Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Steve Gallen - now a Director
Comments
-
Cheers @stonemuse
i too certainly don’t see it as a negative. I suppose like @Cafc43v3r i just don’t think we are knowing the real reason so that leads to intrigue
1 -
Will be interesting to find out whether the shareholdings have changed.
Sometimes you need a director to sign documents so they just need a somebody who is always around?
My wife's a director of my business and adds absolutely no value whatsoever.14 -
Exactly why it concerns me. 😉stonemuse said:
****On its face, this is positive but ... I also wonder why it’s happened.AFKABartram said:A lot of people seem to be seeing this as a promotion/ reward.
Is it?
I say that openly as I don’t know and have no experience of being a director of a company. But I know with it brings certain responsibilities and duties, along with the importance to exercise independent judgment.
So will he simply be carrying on with his current remit but have the jazzy title of director?
Does it allow him to sign off of things quickly and not have the rigmarole of delaying process by needing a director Duchatelet/ Murray authority?
Or is his role changing and he will now have a greater input and authority into football strategy, budget allocation etc?
Or something else?
being a director of a company though brings you accountability into its decision making and a responsibility to wider stakeholders. As stated on Company House website:
”When making decisions, directors must also consider the likely consequences for various stakeholders, including employees, suppliers, customers and communities. They should also consider the impact on the environment, the reputation of the company, company success in the longer term”
*****In any event, my gut instinct prompts me to view this as very positive.
*******Why? I’m not really sure but this just feels right.0 -
AgreedAFKABartram said:Cheers @stonemuse
i too certainly don’t see it as a negative. I suppose like @Cafc43v3r i just don’t think we are knowing the real reason so that leads to intrigue0 -
As I said it begs a number of questions.Cafc43v3r said:This is bonkers. The appointment. The fact he agreed to it. People's reaction to it.
Gallen has done a fantastic job, how ever much we are paying him it isn't enough. But isn't "director of football" just a job title? Ie you don't need to actually be a director? Eg you can have director in your job title without being a "director".
I also assume he is just a director, not a share holder?
Doesn't the fact that he is officially a director of a limited company carry a significant legal obligation?
You can normally resign from a directorship easier than you can from an employment contract, as long as you aren't the last one!
If Rick is right and LVT hasn't been seen since May, which I have no reason to doubt, who has been signing the cheques? 13 odd players don't sign for nothing.
If its a sign RD is suddenly going to try a massive about turn I would expect another appointment this week ie a "director of non-football", ceo, chief executive, chairman or what ever title they get.
This is, imo, significant, but I have no idea why. Why Roland would do it nor why Gallen would agree to it?
If its a way of showing appreciation to Gallen there are other, better, ways of doing it. If it's away of making sure he doesn't leave, there are other, better ways of doing it. I would be shocked if Gallen asked for it. Does it "add value" to the club, not really.
There is an angle to this, from Roland, and it pisses me off I can't see what it is.
But nowhere does it say he's "director of football".
No one needs to sign cheques in the UK to sign players.
Chris Parkes, as club secretary, signs transfer forms. LDT is still with the club, as it stands, but notin England.
But it's a mystery why SG is a director but LDT is not.
SGs span of control is also unclear. Is he now Bowyer's boss?
I agree that the reasoning behind this is unclear but that's hardly new under Duchatelet.
He's irrational.2 -
Duchatelet has already asked him to take a haircut on the score Gallen lent him last time he was over.0
-
I think this is all very simple really. As a UK company, CAFC have to a have a director responsible for running the company. They don’t have a CEO or CFO. Duchatelet and Murray are non-executive directors so it makes sense to promote SG to run the show whilst everything’s in Limbo. Anyway, that’s what I think ...5
-
Sorry, I didn't see/read your post before posting.AFKABartram said:A lot of people seem to be seeing this as a promotion/ reward.
Is it?
I say that openly as I don’t know and have no experience of being a director of a company. But I know with it brings certain responsibilities and duties, along with the importance to exercise independent judgment.
So will he simply be carrying on with his current remit but have the jazzy title of director?
Does it allow him to sign off of things quickly and not have the rigmarole of delaying process by needing a director Duchatelet/ Murray authority?
Or is his role changing and he will now have a greater input and authority into football strategy, budget allocation etc?
Or something else?
being a director of a company though brings you accountability into its decision making and a responsibility to wider stakeholders. As stated on Company House website:
”When making decisions, directors must also consider the likely consequences for various stakeholders, including employees, suppliers, customers and communities. They should also consider the impact on the environment, the reputation of the company, company success in the longer term”
As far as I am aware nothing in football (the playing side) requires "a directors sign off", just an approved "officer". Even cheque signing can be delegated.
As I suggested in my, all be it more rambling, post there are ways of doing all the positive things (remunciation, golden hand cuffs, influence, thank yous etc) with out the burden of the legal obligations of directorship. Or does the burden of directorship reduce as he isn't, yet, a director of the benifical owner? God knows.
May we live in intresting times!
1 -
I was delighted when I saw the news as it is recognition for the great work Gallen has done.
Much better than a parachuted-in CEO.
Probably helps to ensure we comply with EFL rules of governance.
Stlll doesn't sell the club.4 -
How can RD be, as in effect the sole owner, be a non-executive director? Serious question._MrDick said:I think this is all very simple really. As a UK company, CAFC have to a have a director responsible for running the company. They don’t have a CEO or CFO. Duchatelet and Murray are non-executive directors so it makes sense to promote SG to run the show whilst everything’s in Limbo. Anyway, that’s what I think ...0 - Sponsored links:
-
He’s not an employee, he’s a shareholderCafc43v3r said:
How can RD be, as in effect the sole owner, be a non-executive director? Serious question._MrDick said:I think this is all very simple really. As a UK company, CAFC have to a have a director responsible for running the company. They don’t have a CEO or CFO. Duchatelet and Murray are non-executive directors so it makes sense to promote SG to run the show whilst everything’s in Limbo. Anyway, that’s what I think ...1 -
With the Belgian in the background waiting to f*** things up in a split second.Exiled_Addick said:Just need a properly qualified and experienced CEO to run the business side of the club and we’ll look like a proper football club again.
Hands up anybody who thinks long term we'll be better off with him still running the show?
Gallen has done a cracking job having said all that.0 -
In effect the only share holder, so how can he be a non-executive director. Serious question._MrDick said:
He’s not an employee, he’s a shareholderCafc43v3r said:
How can RD be, as in effect the sole owner, be a non-executive director? Serious question._MrDick said:I think this is all very simple really. As a UK company, CAFC have to a have a director responsible for running the company. They don’t have a CEO or CFO. Duchatelet and Murray are non-executive directors so it makes sense to promote SG to run the show whilst everything’s in Limbo. Anyway, that’s what I think ...0 -
An executive director is a member of the board of a Company who also has management responsibilities. A non-executive director is a board member without responsibilities for daily management or operations of the company or organisation.Cafc43v3r said:
In effect the only share holder, so how can he be a non-executive director. Serious question._MrDick said:
He’s not an employee, he’s a shareholderCafc43v3r said:
How can RD be, as in effect the sole owner, be a non-executive director? Serious question._MrDick said:I think this is all very simple really. As a UK company, CAFC have to a have a director responsible for running the company. They don’t have a CEO or CFO. Duchatelet and Murray are non-executive directors so it makes sense to promote SG to run the show whilst everything’s in Limbo. Anyway, that’s what I think ...
Perhaps @Grapevine49 can give you a more comprehensive answer. This is the limit of my knowledge1 -
Does it mean that SG now has the authority to give LB and Lyle new extended contracts??0
-
Depends on his delegated powersbertpalmer said:Does it mean that SG now has the authority to give LB and Lyle new extended contracts??0 -
Good find. I'm guessing Richard Murray has never read it.AFKABartram said:A lot of people seem to be seeing this as a promotion/ reward.
Is it?
I say that openly as I don’t know and have no experience of being a director of a company. But I know with it brings certain responsibilities and duties, along with the importance to exercise independent judgment.
So will he simply be carrying on with his current remit but have the jazzy title of director?
Does it allow him to sign off of things quickly and not have the rigmarole of delaying process by needing a director Duchatelet/ Murray authority?
Or is his role changing and he will now have a greater input and authority into football strategy, budget allocation etc?
Or something else?
being a director of a company though brings you accountability into its decision making and a responsibility to wider stakeholders. As stated on Company House website:
”When making decisions, directors must also consider the likely consequences for various stakeholders, including employees, suppliers, customers and communities. They should also consider the impact on the environment, the reputation of the company, company success in the longer term”1 -
I find the reaction to this very interesting, nearer Luke warm than jubilation. Roland may be a dick but he can still make a good decision. Anything that has chance of making Gallen stay/have a greater influence can only be a good thing. The problem is being bitten 20 times by Roland has made everyone wary.In the years after Roland the importance of Gallen and Bowyer will probably be remembered like Curbishley and Varney. Bowyer may have started the revolution on the pitch, Gallen made sure it didn't fail from lack of support off of it. The man stepped up when we needed someone to.
0 -
Most directors are also employees and paid a salary for the work as an employee. They simply acquire more legal responsibilities for the company’s actions by being also a director.Cafc43v3r said:
In effect the only share holder, so how can he be a non-executive director. Serious question._MrDick said:
He’s not an employee, he’s a shareholderCafc43v3r said:
How can RD be, as in effect the sole owner, be a non-executive director? Serious question._MrDick said:I think this is all very simple really. As a UK company, CAFC have to a have a director responsible for running the company. They don’t have a CEO or CFO. Duchatelet and Murray are non-executive directors so it makes sense to promote SG to run the show whilst everything’s in Limbo. Anyway, that’s what I think ...
A non-executive director is independent and not an employee and paid a fee. Non Execs normally only relevant for public quoted companies to provide oversight for external investors/shareholders where employee directors can be conflicted looking after their own interests.
RD doesn’t need a non exec because he can look after his own interests by being fully in control.
You don’t acquire shares because you are a director and unlikely to get your hands on shares that belong to the owner(s) of a private company, it’s their personal wealth.1 -
Yes I know, most of, all of that. Unless I red it wrong @_MrDick said, or implied, RD was a non-executive director?Dippenhall said:
Most directors are also employees and paid a salary for the work as an employee. They simply acquire more legal responsibilities for the company’s actions by being also a director.Cafc43v3r said:
In effect the only share holder, so how can he be a non-executive director. Serious question._MrDick said:
He’s not an employee, he’s a shareholderCafc43v3r said:
How can RD be, as in effect the sole owner, be a non-executive director? Serious question._MrDick said:I think this is all very simple really. As a UK company, CAFC have to a have a director responsible for running the company. They don’t have a CEO or CFO. Duchatelet and Murray are non-executive directors so it makes sense to promote SG to run the show whilst everything’s in Limbo. Anyway, that’s what I think ...
A non-executive director is independent and not an employee and paid a fee. Non Execs normally only relevant for public quoted companies to provide oversight for external investors/shareholders where employee directors can be conflicted looking after their own interests.
RD doesn’t need a non exec because he can look after his own interests by being fully in control.
You don’t acquire shares because you are a director and unlikely to get your hands on shares that belong to the owner(s) of a private company, it’s their personal wealth.
As the sole share holder he can't be can he? He has to be an executive director, by definition?0 - Sponsored links:
-
Can you compare that to Driesen for us please?Rudders22 said:If only he has more experience
Head of Recruitment: Steve Gallen
Coaching experience: 20 years
Coaching qualification: UEFA Pro Licence
Possessing over two decades of coaching and scouting experience at both academy and senior level, Steve Gallen joined the Addicks as Head of Recruitment in May 2017.
Beginning his coaching career in 1997, Gallen quickly became a vital member of staff within Queens Park Rangers’ youth set-up.
He oversaw the development of the club’s U12s, U16s and U18s – where he worked closely with England international Raheem Sterling – before being appointed as Rangers’ Head of Youth Development.
He would also coach the club’s U21s and, under Gallen, QPR’s academy won five items of silverware, including the Professional Development League 2 title in 2013 and the FL Youth Alliance League in 2011 and 2012.
A UEFA Pro Licensed Coach, Gallen was appointed as Rangers’ first-team coach in 2015. He departed them following 19 years of service a year later and went on to continue developing his experience in the scouting side of the game.
Gallen is the middle-aged of three footballing brothers. Eldest sibling Joe worked as assistant manager to Kenny Jackett at both Millwall and Wolverhampton Wanderers, while younger brother Kevin is QPR’s sixth highest goalscorer, having hit 104 goals for the club between 1994 and 2007.
3 -
I will just ask him.Fumbluff said:
Can you compare that to Driesen for us please?Rudders22 said:If only he has more experienceHead of Recruitment: Steve Gallen
Coaching experience: 20 years
Coaching qualification: UEFA Pro Licence
Possessing over two decades of coaching and scouting experience at both academy and senior level, Steve Gallen joined the Addicks as Head of Recruitment in May 2017.
Beginning his coaching career in 1997, Gallen quickly became a vital member of staff within Queens Park Rangers’ youth set-up.
He oversaw the development of the club’s U12s, U16s and U18s – where he worked closely with England international Raheem Sterling – before being appointed as Rangers’ Head of Youth Development.
He would also coach the club’s U21s and, under Gallen, QPR’s academy won five items of silverware, including the Professional Development League 2 title in 2013 and the FL Youth Alliance League in 2011 and 2012.
A UEFA Pro Licensed Coach, Gallen was appointed as Rangers’ first-team coach in 2015. He departed them following 19 years of service a year later and went on to continue developing his experience in the scouting side of the game.
Gallen is the middle-aged of three footballing brothers. Eldest sibling Joe worked as assistant manager to Kenny Jackett at both Millwall and Wolverhampton Wanderers, while younger brother Kevin is QPR’s sixth highest goalscorer, having hit 104 goals for the club between 1994 and 2007.
0 -
I do think some of you are too into conspiracy theories...
Gallen has said that he was involved in negotiating player contracts.
Probably, any contract of employment by the club has to be signed by a director, which probably meant that everything had to be signed by RD or LvT. By making SG a director, a level of bureaucracy has been removed. He will still have his budget, but he won't gave to send everything back and forth to Belgium for approval.
Just something for you to ponder over. Remember the palaver over signing Hemed? Maybe this was caused by the inability of SG to get hold of a board signatory. Perhaps this is just a way of preventing this kind of balls up happening again?
Just a thought. Maybe there weren't any snipers on the grassy knoll after all...5 -
Congratulations to Steve, well deserved and one of a very few positive things to come out of Duchâtelet’s tenure. Maybe he has now seen the light? One can only hope. A three year contract for Bows now please.0
-
Gallen has been an absolute revelation at the club - simply incredible job on recruitment with very meagre resources.
It's such a rare gift, that of being able to spot a player that other people have not picked up and to bring them into the fold successfully.
Here in Brisbane the local Rugby League giants the Brisbane Broncos built their formidable success on the back of coach Wayne Bennett and produced an extraordinary number of legendary young players.
However, as Bennett admitted himself, his teams would have been nothing without their Chief Scout , Cyril Connell, who would pick up these young players from all over Queensland, often the players other scouts didn't fancy, and hand them over to Bennett to turn into superstars.
These players included future internationals such as Shane Webcke, Petero Civoniceva, Darren Lockyer, Wendell Sailor, Lote Tuqiri and Karmichael Hunt.
Since he died in 2009 the Broncos have hardly produced any of their own top-class players and haven't won a Grand Final.
Indeed, of the Broncos last Grand Final winning team of 2006 - Connell recruited a staggering 15 of the 17 player squad as junior players.
Now, ask yourself, are you better off as a club paying a toss-bag like Marcus Bent 500K per year or are you better off investing in someone like Steve Gallen?7 -
I worked in an industry where a managerial promotion invariably meant that skills were lost (from engineering to admin). More worryingly this also happened whilst I was in hospital. The hugely respected Matron spent two weeks 'acting' on the grade above signing off time sheets (her words).
Hope Gallen's promotion doesn't affect the role to which he has brought so much..4 -
Congratulations! First order - Sack Driesen.3
-
Who are the other Directors?0
-
But what recognition? As Director he just has legal obligations; if it does not come with a pay rise I am not sure of what the benefit to Gallen is?Weegie Addick said:I was delighted when I saw the news as it is recognition for the great work Gallen has done.
Much better than a parachuted-in CEO.
Probably helps to ensure we comply with EFL rules of governance.
Stlll doesn't sell the club.
As a left field conspiracy theory, how about if RD has offered Gallen and Bowyer a small % ownership/partial management buy out - say a couple of % each if we get to the PL. that would keep them sticky to the club and focus their minds whilst meaning RD has to pay out nothing now and this is the first step towards formalising the agreement? Unlikely but thought i would lob it out there.2 -
If RD is involved in running the club, which he obviously is, he can’t be classed as a non exec.Cafc43v3r said:
Yes I know, most of, all of that. Unless I red it wrong @_MrDick said, or implied, RD was a non-executive director?Dippenhall said:
Most directors are also employees and paid a salary for the work as an employee. They simply acquire more legal responsibilities for the company’s actions by being also a director.Cafc43v3r said:
In effect the only share holder, so how can he be a non-executive director. Serious question._MrDick said:
He’s not an employee, he’s a shareholderCafc43v3r said:
How can RD be, as in effect the sole owner, be a non-executive director? Serious question._MrDick said:I think this is all very simple really. As a UK company, CAFC have to a have a director responsible for running the company. They don’t have a CEO or CFO. Duchatelet and Murray are non-executive directors so it makes sense to promote SG to run the show whilst everything’s in Limbo. Anyway, that’s what I think ...
A non-executive director is independent and not an employee and paid a fee. Non Execs normally only relevant for public quoted companies to provide oversight for external investors/shareholders where employee directors can be conflicted looking after their own interests.
RD doesn’t need a non exec because he can look after his own interests by being fully in control.
You don’t acquire shares because you are a director and unlikely to get your hands on shares that belong to the owner(s) of a private company, it’s their personal wealth.
As the sole share holder he can't be can he? He has to be an executive director, by definition?1
