Sandgaard ownership discussion 2022-3 onwards (Meeting with CAST p138)

CAFCTrev

TS is probably asking for silly money for the club, likely the 'real' valuation + his losses so far added on top. Its again with the Roland-style "Im entitled to get every penny Ive spent back" attitude, blocking progress. 

DubaiCAFC

valleynick66 said:

Swisdom said:

I was told this week that JfC is due a large pay rise after his next league appearance.  That’s why he is only in contention in the cups.  Simple as that.  

Source - some guy as close to the situation as you can get.

Assuming it’s accurate why did we trigger the contract extension? Because we expected to sell in the transfer window and recoup some of of the costs of his salary whilst injured?

Seems a strange commercial tactic given we are led to believe player wages are known amongst and between clubs and agents. Can’t see how that was ever likely to pan out to our advantage. Don’t forget TS dues seemingly rely on Gallen on this side of things so seems a bit random. 

And didn’t Garner in an article with Cawley rebuff this suggestion?

Garner not going to come out and say he can’t play him due to the finances around his contract is he??

Sillybilly

JamesSeed said:

For those not on Twitter: 
https://www.votvonline.com/home/the-2022-23-blogs/16-10-sandgaard-is-left-looking-like-a-man-with-no-plan/
(Apols if link already posted).

All the talk of JFC is fine, but until I’ve seen him play a few consecutive games I’m treating him almost like a new signing. Have no idea if his injuries have adversely affected him long term, but from the odd cup performances it’s possible. Can’t really tell until he gets a run in the team, which may of course never happen.

Excellent article. Thanks for posting A compelling and comprehensive if utterly depressing account of how TS has gone from saviour to mug in double quick time. I had such high hopes. I suspect in his naivete and narcissism he did too!

Redrobo

DubaiCAFC said:

valleynick66 said:

Swisdom said:

I was told this week that JfC is due a large pay rise after his next league appearance.  That’s why he is only in contention in the cups.  Simple as that.  

Source - some guy as close to the situation as you can get.

Assuming it’s accurate why did we trigger the contract extension? Because we expected to sell in the transfer window and recoup some of of the costs of his salary whilst injured?

Seems a strange commercial tactic given we are led to believe player wages are known amongst and between clubs and agents. Can’t see how that was ever likely to pan out to our advantage. Don’t forget TS dues seemingly rely on Gallen on this side of things so seems a bit random. 

And didn’t Garner in an article with Cawley rebuff this suggestion?

Garner not going to come out and say he can’t play him due to the finances around his contract is he??

If it is true then we should not play him as we need the money to stay in the budget to go towards paying a striker.
If it’s not true then Garner does not want him in his team. His call.

CafcSCP

Well, one thing we’ve all learned if we didn’t know the meaning of the word already is “Narcissist“
I didn’t know what it meant until we got TS as an owner and it started going wrong!!

Thanks CL for expanding my vocabulary 😉

valleynick66

DubaiCAFC said:

valleynick66 said:

Swisdom said:

I was told this week that JfC is due a large pay rise after his next league appearance.  That’s why he is only in contention in the cups.  Simple as that.  

Source - some guy as close to the situation as you can get.

Assuming it’s accurate why did we trigger the contract extension? Because we expected to sell in the transfer window and recoup some of of the costs of his salary whilst injured?

Seems a strange commercial tactic given we are led to believe player wages are known amongst and between clubs and agents. Can’t see how that was ever likely to pan out to our advantage. Don’t forget TS dues seemingly rely on Gallen on this side of things so seems a bit random. 

And didn’t Garner in an article with Cawley rebuff this suggestion?

Garner not going to come out and say he can’t play him due to the finances around his contract is he??

But saying the opposite (lying?) is a little different. Surely he could have side stepped it and said nothing.

But my main point is I find it an odd contract stipulation / criteria. I don't see JFC attracting a fee when we ourselves have picked up players for free so if we were anxious to avoid increased costs we would have cancelled the contract surely & let JFC negotiate a contract elsewhere?

It may exist but perhaps Garner isn't convinced he is the player for him regardless.

WSS

valleynick66 said:

DubaiCAFC said:

valleynick66 said:

Swisdom said:

I was told this week that JfC is due a large pay rise after his next league appearance.  That’s why he is only in contention in the cups.  Simple as that.  

Source - some guy as close to the situation as you can get.

Assuming it’s accurate why did we trigger the contract extension? Because we expected to sell in the transfer window and recoup some of of the costs of his salary whilst injured?

Seems a strange commercial tactic given we are led to believe player wages are known amongst and between clubs and agents. Can’t see how that was ever likely to pan out to our advantage. Don’t forget TS dues seemingly rely on Gallen on this side of things so seems a bit random. 

And didn’t Garner in an article with Cawley rebuff this suggestion?

Garner not going to come out and say he can’t play him due to the finances around his contract is he??

But saying the opposite (lying?) is a little different. Surely he could have side stepped it and said nothing.

But my main point is I find it an odd contract stipulation / criteria. I don't see JFC attracting a fee when we ourselves have picked up players for free so if we were anxious to avoid increased costs we would have cancelled the contract surely & let JFC negotiate a contract elsewhere?

It may exist but perhaps Garner isn't convinced he is the player for him regardless.

It may have been JFC who had the option of the contract extension and it may have cost us more to terminate it than not?

Cardinal Sin

clive said:

ACADEMY UPDATE

Kit

Like many departments at the club, the academy have been impacted by the challenges faced by the club’s kit supplier Castore.

It means some academy teams are still playing or training in last season’s kit. The club are working hard with Castore to get everything in place as soon as possible.

A Castore statement said: “Due to supply chain issues off the back of the pandemic, all sportswear retail partners have experienced delays in clothing and accessories. However, Castore is working tirelessly to get desired product to Charlton as soon as possible.”

https://www.charltonafc.com/news/academy-update

A quick internet search will tell you that there is no issue with supply of any of the Rangers or Newcastle kits, home, away, third, fourth, women's, juniors etc. However, they only seem to have home shirts for Charlton, MK Dons and Salford. The smaller clubs don't appear to prioritise. As has been said, the home shirt is available on e-bay for £37.27. Why would you pay more from Castore?

Redrobo

valleynick66 said:

DubaiCAFC said:

valleynick66 said:

Swisdom said:

I was told this week that JfC is due a large pay rise after his next league appearance.  That’s why he is only in contention in the cups.  Simple as that.  

Source - some guy as close to the situation as you can get.

Assuming it’s accurate why did we trigger the contract extension? Because we expected to sell in the transfer window and recoup some of of the costs of his salary whilst injured?

Seems a strange commercial tactic given we are led to believe player wages are known amongst and between clubs and agents. Can’t see how that was ever likely to pan out to our advantage. Don’t forget TS dues seemingly rely on Gallen on this side of things so seems a bit random. 

And didn’t Garner in an article with Cawley rebuff this suggestion?

Garner not going to come out and say he can’t play him due to the finances around his contract is he??

But saying the opposite (lying?) is a little different. Surely he could have side stepped it and said nothing.

But my main point is I find it an odd contract stipulation / criteria. I don't see JFC attracting a fee when we ourselves have picked up players for free so if we were anxious to avoid increased costs we would have cancelled the contract surely & let JFC negotiate a contract elsewhere?

It may exist but perhaps Garner isn't convinced he is the player for him regardless.

I would guess the contract would have been extended before Garner was appointed.
To cancel the contract would mean paying him the value, or at least a chunk of his remaining contract. 

He would have to agree agree and presumably he would only do that if someone was prepared to meet his aspirations.

The cheaper option I guess would be to loan him out and cross your fingers someone will pay you something or at least take him in January. The loan fell through but I would guess it will go through in January.
If his wages would increase if we play him, it would be madness to do that if Garner wants him off the payroll.

swordfish

DubaiCAFC said:

valleynick66 said:

Swisdom said:

I was told this week that JfC is due a large pay rise after his next league appearance.  That’s why he is only in contention in the cups.  Simple as that.  

Source - some guy as close to the situation as you can get.

Assuming it’s accurate why did we trigger the contract extension? Because we expected to sell in the transfer window and recoup some of of the costs of his salary whilst injured?

Seems a strange commercial tactic given we are led to believe player wages are known amongst and between clubs and agents. Can’t see how that was ever likely to pan out to our advantage. Don’t forget TS dues seemingly rely on Gallen on this side of things so seems a bit random. 

And didn’t Garner in an article with Cawley rebuff this suggestion?

Garner not going to come out and say he can’t play him due to the finances around his contract is he??

He did say that much of the player wage budget was used up though did he not?

As the EFL restricts that budget to 60% of turnover in L1, if we are operating close to the limit, no incoming owner can spend loads on players in January if, by paying their wages, we end up exceeding it.

It's reassuring to learn that a credible party has expressed an interest in buying us, but I'm not expecting either a quick sale or a quick fix given that constraint. At least there's cause for cautious optimism though.

A word of caution for anyone suggesting boycotting to send a message. If all the empty seats end up costing the Club in foregone turnover, it will have an adverse effect on that player wage budget. Of course, other factors may be considered more important at this time, but it should be taken into account when setting short term expectation levels for a future owner.

Gribbo

Does anyone know if Garner drives a Volvo?

Arthur_Trudgill

Billionaire Shahid Khan in London today it seems. Owns Fulham, may want to expand into SE London? 

CAFCTrev

Arthur_Trudgill said:

Billionaire Shahid Khan in London today it seems. Owns Fulham, may want to expand into SE London? 

Probably here ahead of his NFL team playing in London at the end of the month. 

Gribbo

Arthur_Trudgill said:

Billionaire Shahid Khan in London today it seems. Owns Fulham, may want to expand into SE London? 

This is from Tony Khan's (Shahid''s son) Wikipedia page -

"On February 22, 2017, Khan was named as vice-chairman and director of football operations of Fulham. He oversees the identification, evaluation, recruitment, general maintenance and signing of players for Fulham. Khan assumed these responsibilities following a period of advising the football operations at the club, particularly in the areas of analytics and research. Although Khan was not able to have an immediate effect (as it was after the January transfer window), Fulham only lost twice and went on a run that saw them finish the season in sixth place, where they were defeated in the play-off semi-final to Reading."

Ring any bells.....?

Cafc43v3r

Gribbo said:

Arthur_Trudgill said:

Billionaire Shahid Khan in London today it seems. Owns Fulham, may want to expand into SE London? 

This is from Tony Khan's (Shahid''s son) Wikipedia page -

"On February 22, 2017, Khan was named as vice-chairman and director of football operations of Fulham. He oversees the identification, evaluation, recruitment, general maintenance and signing of players for Fulham. Khan assumed these responsibilities following a period of advising the football operations at the club, particularly in the areas of analytics and research. Although Khan was not able to have an immediate effect (as it was after the January transfer window), Fulham only lost twice and went on a run that saw them finish the season in sixth place, where they were defeated in the play-off semi-final to Reading."

Ring any bells.....?

Yeah Shahid is like a very rich Thomas who had bought a football club, an NFL team and financed a wrestling company so his son can live his dream.  I honestly don't know where Tony gets the time to do all 3.

MarcusH26

I didn't know Tony Khan was still actively involved at Fulham, remember Scott Parker being very public in criticising him. Thought he was just running AEW now. 

jonseventyfive

Not a bad ol'tub I suppose, no dancing girls though, sorry people.

StrikerFirmani

JamesSeed said:

For those not on Twitter: 
https://www.votvonline.com/home/the-2022-23-blogs/16-10-sandgaard-is-left-looking-like-a-man-with-no-plan/
(Apols if link already posted).

All the talk of JFC is fine, but until I’ve seen him play a few consecutive games I’m treating him almost like a new signing. Have no idea if his injuries have adversely affected him long term, but from the odd cup performances it’s possible. Can’t really tell until he gets a run in the team, which may of course never happen.

Thanks for putting this link up.

Raith_C_Chattonell

Blimey as if things aren't bad enough! 

Thanks to Airman I now have to analyse Stevie Smith's poem.  Is Sandgaard the hapless soul who no one can hear?  Is his larking about on guitar a front for other failings? A desperate cry for help?  A plea for recognition? For love? 

I just don't know anymore.

NOT WAVING BUT DROWNING

Nobody heard him, the dead man,   
But still he lay moaning:
I was much further out than you thought   
And not waving but drowning.

Poor chap, he always loved larking
And now he’s dead
It must have been too cold for him his heart gave way,   
They said.

Oh, no no no, it was too cold always   
(Still the dead one lay moaning)   
I was much too far out all my life 

And not waving but drowning. 

MuttleyCAFC

What is interesting from that graph, obvious really but Sandgaard doesn't do obvious, is that the best income year since 2008/2009 was in the Championship despite Covid and relegation. 

Cafc43v3r

MarcusH26 said:

I didn't know Tony Khan was still actively involved at Fulham, remember Scott Parker being very public in criticising him. Thought he was just running AEW now. 

He is Vice Chairman and Director of Football Operations, and he also holds the roles of General Manager and Sporting Director, at Fulham and Senior Vice President of football and technology at Jacksonville Jaguars.

He is also owner, booker, producer and promoter of AEW.

All 3 are full time jobs that would normally be 7 day a week, 60+ hours, totally absorbing ones at that.

Billy_Mix

RedChaser said:

valleynick66 said:

Swisdom said:

I was told this week that JfC is due a large pay rise after his next league appearance.  That’s why he is only in contention in the cups.  Simple as that.  

Source - some guy as close to the situation as you can get.

Assuming it’s accurate why did we trigger the contract extension? Because we expected to sell in the transfer window and recoup some of of the costs of his salary whilst injured?

Seems a strange commercial tactic given we are led to believe player wages are known amongst and between clubs and agents. Can’t see how that was ever likely to pan out to our advantage. Don’t forget TS dues seemingly rely on Gallen on this side of things so seems a bit random. 

And didn’t Garner in an article with Cawley rebuff this suggestion?

Yes here you go;  https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/ben-garner-charlton-midfielders-lack-of-league-one-game-time-not-down-to-contract-appearances-trigger/

Garner rebutted the suggestion that JFC's non-selection wasn't for financial reasons, the implication being he isn't selected cos he's not good enough compared to our other midfielders.  Garner didn't comment on whether JFC's due a payrise/bonus.  Nor should he that's not for him to share.
FWIW the suggestion JFC's less useful than McGrandles is preposterous.  Also completely ignores the fact we didn't have any fit/able leftbacks at the time and JFC has acquitted himself there on a couple of occasions.
Cards on table: I have little doubt Garner will allow his selections to be determined by Sandgaard non footballing constraints.

SomervilleAddick

Redrobo said:

valleynick66 said:

DubaiCAFC said:

valleynick66 said:

Swisdom said:

I was told this week that JfC is due a large pay rise after his next league appearance.  That’s why he is only in contention in the cups.  Simple as that.  

Source - some guy as close to the situation as you can get.

Assuming it’s accurate why did we trigger the contract extension? Because we expected to sell in the transfer window and recoup some of of the costs of his salary whilst injured?

Seems a strange commercial tactic given we are led to believe player wages are known amongst and between clubs and agents. Can’t see how that was ever likely to pan out to our advantage. Don’t forget TS dues seemingly rely on Gallen on this side of things so seems a bit random. 

And didn’t Garner in an article with Cawley rebuff this suggestion?

Garner not going to come out and say he can’t play him due to the finances around his contract is he??

But saying the opposite (lying?) is a little different. Surely he could have side stepped it and said nothing.

But my main point is I find it an odd contract stipulation / criteria. I don't see JFC attracting a fee when we ourselves have picked up players for free so if we were anxious to avoid increased costs we would have cancelled the contract surely & let JFC negotiate a contract elsewhere?

It may exist but perhaps Garner isn't convinced he is the player for him regardless.

I would guess the contract would have been extended before Garner was appointed.
To cancel the contract would mean paying him the value, or at least a chunk of his remaining contract. 

He would have to agree agree and presumably he would only do that if someone was prepared to meet his aspirations.

The cheaper option I guess would be to loan him out and cross your fingers someone will pay you something or at least take him in January. The loan fell through but I would guess it will go through in January.
If his wages would increase if we play him, it would be madness to do that if Garner wants him off the payroll.

JFCs option was picked up on May 10th, Garner was appointed June 8th. 

The club picked up the option, no doubt because they thought he either had value or could play. The former proved not to be true, and the new manager thinks that he can’t play, at least not better than the other players. 

We can all have our opinion on the managers decision, but I do know that in the cup games I’ve seen him play in, nothing screamed out that he deserved a first team game. 

ricky_otto

Gribbo said:

Does anyone know if Garner drives a Volvo?

He does - Sandgaard gave him a company one. 

Fumbluff

ricky_otto said:

Gribbo said:

Does anyone know if Garner drives a Volvo?

He does - Sandgaard gave him a company one. 

About time he changed some of them bulbs in the floodlights and looked into the rusty PA speakers ffs

SouthNorwoodAddick

MuttleyCAFC said:

What is interesting from that graph, obvious really but Sandgaard doesn't do obvious, is that the best income year since 2008/2009 was in the Championship despite Covid and relegation. 

It is completely down to TV and broadcasting rights and goes to show how valuable they are in the Championship now. Relegation from the Championship to League One is an absolute cliff drop when it comes to broadcasting revenue. 

esseffect

Until tomorrow lads 👍🏻

charlton_hero

Directors box looked particularly busy today.

CafcSCP

charlton_hero said:

Directors box looked particularly busy today.

Hopefully some prospective buyers 

oohaahmortimer

charlton_hero said:

Directors box looked particularly busy today.

Karl Robinson was in there filling it up