Tangible assests not the best all and end all of owning a football club. The consortium buying Coventry are doing so without it having tangible assets and with sizable debits. It just takes lots of money and a desire to own a football club.
True, but if a club is haemorrhaging millions of pounds AND has no tangible assets then that’s a double whammy.
Coventry is not the best comparison. As despite not owning any tangible assets their paying crowds have remained fairly healthy throughout their period of decline.
What sort of average attendance at the Valley would be needed for the club to become more viable to external investor (in league1) without the assets has anyone done the math?
What sort of average attendance at the Valley would be needed for the club to become more viable to external investor (in league1) without the assets has anyone done the math?
It would “more viable” with bigger crowds but off the top of my head wouldn’t be in profit at capacity.
Tangible assests not the best all and end all of owning a football club. The consortium buying Coventry are doing so without it having tangible assets and with sizable debits. It just takes lots of money and a desire to own a football club.
You miss the point that Sandgaard has nothing to sell. There may be people who would run the club without owning the ground but why would they pay him for equity?
Quite right Airman, in fact if anyone is interested in making Charlton Athletic a going concern then the first port of call would be to Belgium as that is where the real cards are held, Sandgaard owns nothing but debt.
Tangible assests not the best all and end all of owning a football club. The consortium buying Coventry are doing so without it having tangible assets and with sizable debits. It just takes lots of money and a desire to own a football club.
You miss the point that Sandgaard has nothing to sell. There may be people who would run the club without owning the ground but why would they pay him for equity?
Quite right Airman, in fact if anyone is interested in making Charlton Athletic a going concern then the first port of call would be to Belgium as that is where the real cards are held, Sandgaard owns nothing but debt.
Hence the bullshit revenue projection which is ridiculed by those he approaches.
Tangible assests not the best all and end all of owning a football club. The consortium buying Coventry are doing so without it having tangible assets and with sizable debits. It just takes lots of money and a desire to own a football club.
You miss the point that Sandgaard has nothing to sell. There may be people who would run the club without owning the ground but why would they pay him for equity?
Quite right Airman, in fact if anyone is interested in making Charlton Athletic a going concern then the first port of call would be to Belgium as that is where the real cards are held, Sandgaard owns nothing but debt.
Hence the bullshit revenue projection which is ridiculed by those he approaches.
High time 'Sandgaard' released a cover version of "You Won't Find Another Fool Like Me," if he's Seeking New money 😎
I was told today that mark warburton was offered the job in the summer, agreed terms and was then offered reduced terms at the last minute. Anyone else heard this or is the person who told me, talking out of his bum hole?
Tangible assests not the best all and end all of owning a football club. The consortium buying Coventry are doing so without it having tangible assets and with sizable debits. It just takes lots of money and a desire to own a football club.
You miss the point that Sandgaard has nothing to sell. There may be people who would run the club without owning the ground but why would they pay him for equity?
I suppose he feels he had to pay Southall and co. and so might expect similar?
I also assume however the value of player registrations and sell on’s may well be less than previously.
Again though is there any genuine evidence he is looking to sell or work with other parties or just speculation (reasonable) that he would want to cut his losses?
I was told today that mark warburton was offered the job in the summer, agreed terms and was then offered reduced terms at the last minute. Anyone else heard this or is the person who told me, talking out of his bum hole?
I was told today that mark warburton was offered the job in the summer, agreed terms and was then offered reduced terms at the last minute. Anyone else heard this or is the person who told me, talking out of his bum hole?
Sounds remarkably like the version of events regarding Macauley Bonne. I’d be surprised if both were true
I was told today that mark warburton was offered the job in the summer, agreed terms and was then offered reduced terms at the last minute. Anyone else heard this or is the person who told me, talking out of his bum hole?
Tangible assests not the best all and end all of owning a football club. The consortium buying Coventry are doing so without it having tangible assets and with sizable debits. It just takes lots of money and a desire to own a football club.
You miss the point that Sandgaard has nothing to sell. There may be people who would run the club without owning the ground but why would they pay him for equity?
I suppose he feels he had to pay Southall and co. and so might expect similar?
I also assume however the value of player registrations and sell on’s may well be less than previously.
Again though is there any genuine evidence he is looking to sell or work with other parties or just speculation (reasonable) that he would want to cut his losses?
What evidence would you accept? I know about some of the discussions he’s had. I’m not going to breach confidences to tell you how or who with and I don’t have documentation I can share, but I’m not the only person who knows about them. It’s football. Everybody talks.
I don’t think what he paid Southall is material to this. It’s much more about what he wants.
Tangible assests not the best all and end all of owning a football club. The consortium buying Coventry are doing so without it having tangible assets and with sizable debits. It just takes lots of money and a desire to own a football club.
You miss the point that Sandgaard has nothing to sell. There may be people who would run the club without owning the ground but why would they pay him for equity?
I suppose he feels he had to pay Southall and co. and so might expect similar?
I also assume however the value of player registrations and sell on’s may well be less than previously.
Again though is there any genuine evidence he is looking to sell or work with other parties or just speculation (reasonable) that he would want to cut his losses?
What evidence would you accept? I know about some of the discussions he’s had. I’m not going to breach confidences to tell you how or who with and I don’t have documentation I can share, but I’m not the only person who knows about them. It’s football. Everybody talks.
I don’t think what he paid Southall is material to this. It’s much more about what he wants.
And I'm sure that he wants too much for not a lot.
I wonder if "focusing on the football" will ever be a reality for Charlton fans again. Too many false dawns to count, it's exhausting.
Focusing on the football is currently the greater of 2 evils. I think I'd rather read the RIP threads on here than watch us tip tappy around the pitch for 90 mins & then gift the opposition a last minute equaliser.
Tangible assests not the best all and end all of owning a football club. The consortium buying Coventry are doing so without it having tangible assets and with sizable debits. It just takes lots of money and a desire to own a football club.
You miss the point that Sandgaard has nothing to sell. There may be people who would run the club without owning the ground but why would they pay him for equity?
I suppose he feels he had to pay Southall and co. and so might expect similar?
I also assume however the value of player registrations and sell on’s may well be less than previously.
Again though is there any genuine evidence he is looking to sell or work with other parties or just speculation (reasonable) that he would want to cut his losses?
What evidence would you accept? I know about some of the discussions he’s had. I’m not going to breach confidences to tell you how or who with and I don’t have documentation I can share, but I’m not the only person who knows about them. It’s football. Everybody talks.
I don’t think what he paid Southall is material to this. It’s much more about what he wants.
Happy with that statement. I was seeking to distinguish speculation / assumption from something more tangible. Thank you.
My point about MS was my speculation as to why he might feel he can seek some sort of premium however small I.e. he paid so others might too.
Was sat near the directors box yesterday and noticed Charlie Methven was sat in there and celebrating when Morgan scored. He was the knobhead part-owner of Sunderland before who was like David Brent on their Netflix programme. Hoping he’s not part of a potential takeover!
Was sat near the directors box yesterday and noticed Charlie Methven was sat in there and celebrating when Morgan scored. He was the knobhead part-owner of Sunderland before who was like David Brent on their Netflix programme. Hoping he’s not part of a potential takeover!
I knew I recognised him! He was in the players lounger after the game.
Methven also tried to buy Oxford (on behalf of an investor he represented) in the past.
The sheer fact that he was at the game yesterday could be good news in atleast indicating that TS is inviting/welcoming football consultants to the Valley.
I wonder if "focusing on the football" will ever be a reality for Charlton fans again. Too many false dawns to count, it's exhausting.
It’s not easy to focus on the football given how poor it is. Bowyer achieved the impossible I feel given how he got us up under RD and the team he assembled. I’ve got no way of knowing if Bowyer’s budget was better than BG’s, I suspect it is.
The advantage Bowyer had I guess is that RD had taken a complete back step re: running the club, he was literally looking to sell. TS is looking for ‘investment’ or an unreasonably high price for a club without owning anything of value. We’ve got another lunatic owner
Was sat near the directors box yesterday and noticed Charlie Methven was sat in there and celebrating when Morgan scored. He was the knobhead part-owner of Sunderland before who was like David Brent on their Netflix programme. Hoping he’s not part of a potential takeover!
I wonder if "focusing on the football" will ever be a reality for Charlton fans again. Too many false dawns to count, it's exhausting.
It’s not easy to focus on the football given how poor it is. Bowyer achieved the impossible I feel given how he got us up under RD and the team he assembled. I’ve got no way of knowing if Bowyer’s budget was better than BG’s, I suspect it is.
The advantage Bowyer had I guess is that RD had taken a complete back step re: running the club, he was literally looking to sell. TS is looking for ‘investment’ or an unreasonably high price for a club without owning anything of value. We’ve got another lunatic owner
I think budget is misleading because it means different things to different people at different times.
The total first team wage bill that Bowyer had was huge. Garner's is very big. By league 1 standards.
At the same time the amount of money they had to spend on transfers and wages was very small, even by league 1 standards.
He is definitely preferring a situation where he holds on to share in the club - which combined with the money being asked, is simply not realistic.
And still looking for funding on the basis of his bonkers revenue projection.
I can’t even imagine how he’d position ‘investment’. Come and give me X for a loss making entity that I have no historical expertise or knowledge in, I’ll still have the overall say in how the club is run and if we get into the Premier league at some point then you may get a return. Crazy
Spot on. Who would want to invest when for practically the same money they could buy the club?
Comments
I also assume however the value of player registrations and sell on’s may well be less than previously.
I don’t think what he paid Southall is material to this. It’s much more about what he wants.
I knew I recognised him! He was in the players lounger after the game.
The sheer fact that he was at the game yesterday could be good news in atleast indicating that TS is inviting/welcoming football consultants to the Valley.
The advantage Bowyer had I guess is that RD had taken a complete back step re: running the club, he was literally looking to sell. TS is looking for ‘investment’ or an unreasonably high price for a club without owning anything of value. We’ve got another lunatic owner
The total first team wage bill that Bowyer had was huge. Garner's is very big. By league 1 standards.
At the same time the amount of money they had to spend on transfers and wages was very small, even by league 1 standards.