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

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

178101213170

Comments

  • Gribbo said:
    Even going with 25000; at £45 a ticket (is that the going rate for an outside gig theses days??), it would be £1.25m gross

    Edit* Just looked and Ed Sheeran was £50 to £80 a ticket for his recent London gig
    I think we paid 90 quid ? to stand on the pitch.
  • This content has been removed.
  • Didn’t we have Elton John (or similar) at the Valley within ‘recent’ history?
    Yep. I went to that one.
  • i.e. your family. 

  • swordfish said:
    So the Valley has played host to 3 concerts in the last 48 years, two with Gliksten as owner, the other Murray. If it were to happen, wouldn't it be Roland's gig seeing as he owns the Valley, or is TS planning on acquiring it before then I wonder? 😉

    It could be negotiable between them perhaps.

    Roland is a stubborn individual, and that is not going to change, but hopefully time may have been a brief healer for him over the last couple of years. Who the hell knows!

    If some kind of gig generates extra income for sir waffle, then maybe the cost of the valley could get reduced.


  • WSS said:
    First date with the now wife was the Elton John gig.

    Will never forgive him even if he said sorry (which I’d doubt he’d say as it’s a pretty difficult word it seems).
    Don't go on at him like that.....
  • At least you're still standing.....ffs
  • It been no sacrifice at all
  • Sponsored links:


  • Dave2l said:

    It could be negotiable between them perhaps.

    Roland is a stubborn individual, and that is not going to change, but hopefully time may have been a brief healer for him over the last couple of years. Who the hell knows!

    If some kind of gig generates extra income for sir waffle, then maybe the cost of the valley could get reduced.


    Depends on what the lease says but I imagine RD wanted shot of all potential liability so our rental won't be match days only (like West Ham) but 365 days a year.  As such I imagine we can hold a gig and pocket any money ourselves. 

    Possibility we need landlords consent but I doubt it and if we do then if TS is a sensible businessman with sensible lawyers he would have had that not to be unreasonably with held anyway.
  • "I looked at a number of clubs including Sunderland......then I looked at Charlton and saw massive revenue potential due to the huge fanbase.."  :#
    Didn’t tick his London box.
  • Scoham said:
    Didn’t tick his London box.
    Yeh, I know.
    There was always going to be a variety of factors in his decision, I was just being a bit cheeky
  • Scoham said:
    Didn’t tick his London box.

    He didn't know Sunderland wasn't in London?

    Typical skintgaard, can't afford a map of the UK.
  • WSS said:
    First date with the now wife was the Elton John gig.

    Will never forgive him even if he said sorry (which I’d doubt he’d say as it’s a pretty difficult word it seems).
    That's sad so sad
  • Fwiw ..I have been to Elton at the valley and rod Stewart at the Amex .I have seen football at both stadiums.The valley is much more accessible and easier to leave, the Amex is a nightmare 
  • Sponsored links:


  • lolwray said:
    Fwiw ..I have been to Elton at the valley and rod Stewart at the Amex .I have seen football at both stadiums.The valley is much more accessible and easier to leave, the Amex is a nightmare 
    That’s mainly due to the quality of the football. 
  • edited July 2022
    I refer you to the long history of conflicts with residents over pop concerts, real and imaginary. This will start a discussion locally that in all probability will end in unnecessary suspicion and bad feeling over something that ultimately won’t happen - either because it doesn’t stack up financially or because the council won’t have it. 

    The market changes so who knows, but rest assured if there was a viable route to profitable concerts at The Valley it would have been followed again since 2006. No harm in looking again, in fact it is sensible, but dropping it into the public domain like this probably isn’t helpful to a successful outcome as it will just antagonise the locals, who in turn will influence the council.

    You may be right that they will object however they find out, but the point of PR is to manage people's response in order to contain the damage. The lack of detail (or substance) here allows the issue to run out of control at the outset.

    Take Charlton's piece of paper about the move to Selhurst Park, distributed to fans as they arrived at a match against Crystal Palace. Fans would always have objected but many were insulted by the means of communication and its tone, whatever the club's intention in dong it that way. 
    It's hard to ignore the fact that there have only been 3 concerts in 48 years. Even I can see there's probably a good reason for that, although I enjoyed the Elton John one. Well, my wife did actually, which is more important! I wasn't particularly a fan of his, but it was a great day out for us.

    You're better placed than me to comment on local council decision making, but from my experience they're such strange beasts. You can feed them the same information and get different outcomes, for reasons which aren't always easily comprehendible, so it's hard to establish precedents for this sort of thing.

    I can't recall how Murray dealt with comms for the EJ one. I presume the locals weren't overjoyed at the prospect of a concert back then either and made their views known, but I remember well the "Message to Our Supporters" bombshell dropping. I wonder how that might have been handled in age of Social Media, and dread to imagine.

    TS can't take back having said that he's considering it as an option for next summer, but if that was a PR mistake, which until we see evidence of the fallout is an unknown, at least he'll be able to factor the response into any future planning as he was just floating an idea.


  • Absolutely pathetic, yet absolutely true to form.
    Is Airman wrong then? Perhaps a slightly unnecessary dig as in the grand scheme of things the inaccuracy of how long we’ve been mismanaged doesn’t mean much. But I don’t see much wrong with their post anyway 
  • edited July 2022
    Is Airman wrong then? Perhaps a slightly unnecessary dig as in the grand scheme of things, the inaccuracy of how long we've been mismanaged doesn't mean much. But I don’t see much wrong with their post anyway
    Exactly! I'd agree with that when the quote is taken in the context of the interview as a whole.

    The inaccuracy over the length of Garner's contract wasn't considered an important factor when Raelynn was judged for her "understand that not to be correct" tweet, posted when she got annoyed seeing Cawley tweet that he understood it to be for two years when it was for three. She was then subjected to criticism for being pedantic in calling out Cawley for it 

    I'm not suggesting Raelynn was right to tweet what she did, but I don't think Airman is necessarily right with this either. However, I accept that he's entitled to make his views on it clear because, as with Raelynn response, he's reacting to something stated that isn't accurate. We were mismanaged for thirteen or so years, but isn't he also being pedantic?

    I'm not sure it's actually a case of double standards being applied though and I'm sure he'll be able to point out the difference for me and anyone else who's interested. 
  • Terrific idea.  
    Maybe Roland might roll with it and change the venue in to an outdoor concert arena if it all works out with some great events at The Valley 
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!