Perhaps all this has been said already, but it seems to me that it is now easiest to just focus purely on the issue of money, rather than the various rumours about RD and his intermittent media spoutings.
He has made errors, but it seems pretty clear he is not prepared to pay for those errors. He has calculated how much £ he needs to recoup/is prepared to write off. In league 1 this was naturally a different figure than in the championship. Both prices were/are clearly too high for anyone who has been interested thus far.
I believe his strategy is now to perhaps try and run the club at break even /slight profit for as long as it takes to find a buyer at the price he wants. It may take him years, as he sits and waits for the club (like equity on a property) to increase in value over time. If relegation occurs then he will perhaps lower the price again to reflect this, but will feel confident he can continue to run the club at break even due to lower wage demands of players at league 1 level.
It is depressing, but then finance has ruined plenty of football clubs for some time. The difference here is that he is seemingly doing the opposite to the gambling of Bury or Bolton, and instead deciding to stop running the club at a loss. But this is perhaps not for any honourable Andy Holt style crusade of making football financially sound and preserving clubs at the centre of their community, but rather just to help pay for his past errors.
It is very frustrating. The club is on the crest of a wave and a little gamble could go a long way. But I can't see any change unless someone with lots of cash is prepared to pay him off or someone can influence him to give Bowyer a bit of extra funding.
The only way he can break even in L1 (other than selling players) is to embrace amateurism and staff the club with volunteers. He may go down encumbered with fewer contractual obligations than last time, but he loses about £7m in revenue immediately. He cannot cut the wage bill from circa £10m to £3m because he is already paying L1 wages.
What he's trying to do is square the circle by paying mid-L1 wages in the Championship. He will probably break even for one year, but it will only work for as long as he can keep the club in that division.
The only way as fans that we could possibly force the old scrote to sell would be a 100% boycott. We all know that for many reasons that will never happen. The feel Good factor following Wembley could have taken this club a long way with a decent owner. But Shitweasel has all but destroyed that single handed. To say I despise the prick is an understatement.
Just sell the club and FUCK OFF
Not digging at you but curious why a 100% boycott would force his hand? He's not been to a game for nearly 5 years?
I think if we had a 100% Boycott and games at the valley were played in front of an empty stadium,bar away support that the EFL would be forced to take some sort of action. Also the inconvenience of having a boycott talked about in the media both at home and in Belgium would cause a lot of embarrassment for Roland. It will never happen of course so I can't be 100%sure it would work.
The only way as fans that we could possibly force the old scrote to sell would be a 100% boycott. We all know that for many reasons that will never happen. The feel Good factor following Wembley could have taken this club a long way with a decent owner. But Shitweasel has all but destroyed that single handed. To say I despise the prick is an understatement.
Just sell the club and FUCK OFF
I don't think a full Boycott would work - I think that would only enhance his belief that fans are insignificant and allow him to demonstrate it - its the 'system' in place being wrong which he is more interested in. Embarrassing him in Belgium is the only way forward in my opinion and if the first couple of months of the season turns to absolute shite, I'm in
So would you be protesting about Roland owning the club or about the results? Genuinely intrested.
I know the ownership is reflected in the results by why would it take the season turning to shite to kick start it?
Because if it goes well, there's nothing to protest about - I don't care how shallow that looks to some on here, that's it - please don't come back about all the other stuff, I've heard it a million times and agree but that's it - I wouldn't even contemplate going to Belgium if things were going well.
The only way as fans that we could possibly force the old scrote to sell would be a 100% boycott. We all know that for many reasons that will never happen. The feel Good factor following Wembley could have taken this club a long way with a decent owner. But Shitweasel has all but destroyed that single handed. To say I despise the prick is an understatement.
Just sell the club and FUCK OFF
Not digging at you but curious why a 100% boycott would force his hand? He's not been to a game for nearly 5 years?
I think if we had a 100% Boycott and games at the valley were played in front of an empty stadium,bar away support that the EFL would be forced to take some sort of action. Also the inconvenience of having a boycott talked about in the media both at home and in Belgium would cause a lot of embarrassment for Roland. It will never happen of course so I can't be 100%sure it would work.
Why would the EFL have to take any action if there was a 100% boycott?
The only way as fans that we could possibly force the old scrote to sell would be a 100% boycott. We all know that for many reasons that will never happen. The feel Good factor following Wembley could have taken this club a long way with a decent owner. But Shitweasel has all but destroyed that single handed. To say I despise the prick is an understatement.
Just sell the club and FUCK OFF
Not digging at you but curious why a 100% boycott would force his hand? He's not been to a game for nearly 5 years?
I think if we had a 100% Boycott and games at the valley were played in front of an empty stadium,bar away support that the EFL would be forced to take some sort of action. Also the inconvenience of having a boycott talked about in the media both at home and in Belgium would cause a lot of embarrassment for Roland. It will never happen of course so I can't be 100%sure it would work.
As much as it’s great to discuss potential avenues to get at Roland, it’s not fair to leave Bowyer and the team to get battered every week in an empty stadium, especially after last season.
Perhaps all this has been said already, but it seems to me that it is now easiest to just focus purely on the issue of money, rather than the various rumours about RD and his intermittent media spoutings.
He has made errors, but it seems pretty clear he is not prepared to pay for those errors. He has calculated how much £ he needs to recoup/is prepared to write off. In league 1 this was naturally a different figure than in the championship. Both prices were/are clearly too high for anyone who has been interested thus far.
I believe his strategy is now to perhaps try and run the club at break even /slight profit for as long as it takes to find a buyer at the price he wants. It may take him years, as he sits and waits for the club (like equity on a property) to increase in value over time. If relegation occurs then he will perhaps lower the price again to reflect this, but will feel confident he can continue to run the club at break even due to lower wage demands of players at league 1 level.
It is depressing, but then finance has ruined plenty of football clubs for some time. The difference here is that he is seemingly doing the opposite to the gambling of Bury or Bolton, and instead deciding to stop running the club at a loss. But this is perhaps not for any honourable Andy Holt style crusade of making football financially sound and preserving clubs at the centre of their community, but rather just to help pay for his past errors.
It is very frustrating. The club is on the crest of a wave and a little gamble could go a long way. But I can't see any change unless someone with lots of cash is prepared to pay him off or someone can influence him to give Bowyer a bit of extra funding.
A very good summary and this was obvious to me a year ago. The Aussies didn't agree a deal and RD's response was to try and slash costs to reduce losses.
This season if he keeps the costs about the same, he can wipe out the annual loss with the @£7M extra revenue.
The problem with this strategy is that it always leads to relegation in a year or two. Then he will need to reduce costs in L1 by @£7M, in order to break even.
Meanwhile, if he's not losing money he chooses to sit tight, waiting for someone to come along, that are willing to pay a higher price.
PS unless I'm mistaken, AFKA did not say the protests hadn't been successful. He said they hadn't forced him to sell at a reasonable price and he is obviously correct.
Where we go from here I've no idea and I'm open to all options. I've protested in Belgium and am willing to consider going again, but no one knows whether this would hasten the sale, slow the sale down or do neither.
The only way as fans that we could possibly force the old scrote to sell would be a 100% boycott. We all know that for many reasons that will never happen. The feel Good factor following Wembley could have taken this club a long way with a decent owner. But Shitweasel has all but destroyed that single handed. To say I despise the prick is an understatement.
Just sell the club and FUCK OFF
Not digging at you but curious why a 100% boycott would force his hand? He's not been to a game for nearly 5 years?
I think if we had a 100% Boycott and games at the valley were played in front of an empty stadium,bar away support that the EFL would be forced to take some sort of action. Also the inconvenience of having a boycott talked about in the media both at home and in Belgium would cause a lot of embarrassment for Roland. It will never happen of course so I can't be 100%sure it would work.
As much as it’s great to discuss potential avenues to get at Roland, it’s not fair to leave Bowyer and the team to get battered every week in an empty stadium, especially after last season.
The above is what you wrote last night, @AFKABartram.
There is never "nothing" that anyone can do, about anything. Never ever. I'm really susprised to have to say to you of all people that the recent history of Charlton and its fans is the best evidence to support my statement.
kin ell.
I know what i wrote last night. I wrote it.
You tell me then what can be done to make him lower his demands?
What has been done so far, which has been unsuccessful in making him sell at a fair value / lower his demands has been:
- 50+ protests at home - 20+ protests in his own country - multiple game stoppages - massive security costs - 300+ marching through his town - picketing of his places of ownership and places of work - leafleting in his town - multiple flytipping of his property - graffeti of his properties - reduced income to the club - international press ridiculing his name - disruption to his local elections - harrassement to his key employees and their families - disruption at games of other clubs in his network - multiple interuption at STVV to his social engagements - disruption to his birthday celebrations with his family - hate mail / threats to his personal safety
basically, the kitchen sink has been thrown at it and not one of those things has been successful in forcing / encouraging him to lower his demands to a level his not comfortable with. If rumours are true, over the last couple of months he has allegedly increased his demands.
So what based on the above is so outlandish in my viewpoint that there is no evidence that protesting has been / will be successful in leading him to sell outside of a level that he in his own mind sees as him comfortable with (delivering faith in his own mind that he has not 'lost' during this experiment?)
Surely all that has happened over the last five years points to that, no?
The same arguments were made in the 1980s. Nothing can be done; no one is going to pay to resurrect The Valley; we’ve been protesting for five years and we’re still not back there, etc, etc. Then we won.
This is a different problem but we are a long way from where we were four years ago. Duchatelet is publicly exposed and ridiculed. We have a credible football management set-up. He has met and engaged with a whole series of buyers and spent large sums on professional fees.
The argument that nothing has been achieved because everything hasn’t yet been achieved doesn’t really stand up, any more than it did at Selhurst Park.
It's an entirely different scenario and cannot be compared to our move away from the Valley.
All the time protests cost Duchatelet money he adds it to the price, so please do tell me what will make the club more saleable if the protests continue to increase the price?
We got Roland to the point of listing the club for sale, continued actions will only cause a negative effect on the chances for him to sell.
I'm repeating myself but, the more the protests cost Duchatelet money it seems the higher the clubs price goes out of his spite towards us.
The financial cost of protests are a trivial issue compared to the operating losses, which are principally a function of players' wages. Duchatalet can add what he likes to his price, but as no one will ever pay it that won't help him.
But it doesn't help us either? It continues to delay our sale...
What is “it”, exactly? What are these protests that have cost the club money, unless you are talking about the right of supporters to keep their own money in their own pockets?
I believe he is the type to levy additional charges he incurs as a result of protests against the club.
I also believe he'd try to make back more money as a result of not liking the fan base. Why would he want to write off debts to the fans that have been pissing him off?
If I lent someone £100, I would want my £100 back more and more as they acted against me... I would be less inclined to say "'Ah well, it is what it is" despite that being a detrimental waste of my time.
Probably get a few lols for this and some raised eyebrows but I truly hate the support the team stuff now. At first I bought into it cause of the emotion of Wembley and our play off run but now after everything that's happened since I have no interest in the new season. I couldn't care less if we did a mass boycott and our players had to play in front of no fans, the future of our club is more important than what makes the likes of Bowyer or Lyle Taylor happy. Players and managers come and go, the club doesn't/we can't let it.
I've said it before that Bowyer is my favourite manager since Curbs but it gets to a point where that's not enough, if Bowyer was anyone else there would be outrage, asking us to fill stadiums etc when he knows the resent we have towards our owner, filling the stadium isn't going to win us games or make us play better, making it a ghost town on match days would have a bigger impact.
We have a worse team than league1 or at best on par, the feel good factor has well and truly passed and I've already told myself I won't be going to any games, including aways now. Roland needs to go, if that means losing all our current favourite players and manager then so be it, it's a no brainer. A mass boycott would definitely cause something, I don't know why it has been argued that it wouldn't in the past, even if it was for one game it would be a huge deal
The only way as fans that we could possibly force the old scrote to sell would be a 100% boycott. We all know that for many reasons that will never happen. The feel Good factor following Wembley could have taken this club a long way with a decent owner. But Shitweasel has all but destroyed that single handed. To say I despise the prick is an understatement.
Just sell the club and FUCK OFF
Not digging at you but curious why a 100% boycott would force his hand? He's not been to a game for nearly 5 years?
I think if we had a 100% Boycott and games at the valley were played in front of an empty stadium,bar away support that the EFL would be forced to take some sort of action. Also the inconvenience of having a boycott talked about in the media both at home and in Belgium would cause a lot of embarrassment for Roland. It will never happen of course so I can't be 100%sure it would work.
I don't see The EFL taking any action at all if we had a 100% boycott at home. They haven't done anything to date and not sure they could even if they wanted to.
I get what you're saying with the embarrassment but other home protests like the mock funeral, crisps have all caused him embarrassment too and he's still here. I feel we would just be repeating what we've done already just via a different approach.
So would you be protesting about Roland owning the club or about the results? Genuinely intrested. I know the ownership is reflected in the results by why would it take the season turning to shite to kick start it?
On the coach in France last weekend there were boycotters and ST holders, and casual attenders, but as far as I heard not a single Roland apologist. Everybody wants him out. However, it was noticeable that talk of actually doing something, such as protesting in Belgium, increased as the scores from the Villa match filtered through.
This does not surprise me. After 4 years we are suffering protest fatigue, and no longer have things like the string of inadequate managers or KM's latest nonsense to constantly motivate us.
So it takes a disappointing result on the field to reignite talk of action. And I suspect it may take a string of disappointing results before there is a critical mass of fans who are sufficiently riled up for something large-scale like the coffin march or the Unity march in Sint-Truiden to happen. This does not mean we are solely motivated by poor results - we're Charlton; we're used to that! - but it takes something like that to get a large number of fans simultaneously angry enough to take action, to "put their money where their mouths are".
In between there are still individuals who will come up with an idea which can be enacted by a small number, be it KM's "resignation", the LIAR bedsheet, leafleting his home town (where he is a major employer) about his failure to pay the bonuses at Charlton, or (perhaps?) the graffiti in S-T. All reminds RD we have not gone away, we are still opposed to his vision (or lack of it) for the club, and we will challenge his reputation whenever and wherever we can.
I agree with those who feel it is more productive to challenge his ego rather than his finances - although the additional policing costs of large protests at The Valley will surely make a mess of any plans he has to demonstrate his genius by breaking even in the Championship! There is also value in getting media publicity, because the football world has a short attention span, and it is all too easy for others to assume all is well at Charlton if we are not featuring anywhere other than in match reports.
So would you be protesting about Roland owning the club or about the results? Genuinely intrested. I know the ownership is reflected in the results by why would it take the season turning to shite to kick start it?
On the coach in France last weekend there were boycotters and ST holders, and casual attenders, but as far as I heard not a single Roland apologist.
Perhaps all this has been said already, but it seems to me that it is now easiest to just focus purely on the issue of money, rather than the various rumours about RD and his intermittent media spoutings.
He has made errors, but it seems pretty clear he is not prepared to pay for those errors. He has calculated how much £ he needs to recoup/is prepared to write off. In league 1 this was naturally a different figure than in the championship. Both prices were/are clearly too high for anyone who has been interested thus far.
I believe his strategy is now to perhaps try and run the club at break even /slight profit for as long as it takes to find a buyer at the price he wants. It may take him years, as he sits and waits for the club (like equity on a property) to increase in value over time. If relegation occurs then he will perhaps lower the price again to reflect this, but will feel confident he can continue to run the club at break even due to lower wage demands of players at league 1 level.
It is depressing, but then finance has ruined plenty of football clubs for some time. The difference here is that he is seemingly doing the opposite to the gambling of Bury or Bolton, and instead deciding to stop running the club at a loss. But this is perhaps not for any honourable Andy Holt style crusade of making football financially sound and preserving clubs at the centre of their community, but rather just to help pay for his past errors.
It is very frustrating. The club is on the crest of a wave and a little gamble could go a long way. But I can't see any change unless someone with lots of cash is prepared to pay him off or someone can influence him to give Bowyer a bit of extra funding.
A very good summary and this was obvious to me a year ago. The Aussies didn't agree a deal and RD's response was to try and slash costs to reduce losses.
This season if he keeps the costs about the same, he can wipe out the annual loss with the @£7M extra revenue.
The problem with this strategy is that it always leads to relegation in a year or two. Then he will need to reduce costs in L1 by @£7M, in order to break even.
Meanwhile, if he's not losing money he chooses to sit tight, waiting for someone to come along, that are willing to pay a higher price.
PS unless I'm mistaken, AFKA did not say the protests hadn't been successful. He said they hadn't forced him to sell at a reasonable price and he is obviously correct.
Where we go from here I've no idea and I'm open to all options. I've protested in Belgium and am willing to consider going again, but no one knows whether this would hasten the sale, slow the sale down or do neither.
Even more annoying is that if he had half a brain for football he could've made enough money from the Konsa/Lookman sell ons and also the Aribo deal (by offering him a decent contract last summer) to wipe out at least another 10m of losses, which could've made the asking price more reasonable and he'd have sold the club.
The above is what you wrote last night, @AFKABartram.
There is never "nothing" that anyone can do, about anything. Never ever. I'm really susprised to have to say to you of all people that the recent history of Charlton and its fans is the best evidence to support my statement.
kin ell.
I know what i wrote last night. I wrote it.
You tell me then what can be done to make him lower his demands?
What has been done so far, which has been unsuccessful in making him sell at a fair value / lower his demands has been:
- 50+ protests at home - 20+ protests in his own country - multiple game stoppages - massive security costs - 300+ marching through his town - picketing of his places of ownership and places of work - leafleting in his town - multiple flytipping of his property - graffeti of his properties - reduced income to the club - international press ridiculing his name - disruption to his local elections - harrassement to his key employees and their families - disruption at games of other clubs in his network - multiple interuption at STVV to his social engagements - disruption to his birthday celebrations with his family - hate mail / threats to his personal safety
basically, the kitchen sink has been thrown at it and not one of those things has been successful in forcing / encouraging him to lower his demands to a level his not comfortable with. If rumours are true, over the last couple of months he has allegedly increased his demands.
So what based on the above is so outlandish in my viewpoint that there is no evidence that protesting has been / will be successful in leading him to sell outside of a level that he in his own mind sees as him comfortable with (delivering faith in his own mind that he has not 'lost' during this experiment?)
Surely all that has happened over the last five years points to that, no?
The same arguments were made in the 1980s. Nothing can be done; no one is going to pay to resurrect The Valley; we’ve been protesting for five years and we’re still not back there, etc, etc. Then we won.
This is a different problem but we are a long way from where we were four years ago. Duchatelet is publicly exposed and ridiculed. We have a credible football management set-up. He has met and engaged with a whole series of buyers and spent large sums on professional fees.
The argument that nothing has been achieved because everything hasn’t yet been achieved doesn’t really stand up, any more than it did at Selhurst Park.
It's an entirely different scenario and cannot be compared to our move away from the Valley.
All the time protests cost Duchatelet money he adds it to the price, so please do tell me what will make the club more saleable if the protests continue to increase the price?
We got Roland to the point of listing the club for sale, continued actions will only cause a negative effect on the chances for him to sell.
I'm repeating myself but, the more the protests cost Duchatelet money it seems the higher the clubs price goes out of his spite towards us.
The financial cost of protests are a trivial issue compared to the operating losses, which are principally a function of players' wages. Duchatalet can add what he likes to his price, but as no one will ever pay it that won't help him.
But it doesn't help us either? It continues to delay our sale...
What is “it”, exactly? What are these protests that have cost the club money, unless you are talking about the right of supporters to keep their own money in their own pockets?
I believe he is the type to levy additional charges he incurs as a result of protests against the club.
I also believe he'd try to make back more money as a result of not liking the fan base. Why would he want to write off debts to the fans that have been pissing him off?
If I lent someone £100, I would want my £100 back more and more as they acted against me... I would be less inclined to say "'Ah well, it is what it is" despite that being a detrimental waste of my time.
Of course any costs in incurred by the club, due to protests, are added to the debt owed to RD, as they increase the operating costs of the club and the size of any loss. As for the analogy of wanting back money lent that's a bit wide of the mark. RD hasn't lent the fans any money he has wasted tens of millions of pounds of his own money because he doesn't have a clue as to how to run a football club. The fans haven't wasted that money, he has and the longer he holds out for what he considers a suitable buyer the more money he is going to "lend".
Probably get a few lols for this and some raised eyebrows but I truly hate the support the team stuff now. At first I bought into it cause of the emotion of Wembley and our play off run but now after everything that's happened since I have no interest in the new season. I couldn't care less if we did a mass boycott and our players had to play in front of no fans, the future of our club is more important than what makes the likes of Bowyer or Lyle Taylor happy. Players and managers come and go, the club doesn't/we can't let it.
I've said it before that Bowyer is my favourite manager since Curbs but it gets to a point where that's not enough, if Bowyer was anyone else there would be outrage, asking us to fill stadiums etc when he knows the resent we have towards our owner, filling the stadium isn't going to win us games or make us play better, making it a ghost town on match days would have a bigger impact.
We have a worse team than league1 or at best on par, the feel good factor has well and truly passed and I've already told myself I won't be going to any games, including aways now. Roland needs to go, if that means losing all our current favourite players and manager then so be it, it's a no brainer. A mass boycott would definitely cause something, I don't know why it has been argued that it wouldn't in the past, even if it was for one game it would be a huge deal
What would it cause apart from a bit of media coverage for a week (if we’re lucky), and then back to the status quo?
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but Roland really doesn’t care whether fans turn up or not, neither do the EFL.
If you feel like boycotting helps then by all means I support you in that decision, I just don’t think it makes much difference to the sale of the club.
Any protest or action needs to happen against his business interests. Doesn't matter how big or small, just drip, drip, drip over his personal and businesses reputations.
I do agree that trying to force Roland’s hand by fans applying financial pressure is unlikely to work because of Roland’s very deep pockets. I will continue to boycott because I refuse to hand any further money to him on a point of principle and because Roland has stated that supporters who attend games support him.
However I do think that he has an Achilles heel.
I haven’t been to St. Truiden for a couple of years but there was a giant screen on the street side of one of the stands that showed a loop of films featuring Roland acting as the benevolent dictator of the town. You could see him patting children’s heads or handing out prizes at football competitions etc. He clearly wants to be seen as the great leader beloved by all. When this illusion is shattered, for instance by the birthday protest, the embassy protest or the painting of obscenities on his or his family’s properties, he reacts. Slade gets sacked, the EFL is commanded to buy the club etc, etc.
Make the autistic bastard appear weak, stupid and touchable is the way forward. I wholeheartedly applaud the phantom painters of St. Truiden. Daub him into submission.
I do agree that trying to force Roland’s hand by fans applying financial pressure is unlikely to work because of Roland’s very deep pockets. I will continue to boycott because I refuse to hand any further money to him on a point of principle and because Roland has stated that supporters who attend games support him.
However I do think that he has an Achilles heel.
I haven’t been to St. Truiden for a couple of years but there was a giant screen on the street side of one of the stands that showed a loop of films featuring Roland acting as the benevolent dictator of the town. You could see him patting children’s heads or handing out prizes at football competitions etc. He clearly wants to be seen as the great leader beloved by all. When this illusion is shattered, for instance by the birthday protest, the embassy protest or the painting of obscenities on his or his family’s properties, he reacts. Slade gets sacked, The EFL is commanded to buy the club etc, etc.
Make the autistic bastard appear weak, stupid and touchable is the way forward. I wholeheartedly applaud the phantom painters of St. Truiden. Daub him into submission.
Reminds me, I keep forgetting to book myself Into a nice hotel in Belgium. Been meaning to book it all summer.
The above is what you wrote last night, @AFKABartram.
There is never "nothing" that anyone can do, about anything. Never ever. I'm really susprised to have to say to you of all people that the recent history of Charlton and its fans is the best evidence to support my statement.
kin ell.
I know what i wrote last night. I wrote it.
You tell me then what can be done to make him lower his demands?
What has been done so far, which has been unsuccessful in making him sell at a fair value / lower his demands has been:
- 50+ protests at home - 20+ protests in his own country - multiple game stoppages - massive security costs - 300+ marching through his town - picketing of his places of ownership and places of work - leafleting in his town - multiple flytipping of his property - graffeti of his properties - reduced income to the club - international press ridiculing his name - disruption to his local elections - harrassement to his key employees and their families - disruption at games of other clubs in his network - multiple interuption at STVV to his social engagements - disruption to his birthday celebrations with his family - hate mail / threats to his personal safety
basically, the kitchen sink has been thrown at it and not one of those things has been successful in forcing / encouraging him to lower his demands to a level his not comfortable with. If rumours are true, over the last couple of months he has allegedly increased his demands.
So what based on the above is so outlandish in my viewpoint that there is no evidence that protesting has been / will be successful in leading him to sell outside of a level that he in his own mind sees as him comfortable with (delivering faith in his own mind that he has not 'lost' during this experiment?)
Surely all that has happened over the last five years points to that, no?
The same arguments were made in the 1980s. Nothing can be done; no one is going to pay to resurrect The Valley; we’ve been protesting for five years and we’re still not back there, etc, etc. Then we won.
This is a different problem but we are a long way from where we were four years ago. Duchatelet is publicly exposed and ridiculed. We have a credible football management set-up. He has met and engaged with a whole series of buyers and spent large sums on professional fees.
The argument that nothing has been achieved because everything hasn’t yet been achieved doesn’t really stand up, any more than it did at Selhurst Park.
It's an entirely different scenario and cannot be compared to our move away from the Valley.
All the time protests cost Duchatelet money he adds it to the price, so please do tell me what will make the club more saleable if the protests continue to increase the price?
We got Roland to the point of listing the club for sale, continued actions will only cause a negative effect on the chances for him to sell.
I'm repeating myself but, the more the protests cost Duchatelet money it seems the higher the clubs price goes out of his spite towards us.
The financial cost of protests are a trivial issue compared to the operating losses, which are principally a function of players' wages. Duchatalet can add what he likes to his price, but as no one will ever pay it that won't help him.
But it doesn't help us either? It continues to delay our sale...
What is “it”, exactly? What are these protests that have cost the club money, unless you are talking about the right of supporters to keep their own money in their own pockets?
I believe he is the type to levy additional charges he incurs as a result of protests against the club.
I also believe he'd try to make back more money as a result of not liking the fan base. Why would he want to write off debts to the fans that have been pissing him off?
If I lent someone £100, I would want my £100 back more and more as they acted against me... I would be less inclined to say "'Ah well, it is what it is" despite that being a detrimental waste of my time.
Of course any costs in incurred by the club, due to protests, are added to the debt owed to RD, as they increase the operating costs of the club and the size of any loss. As for the analogy of wanting back money lent that's a bit wide of the mark. RD hasn't lent the fans any money he has wasted tens of millions of pounds of his own money because he doesn't have a clue as to how to run a football club. The fans haven't wasted that money, he has and the longer he holds out for what he considers a suitable buyer the more money he is going to "lend".
Of course you're right. You should never be willing to invest more than you are willing to lose. It seems he's trying to catch some of that lost money, which is moronic. He continues to gamble, however our club, the training ground and stadium are his bargaining chips, they say £25m on the lot but he sees £50m
I do agree that trying to force Roland’s hand by fans applying financial pressure is unlikely to work because of Roland’s very deep pockets. I will continue to boycott because I refuse to hand any further money to him on a point of principle and because Roland has stated that supporters who attend games support him.
However I do think that he has an Achilles heel.
I haven’t been to St. Truiden for a couple of years but there was a giant screen on the street side of one of the stands that showed a loop of films featuring Roland acting as the benevolent dictator of the town. You could see him patting children’s heads or handing out prizes at football competitions etc. He clearly wants to be seen as the great leader beloved by all. When this illusion is shattered, for instance by the birthday protest, the embassy protest or the painting of obscenities on his or his family’s properties, he reacts. Slade gets sacked, The EFL is commanded to buy the club etc, etc.
Make the autistic bastard appear weak, stupid and touchable is the way forward. I wholeheartedly applaud the phantom painters of St. Truiden. Daub him into submission.
Quality post. If the Belgie 20 have any ideas that need support perhaps we can get a team of those willing to participate to join the group.
In addition/alternatively, do they need money to help fund anything? Personally I don’t care what they do to upset him and would not want any conditions or accountability put on the funds for obvious reasons and I am happy to chip in.
Probably get a few lols for this and some raised eyebrows but I truly hate the support the team stuff now. At first I bought into it cause of the emotion of Wembley and our play off run but now after everything that's happened since I have no interest in the new season. I couldn't care less if we did a mass boycott and our players had to play in front of no fans, the future of our club is more important than what makes the likes of Bowyer or Lyle Taylor happy. Players and managers come and go, the club doesn't/we can't let it.
I've said it before that Bowyer is my favourite manager since Curbs but it gets to a point where that's not enough, if Bowyer was anyone else there would be outrage, asking us to fill stadiums etc when he knows the resent we have towards our owner, filling the stadium isn't going to win us games or make us play better, making it a ghost town on match days would have a bigger impact.
We have a worse team than league1 or at best on par, the feel good factor has well and truly passed and I've already told myself I won't be going to any games, including aways now. Roland needs to go, if that means losing all our current favourite players and manager then so be it, it's a no brainer. A mass boycott would definitely cause something, I don't know why it has been argued that it wouldn't in the past, even if it was for one game it would be a huge deal
What would it cause apart from a bit of media coverage for a week (if we’re lucky), and then back to the status quo?
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but Roland really doesn’t care whether fans turn up or not, neither do the EFL.
If you feel like boycotting helps then by all means I support you in that decision, I just don’t think it makes much difference to the sale of the club.
I just think it sends a better message than bringing numbers to games, more coverage, more questions. The main point is without sounding too horrible on the off chance any of our players read this post, we don't have players on par with a lot of championship sides, so us filling out away ends and singing all game isn't going to get us a win, if that was the case Leeds would be the best team in the world.
We don't have the players good enough to mount a challenge, we look like we are going to be relegated on paper, if we start the protests now people may be thinking 'they've been promoted and they're still unhappy, I wonder why' if we start losing and ramp up the protests we will be accused of only being angry when we lose. I think you would be staggered if you knew how many people don't know about our situation to this day who follow football. I have people say things to me like 'yeah you lot should stay up, now you're promoted you can spend a bit more and attract better players' and I find it so hard not to go on a massive rant. People don't get our situation and I think a big part of that is because of the part time protests. Not enough people know that's all I'm saying. What difference it makes who knows, but it would look a lot worse on Roland's part if we were winning or losing in an empty stadium rather than a third full one. That combined with visits to his home city would surely, eventually have an impact on the future of this club
And as for not making a difference to the club it's more a personal decision for me. Why should I waste my weekends spending money and travelling around when ultimately it's not going to make a difference to our results and my money and time can be better invested elsewhere. Love our fans, love our club but I hate the feeling it has again, stop going and I don't have to worry about that.
20k fans showing up and beating Stoke on the opening home game will suggest everything is ok, no one showing up and Stoke giving us a pasting will send the message that everything is not ok which is what we need. We are not going to grow while Roland is in charge so why does it matter if we stay up or not at this point, clearly it doesn't change his stance on selling the club
I've just listened to the interview. Nothing has changed.
Roland still, after all these years, has his world ideologies and political views clouding his judgement on this.
At risk of being controversial, I have this belief that fundamentally, he's a decent man with good intentions. He wants everyone to have fun, be together, operate on "fair" terms for everyone. He's a true socialist. It's not about the result, it's about people coming together. All well and good, if a bit happy-clappy-hippy-dippy.
Trouble is, that's not the world of competitive sport. Quite the opposite, arguably.
It's tribal.
We WANT to beat the other team. We don't expect to win the Premier League any time soon, but we want to believe that one day, it could happen. We want to believe we are working towards that, and be the next Leicester.
That's why people buy clubs, Roland. That's why they throw stupid money at it. It's a badge of honour, a status symbol, a point of pride. Anyone who gets involved in this game should know that, and be willing to pay the (literal) price.
Roland, you can't come back with the argument "It would all be fine if everyone just chilled out and played by the same rules as me" because that's not the point of owning a competitive football club.
This game isn't for you, Roland. Your attempts to change it are well-intentioned, and admirable. They're also delusional.
You want that sense of community in sports? Go fund several grass-roots teams and have them compete in your own "competition". You have the finances. Then everyone back to yours for dancing, huh?
Please, accept that you aren't going to be the agent of change that you seem to think everyone wants, sell the club to the next chancer, and be done with it. You have no moral obligation for our future.
The EFL might not be sustainable, but that's not your problem either.
When it all goes wrong, you can stand back and say "I told you so."
Probably get a few lols for this and some raised eyebrows but I truly hate the support the team stuff now. At first I bought into it cause of the emotion of Wembley and our play off run but now after everything that's happened since I have no interest in the new season. I couldn't care less if we did a mass boycott and our players had to play in front of no fans, the future of our club is more important than what makes the likes of Bowyer or Lyle Taylor happy. Players and managers come and go, the club doesn't/we can't let it.
I've said it before that Bowyer is my favourite manager since Curbs but it gets to a point where that's not enough, if Bowyer was anyone else there would be outrage, asking us to fill stadiums etc when he knows the resent we have towards our owner, filling the stadium isn't going to win us games or make us play better, making it a ghost town on match days would have a bigger impact.
We have a worse team than league1 or at best on par, the feel good factor has well and truly passed and I've already told myself I won't be going to any games, including aways now. Roland needs to go, if that means losing all our current favourite players and manager then so be it, it's a no brainer. A mass boycott would definitely cause something, I don't know why it has been argued that it wouldn't in the past, even if it was for one game it would be a huge deal
What would it cause apart from a bit of media coverage for a week (if we’re lucky), and then back to the status quo?
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but Roland really doesn’t care whether fans turn up or not, neither do the EFL.
If you feel like boycotting helps then by all means I support you in that decision, I just don’t think it makes much difference to the sale of the club.
I just think it sends a better message than bringing numbers to games, more coverage, more questions. The main point is without sounding too horrible on the off chance any of our players read this post, we don't have players on par with a lot of championship sides, so us filling out away ends and singing all game isn't going to get us a win, if that was the case Leeds would be the best team in the world.
We don't have the players good enough to mount a challenge, we look like we are going to be relegated on paper, if we start the protests now people may be thinking 'they've been promoted and they're still unhappy, I wonder why' if we start losing and ramp up the protests we will be accused of only being angry when we lose. I think you would be staggered if you knew how many people don't know about our situation to this day who follow football. I have people say things to me like 'yeah you lot should stay up, now you're promoted you can spend a bit more and attract better players' and I find it so hard not to go on a massive rant. People don't get our situation and I think a big part of that is because of the part time protests. Not enough people know that's all I'm saying. What difference it makes who knows, but it would look a lot worse on Roland's part if we were winning or losing in an empty stadium rather than a third full one. That combined with visits to his home city would surely, eventually have an impact on the future of this club
Some very fair points here.
The only thing i’d pick up on is the “people aren’t aware” point. It’s not that they’re not aware, it’s just that imo anyone who isn’t a Charlton fan doesn’t really care about our situation. Look at what’s happening to Bury and Bolton, bar the odd viral tweet about how disgusting it is that owners are doing this, no one is doing anything to help them.
Football fans seem to just care about their own clubs
And as for not making a difference to the club it's more a personal decision for me. Why should I waste my weekends spending money and travelling around when ultimately it's not going to make a difference to our results and my money and time can be better invested elsewhere. Love our fans, love our club but I hate the feeling it has again, stop going and I don't have to worry about that.
20k fans showing up and beating Stoke on the opening home game will suggest everything is ok, no one showing up and Stoke giving us a pasting will send the message that everything is not ok which is what we need. We are not going to grow while Roland is in charge so why does it matter if we stay up or not at this point, clearly it doesn't change his stance on selling the club
Comments
Also the inconvenience of having a boycott talked about in the media both at home and in Belgium would cause a lot of embarrassment for Roland.
It will never happen of course so I can't be 100%sure it would work.
Support the team, not the regime
The Aussies didn't agree a deal and RD's response was to try and slash costs to reduce losses.
This season if he keeps the costs about the same, he can wipe out the annual loss with the @£7M extra revenue.
The problem with this strategy is that it always leads to relegation in a year or two.
Then he will need to reduce costs in L1 by @£7M, in order to break even.
Meanwhile, if he's not losing money he chooses to sit tight, waiting for someone to come along, that are willing to pay a higher price.
PS unless I'm mistaken, AFKA did not say the protests hadn't been successful.
He said they hadn't forced him to sell at a reasonable price and he is obviously correct.
Where we go from here I've no idea and I'm open to all options.
I've protested in Belgium and am willing to consider going again, but no one knows whether this would hasten the sale, slow the sale down or do neither.
It'll never happen
I also believe he'd try to make back more money as a result of not liking the fan base. Why would he want to write off debts to the fans that have been pissing him off?
If I lent someone £100, I would want my £100 back more and more as they acted against me... I would be less inclined to say "'Ah well, it is what it is" despite that being a detrimental waste of my time.
I've said it before that Bowyer is my favourite manager since Curbs but it gets to a point where that's not enough, if Bowyer was anyone else there would be outrage, asking us to fill stadiums etc when he knows the resent we have towards our owner, filling the stadium isn't going to win us games or make us play better, making it a ghost town on match days would have a bigger impact.
We have a worse team than league1 or at best on par, the feel good factor has well and truly passed and I've already told myself I won't be going to any games, including aways now. Roland needs to go, if that means losing all our current favourite players and manager then so be it, it's a no brainer. A mass boycott would definitely cause something, I don't know why it has been argued that it wouldn't in the past, even if it was for one game it would be a huge deal
I get what you're saying with the embarrassment but other home protests like the mock funeral, crisps have all caused him embarrassment too and he's still here. I feel we would just be repeating what we've done already just via a different approach.
This does not surprise me. After 4 years we are suffering protest fatigue, and no longer have things like the string of inadequate managers or KM's latest nonsense to constantly motivate us.
So it takes a disappointing result on the field to reignite talk of action. And I suspect it may take a string of disappointing results before there is a critical mass of fans who are sufficiently riled up for something large-scale like the coffin march or the Unity march in Sint-Truiden to happen. This does not mean we are solely motivated by poor results - we're Charlton; we're used to that! - but it takes something like that to get a large number of fans simultaneously angry enough to take action, to "put their money where their mouths are".
In between there are still individuals who will come up with an idea which can be enacted by a small number, be it KM's "resignation", the LIAR bedsheet, leafleting his home town (where he is a major employer) about his failure to pay the bonuses at Charlton, or (perhaps?) the graffiti in S-T. All reminds RD we have not gone away, we are still opposed to his vision (or lack of it) for the club, and we will challenge his reputation whenever and wherever we can.
I agree with those who feel it is more productive to challenge his ego rather than his finances - although the additional policing costs of large protests at The Valley will surely make a mess of any plans he has to demonstrate his genius by breaking even in the Championship! There is also value in getting media publicity, because the football world has a short attention span, and it is all too easy for others to assume all is well at Charlton if we are not featuring anywhere other than in match reports.
(edit for spelling error)
As for the analogy of wanting back money lent that's a bit wide of the mark. RD hasn't lent the fans any money he has wasted tens of millions of pounds of his own money because he doesn't have a clue as to how to run a football club. The fans haven't wasted that money, he has and the longer he holds out for what he considers a suitable buyer the more money he is going to "lend".
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but Roland really doesn’t care whether fans turn up or not, neither do the EFL.
If you feel like boycotting helps then by all means I support you in that decision, I just don’t think it makes much difference to the sale of the club.
However I do think that he has an Achilles heel.
I haven’t been to St. Truiden for a couple of years but there was a giant screen on the street side of one of the stands that showed a loop of films featuring Roland acting as the benevolent dictator of the town. You could see him patting children’s heads or handing out prizes at football competitions etc. He clearly wants to be seen as the great leader beloved by all. When this illusion is shattered, for instance by the birthday protest, the embassy protest or the painting of obscenities on his or his family’s properties, he reacts. Slade gets sacked, the EFL is commanded to buy the club etc, etc.
Make the autistic bastard appear weak, stupid and touchable is the way forward. I wholeheartedly applaud the phantom painters of St. Truiden. Daub him into submission.
Been meaning to book it all summer.
In addition/alternatively, do they need money to help fund anything? Personally I don’t care what they do to upset him and would not want any conditions or accountability put on the funds for obvious reasons and I am happy to chip in.
We don't have the players good enough to mount a challenge, we look like we are going to be relegated on paper, if we start the protests now people may be thinking 'they've been promoted and they're still unhappy, I wonder why' if we start losing and ramp up the protests we will be accused of only being angry when we lose. I think you would be staggered if you knew how many people don't know about our situation to this day who follow football. I have people say things to me like 'yeah you lot should stay up, now you're promoted you can spend a bit more and attract better players' and I find it so hard not to go on a massive rant. People don't get our situation and I think a big part of that is because of the part time protests. Not enough people know that's all I'm saying. What difference it makes who knows, but it would look a lot worse on Roland's part if we were winning or losing in an empty stadium rather than a third full one. That combined with visits to his home city would surely, eventually have an impact on the future of this club
20k fans showing up and beating Stoke on the opening home game will suggest everything is ok, no one showing up and Stoke giving us a pasting will send the message that everything is not ok which is what we need. We are not going to grow while Roland is in charge so why does it matter if we stay up or not at this point, clearly it doesn't change his stance on selling the club
To date have never seen a zebra using one.
Roland still, after all these years, has his world ideologies and political views clouding his judgement on this.
At risk of being controversial, I have this belief that fundamentally, he's a decent man with good intentions. He wants everyone to have fun, be together, operate on "fair" terms for everyone. He's a true socialist. It's not about the result, it's about people coming together. All well and good, if a bit happy-clappy-hippy-dippy.
Trouble is, that's not the world of competitive sport. Quite the opposite, arguably.
It's tribal.
We WANT to beat the other team. We don't expect to win the Premier League any time soon, but we want to believe that one day, it could happen. We want to believe we are working towards that, and be the next Leicester.
That's why people buy clubs, Roland. That's why they throw stupid money at it. It's a badge of honour, a status symbol, a point of pride. Anyone who gets involved in this game should know that, and be willing to pay the (literal) price.
Roland, you can't come back with the argument "It would all be fine if everyone just chilled out and played by the same rules as me" because that's not the point of owning a competitive football club.
This game isn't for you, Roland. Your attempts to change it are well-intentioned, and admirable. They're also delusional.
You want that sense of community in sports? Go fund several grass-roots teams and have them compete in your own "competition". You have the finances. Then everyone back to yours for dancing, huh?
Please, accept that you aren't going to be the agent of change that you seem to think everyone wants, sell the club to the next chancer, and be done with it. You have no moral obligation for our future.
The EFL might not be sustainable, but that's not your problem either.
When it all goes wrong, you can stand back and say "I told you so."
And we won't care.
THIS!
Close the thread.
Some very fair points here.
The only thing i’d pick up on is the “people aren’t aware” point. It’s not that they’re not aware, it’s just that imo anyone who isn’t a Charlton fan doesn’t really care about our situation. Look at what’s happening to Bury and Bolton, bar the odd viral tweet about how disgusting it is that owners are doing this, no one is doing anything to help them.
Football fans seem to just care about their own clubs