The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
What the fcuk are you on about?
I understood it to mean that we're sometimes linked with seriously loaded buyers, often when things have started to unravel under previous owners, but it never comes to pass for whatever reason, so we shouldn't kid ourselves it might anytime soon. I'll call it, 'playing the Barclay card', whether that's fair on him or not, which I don't believe it is, but I can see where @DOUCHER is coming from and I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not getting involved in apportioning any blame for it though. It's just frustrating.
thankyou - doesn't take a lot to work out unless you don't want to
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
What the fcuk are you on about?
I understood it to mean that we're sometimes linked with seriously loaded buyers, often when things have started to unravel under previous owners, but it never comes to pass for whatever reason, so we shouldn't kid ourselves it might anytime soon. I'll call it, 'playing the Barclay card', whether that's fair on him or not, which I don't believe it is, but I can see where @DOUCHER is coming from and I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not getting involved in apportioning any blame for it though. It's just frustrating.
I was particularly struck by the line "they and they're (sic) cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit". I'd love to know precisely what he means by that.
Edit: I mean, beyond the superficial, boohoo for not buying us. What "cheerleaders"?
He's probably sitting with his feet up having a cup of coffee and a small cake laughing at us trying to make sense of his post 😎
I’m not trying to make sense of it, because it’s obviously meaningless drivel.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
What the fcuk are you on about?
I understood it to mean that we're sometimes linked with seriously loaded buyers, often when things have started to unravel under previous owners, but it never comes to pass for whatever reason, so we shouldn't kid ourselves it might anytime soon. I'll call it, 'playing the Barclay card', whether that's fair on him or not, which I don't believe it is, but I can see where @DOUCHER is coming from and I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not getting involved in apportioning any blame for it though. It's just frustrating.
I was particularly struck by the line "they and they're (sic) cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit". I'd love to know precisely what he means by that.
Edit: I mean, beyond the superficial, boohoo for not buying us. What "cheerleaders"?
He's probably sitting with his feet up having a cup of coffee and a small cake laughing at us trying to make sense of his post 😎
I’m not trying to make sense of it, because it’s obviously meaningless drivel.
A bit harsh maybe? I think most of us are getting fed up being left thinking "Here's what you could have won" when it comes to our owners. When the interest of mega rich investors comes to nought, we're all left frustrated, although I won't try to defend the attempt to apportion blame for it because I don't know where it lies if not solely at RD's door.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.
We're in a right mess aren't we? So depressing. Shit team, shit management set up and no physical assets. Just a relegation scrap to look forward to. Still our xg stats are good I should imagine.
The problem with any serious buyer, wealthy or not is RD. The Aussies appeared serious contenders but Roland changed the goalposts at a crucial time and I think Barclay couldn't even gain an audience with Roland. Of those two it would appear the Aussies tried harder as they at least collected and wore their Charlton scarves before closing the door.
They were at the playoff finally thinking they had a deal. Roland moved the goalposts, as you said.
I don’t think they could have been any worse than ESI and Sandgaard. (Don’t know for sure of course).
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
Loans can be secured if you own the freeholds. Also, freeholds can increase in value, even if considered ‘unviable’ for development.
In the assumed knowledge that sandgaard would sell for a pound wouldn't it be an idea to buy the land from ol yellow teeth first and then cough up a pound to Tommy or even 2 if TS plays hardball 😁
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.
Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released,
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
Do you honestly believe any of these people were actually interested? serious billionaires, ready to blow cash and they can’t even get a meeting with RD, come on.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
Do you honestly believe any of these people were actually interested? serious billionaires, ready to blow cash and they can’t even get a meeting with RD, come on.
I’m not having a dig as I don’t know why there was no deal done apart from some saying that RD kept moving the goal posts. But why do you think they would pretend to be interested and then just walk away if a deal was possible?
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
but we can now add a further problem to the idea of developing the land into housing and commercial property, is the rising interest rates around the world and in particular this country. this will put a dampener on the housing market for some time in this country and falling consumer demand will dampen the commercial market.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
Do you honestly believe any of these people were actually interested? serious billionaires, ready to blow cash and they can’t even get a meeting with RD, come on.
Why do you imagine Andrew Barclay bothered to speak to Mark Kleinman, me and Peter Varney, then engage with Elliott and co, if he wasn't "actually interested"?
Do you not think he could entertain himself in other ways? That wasn't even his starting point. He'd tried and failed to get to Duchatelet already, which is why he sought help.
The Aussies had plenty of meetings and discussions over an 18-month period. When they matched Duchatelet's price, he increased it.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.
Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released,
I've been told that TS refused point blank to employ the number of academy staff specified in the regulations, so no matter what he did with buildings he was never going to succeed. This information came from a football source outside the club. I've no reason to think it isn't true, but I can't confirm it.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.
Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released,
I've been told that TS refused point blank to employ the number of academy staff specified in the regulations, so no matter what he did with buildings he was never going to succeed. This information came from a football source outside the club. I've no reason to think it isn't true, but I can't confirm it.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.
Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released,
I've been told that TS refused point blank to employ the number of academy staff specified in the regulations, so no matter what he did with buildings he was never going to succeed. This information came from a football source outside the club. I've no reason to think it isn't true, but I can't confirm it.
The man is an idiot.
I'm not sure I believe that one... why would you sink money into something and then knowingly break a rule that you know is going to make your investment a waste of time
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.
Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released,
I've been told that TS refused point blank to employ the number of academy staff specified in the regulations, so no matter what he did with buildings he was never going to succeed. This information came from a football source outside the club. I've no reason to think it isn't true, but I can't confirm it.
The man is an idiot.
I'm not sure I believe that one... why would you sink money into something and then knowingly break a rule that you know is going to make your investment a waste of time
I don't think Airman would post something without being certain. Based on TS's judgement calls so far, I have no reason to disbelieve it.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.
Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released,
I've been told that TS refused point blank to employ the number of academy staff specified in the regulations, so no matter what he did with buildings he was never going to succeed. This information came from a football source outside the club. I've no reason to think it isn't true, but I can't confirm it.
The man is an idiot.
I'm not sure I believe that one... why would you sink money into something and then knowingly break a rule that you know is going to make your investment a waste of time
What investment ? he doesn't own the training ground, unless he struck up some deal with Dutchatelet where he shares the cost to finish the site and Roland gets a cut of player sales.
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.
Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released,
I've been told that TS refused point blank to employ the number of academy staff specified in the regulations, so no matter what he did with buildings he was never going to succeed. This information came from a football source outside the club. I've no reason to think it isn't true, but I can't confirm it.
The man is an idiot.
I'm not sure I believe that one... why would you sink money into something and then knowingly break a rule that you know is going to make your investment a waste of time
Because, as with just about EVERYTHING he's done at our club since he came here has been done HIS way. He clearly thinks he can get around anything , despite it being set in stone, because he is who he is..... rather wealthy Rocker !
There are too many instances to list here where he's refused to listen to the advice from those with experience ...and is paying the price now, lol.
I'm not sure I believe that one... why would you sink money into something and then knowingly break a rule that you know is going to make your investment a waste of time
Surely any improvements that have been made aren't a waste of time and money. Does anyone know what those actually using the Academy think of how the money's been spent and isn't that important too?
The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics - great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit
The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.
well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument
Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.
agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners
For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.
the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club
The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.
Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released,
I've been told that TS refused point blank to employ the number of academy staff specified in the regulations, so no matter what he did with buildings he was never going to succeed. This information came from a football source outside the club. I've no reason to think it isn't true, but I can't confirm it.
Cat 1 does require extra coaches. Which makes sense really, that the extra level is as much about the coaching the players can get as much as the bricks and mortar.
Yes it would be nice to have, but Cat 1 is a massive financial burden in L1.
Comments
Which appears to be the case currently 🤷♀️
* Our entertaining football, goals and clean sheets are putting bums on seats
Do you not think he could entertain himself in other ways? That wasn't even his starting point. He'd tried and failed to get to Duchatelet already, which is why he sought help.
The Aussies had plenty of meetings and discussions over an 18-month period. When they matched Duchatelet's price, he increased it.
There are too many instances to list here where he's refused to listen to the advice from those with experience ...and is paying the price now, lol.
Yes it would be nice to have, but Cat 1 is a massive financial burden in L1.