Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Sandgaard ownership discussion 2022-3 onwards (Meeting with CAST p138)
Comments
-
Lets not make out that if TS didn't step in, we would have just refreshed the computer after a nice dose of admin and be in a strong position now. @swordfish has highlighted this well.2
-
Ah well that’s him off then…Pavoren007 said:
I think Gallen is probably doing just as good a job, it’s more optics and perceptions playing their part here and a simple fact, the budget is all of a sudden looking leaner.Athletico Charlton said:
I am not sure it is snide to say that Gallens only successful (in monetary terms) signing has been Bonne. Can you name others?soverncomfort said:
I'm seeing a lot of snide comments and criticisms of Gallen. Tbf I thought he was doing really well by us in the RD days. It's only sine Sandgaard has come in and changed the way recruitment is done that he has been less successful. Others with more inside knowledge may have differet views but this is my view from the outside looking in.Athletico Charlton said:Airman Brown said:
That he’s looking around. Wouldn’t have put it out there on its own as it’s just gossip, but it came from elsewhere.FAVADDICK said:So what have you heard about gallen rick ???
I am undecided about Gallen and how good he is but when his only real successful (in monetary terms) acquisition /trading is Macaulay Bonne after, what, 4-5 years at the club I doubt he will have a huge list of employers prepared to pay him well.
On the other hand, him leaving would leave TS and MS in charge of recruitment and you can forget anything happening in January.
Of course he has had to deal with a whole range of poor owners and skint budgets but I just don't think his record is stand out enough to jump much up the ladder.Some outgoing players like Davison and Burstow attracted pretty decent money apparently (I know more on the former than latter) while his selling skills are continuing to do their job, we beat off stiff competition including clubs in the Champ for McGrandles, for example.The man comes across highly professionally, is articulate and appears to work his b*ll*cks off. I fear he is a flight risk and will be a real loss for us if the break even noises land at his door. Hopefully his value is recognised and respected. You get what you pay for after all…0 -
Thanks for that, but I seem to be fighting a losing battle arguing against Administration now that things have turned sour under Thomas. I find the rose tinted view of it a hard one to accept, those confident we'd have been better off believing that the guaranteed negatives are outweighed by the potential positives, not a view I share as many Clubs suffer relegation soon after with the process usually taking months to resolve.mendonca said:Lets not make out that if TS didn't step in, we would have just refreshed the computer after a nice dose of admin and be in a strong position now. @swordfish has highlighted this well.
We'll never know what would have transpired on the field under those circumstances, and the same fate might have befallen us, seeing us drop into L2.
Those chosing to now believe Thomas didn't save the Club are assuming that, by saving us from going into Administration at least if they believe he did that, he's ended up causing us harm, albeit unintentionally. I remain grateful for his intervention when Administration was looming though.12 -
I think people see clubs going into administration and then a season or two later they are flying high with a bright future. Clean slate and fresh start and all that.
But we are talking Charlton here and you just know that if we ever went into admin we would never recover.3 -
Some people either have short memories or rose tinted glasses as you say mate.swordfish said:
Thanks for that, but I seem to be fighting a losing battle arguing against Administration now that things have turned sour under Thomas. I find the rose tinted view of it a hard one to accept, those confident we'd have been better off believing that the guaranteed negatives are outweighed by the potential positives, not a view I share as many Clubs suffer relegation soon after with the process usually taking months to resolve.mendonca said:Lets not make out that if TS didn't step in, we would have just refreshed the computer after a nice dose of admin and be in a strong position now. @swordfish has highlighted this well.
We'll never know what would have transpired on the field under those circumstances, and the same fate might have befallen us, seeing us drop into L2.
Those chosing to now believe Thomas didn't save the Club are assuming that, by saving us from going into Administration at least if they believe he did that, he's ended up causing us harm, albeit unintentionally. I remain grateful for his intervention when Administration was looming though.
Yes things are not in a good place right now but the fact remains in my view the bloke stepped in and saved the club when nobody else was going to. That is imo 100% fact and one that we should be grateful for even if it all turns Pete Tong. How anyone can think that Admin would have been a better route is deluded.
I'm now of the view that TS will be forced in the end to give up and sell the club as with the best will in the world he isnt going to be able to get to a position where things are "sustainable" as he puts it. My hope is that when he does we are not thrown back to the Bassini's of this world which is the more likely scenario than finding a Billionaire9 -
JamesSeed said:
If only there was a way of encouraging him to sell.vff said:
I see what you mean, but Duchatelet holds the assets. He achieved his aim. RD would happily see the club go under. Charlton will not prosper with Duchatelet in the background.carly burn said:
He didn't save the club. He saved Duchatelet.vff said:Duchatelet over pricing of Valley & Sparrows Lane assts is still the major problem. It’s preventing Charlton from getting decent owners.Duchatelet divided the club from the assets & used crooks / chumps & charlatans to achieve that. Sandgaard was likely the best owner in the circumstances, that Charlton could have realistically received at that moment.Sandgaard saved the club but misunderstood the level of investment required even to get out of league one. A decent person but got carried away & overpromised & under delivered.It’s delusional to fill the Valley on a squad that doesn’t have the depth to sustain a realistic promotion push & a seemingly amateurish & cost cutting approaches off field that ignores decent friendly & local advice.Evidence is that he will sell off the decent youngsters to balance the losses in a not too disimilar way to Duchatelet. Doing that in League one, gets a lower return, and dismays the supporters. A football team needs to drive forward and if it doesn't have the ambition or realistic chance of promotion, then many supporters are not going to bother.Its a real pity that Cat 1 status didn't happen as this appears crucial to Sandgaards strategy. Not sure why it failed this year, surely it can be addressed ? Garner appears a good manager and I like his honesty in interviews. The football is better and it is a real pity that the squad is left light againIts a worry as to what happens to the club, when Sandgaard realises that a League One club is an expensive thing & is not getting adulation for sustaining it. We have that spectre of Duchatelet in the background, who would happily realise any profits from sale of the Valley and Sparrows Lane to claw back some of the money he misspent / wasted whilst owner. Duchatelet has put his own interests ahead of Charlton throughout his involvement.Its worrying times. The only hope is that the difficulties of the Academy getting Cat 1 status are resolved. The only hope that Sandgaard acknowledges reality and tries to get some significant other investor in but who that might be with Duchatelet holding the assets, is totally unclear.
The Valley will be flooded in less than 10 years - who would buy that? It's not something I wish for, but I'd love to see RD's face when he realises he's held on too long and now owns the Atlantis Stadium, a shipping hazard
8 -
He will be pretty happy he has managed to live that long!IdleHans said:JamesSeed said:
If only there was a way of encouraging him to sell.vff said:
I see what you mean, but Duchatelet holds the assets. He achieved his aim. RD would happily see the club go under. Charlton will not prosper with Duchatelet in the background.carly burn said:
He didn't save the club. He saved Duchatelet.vff said:Duchatelet over pricing of Valley & Sparrows Lane assts is still the major problem. It’s preventing Charlton from getting decent owners.Duchatelet divided the club from the assets & used crooks / chumps & charlatans to achieve that. Sandgaard was likely the best owner in the circumstances, that Charlton could have realistically received at that moment.Sandgaard saved the club but misunderstood the level of investment required even to get out of league one. A decent person but got carried away & overpromised & under delivered.It’s delusional to fill the Valley on a squad that doesn’t have the depth to sustain a realistic promotion push & a seemingly amateurish & cost cutting approaches off field that ignores decent friendly & local advice.Evidence is that he will sell off the decent youngsters to balance the losses in a not too disimilar way to Duchatelet. Doing that in League one, gets a lower return, and dismays the supporters. A football team needs to drive forward and if it doesn't have the ambition or realistic chance of promotion, then many supporters are not going to bother.Its a real pity that Cat 1 status didn't happen as this appears crucial to Sandgaards strategy. Not sure why it failed this year, surely it can be addressed ? Garner appears a good manager and I like his honesty in interviews. The football is better and it is a real pity that the squad is left light againIts a worry as to what happens to the club, when Sandgaard realises that a League One club is an expensive thing & is not getting adulation for sustaining it. We have that spectre of Duchatelet in the background, who would happily realise any profits from sale of the Valley and Sparrows Lane to claw back some of the money he misspent / wasted whilst owner. Duchatelet has put his own interests ahead of Charlton throughout his involvement.Its worrying times. The only hope is that the difficulties of the Academy getting Cat 1 status are resolved. The only hope that Sandgaard acknowledges reality and tries to get some significant other investor in but who that might be with Duchatelet holding the assets, is totally unclear.
The Valley will be flooded in less than 10 years - who would buy that? It's not something I wish for, but I'd love to see RD's face when he realises he's held on too long and now owns the Atlantis Stadium, a shipping hazard4 -
Maybe some ads in his local papers pointing out how he’s still squeezing the life out of the club by separating it from its spiritual home? He doesn’t like to be embarrassed, does he!1
-
40 -
You can get to Wembley from Hastings on Oyster?9goalswentpastperry said:
If Wembley was actually in Newcastle not London what do we think the split of fans would have been ? We have the rather large advantage of getting to Wembley on an Oyster card.swordfish7 said:
Sunderland fans, and lots of them. No empty seats, so I wouldn't disagree on that, but it didn't feel to me like it was 50/50 at the time if you're telling me the allocation was equal. Just my impression, so I may be mistaken.soapboxsam said:swordfish said:
If that was 50/50 I'm a Dutchman's Uncle!soapboxsam said:The Super clive final when the best ever bona fide hat trick was scored at Wembley, Sunderland had many fans in the Charlton Allocation. Some were removed early doors.
Millwall fan has explained that the off one relation or mate will turn up for the clubs who don't get to Wembley too often.
Wasn't it more 50/50 in the BFG winning goal final and last time I checked we are a tad nearer than Sunderland to the Stadium.
They had had a Shocking run of losing at Wembley which they only overcame last season when there were plenty of Wearsiders in London for a couple of days over the bank holiday.
Who was in the Sunderland end if not Sunderland fans. I can't remember thinking there was empty seats ?
1 - Sponsored links:
-
Time’s up imo. Unless he wants to spend more money, which I don’t think he does, on better players, we’re at the beginning of the end imo. The current squad aren’t going to be or around the top 6 come Jan, and if anything our windows will be more about holding onto players rather than getting better quality in to push on. It’s painfully evident the work needed based on where we finished and the gap to get to the top 6 has had a few plasters thrown on it, not the surgery required.13
-
Garnerball was looking promising after the Plymouth game but since then everything has fallen apart and our players are being shown up as just not good enough. Or, is it the coaching that is being shown up as just not good enough! So much for needing 2 more windows to make us promotion challengers. Looks to me like Garner is starting to run out of ideas. The wheels may very well be coming off the bus and it’s all down to penny pinching by our owner. That’s how I see it anyway. Not good times to be a Charlton fan. We are well and truly going backwards. Who fancies L2 next year? That’s where we could well be heading.5
-
We won't go down but we have absolutely no chance of going up - Sandgaard and his penny-pinching has made sure of that.Rob said:Garnerball was looking promising after the Plymouth game but since then everything has fallen apart and our players are being shown up as just not good enough. Or, is it the coaching that is being shown up as just not good enough! So much for needing 2 more windows to make us promotion challengers. Looks to me like Garner is starting to run out of ideas. The wheels may very well be coming off the bus and it’s all down to penny pinching by our owner. That’s how I see it anyway. Not good times to be a Charlton fan. We are well and truly going backwards. Who fancies L2 next year? That’s where we could well be heading.
Garner's possession football is good in principal but you have to move the ball quickly and players have to show for the ball. The passing is so slow that sometimes you think that it won't reach the recipient. Other times it is pinged at such a pace that there is no chance of controlling the ball.
Another season of mediocrity is under way.
It looks like Sandgaard will have to really cut those costs further to achieve his break-even plans because he certainly will not be increasing revenue, unless, of course, he sells every promising youngster.4 -
We can’t he’s a palace playersuperclive98 said:
We won't go down but we have absolutely no chance of going up - Sandgaard and his penny-pinching has made sure of that.Rob said:Garnerball was looking promising after the Plymouth game but since then everything has fallen apart and our players are being shown up as just not good enough. Or, is it the coaching that is being shown up as just not good enough! So much for needing 2 more windows to make us promotion challengers. Looks to me like Garner is starting to run out of ideas. The wheels may very well be coming off the bus and it’s all down to penny pinching by our owner. That’s how I see it anyway. Not good times to be a Charlton fan. We are well and truly going backwards. Who fancies L2 next year? That’s where we could well be heading.
Garner's possession football is good in principal but you have to move the ball quickly and players have to show for the ball. The passing is so slow that sometimes you think that it won't reach the recipient. Other times it is pinged at such a pace that there is no chance of controlling the ball.
Another season of mediocrity is under way.
It looks like Sandgaard will have to really cut those costs further to achieve his break-even plans because he certainly will not be increasing revenue, unless, of course, he sells every promising youngster.11 -
Done with TS, convinced we will never be more than a mid table team under him. Pray that he has enough of losing money and sells up.Sick of being bang average.3
-
He’s not losing any money, it’s all a loan. We will end up in administration2
-
Isn’t he more likely to sell so he gets some of his money back? He won’t get it all back unless he gets lucky with a few big sales and someone making up the rest with their offer for the club.robroy said:He’s not losing any money, it’s all a loan. We will end up in administration
1 -
Watching the Wrexham doc at the moment and there’s an episode that talks about their dodgy owner from the past. He separated the Racecourse from the club in a bid to kill it off and sell the land for development.
Sounded worryingly familiar.
Roland hasn’t gone anywhere has he? Just biding his time.
6 -
I can't see how we are worth more than £1. No ground assets and the rest loses money as a guarantee at around £8m a season at this level. We are shrinking as a club of our size can't stay in this league and not do so. We need to climb up the leagues but with this owner, even if he spent money, which he did initially, he is an idiot. I take no joy in pointing it out, I just take off the rose tinted specs and it is there, sadly, for all to see.Scoham said:
Isn’t he more likely to sell so he gets some of his money back? He won’t get it all back unless he gets lucky with a few big sales and someone making up the rest with their offer for the club.robroy said:He’s not losing any money, it’s all a loan. We will end up in administration15 - Sponsored links:
-
Someone with money and a plan might see it differently. That’s not to say they’ll have enough money or a good plan, or even good intentions.MuttleyCAFC said:
I can't see how we are worth more than £1. No ground assets and the rest loses money as a guarantee at around £8m a season at this level. We are shrinking as a club of our size can't stay in this league and not do so. We need to climb up the leagues but with this owner, even if he spent money, which he did initially, he is an idiot. I take no joy in pointing it out, I just take off the rose tinted specs and it is there, sadly, for all to see.Scoham said:
Isn’t he more likely to sell so he gets some of his money back? He won’t get it all back unless he gets lucky with a few big sales and someone making up the rest with their offer for the club.robroy said:He’s not losing any money, it’s all a loan. We will end up in administration1 -
He’s got nothing to sell. He doesn’t own anything except “the football club” which is bang in debt. Even if he sold off the entire academy squad at a million quid a man (nurse, nurse!!!!!!!) he wouldn’t get back what he’s lost so far. He could only sell to a deluded egocentric with more money than sense who knows fuck all about running a football club. Lightning striking twice and all that……Scoham said:
Isn’t he more likely to sell so he gets some of his money back? He won’t get it all back unless he gets lucky with a few big sales and someone making up the rest with their offer for the club.robroy said:He’s not losing any money, it’s all a loan. We will end up in administration2 -
Yes, I am not saying we can't be successful. I am saying that Sandgaard shouldn't expect any money for us and the person who takes us over needs not to be an egotistical fool who thinks he knows better than everybody else. He might do when it comes to medical equipment but my dog would make better football decisions and that includes when he was spending money. I was questioning his decisions then too.Scoham said:
Someone with money and a plan might see it differently. That’s not to say they’ll have enough money or a good plan, or even good intentions.MuttleyCAFC said:
I can't see how we are worth more than £1. No ground assets and the rest loses money as a guarantee at around £8m a season at this level. We are shrinking as a club of our size can't stay in this league and not do so. We need to climb up the leagues but with this owner, even if he spent money, which he did initially, he is an idiot. I take no joy in pointing it out, I just take off the rose tinted specs and it is there, sadly, for all to see.Scoham said:
Isn’t he more likely to sell so he gets some of his money back? He won’t get it all back unless he gets lucky with a few big sales and someone making up the rest with their offer for the club.robroy said:He’s not losing any money, it’s all a loan. We will end up in administration
It is quite simple when you own a football club. Get the right manager in and back him. Don't tell him how to play, just back him. And if he isn't the right manager sack him and try again.3 -
I'm just wondering in a sale situation, what price would TS even want given he owns very little?0
-
I can’t imagine anyone sensible/honest/not oil money rich would now pay anything for the club alone. Possibly a deal whereby they assume the debt, but even then I wouldn’t do it if it was my money.MarcusH26 said:I'm just wondering in a sale situation, what price would TS even want given he owns very little?0 -
se9addick said:
I can’t imagine anyone sensible/honest/not oil money rich would now pay anything for the club alone. Possibly a deal whereby they assume the debt, but even then I wouldn’t do it if it was my money.MarcusH26 said:I'm just wondering in a sale situation, what price would TS even want given he owns very little?
That's what I was thinking, no one would want to assume the debt and the club in effect changes hands for a nominal amount.0 -
Yep which opens the door for more chancers to come in and have their five minutes of fame and then sod off again leaving us no better off than beforeMarcusH26 said:se9addick said:
I can’t imagine anyone sensible/honest/not oil money rich would now pay anything for the club alone. Possibly a deal whereby they assume the debt, but even then I wouldn’t do it if it was my money.MarcusH26 said:I'm just wondering in a sale situation, what price would TS even want given he owns very little?
That's what I was thinking, no one would want to assume the debt and the club in effect changes hands for a nominal amount.7 -
But whoever 'buys'. And I use the term loosely, will probably end up in the same situation as Sandgaard pretty quickly.MarcusH26 said:se9addick said:
I can’t imagine anyone sensible/honest/not oil money rich would now pay anything for the club alone. Possibly a deal whereby they assume the debt, but even then I wouldn’t do it if it was my money.MarcusH26 said:I'm just wondering in a sale situation, what price would TS even want given he owns very little?
That's what I was thinking, no one would want to assume the debt and the club in effect changes hands for a nominal amount.
There may be some out there with serious capital to move us forward, but having to deal with Duchatelet would be a major sticking point imo.3 -
Although I do not own the club, I have been suggesting from day one a model which is about trying to find a manager on the cheap from within and if that does not pay off, ensure they are easy to sack and try somebody else from within. I wouldn't tell them how to play, just get us up and I would back them as best I could within reason. Unless I had shedloads of cash to throw at it, that is how you do it.
Sandgaard came in full of bluster, promised to blow the league away and brought in an expensive experienced manager who was told how to play. Ok, if you are going to keep funding that model but already we have seen this season that Sandgaard isn't. He decided how he wanted us to play, brought in a manager and didn't back him.
We got rid of a lot of dead wood in the Summer and it was a chance to focus on continuous improvement. Not tear up the blueprint and start again. If Jacko was decided not to be the man, Euell should have been given a chance. Give them a chance and sack them until you get the right one. Garner has shown potential but he has been told how to play and hasn't been properly backed and that is pretty shite for him.
Hearing Sandgaard in the summer filled me with fear, talking about the success we would gain from playing a specific game when really we needed to evolve based on what we had. Moving from how Sandgaard wanted us to play from where we were was always going to cost more money and the idiot seems intent on drastically cutting the budget.1
