Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Sandgaard ownership discussion 2022-3 onwards (Meeting with CAST p138)

1…8990929495…170

Comments

  • DOUCHER
    DOUCHER Posts: 7,922
    swordfish said:
    Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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  
  • Uboat
    Uboat Posts: 12,208
    swordfish said:
    Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
    swordfish said:
    Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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. 
  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,757
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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.

  • DOUCHER
    DOUCHER Posts: 7,922
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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  
  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,757
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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.
  • DOUCHER
    DOUCHER Posts: 7,922
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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  
  • swordfish
    swordfish Posts: 4,238
    Uboat said:
    swordfish said:
    Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
    swordfish said:
    Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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. 
  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,757
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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.
  • KBslittlesis
    KBslittlesis Posts: 8,669
    And it’s all meaningless if both the owner of the club & the land don’t want to sell.
    Which appears to be the case currently 🤷‍♀️
  • bolloxbolder
    bolloxbolder Posts: 7,986
    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.

  • Sponsored links:



  • JamesSeed
    JamesSeed Posts: 17,394
    edited October 2022
    Clarky said:
    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). 
  • JamesSeed
    JamesSeed Posts: 17,394
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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. 
  • AndyG
    AndyG Posts: 5,938
    What is beyond any doubt is................................... Being a CAFC fan is bloody exhusting !!!!!
  • lolwray
    lolwray Posts: 4,918
    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 😁
  • SomervilleAddick
    SomervilleAddick Posts: 3,582
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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, 
  • Clarky
    Clarky Posts: 582
    AndyG said:
    What is beyond any doubt is................................... Being a CAFC fan is bloody exhusting !!!!!
    Absolutely, just think what other clubs are saying on their forums:-
    * Our entertaining football, goals and clean sheets are putting bums on seats
    * We won't break even but cheap tickets are certainly helping to fill our stadium
    * Who is our owner again, don't hear much from him
    * The CEO is doing a fantastic job
    * That striker we got on deadline day looks capable of 20+ goals this season
    * Another unchanged team, we are so lucky with injuries
    * The catering staff do a brilliant job, no queues and another correct order, too many chips though
    * Didn't know what to buy in our fully stocked club merchandise shop today
  • Stu_of_Kunming
    Stu_of_Kunming Posts: 17,127
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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  
    He can and regularly does. 
  • Fanny Fanackapan
    Fanny Fanackapan Posts: 18,768
    KBslittlesis said:
    And it’s all meaningless if both the owner of the club & the land don’t want to sell.
    Which appears to be the case currently 🤷‍♀️
    Any particular reason/inside info why you think TS doesn't want to sell ?
  • Stu_of_Kunming
    Stu_of_Kunming Posts: 17,127
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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. 
  • SID
    SID Posts: 266
    Stu_of_Kunming said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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?

  • Sponsored links:



  • msomerton
    msomerton Posts: 2,999
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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.
  • J BLOCK
    J BLOCK Posts: 8,325
    Airman Brown said:
    SomervilleAddick said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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. 
  • CAFCsayer
    CAFCsayer Posts: 10,252
    J BLOCK said:
    Airman Brown said:
    SomervilleAddick said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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
  • J BLOCK
    J BLOCK Posts: 8,325
    CAFCsayer said:
    J BLOCK said:
    Airman Brown said:
    SomervilleAddick said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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.
  • Bailey
    Bailey Posts: 3,286
    CAFCsayer said:
    J BLOCK said:
    Airman Brown said:
    SomervilleAddick said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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. 
  • Fanny Fanackapan
    Fanny Fanackapan Posts: 18,768
    CAFCsayer said:
    J BLOCK said:
    Airman Brown said:
    SomervilleAddick said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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.
  • swordfish
    swordfish Posts: 4,238
    CAFCsayer said:
    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?  
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 70,014
    Airman Brown said:
    SomervilleAddick said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    Airman Brown said:
    DOUCHER said:
    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.

Categories

“Marketplace”