid back"
Why does our owner need a £350,000 loan.... well, I will tell you why... he doesn't have enough cash in the bank to run CAFC properly.
We're not unlike other clubs in that regard. Football is a crazily expensive business to be in. The issue is TS is not a fan and has no allegiance to us.
Our future looks bottom half of division 3 and downwards right now I am afraid.
Source?
for what? if you mean the 350k its been confirmed by TS himself.
Of course not! The statement that he doesn't have enough cash in the bank to run CAFC properly. And got a load of likes.
He is cutting staff left, right and centre The squad added free transfers in the close season The club shop doesn't have anything in it He borrowed £350k from a fan
If you have enough cash to properly run the club, you don't do that. Nothing is cheaper than your own cash.
We are losing millions It's a crazy business
You have focused on one part of my post
TS is NOT a fan He won't put his hand in his pocket like a fan would to give their club a chance of competing
We will not be able to compete in this division if our current owner continues operating like this
Not saying you are wrong, but none of those reasons imo signify that he doesn’t have enough cash in the bank to run CAFC as an ongoing concern.
This
I'm fed up with people saying he hasn't got money as a matter of fact. Simply not true. Whether he wants to invest anymore is another matter.
What's worse, that he doesn't have the money or that he isn't arsed to invest the amount required for success?
The sensible, if immoral, thing to do would be to pay Sandgaard his £1 for the club and then put it into administration thus wiping out all the debts. Then buy it out of administration debt free. That at least would mean the new owners would be able to use any money they had investing in decent players. This would not solve the ownership of the ground issue, which will stay until Duchatelet or his family decide to sell. But the example of the Glikstens might warn us that that could on for thirty years or more.
The £7m debt would not be wiped by administration because it is secured as the first charge over the freehold assets as well as the football club. It ranks above Sandgaard’s loans to the club, too.
Either it would fall back on RD as the freeholder or Sandgaard would be liable for it because he has entered into some private arrangement over it, although the latter is pure speculation.
Making it fall back on RD would be a good thing tho, surely. Might it make him think about liquidating the asset?
The sensible, if immoral, thing to do would be to pay Sandgaard his £1 for the club and then put it into administration thus wiping out all the debts. Then buy it out of administration debt free. That at least would mean the new owners would be able to use any money they had investing in decent players. This would not solve the ownership of the ground issue, which will stay until Duchatelet or his family decide to sell. But the example of the Glikstens might warn us that that could on for thirty years or more.
The £7m debt would not be wiped by administration because it is secured as the first charge over the freehold assets as well as the football club. It ranks above Sandgaard’s loans to the club, too.
Either it would fall back on RD as the freeholder or Sandgaard would be liable for it because he has entered into some private arrangement over it, although the latter is pure speculation.
Making it fall back on RD would be a good thing tho, surely. Might it make him think about liquidating the asset?
According to Sandgaard previously, Duchatelet was anxious about this in September 2020 and that was one reason he was able to do a deal. It’s why I think RD would have been forced to the table with others if TS hadn’t turned up, because it was a more immediate prospect than any realisation of the notional development value of The Valley ever was.
I don't believe TS has the cash to run us Some here say he won't spend it running us Either way, it isn't great Hence my mid table mediocrity comment And that's actually a positive on where we currently sit.
Until we get an owner willing to spend probably £15m+ of their own cash on salaries and transfer fees, and quickly, we won't get promoted
I don't believe TS has the cash to run us Some here say he won't spend it running us Either way, it isn't great Hence my mid table mediocrity comment And that's actually a positive on where we currently sit.
Until we get an owner willing to spend probably £15m+ of their own cash on salaries and transfer fees, and quickly, we won't get promoted
Think everyone and their dog agrees with all that tbh mate. The only thing a couple took issue with in some earlier comments was the stating as fact, that TS was obviously skint. He could well be, but all we really know at this point is that funds are drying up.
Even though the effect on the Club is bassically the same, I personal think there's a big difference between being skint and refusing to make any more substantial investment. The later being more concerning and frustrating.
It'll go the same way as most of these things do on here though; if you take a wild guess at something 6, 8, 10 months in advance and the conspiracy kind of comes to fruition, you'll get a pat on the back. But, if you keep an open mind until genuine facts emerge, you're nieve and gullible.
Most clubs make losses, what I’d like to know for balance is if there was a table of all 72 EFL clubs making the most losses with 1st being closest to administration then how high would we be?
I'm scratching my head about all these figures, and I don't understand financial statements, but I think your answer isn't related to these. It comes down to the wealth of the backer and their willingness/desire to carry on funding a club. The wealth is in black and white somewhere in bank statements- but what goes on between the owners ears is unknowable for most fans. Maybe a business partner or partner may know. You can make a league table from Sunday Times Rich List but the bit between the ears is a missing factor.
I don't believe he is skint. But just like RD he has realised this football lark is a lot harder than he imagined.
Therefore he's not prepared to continually pump cash into what is in essence a failing business (in that it loses money hand over fist), he also may be looking and thinking he doesn't want to spend most of his wealth on a football club.
One of his biggest mistakes is to believe he can be competitive and break even, the two just don't compute in this division. His option is to continually lose cash or increase income, he's chosen the latter without fully understanding it's impossible.
I honestly think I could do a better job than him on minimising the loses........
His best hope based on what I believe he wants is to be extremely clever in the transfer market, loans in particular and he'll also need some luck on players coming through. So far though he seems to be doing the opposite.
Our promotion season sets what he needs to do, 2 or 3 high level loans and getting in players of the Taylor Ilk on free's. We had a number of players that year who could and did go on to play at a higher level. Currently I don't see any of our players being capable of playing in the Championship.
I reckon TS had the funds but has got pissed off with the fans, the academy system, agents, his own fuck ups and has just decided to shut up shop and cut costs - happened when he sacked jacko I’d say - probably told him he’d bought a load of crap and he thought right, might as well get the cheapest manager in the league - and he was available - and gamble on him unearthing some league 2 gems - if that don’t work then he’s off - that’s my theory anyway - let’s just hope whoever’s next isn’t another disaster
Garner was one year into his contract at Swindon. He also had play off matches going into May and then, apparently, went off on holiday (how dare he! disgraceful conduct). TS could have opted to employ any out of work manager, so If there was a change of approach, including in how he handled social media, it happened later.
Not much though, for it might well have stemmed from the saga surrounding Garner's drawn out appointment, involving a lot of negative publicity. I remember it well as I'd only just signed up to CL. Don't blame me though as my posts back then we're broadly supportive of him
Anyway, that night have been the last straw given the other things you mention. I could be wrong of course, in which case, "understand that not to be correct".
Ok but if rumour is right, he was and is on a very low wage - lowest in the league allegedly - plausible as Swindon were in big trouble and he had failed at his first management job at Bristol Rovers - anyway, point is, cheap option and cost cutting now appears the only strategy which can only indicate a desire to sell up in my opinion
I suspect it was the drop off of season ticket sales resulting in lower revenue and more losses that was the point he started to realize this is a bottomless pit he no longer wished to throw money at in the same way he had previously. Combined with the fact that those players we paid money for have generally been poor business (Kirk, DJ, Stockley, Schwartz, Aneke) from an economic perspective.
Genuinely astounded though that he paid £1.15M for us and +£600K for the women's team. Nimer/Southall can't have believed their luck.
It’s not a big amount really if you are rich and want to own a substantial London football club which is why you have to question the motives of all these other allegedly interested parties who won’t buy without the land
The sensible, if immoral, thing to do would be to pay Sandgaard his £1 for the club and then put it into administration thus wiping out all the debts. Then buy it out of administration debt free. That at least would mean the new owners would be able to use any money they had investing in decent players. This would not solve the ownership of the ground issue, which will stay until Duchatelet or his family decide to sell. But the example of the Glikstens might warn us that that could on for thirty years or more.
The £7m debt would not be wiped by administration because it is secured as the first charge over the freehold assets as well as the football club. It ranks above Sandgaard’s loans to the club, too.
Either it would fall back on RD as the freeholder or Sandgaard would be liable for it because he has entered into some private arrangement over it, although the latter is pure speculation.
Making it fall back on RD would be a good thing tho, surely. Might it make him think about liquidating the asset?
According to Sandgaard previously, Duchatelet was anxious about this in September 2020 and that was one reason he was able to do a deal. It’s why I think RD would have been forced to the table with others if TS hadn’t turned up, because it was a more immediate prospect than any realisation of the notional development value of The Valley ever was.
Yes, I keep asking why RD bothered striking a deal with TS if his plan was to ruin us. Deluded old fool he maybe, but he's got to a position of having cash inflows instead of outs and is protected by owning the assets, his only liability potentially that £7M. Why would he want to kill his cash cow?
When he famously said "enjoy the moment" on selling up, I believe he meant just that, and only that, as he knew we had been wanting him out. Although our protests annoyed him, I doubt he gives a toss about all that now. He wouldn't let it cloud his judgement and drive his decision making.
He'll continue to sit pretty getting paid monthly with no immediate liabilities. If and when TS goes, he'll try to strike a similar deal with another, or sell the assets if he can find a mug to pay much more than they're worth then.
However, judging by some of his actions to date* it might seem that he doesn't really want to sell those. I suppose that's why so many believe he has a long term vision of property development at the Valley.
* Upping the asking price with the Aussies and ESI, although ESI accepted it, and refusing to engage with Barclay & Co.
Something changed. In the beginning he was happy to spunk money on dubious spends, then suddenly he stopped. It is obvious that a big reason we missed out on a striker was we had to free up money elsewhere first but couldn't. It begs the question why we brought in so many midfielders if we knew it was spending all the budget. I would say it is either because Garner is an idiot or the budget changed. My money is on the latter.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
As others have concluded he has been hoisted by his own petard. I genuinely believe that he believed in himself and his own business acumen to the extent that he thought above all else that would be enough for us succeed. I also believe he is that arrogant if you asked him he would maintain that he hasn't really done that much wrong.
I think the point has now come though when he has realised, which he should have known from the start that without shed loads of investment we can only tread water as a club. The thing that baffled me most is that he has become so disengaged with the fans which has lead to falling numbers and a such toxic feel at the moment, you would have hoped when he first took over with all the bravado that would have been the least of his problems
Interesting thing re: Garner, obvs depending on how his contract is structured, but if results continue to be poor and TS finds himself in the firing line with regard our discontent, sacks BG, then it’s likely to be another payout. Might not be that much in the grand scheme of things, but it would be another headache on the footballing side.
It’s been summed well by most on here, but I think he came into this completely ignorant of what it would take to make this a success and thought I have X amount allocated, let’s spend it, by that time we’ll be in the Championship and probably competing to go up to the Prem. I truly believe he thought the 5 year goal was attainable on the X amount he’d allocated at the start and over 5 years. Basically he thought year one or year two (the first full season he had - last season) we would get out of League One. Year 3, this season, either already had a season in the Championship to establish ourselves, or this was our first season back, more people would come to watch, gates would increase slightly and the feel good factor would be there, and by year 5, goal achieved, additional investment, sponsorship etc.
All good intentions, grossly misjudged on the basis, he’s not a football man. Look and listen to him. Who writes a song with the lyric ‘clean sheet win’
I’m not adding much new, we’ve all said the same thing in different ways. He quite literally hasn’t got a clue about English football, or football in general for that matter. I’ve had a life time of watching us play largely League football, bar 8 seasons in the Prem. This club is in our blood. We’ve lived hundreds of crap results over and over (there’s been some great wins to). This is what he doesn’t get. I’m not saying being a fan of us would guarantee success, but I reckon most of the people on this site could’ve made a better go of it than him if they had the money, or at least offered him sound advice, based on the fact we get it.
It’s a shame because I think he’s come in with all the right intentions, which have slowly eroded over time and that may have had an impact on his treatment of non playing staff and belligerence in running the club. I say ‘May’ because I don’t know for sure, but I think as things have gotten worse and not gone his way, his approach to running the club has matched this
Something changed. In the beginning he was happy to spunk money on dubious spends, then suddenly he stopped. It is obvious that a big reason we missed out on a striker was we had to free up money elsewhere first but couldn't. It begs the question why we brought in so many midfielders if we knew it was spending all the budget. I would say it is either because Garner is an idiot or the budget changed. My money is on the latter.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
Has Sandgaard “suddenly stopped”? I assume he’s still providing pretty significant funding or we would be heading towards administration now.
Zynex currently have 17% of their shares sold short. Someone has a very large bet that his company isn't worth the $9 a share it's currently trading at.
Most stocks have short positions, this sector is an easy target. Stock currently has 3 buy ratings and one neutral.
Something changed. In the beginning he was happy to spunk money on dubious spends, then suddenly he stopped. It is obvious that a big reason we missed out on a striker was we had to free up money elsewhere first but couldn't. It begs the question why we brought in so many midfielders if we knew it was spending all the budget. I would say it is either because Garner is an idiot or the budget changed. My money is on the latter.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
Has Sandgaard “suddenly stopped”? I assume he’s still providing pretty significant funding or we would be heading towards administration now.
He is probably worth around $150m which is a lot of money but not hugely liquid and certainly not enough to want to commit c $10m every year to a losing football club.
Comments
Some here say he won't spend it running us
Either way, it isn't great
Hence my mid table mediocrity comment
And that's actually a positive on where we currently sit.
Until we get an owner willing to spend probably £15m+ of their own cash on salaries and transfer fees, and quickly, we won't get promoted
Even though the effect on the Club is bassically the same, I personal think there's a big difference between being skint and refusing to make any more substantial investment. The later being more concerning and frustrating.
It'll go the same way as most of these things do on here though; if you take a wild guess at something 6, 8, 10 months in advance and the conspiracy kind of comes to fruition, you'll get a pat on the back. But, if you keep an open mind until genuine facts emerge, you're nieve and gullible.
Therefore he's not prepared to continually pump cash into what is in essence a failing business (in that it loses money hand over fist), he also may be looking and thinking he doesn't want to spend most of his wealth on a football club.
One of his biggest mistakes is to believe he can be competitive and break even, the two just don't compute in this division. His option is to continually lose cash or increase income, he's chosen the latter without fully understanding it's impossible.
I honestly think I could do a better job than him on minimising the loses........
His best hope based on what I believe he wants is to be extremely clever in the transfer market, loans in particular and he'll also need some luck on players coming through. So far though he seems to be doing the opposite.
Our promotion season sets what he needs to do, 2 or 3 high level loans and getting in players of the Taylor Ilk on free's. We had a number of players that year who could and did go on to play at a higher level. Currently I don't see any of our players being capable of playing in the Championship.
When he famously said "enjoy the moment" on selling up, I believe he meant just that, and only that, as he knew we had been wanting him out. Although our protests annoyed him, I doubt he gives a toss about all that now. He wouldn't let it cloud his judgement and drive his decision making.
He'll continue to sit pretty getting paid monthly with no immediate liabilities. If and when TS goes, he'll try to strike a similar deal with another, or sell the assets if he can find a mug to pay much more than they're worth then.
However, judging by some of his actions to date* it might seem that he doesn't really want to sell those. I suppose that's why so many believe he has a long term vision of property development at the Valley.
* Upping the asking price with the Aussies and ESI, although ESI accepted it, and refusing to engage with Barclay & Co.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
I think the point has now come though when he has realised, which he should have known from the start that without shed loads of investment we can only tread water as a club. The thing that baffled me most is that he has become so disengaged with the fans which has lead to falling numbers and a such toxic feel at the moment, you would have hoped when he first took over with all the bravado that would have been the least of his problems
It’s been summed well by most on here, but I think he came into this completely ignorant of what it would take to make this a success and thought I have X amount allocated, let’s spend it, by that time we’ll be in the Championship and probably competing to go up to the Prem. I truly believe he thought the 5 year goal was attainable on the X amount he’d allocated at the start and over 5 years. Basically he thought year one or year two (the first full season he had - last season) we would get out of League One. Year 3, this season, either already had a season in the Championship to establish ourselves, or this was our first season back, more people would come to watch, gates would increase slightly and the feel good factor would be there, and by year 5, goal achieved, additional investment, sponsorship etc.
All good intentions, grossly misjudged on the basis, he’s not a football man. Look and listen to him. Who writes a song with the lyric ‘clean sheet win’
I’m not adding much new, we’ve all said the same thing in different ways. He quite literally hasn’t got a clue about English football, or football in general for that matter. I’ve had a life time of watching us play largely League football, bar 8 seasons in the Prem. This club is in our blood. We’ve lived hundreds of crap results over and over (there’s been some great wins to). This is what he doesn’t get. I’m not saying being a fan of us would guarantee success, but I reckon most of the people on this site could’ve made a better go of it than him if they had the money, or at least offered him sound advice, based on the fact we get it.
It’s a shame because I think he’s come in with all the right intentions, which have slowly eroded over time and that may have had an impact on his treatment of non playing staff and belligerence in running the club. I say ‘May’ because I don’t know for sure, but I think as things have gotten worse and not gone his way, his approach to running the club has matched this
Stock currently has 3 buy ratings and one neutral.