Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Sandgaard ownership discussion 2022-3 onwards (Meeting with CAST p138)
Comments
-
He can't come out and announce who he is incase of repurcussions.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
I care. I don't take shit at face value in case it is some attention seeking mug, but you crack onDazzler21 said:
Who cares who, fact is he is confirming a lot of the stuff suggested last season and this.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Who is Rui Pinto and how would he know about a conversation with junior staff?
2 -
I get that, but has anybody verified he is genuine and not just an attention seeker?Dazzler21 said:
He can't come out and announce who he is incase of repurcussions.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
I care. I don't take shit at face value in case it is some attention seeking mug, but you crack onDazzler21 said:
Who cares who, fact is he is confirming a lot of the stuff suggested last season and this.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Who is Rui Pinto and how would he know about a conversation with junior staff?
Maybe I missed it earlier in the thread, I was a tad drunk when I read it last night?3 -
Hold my beerSporadicAddick said:
Body language experts would have a field day with this!EugenesAxe said:
Particularly like this one, was taken at a CAST meeting (if ever there’s a time to don your guitar!) however his expression paints a thousand pictures!boggzy said:I actually hate the bloke more than Duchâtelet. At least the Belgian cretin didn't try to disguise his views, and what he was doing; or the fact that he was a clueless, egotistical twat.
Not half as egotistical as Sandgaard, mind you.
1. Bloke in the middle limes to play guitar a bit.
That concludes my analysis1 -
Accurately reflects conversations I’ve had with staff (multiple individuals). So unless you think there’s a conspiracy of employees against Sandgaard and his family I’d say the gist is reliable. Then there’s the number leaving.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
I get that, but has anybody verified he is genuine and not just an attention seeker?Dazzler21 said:
He can't come out and announce who he is incase of repurcussions.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
I care. I don't take shit at face value in case it is some attention seeking mug, but you crack onDazzler21 said:
Who cares who, fact is he is confirming a lot of the stuff suggested last season and this.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Who is Rui Pinto and how would he know about a conversation with junior staff?
Maybe I missed it earlier in the thread, I was a tad drunk when I read it last night?On the other side, of course, TS says he was a “bystander” on free tickets and the moon is made of blue cheese - well, one of those anyway.32 -
Doesn’t sound like you believe the talk elsewhere that TS is the obstacle to a sale?Airman Brown said:
I don't know about that but I am not sure that protesting gets us anywhere. The club will be sold if someone with big enough pockets wants to buy it and take Duchatelet out at the same time.msomerton said:The problem now is that for the fans to be seen to be protesting at the owner, which is at least the third time in 6 years 3 owners on the trot will not encourage anyone else to buy the club.
Protests wouldn't bring that forward unless people think Sandgaard is the obstacle to a sale.0 -
The biggest obstacle to a sale is the same thing it's been for years. The fact that almost every ounce of tangible value in this club sits with someone who has no desire or motivation to sell it for any less than the ludicrous value he has attached to it.
The moment the football club was uncoupled from its real estate was the moment that cemented just how screwed we are.
Sandgaard's noise, arrogance and mistreatment of staff and the club's culture are all regrettable but ultimately he didn't break us. Duchatelet did.
We are now only going to appeal to idiots, crooks or someone who is happy to burn a serious amount of cash either by buying out Duchatelet or pumping money into what is essentially an asset-less business trying to get us promoted which is the only viable way of increasing revenue.18 -
And Leo Rifkinds comments reflected the exact same philosophy of Sandgaard and he wholeheartedly agreed with the sentiment.Airman Brown said:
Accurately reflects conversations I’ve had with staff (multiple individuals). So unless you think there’s a conspiracy of employees against Sandgaard and his family I’d say the gist is reliable. Then there’s the number leaving.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
I get that, but has anybody verified he is genuine and not just an attention seeker?Dazzler21 said:
He can't come out and announce who he is incase of repurcussions.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
I care. I don't take shit at face value in case it is some attention seeking mug, but you crack onDazzler21 said:
Who cares who, fact is he is confirming a lot of the stuff suggested last season and this.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Who is Rui Pinto and how would he know about a conversation with junior staff?
Maybe I missed it earlier in the thread, I was a tad drunk when I read it last night?On the other side, of course, TS says he was a “bystander” on free tickets and the moon is made of blue cheese - well, one of those anyway.0 -
Okay thanks. Was aware of the general background, just not tghis guy and don't like taking things at face valueAirman Brown said:
Accurately reflects conversations I’ve had with staff (multiple individuals). So unless you think there’s a conspiracy of employees against Sandgaard and his family I’d say the gist is reliable. Then there’s the number leaving.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
I get that, but has anybody verified he is genuine and not just an attention seeker?Dazzler21 said:
He can't come out and announce who he is incase of repurcussions.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
I care. I don't take shit at face value in case it is some attention seeking mug, but you crack onDazzler21 said:
Who cares who, fact is he is confirming a lot of the stuff suggested last season and this.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Who is Rui Pinto and how would he know about a conversation with junior staff?
Maybe I missed it earlier in the thread, I was a tad drunk when I read it last night?On the other side, of course, TS says he was a “bystander” on free tickets and the moon is made of blue cheese - well, one of those anyway.1 -
Genuine question: Sandgaard doesn't actually own anything at the club and is (reportedly) losing £8m p.a, so what would stop him from just saying he doesn't want to play football owner anymore and simply walk away?0
-
Don’t suppose the person who won £171million on euromillions is a Charlton supporter? Begging bowl at the ready.2
-
Sponsored links:
-
tangoflash said:Genuine question: Sandgaard doesn't actually own anything at the club and is (reportedly) losing £8m p.a, so what would stop him from just saying he doesn't want to play football owner anymore and simply walk away?
Does Roland want roughly 50 million for the valley?
I personally believe, that if protests are to resume, then they should still be directed at Roland. He's not out of the club. He needs to be out, out.
Sandguard can't purchase the valley for a reasonable price. I believe the frustration of this has played a part in him behaving like a nob. Helped get the worst out of him.5 -
And the fact he is one probably.5
-
Problem is, TS can't commit to the financial investment needed on the field and off the field even if he could buy the valley for a reasonable price. We are going no where under his ownership.Dave2l said:tangoflash said:Genuine question: Sandgaard doesn't actually own anything at the club and is (reportedly) losing £8m p.a, so what would stop him from just saying he doesn't want to play football owner anymore and simply walk away?
Does Roland want roughly 50 million for the valley?
I personally believe, that if protests are to resume, then they should still be directed at Roland. He's not out of the club. He needs to be out, out.
Sandguard can't purchase the valley for a reasonable price. I believe the frustration of this has played a part in him behaving like a nob. Helped get the worst out of him.7 -
I've long since felt that we're completely screwed until Roland dies and then his kids hopefully negotiate on the price for our owner (whoever it may be at the time) to buy the Valley/Sparrows Lane.ISawLeaburnScore said:The biggest obstacle to a sale is the same thing it's been for years. The fact that almost every ounce of tangible value in this club sits with someone who has no desire or motivation to sell it for any less than the ludicrous value he has attached to it.
The moment the football club was uncoupled from its real estate was the moment that cemented just how screwed we are.
Sandgaard's noise, arrogance and mistreatment of staff and the club's culture are all regrettable but ultimately he didn't break us. Duchatelet did.
We are now only going to appeal to idiots, crooks or someone who is happy to burn a serious amount of cash either by buying out Duchatelet or pumping money into what is essentially an asset-less business trying to get us promoted which is the only viable way of increasing revenue.
4 -
He'd lose what he'd put in, is on the hook for any personal guarantees he's made to RD and potentially the ex-director loans.tangoflash said:Genuine question: Sandgaard doesn't actually own anything at the club and is (reportedly) losing £8m p.a, so what would stop him from just saying he doesn't want to play football owner anymore and simply walk away?0 -
I think his ownership will collapse of its own contradictions anyway.Scoham said:
Doesn’t sound like you believe the talk elsewhere that TS is the obstacle to a sale?Airman Brown said:
I don't know about that but I am not sure that protesting gets us anywhere. The club will be sold if someone with big enough pockets wants to buy it and take Duchatelet out at the same time.msomerton said:The problem now is that for the fans to be seen to be protesting at the owner, which is at least the third time in 6 years 3 owners on the trot will not encourage anyone else to buy the club.
Protests wouldn't bring that forward unless people think Sandgaard is the obstacle to a sale.15 -
I thought the lease removed all of the guarantees to RD.Airman Brown said:
He'd lose what he'd put in, is on the hook for any personal guarantees he's made to RD and potentially the ex-director loans.tangoflash said:Genuine question: Sandgaard doesn't actually own anything at the club and is (reportedly) losing £8m p.a, so what would stop him from just saying he doesn't want to play football owner anymore and simply walk away?
0 -
J BLOCK said:
Problem is, TS can't commit to the financial investment needed on the field and off the field even if he could buy the valley for a reasonable price. We are going no where under his ownership.Dave2l said:tangoflash said:Genuine question: Sandgaard doesn't actually own anything at the club and is (reportedly) losing £8m p.a, so what would stop him from just saying he doesn't want to play football owner anymore and simply walk away?
Does Roland want roughly 50 million for the valley?
I personally believe, that if protests are to resume, then they should still be directed at Roland. He's not out of the club. He needs to be out, out.
Sandguard can't purchase the valley for a reasonable price. I believe the frustration of this has played a part in him behaving like a nob. Helped get the worst out of him.
I don't want sandguard to own the valley. I'm not too fussed either way about that. Cross that road when we come to it.
I just don't want Roland to still have an attachment to the club. It is still the main problem in my opinion.
It is the long term stressor that still remains. Him owning the valley is stopping us from moving onwards and upwards.
We want and need Roland to sell the valley to new potential buyers.
Then, the new billionaires throw a quid on the floor by sandguards foot and say see ya mate, we'll take it from here.
2 -
as an outsider looking in with no inside knowledge at all and only able to assess based on what’s shared, my take (now) is that TS is a typical boss who has the attitude of ‘it’s my way or the highway’. That’s likely come from being successful elsewhere to date and the self confidence money has given him.Airman Brown said:
Accurately reflects conversations I’ve had with staff (multiple individuals). So unless you think there’s a conspiracy of employees against Sandgaard and his family I’d say the gist is reliable. Then there’s the number leaving.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
I get that, but has anybody verified he is genuine and not just an attention seeker?Dazzler21 said:
He can't come out and announce who he is incase of repurcussions.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
I care. I don't take shit at face value in case it is some attention seeking mug, but you crack onDazzler21 said:
Who cares who, fact is he is confirming a lot of the stuff suggested last season and this.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Who is Rui Pinto and how would he know about a conversation with junior staff?
Maybe I missed it earlier in the thread, I was a tad drunk when I read it last night?On the other side, of course, TS says he was a “bystander” on free tickets and the moon is made of blue cheese - well, one of those anyway.That doesn’t make him unique or particularly worse than many others. It does mean he isn’t a good boss though if he won’t learn from his mistakes.Seems he doesn’t like criticism and potentially why he called himself a ‘bystander’ in the ticket pricing strategy as he likely sees it as a weakness to hold his hand up.The way forward hinges on who can persuade him to modify his approach before the losses become too much. Maybe that’s his partner maybe it’s a staff member who he trusts or maybe it’s an external party.A buyer won’t come forward and offer to make good all he has spent if they believe he will lower his expectations as each month passes by. We are no more attractive to buy now or next year unless anyone thinks relegation is a real possibility.2 -
Put you on the spot here Airman, do you believe there is a very good chance we could end up in administration ?Airman Brown said:
I think his ownership will collapse of its own contradictions anyway.Scoham said:
Doesn’t sound like you believe the talk elsewhere that TS is the obstacle to a sale?Airman Brown said:
I don't know about that but I am not sure that protesting gets us anywhere. The club will be sold if someone with big enough pockets wants to buy it and take Duchatelet out at the same time.msomerton said:The problem now is that for the fans to be seen to be protesting at the owner, which is at least the third time in 6 years 3 owners on the trot will not encourage anyone else to buy the club.
Protests wouldn't bring that forward unless people think Sandgaard is the obstacle to a sale.
0 -
Sponsored links:
-
No chance in my opinion.Bailey said:
Put you on the spot here Airman, do you believe there is a very good chance we could end up in administration ?Airman Brown said:
I think his ownership will collapse of its own contradictions anyway.Scoham said:
Doesn’t sound like you believe the talk elsewhere that TS is the obstacle to a sale?Airman Brown said:
I don't know about that but I am not sure that protesting gets us anywhere. The club will be sold if someone with big enough pockets wants to buy it and take Duchatelet out at the same time.msomerton said:The problem now is that for the fans to be seen to be protesting at the owner, which is at least the third time in 6 years 3 owners on the trot will not encourage anyone else to buy the club.
Protests wouldn't bring that forward unless people think Sandgaard is the obstacle to a sale.
What will happen is that Sandgaard will at some point think bollox to all this it's not worth the effort.
The reality of how much we are worth will come crashing down upon him when he realises that any potential new owner will only take a chance if they can obtain the club for next to nothing.
He has absolutely no chance of getting his money back and that's down to him for being an arrogant knob.10 -
There isn't anything to administrate, more likely to be sold for £1 than go into administration IMO.Bailey said:
Put you on the spot here Airman, do you believe there is a very good chance we could end up in administration ?Airman Brown said:
I think his ownership will collapse of its own contradictions anyway.Scoham said:
Doesn’t sound like you believe the talk elsewhere that TS is the obstacle to a sale?Airman Brown said:
I don't know about that but I am not sure that protesting gets us anywhere. The club will be sold if someone with big enough pockets wants to buy it and take Duchatelet out at the same time.msomerton said:The problem now is that for the fans to be seen to be protesting at the owner, which is at least the third time in 6 years 3 owners on the trot will not encourage anyone else to buy the club.
Protests wouldn't bring that forward unless people think Sandgaard is the obstacle to a sale.0 -
How is that possible? Who would pick up the debt?Cafc43v3r said:
There isn't anything to administrate, more likely to be sold for £1 than go into administration IMO.Bailey said:
Put you on the spot here Airman, do you believe there is a very good chance we could end up in administration ?Airman Brown said:
I think his ownership will collapse of its own contradictions anyway.Scoham said:
Doesn’t sound like you believe the talk elsewhere that TS is the obstacle to a sale?Airman Brown said:
I don't know about that but I am not sure that protesting gets us anywhere. The club will be sold if someone with big enough pockets wants to buy it and take Duchatelet out at the same time.msomerton said:The problem now is that for the fans to be seen to be protesting at the owner, which is at least the third time in 6 years 3 owners on the trot will not encourage anyone else to buy the club.
Protests wouldn't bring that forward unless people think Sandgaard is the obstacle to a sale.0 -
The debt is surely Sandgaard's and he would have to write it off.se9addick said:
How is that possible? Who would pick up the debt?Cafc43v3r said:
There isn't anything to administrate, more likely to be sold for £1 than go into administration IMO.Bailey said:
Put you on the spot here Airman, do you believe there is a very good chance we could end up in administration ?Airman Brown said:
I think his ownership will collapse of its own contradictions anyway.Scoham said:
Doesn’t sound like you believe the talk elsewhere that TS is the obstacle to a sale?Airman Brown said:
I don't know about that but I am not sure that protesting gets us anywhere. The club will be sold if someone with big enough pockets wants to buy it and take Duchatelet out at the same time.msomerton said:The problem now is that for the fans to be seen to be protesting at the owner, which is at least the third time in 6 years 3 owners on the trot will not encourage anyone else to buy the club.
Protests wouldn't bring that forward unless people think Sandgaard is the obstacle to a sale.1 -
As each day goes by, this looks more and more like a strategic car crash on every level. Suspect the gamble rested upon us getting promoted last year or the year before and as that did not transpire, now it is a game of minimising losses and squeezing eyes very tightly each night. Oh, we’ve had to put up with some b*ll*cks across our history.5
-
That's how I see it. If he abandons ship he loses what he has put in, if he stays the debt continues to grow. Whatever he decides to do he will lose money as his only assets are a few youngsters who if sold the fees in would be far less than what has already been lost.Covered End said:
The debt is surely Sandgaard's and he would have to write it off.se9addick said:
How is that possible? Who would pick up the debt?Cafc43v3r said:
There isn't anything to administrate, more likely to be sold for £1 than go into administration IMO.Bailey said:
Put you on the spot here Airman, do you believe there is a very good chance we could end up in administration ?Airman Brown said:
I think his ownership will collapse of its own contradictions anyway.Scoham said:
Doesn’t sound like you believe the talk elsewhere that TS is the obstacle to a sale?Airman Brown said:
I don't know about that but I am not sure that protesting gets us anywhere. The club will be sold if someone with big enough pockets wants to buy it and take Duchatelet out at the same time.msomerton said:The problem now is that for the fans to be seen to be protesting at the owner, which is at least the third time in 6 years 3 owners on the trot will not encourage anyone else to buy the club.
Protests wouldn't bring that forward unless people think Sandgaard is the obstacle to a sale.0 -
But what is it he's selling? A loss making, capital draining pain in the arse. Do you really think he'll be looking to make a profit out of that?blackpool72 said:
No chance in my opinion.Bailey said:
Put you on the spot here Airman, do you believe there is a very good chance we could end up in administration ?Airman Brown said:
I think his ownership will collapse of its own contradictions anyway.Scoham said:
Doesn’t sound like you believe the talk elsewhere that TS is the obstacle to a sale?Airman Brown said:
I don't know about that but I am not sure that protesting gets us anywhere. The club will be sold if someone with big enough pockets wants to buy it and take Duchatelet out at the same time.msomerton said:The problem now is that for the fans to be seen to be protesting at the owner, which is at least the third time in 6 years 3 owners on the trot will not encourage anyone else to buy the club.
Protests wouldn't bring that forward unless people think Sandgaard is the obstacle to a sale.
What will happen is that Sandgaard will at some point think bollox to all this it's not worth the effort.
The reality of how much we are worth will come crashing down upon him when he realises that any potential new owner will only take a chance if they can obtain the club for next to nothing.
He has absolutely no chance of getting his money back and that's down to him for being an arrogant knob.
These things always get offloaded for next to nothing. He will just want to rid himself of the burden.
There are many that will probably want to get their hands on that molten hot potato . The problem is, most don't have a lot going on in between their ears, as our last few owners stand testament to.7 -
And we know that because if they did...carly burn said:
But what is it he's selling? A loss making, capital draining pain in the arse. Do you really think he'll be looking to make a profit out of that?blackpool72 said:
No chance in my opinion.Bailey said:
Put you on the spot here Airman, do you believe there is a very good chance we could end up in administration ?Airman Brown said:
I think his ownership will collapse of its own contradictions anyway.Scoham said:
Doesn’t sound like you believe the talk elsewhere that TS is the obstacle to a sale?Airman Brown said:
I don't know about that but I am not sure that protesting gets us anywhere. The club will be sold if someone with big enough pockets wants to buy it and take Duchatelet out at the same time.msomerton said:The problem now is that for the fans to be seen to be protesting at the owner, which is at least the third time in 6 years 3 owners on the trot will not encourage anyone else to buy the club.
Protests wouldn't bring that forward unless people think Sandgaard is the obstacle to a sale.
What will happen is that Sandgaard will at some point think bollox to all this it's not worth the effort.
The reality of how much we are worth will come crashing down upon him when he realises that any potential new owner will only take a chance if they can obtain the club for next to nothing.
He has absolutely no chance of getting his money back and that's down to him for being an arrogant knob.
These things always get offloaded for next to nothing. He will just want to rid himself of the burden.
There are many that will probably want to get their hands on that molten hot potato . The problem is, most don't have a lot going on in between their ears, as our last few owners stand testament to.0 -
I mean soooo many clowns every time we’ve been up for sale waffle the complete shit of we’re a good “investment” … London club , Premiership ground , good potential blah blah blah
utter fucking guff
we are a drain on anyone that owns us
A loss making business
as I’ve always said no sane person would want to own us
basically we need more than a miracle to get out of this rut of shitness14 -
You buying us then mate:)oohaahmortimer said:I mean soooo many clowns every time we’ve been up for sale waffle the complete shit of we’re a good “investment” … London club , Premiership ground , good potential blah blah blah
utter fucking guff
we are a drain on anyone that owns us
A loss making business
as I’ve always said no sane person would want to own us
basically we need more than a miracle to get out of this rut of shitness6
