We know how to break even but we're not going to tell you. That old chestnut Why all the noise recently about breaking even anyway? Who is Sandgaard trying to appease with this constant blurge? It's certainly not the fans. I doubt most really care if we break even or not.
Two possible reasons for me. He's either trying to get the attention of someone to get involved. But with the chance of maybe breaking even I doubt there's many investors falling over themselves to pour money in.
Or, he's trying to settle the nerves of someone who has already invested or got capital involved somewhere. Probably his bank manager hoping to at least get some of his money back!
How far down the football pyramid do we reckon that this sort of thing is normal behaviour? I'd be willing to guess that nearly all L1 owners do not do this?
To have this in the same sentence as "there are “a thousand more business principles which need to be applied throughout the club so it can run more agile”" it's unbelievably short sighted. An agile business is one that doesn't have an owner micro managing every single detail around it.
That is a shame about KA. If I recall correctly he has had long term issues and so it is not definitely about the club, especially given he is staying as a photographer. I wish him well. Seems a very decent person.
Your no fun
Well I should probably therefore point out that it is "you're" no fun then. 😃
I have not read the Trust notes yet but I am wondering if the clubs attempt to break even is why they have emailed my 7year old daughter / Season ticket holder /Junior Red this morning to suggest she bought jackpot tickets. I would assume this is a Small Society Lottery by definition so it would be illegal to sell a ticket to anyone under the age of 16. You would hope the clubs systems would be sufficient to screen out all U16s.
Just a load of jargon mixed in with statements that completely contradict reality. His statement that we shouldn’t be questioning the business side of the club and should ‘just turn up and cheer on the team’ when things are so clearly crumbling on that side of things pretty much sums it up.
As I’ve said previously, he’s not looking to sell, he’s just delusional.
We know how to break even but we're not going to tell you. That old chestnut Why all the noise recently about breaking even anyway? Who is Sandgaard trying to appease with this constant blurge? It's certainly not the fans. I doubt most really care if we break even or not.
Two possible reasons for me. He's either trying to get the attention of someone to get involved. But with the chance of maybe breaking even I doubt there's many investors falling over themselves to pour money in.
Or, he's trying to settle the nerves of someone who has already invested or got capital involved somewhere. Probably his bank manager hoping to at least get some of his money back!
Would you rather he hadn't attempted to answer the questions asked of him by the Trust then?
Most might not worry about breaking even, but as as he said a while back that it was an aim, he was once again being asked to justify his comments. To be fair, he does have a duty of care as our owner to manage the Club's finances responsibly, although not doing so seems to be quite common for clubs aspiring to be successful.
It's not how much he spends anyway that's the problem, it's what he's spending it on, including paying for things like out of court settlements to former employees, assuming that's true. He didn't rule out paying fees in the January window, but I won't be holding my breath after last time and expect it to be loan signings.
How far down the football pyramid do we reckon that this sort of thing is normal behaviour? I'd be willing to guess that nearly all L1 owners do not do this?
To have this in the same sentence as "there are “a thousand more business principles which need to be applied throughout the club so it can run more agile”" it's unbelievably short sighted. An agile business is one that doesn't have an owner micro managing every single detail around it.
I can see both sides of it.
If it was my company i'd certainly want to know what we were paying out, how much, who to and how essential it was.
But it also depends how far he's taking it. I certainly wouldn't expect him to be signing off the cost for coffee and tea bags but anything over a grand or two i could understand.
"We suggested that two years into his ownership there is not a clear
shape to the structure of the organisation on the non-football side.
Thomas said that “we’ll figure it out” and that “you don’t need to worry
about that – just turn up and cheer on the team”. "
"We suggested that two years into his ownership there is not a clear
shape to the structure of the organisation on the non-football side.
Thomas said that “we’ll figure it out” and that “you don’t need to worry
about that – just turn up and cheer on the team”. "
What a penis... how condescending
And we thought calling us " customers " was an insult !
How far down the football pyramid do we reckon that this sort of thing is normal behaviour? I'd be willing to guess that nearly all L1 owners do not do this?
To have this in the same sentence as "there are “a thousand more business principles which need to be applied throughout the club so it can run more agile”" it's unbelievably short sighted. An agile business is one that doesn't have an owner micro managing every single detail around it.
I can see both sides of it.
If it was my company i'd certainly want to know what we were paying out, how much, who to and how essential it was.
But it also depends how far he's taking it. I certainly wouldn't expect him to be signing off the cost for coffee and tea bags but anything over a grand or two i could understand.
"We suggested that two years into his ownership there is not a clear
shape to the structure of the organisation on the non-football side.
Thomas said that “we’ll figure it out” and that “you don’t need to worry
about that – just turn up and cheer on the team”. "
What a penis... how condescending
In his opinion the trust don't have much business savvy.
"We suggested that two years into his ownership there is not a clear
shape to the structure of the organisation on the non-football side.
Thomas said that “we’ll figure it out” and that “you don’t need to worry
about that – just turn up and cheer on the team”. "
What a penis... how condescending
Yup ... a pat on the head and telling us not to get involved in stuff we don't understand ... very condescending ... cannot believe I ever defended this bloke!
Unfortunately the Danish for “bullshit” is “bullshit” so the smartest I can offer is “fjollet spadestik”. It means “silly sod”
I was actually reading through the notes (thank you for posting btw) and coming to a slightly more favourable opinion of TS than I have been forming in recent weeks. For a start, at least he turned up! I had a feeling he wouldn’t given his recent disappearing act. And in a sense it’s his business how he spends his money and chooses to run his operations. I imagine that he sees the Trust as a well intentioned pain in the behind. He doesn’t seem to be someone who takes advice from those in a position to understand things in a different and more sympathetic way than he does. That’s his choice and I understand it. But the more I read the more the arrogance and borderline delusion just seeps through. The narcissistic satisfaction of being our saviour has worn off somewhat spectacularly and that is probably difficult for him to take. I don’t read anything though that makes me think he is close to or even thinking about selling up.
He’s getting triggered when he’s now having to mention Duchatelet. Not even 10 percent that went on with the protests etc back then, are even close to now.
I don’t see him being owner of Charlton by the start of next season in my opinion. Not been told or heard anything but running it down to the bear minimum may (in his mind) make it easier to sell by next summer
How far down the football pyramid do we reckon that this sort of thing is normal behaviour? I'd be willing to guess that nearly all L1 owners do not do this?
To have this in the same sentence as "there are “a thousand more business principles which need to be applied throughout the club so it can run more agile”" it's unbelievably short sighted. An agile business is one that doesn't have an owner micro managing every single detail around it.
I can see both sides of it.
If it was my company i'd certainly want to know what we were paying out, how much, who to and how essential it was.
But it also depends how far he's taking it. I certainly wouldn't expect him to be signing off the cost for coffee and tea bags but anything over a grand or two i could understand.
We know how to break even but we're not going to tell you. That old chestnut Why all the noise recently about breaking even anyway? Who is Sandgaard trying to appease with this constant blurge? It's certainly not the fans. I doubt most really care if we break even or not.
Two possible reasons for me. He's either trying to get the attention of someone to get involved. But with the chance of maybe breaking even I doubt there's many investors falling over themselves to pour money in.
Or, he's trying to settle the nerves of someone who has already invested or got capital involved somewhere. Probably his bank manager hoping to at least get some of his money back!
Would you rather he hadn't attempted to answer the questions asked of him by the Trust then?
Most might not worry about breaking even, but as as he said a while back that it was an aim, he was once again being asked to justify his comments. To be fair, he does have a duty of care as our owner to manage the Club's finances responsibly, although not doing so seems to be quite common for clubs aspiring to be successful.
It's not how much he spends anyway that's the problem, it's what he's spending it on, including paying for things like out of court settlements to former employees, assuming that's true. He didn't rule out paying fees in the January window, but I won't be holding my breath after last time and expect it to be loan signings.
But he didn't answer it did he.
I quote ' He believes that there is a lot of potential for growing revenue and
that, although he didn’t want to go into detail, there are areas showing
good progress. He is confident that losses can be halved in one more
season and break even achieved in another season and a half after that."
I'm not quite sure what people thought he would say differently.
I understand why CAST challenged of course to keep some pressure on (as far as they can) and register the concerns, but the response is as we would expect / predict in my opinion.
He is hardly going to publicly say 'yep I got it all wrong' and 'please come and help me' !
Reading between the lines, I suspect it was not an easy meeting - but it was a necessary one. TS can now be in no doubt that the fans do, and will continue to take an interest in club affairs over and above what happens on the field (and rightfully so, in my opinion).
Yes, in many ways "he who pays the piper" has the right to "call the tune", but maybe not how it is played - especially if it comes to alleged bullying to achieve his ends.
He has acknowledged that others see some of his workplace initiatives as "offensive and aggressive". Well, we'll all be keeping a close look to see whether he takes measures to change that reputation-damaging perception.
He’s getting triggered when he’s now having to mention Duchatelet. Not even 10 percent that went on with the protests etc back then, are even close to now.
I don’t see him being owner of Charlton by the start of next season in my opinion. Not been told or heard anything but running it down to the bear minimum may (in his mind) make it easier to sell by next summer
I do dearly hope he isn't.
If he doesn't want to be treated like Duchatelet, howabout he stops behaving like him.
What a clueless, condescending piece of shit the bloke is. Utter fantasist.
PS Can't believe the bullying concerns and myriad staff 'losses' weren't brought up at the meeting!
He stressed that “the break even scenario would not be achieved by cost cutting.” He discounted the idea of imminent sales of young players to balance the books
In laymen's terms: we can't cut costs to the point we start to break even And we're not going to cash in on young players.
That's Trussonomics right there. "Spending cuts won't get us far enough and I'm not going to liquidate assets, I'm going to wish the loss making business magically breaks even." At best he's delusional. We know fine well that attendances aren't going to raise significant sums. Quite the reverse in this climate. There may well be scope for commercial income increases but realistically who is going to be spunking thousands on hospitality or advertising at a midtable (!) 3rd division football ground with rarely more than ten thousand bods in it 25 times a season?
He'd probably "accidentally" bring his guitar to a funeral..."just incase".
I doubt he would slowly roll his hand up and say "you've charmed me" while interviewing a new financial director who he wants to immediately hire and all the car crash behaviour brent offered, but there would still be a bit of it present, just in a different style.
On the subject of hospitality: £96 for a pie and a pint? TV lounge - that's got to be the biggest tastiest damn pie anyone ever had Even worse £96 for a padded seat and an inside space not even a cuppa? Vista - wibble Makes the £36 for a drink and an inside space look sort of not completely mental. 1905 £7 a pint and £29 for the opportunity to spend more money.
Perfectly clear why we get emails trying to flog us this lunacy on the day before every match.
He stressed that “the break even scenario would not be achieved by cost cutting.” He discounted the idea of imminent sales of young players to balance the books
In laymen's terms: we can't cut costs to the point we start to break even And we're not going to cash in on young players.
That's Trussonomics right there. "Spending cuts won't get us far enough and I'm not going to liquidate assets, I'm going to wish the loss making business magically breaks even." At best he's delusional. We know fine well that attendances aren't going to raise significant sums. Quite the reverse in this climate. There may well be scope for commercial income increases but realistically who is going to be spunking thousands on hospitality or advertising at a midtable (!) 3rd division football ground with rarely more than ten thousand bods in it 25 times a season?
It’s just nonsense and everyone who has looked at the books and knows the club is aware of that. I notice the timescale to the mythical break even has been extended too.
He can’t get the staff because of the tight labour market, he says, but he also sacks someone like Olly and then has to pay him over the odds because he didn’t follow proper process. Business genius.
He’s getting triggered when he’s now having to mention Duchatelet. Not even 10 percent that went on with the protests etc back then, are even close to now.
I don’t see him being owner of Charlton by the start of next season in my opinion. Not been told or heard anything but running it down to the bear minimum may (in his mind) make it easier to sell by next summer
I do dearly hope he isn't.
If he doesn't want to be treated like Duchatelet, howabout he stops behaving like him.
What a clueless, condescending piece of shit the bloke is. Utter fantasist.
PS Can't believe the bullying concerns and myriad staff 'losses' weren't brought up at the meeting!
We know how to break even but we're not going to tell you. That old chestnut Why all the noise recently about breaking even anyway? Who is Sandgaard trying to appease with this constant blurge? It's certainly not the fans. I doubt most really care if we break even or not.
Two possible reasons for me. He's either trying to get the attention of someone to get involved. But with the chance of maybe breaking even I doubt there's many investors falling over themselves to pour money in.
Or, he's trying to settle the nerves of someone who has already invested or got capital involved somewhere. Probably his bank manager hoping to at least get some of his money back!
Would you rather he hadn't attempted to answer the questions asked of him by the Trust then?
Most might not worry about breaking even, but as as he said a while back that it was an aim, he was once again being asked to justify his comments. To be fair, he does have a duty of care as our owner to manage the Club's finances responsibly, although not doing so seems to be quite common for clubs aspiring to be successful.
It's not how much he spends anyway that's the problem, it's what he's spending it on, including paying for things like out of court settlements to former employees, assuming that's true. He didn't rule out paying fees in the January window, but I won't be holding my breath after last time and expect it to be loan signings.
But he didn't answer it did he.
I quote ' He believes that there is a lot of potential for growing revenue and
that, although he didn’t want to go into detail, there are areas showing
good progress. He is confident that losses can be halved in one more
season and break even achieved in another season and a half after that."
Straight out the book of Trussonomics, that!
No, I get your point, but it's precisely because fans do care about his thoughts on it that the question was asked of him.
I note it wasn't the only time he effectively dodged the question either. On reading some of his answers, you could be forgiven for interpreting them as him saying 'that really isn't something that should concern you,' which I agree is condescending and he shouldn't be surprised with our fan base and history that he's being asked awkward questions.
Incidentally I think he is still content going it alone and isn't looking for outside investment. No way would his ego tolerate power sharing. As for it being an attempt to give assurance to a money lender, why choose a meeting with CAST, or make any public declaration, to do that?
Comments
Why all the noise recently about breaking even anyway?
Who is Sandgaard trying to appease with this constant blurge?
It's certainly not the fans. I doubt most really care if we break even or not.
Two possible reasons for me.
He's either trying to get the attention of someone to get involved. But with the chance of maybe breaking even I doubt there's many investors falling over themselves to pour money in.
Or, he's trying to settle the nerves of someone who has already invested or got capital involved somewhere. Probably his bank manager hoping to at least get some of his money back!
But will need to read through again before commenting & look forward to hearing the opinions of others on here.
How far down the football pyramid do we reckon that this sort of thing is normal behaviour? I'd be willing to guess that nearly all L1 owners do not do this?
To have this in the same sentence as "there are “a thousand more business principles which need to be applied throughout the club so it can run more agile”" it's unbelievably short sighted. An agile business is one that doesn't have an owner micro managing every single detail around it.
Well I should probably therefore point out that it is "you're" no fun then. 😃
You would hope the clubs systems would be sufficient to screen out all U16s.
Most might not worry about breaking even, but as as he said a while back that it was an aim, he was once again being asked to justify his comments. To be fair, he does have a duty of care as our owner to manage the Club's finances responsibly, although not doing so seems to be quite common for clubs aspiring to be successful.
It's not how much he spends anyway that's the problem, it's what he's spending it on, including paying for things like out of court settlements to former employees, assuming that's true. He didn't rule out paying fees in the January window, but I won't be holding my breath after last time and expect it to be loan signings.
If it was my company i'd certainly want to know what we were paying out, how much, who to and how essential it was.
But it also depends how far he's taking it. I certainly wouldn't expect him to be signing off the cost for coffee and tea bags but anything over a grand or two i could understand.
What a penis... how condescending
I don’t see him being owner of Charlton by the start of next season in my opinion. Not been told or heard anything but running it down to the bear minimum may (in his mind) make it easier to sell by next summer
I understand why CAST challenged of course to keep some pressure on (as far as they can) and register the concerns, but the response is as we would expect / predict in my opinion.
He is hardly going to publicly say 'yep I got it all wrong' and 'please come and help me' !
The exchange has served its purpose regardless.
Reading between the lines, I suspect it was not an easy meeting - but it was a necessary one. TS can now be in no doubt that the fans do, and will continue to take an interest in club affairs over and above what happens on the field (and rightfully so, in my opinion).
Yes, in many ways "he who pays the piper" has the right to "call the tune", but maybe not how it is played - especially if it comes to alleged bullying to achieve his ends.
He has acknowledged that others see some of his workplace initiatives as "offensive and aggressive". Well, we'll all be keeping a close look to see whether he takes measures to change that reputation-damaging perception.
If he doesn't want to be treated like Duchatelet, howabout he stops behaving like him.
What a clueless, condescending piece of shit the bloke is. Utter fantasist.
PS Can't believe the bullying concerns and myriad staff 'losses' weren't brought up at the meeting!
He discounted the idea of imminent sales of young players to balance the books
In laymen's terms: we can't cut costs to the point we start to break even And we're not going to cash in on young players.
That's Trussonomics right there. "Spending cuts won't get us far enough and I'm not going to liquidate assets, I'm going to wish the loss making business magically breaks even."
At best he's delusional. We know fine well that attendances aren't going to raise significant sums. Quite the reverse in this climate. There may well be scope for commercial income increases but realistically who is going to be spunking thousands on hospitality or advertising at a midtable (!) 3rd division football ground with rarely more than ten thousand bods in it 25 times a season?
He'd probably "accidentally" bring his guitar to a funeral..."just incase".
I doubt he would slowly roll his hand up and say "you've charmed me" while interviewing a new financial director who he wants to immediately hire and all the car crash behaviour brent offered, but there would still be a bit of it present, just in a different style.
Completely lost in his own world
£96 for a pie and a pint? TV lounge - that's got to be the biggest tastiest damn pie anyone ever had
Even worse £96 for a padded seat and an inside space not even a cuppa? Vista - wibble
Makes the £36 for a drink and an inside space look sort of not completely mental. 1905 £7 a pint and £29 for the opportunity to spend more money.
Perfectly clear why we get emails trying to flog us this lunacy on the day before every match.
It’s just nonsense and everyone who has looked at the books and knows the club is aware of that. I notice the timescale to the mythical break even has been extended too.
I note it wasn't the only time he effectively dodged the question either. On reading some of his answers, you could be forgiven for interpreting them as him saying 'that really isn't something that should concern you,' which I agree is condescending and he shouldn't be surprised with our fan base and history that he's being asked awkward questions.
Incidentally I think he is still content going it alone and isn't looking for outside investment. No way would his ego tolerate power sharing. As for it being an attempt to give assurance to a money lender, why choose a meeting with CAST, or make any public declaration, to do that?