Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Sandgaard ownership discussion 2022-3 onwards (Meeting with CAST p138)
Comments
-
Seems pretty clear to me that getting cat A status has been a fundamental part of his strategy - why else would roddy have been his first ‘hire’ ? He’s probably also aware fans don’t want to hear the likely reality so has allowed us to ‘dream’ by aiming high re prem etc - I think he’s trying but like so many others, is finding out just how tough it is to do well in English football0
-
Yes, running a football club is not easyDOUCHER said:Seems pretty clear to me that getting cat A status has been a fundamental part of his strategy - why else would roddy have been his first ‘hire’ ? He’s probably also aware fans don’t want to hear the likely reality so has allowed us to ‘dream’ by aiming high re prem etc - I think he’s trying but like so many others, is finding out just how tough it is to do well in English football0 -
Yes, he’s also possibly talked a lot of bollox along the way - we shall see this yearshirty5 said:
Yes, running a football club is not easyDOUCHER said:Seems pretty clear to me that getting cat A status has been a fundamental part of his strategy - why else would roddy have been his first ‘hire’ ? He’s probably also aware fans don’t want to hear the likely reality so has allowed us to ‘dream’ by aiming high re prem etc - I think he’s trying but like so many others, is finding out just how tough it is to do well in English football0 -
I don’t think it’s that great for him, to be honest. He could have banked £30m up front with more to come in future based on performance - he’s currently getting £500,000 a year plus potential performance bonuses which TS has shown no evidence he can trigger.DOUCHER said:
I didn’t say he was but u suggest he now has us by the bolloxAirman Brown said:
Except he was an arse when he arrived and before that in terms of other clubs. There’s no evidence his irrationality was confined to Charlton.DOUCHER said:
Well looks like pissing him right off has backfiredOAirman Brown said:
For now, but based on the false assumption which he keeps repeating for a reason: that he can triple the revenue and sell the ground out in L1 and, as he has also said, win promotion from the Championship without competing on wages.Stu_of_Kunming said:
He owns and is bankrolling the club, something no one else was able and or willing to do, even the secret silent billionaires.Airman Brown said:
The problem with that for me is that TS doesn’t own anything at Charlton that is worth any money. The only way that changes as far as I can see is by getting to the PL.AndyG said:
Bloody hell something we agree on mate 😉Airman Brown said:
That’s why ultimately I think it will be resolved, but not by TS whose approach is based on a complete misreading of the commercial opportunities outside the PL.AndyG said:We all know that RD over values the club but if you look at things in a different way to normal life and more from the crazy world of football.
If someone has crazy wealth and wants to buy a football club that meets all the requirements of being a top premiership club with enough investment from aforementioned wealth them £50m is a drop in the ocean. It isnt even the cost of a decent premiership player. There are a handful of clubs in lower leagues that meet that criteria and I would argue that we are one of them.
I'm not saying RD's valuation is anywhere near correct but I'm not in the category of people that have crazy wealth obviously. If I was then £50m shouldn't be a major hurdle in the world of football ownership
Ofcourse you are correct with the best will in the world TS doesnt have the money to get us anywhere near. But I do think we owe the man as he stepped in a dealt with the crooks and RD when nobody else would or was able. I see him as a holding owner to hopefully sort the shite out and then sell whilst making himself a nice few quid with my blessing
I agree, he is the owner we have and there is no point endlessly going over alternative scenarios any more than revisiting 2006. But it is important to understand why he is the owner - because like ESI he would rent the ground - and that this puts the club is a weak position going forward, even though it has removed the immediate threat of Southall, Farnell and co, which is clearly a good thing.No one else other than ESI would buy the club without the ground. That is still the case and means that unless Sandgaard turns water into wine, which I doubt he can, we still have.a problem. There is no value in the business.If TS fails he’ll either lose the rent or have to accept a similar or worse deal to the one he could have had 2017-2020, because the basis of his valuation is a property scheme that won’t fly.0 -
No but he seems to be acting stubbornly - something u can afford to do when u have his resources and want to get sone revengeAirman Brown said:
I don’t think it’s that great for him, to be honest. He could have banked £30m up front with more to come in future based on performance - he’s currently getting £500,000 a year plus potential performance bonuses which TS has shown no evidence he can trigger.DOUCHER said:
I didn’t say he was but u suggest he now has us by the bolloxAirman Brown said:
Except he was an arse when he arrived and before that in terms of other clubs. There’s no evidence his irrationality was confined to Charlton.DOUCHER said:
Well looks like pissing him right off has backfiredOAirman Brown said:
For now, but based on the false assumption which he keeps repeating for a reason: that he can triple the revenue and sell the ground out in L1 and, as he has also said, win promotion from the Championship without competing on wages.Stu_of_Kunming said:
He owns and is bankrolling the club, something no one else was able and or willing to do, even the secret silent billionaires.Airman Brown said:
The problem with that for me is that TS doesn’t own anything at Charlton that is worth any money. The only way that changes as far as I can see is by getting to the PL.AndyG said:
Bloody hell something we agree on mate 😉Airman Brown said:
That’s why ultimately I think it will be resolved, but not by TS whose approach is based on a complete misreading of the commercial opportunities outside the PL.AndyG said:We all know that RD over values the club but if you look at things in a different way to normal life and more from the crazy world of football.
If someone has crazy wealth and wants to buy a football club that meets all the requirements of being a top premiership club with enough investment from aforementioned wealth them £50m is a drop in the ocean. It isnt even the cost of a decent premiership player. There are a handful of clubs in lower leagues that meet that criteria and I would argue that we are one of them.
I'm not saying RD's valuation is anywhere near correct but I'm not in the category of people that have crazy wealth obviously. If I was then £50m shouldn't be a major hurdle in the world of football ownership
Ofcourse you are correct with the best will in the world TS doesnt have the money to get us anywhere near. But I do think we owe the man as he stepped in a dealt with the crooks and RD when nobody else would or was able. I see him as a holding owner to hopefully sort the shite out and then sell whilst making himself a nice few quid with my blessing
I agree, he is the owner we have and there is no point endlessly going over alternative scenarios any more than revisiting 2006. But it is important to understand why he is the owner - because like ESI he would rent the ground - and that this puts the club is a weak position going forward, even though it has removed the immediate threat of Southall, Farnell and co, which is clearly a good thing.No one else other than ESI would buy the club without the ground. That is still the case and means that unless Sandgaard turns water into wine, which I doubt he can, we still have.a problem. There is no value in the business.If TS fails he’ll either lose the rent or have to accept a similar or worse deal to the one he could have had 2017-2020, because the basis of his valuation is a property scheme that won’t fly.2 -
Be interesting to see RD’s age and how that plays a factor.
Not suggesting he’s close to leaving this world, but at 75, this may also have an impact for whoever is owner in a few years0 -
Has the ground always been a separate entity to the club?
If not where did this loophole start. Surely their should have been more securities in place than a 'struggling to get planning permission' headache for those that might be intent on using the Valley for other purposes than football.
Who's at fault for not contractually linking both together?
My guess is Murray.0 -
The reason for separating the two companies was to protect the freehold if the football company went bust. It’s been like that since circa 1992 - and there had been a risk of it going bust in 1991. It always had the same owners until 2020 and was variously a subsidiary of the plc from 1994 and Baton from 2010.carly burn said:Has the ground always been a separate entity to the club?
If not where did this loophole start. Surely their should have been more securities in place than a 'struggling to get planning permission' headache for those that might be intent on using the Valley for other purposes than football.
Who's at fault for not contractually linking both together?
My guess is Murray.The planning system offers quite robust protection because of the land designation. Residential is contrary to the local plan and would be a lengthy legal battle, which would go beyond Greenwich. But a crucial point is that The Valley is a problematic site anyway because of the topography, the railway line and the soil conditions. It probably requires excavation under Ransom Walk railway bridge to create suitable access for a viable number of homes.0 -
I get the intention. Times change.Airman Brown said:
The reason for separating the two companies was to protect the freehold if the football company went bust. It’s been like that since circa 1992 - and there had been a risk of it going bust in 1991. It always had the same owners until 2020 and was variously a subsidiary of the plc from 1994 and Baton from 2010.carly burn said:Has the ground always been a separate entity to the club?
If not where did this loophole start. Surely their should have been more securities in place than a 'struggling to get planning permission' headache for those that might be intent on using the Valley for other purposes than football.
Who's at fault for not contractually linking both together?
My guess is Murray.
it's now clearly being used as a stick to beat us with.1 -
Nancy Pelosi is 82. And she's just about to kick off world war 3!cabbles said:Be interesting to see RD’s age and how that plays a factor.
Not suggesting he’s close to leaving this world, but at 75, this may also have an impact for whoever is owner in a few years4 - Sponsored links:
-
I don’t see what would have prevented RD carving it out when he sold the club to ESI anyway.carly burn said:
I get the intention. Times change.Airman Brown said:
The reason for separating the two companies was to protect the freehold if the football company went bust. It’s been like that since circa 1992 - and there had been a risk of it going bust in 1991. It always had the same owners until 2020 and was variously a subsidiary of the plc from 1994 and Baton from 2010.carly burn said:Has the ground always been a separate entity to the club?
If not where did this loophole start. Surely their should have been more securities in place than a 'struggling to get planning permission' headache for those that might be intent on using the Valley for other purposes than football.
Who's at fault for not contractually linking both together?
My guess is Murray.
it's now clearly being used as a stick to beat us with.1 -
Don't the Chelsea fans group own the pitch at Stamford bridge or something? Could we have put something like that in place before it started to fall into the hands of people who may not have the interests of CAFC as their sole purpose of getting involved?Airman Brown said:
I don’t see what would have prevented RD carving it out when he sold the club to ESI anyway.carly burn said:
I get the intention. Times change.Airman Brown said:
The reason for separating the two companies was to protect the freehold if the football company went bust. It’s been like that since circa 1992 - and there had been a risk of it going bust in 1991. It always had the same owners until 2020 and was variously a subsidiary of the plc from 1994 and Baton from 2010.carly burn said:Has the ground always been a separate entity to the club?
If not where did this loophole start. Surely their should have been more securities in place than a 'struggling to get planning permission' headache for those that might be intent on using the Valley for other purposes than football.
Who's at fault for not contractually linking both together?
My guess is Murray.
it's now clearly being used as a stick to beat us with.
Might have made RD seriously consider any offers to buy lock & stock?0 -
Given the multiple investigations of a move to the peninsula, including in conjunction with the council, I doubt the club was ever open to that. It may in fact have pushed the club into admin because there weren’t a lot of other options in 2010 in particular, while in 2013 the spivs were trying to force relocation as the subsequent court case laid out.carly burn said:
Don't the Chelsea fans group own the pitch at Stamford bridge or something? Could we have put something like that in place before it started to fall into the hands of people who may not have the interests of CAFC as their sole purpose of getting involved?Airman Brown said:
I don’t see what would have prevented RD carving it out when he sold the club to ESI anyway.carly burn said:
I get the intention. Times change.Airman Brown said:
The reason for separating the two companies was to protect the freehold if the football company went bust. It’s been like that since circa 1992 - and there had been a risk of it going bust in 1991. It always had the same owners until 2020 and was variously a subsidiary of the plc from 1994 and Baton from 2010.carly burn said:Has the ground always been a separate entity to the club?
If not where did this loophole start. Surely their should have been more securities in place than a 'struggling to get planning permission' headache for those that might be intent on using the Valley for other purposes than football.
Who's at fault for not contractually linking both together?
My guess is Murray.
it's now clearly being used as a stick to beat us with.
Might have made RD seriously consider any offers to buy lock & stock?
0 -
Ever?Airman Brown said:
Given the multiple investigations of a move to the peninsula, including in conjunction with the council, I doubt the club was ever open to that. It may in fact have pushed the club into admin because there weren’t a lot of other options in 2010 in particular, while in 2013 the spivs were trying to force relocation as the subsequent court case laid out.carly burn said:
Don't the Chelsea fans group own the pitch at Stamford bridge or something? Could we have put something like that in place before it started to fall into the hands of people who may not have the interests of CAFC as their sole purpose of getting involved?Airman Brown said:
I don’t see what would have prevented RD carving it out when he sold the club to ESI anyway.carly burn said:
I get the intention. Times change.Airman Brown said:
The reason for separating the two companies was to protect the freehold if the football company went bust. It’s been like that since circa 1992 - and there had been a risk of it going bust in 1991. It always had the same owners until 2020 and was variously a subsidiary of the plc from 1994 and Baton from 2010.carly burn said:Has the ground always been a separate entity to the club?
If not where did this loophole start. Surely their should have been more securities in place than a 'struggling to get planning permission' headache for those that might be intent on using the Valley for other purposes than football.
Who's at fault for not contractually linking both together?
My guess is Murray.
it's now clearly being used as a stick to beat us with.
Might have made RD seriously consider any offers to buy lock & stock?
I get when we had gangsters running the club. But in the wholesome, well run years?0 -
The peninsula thing reared its head around 2000 - the board was more focused on raising cash in the City prior to and after that than protecting the ground. There may have been a tension between the two.carly burn said:
Ever?Airman Brown said:
Given the multiple investigations of a move to the peninsula, including in conjunction with the council, I doubt the club was ever open to that. It may in fact have pushed the club into admin because there weren’t a lot of other options in 2010 in particular, while in 2013 the spivs were trying to force relocation as the subsequent court case laid out.carly burn said:
Don't the Chelsea fans group own the pitch at Stamford bridge or something? Could we have put something like that in place before it started to fall into the hands of people who may not have the interests of CAFC as their sole purpose of getting involved?Airman Brown said:
I don’t see what would have prevented RD carving it out when he sold the club to ESI anyway.carly burn said:
I get the intention. Times change.Airman Brown said:
The reason for separating the two companies was to protect the freehold if the football company went bust. It’s been like that since circa 1992 - and there had been a risk of it going bust in 1991. It always had the same owners until 2020 and was variously a subsidiary of the plc from 1994 and Baton from 2010.carly burn said:Has the ground always been a separate entity to the club?
If not where did this loophole start. Surely their should have been more securities in place than a 'struggling MMO to get planning permission' headache for those that might be intent on using the Valley for other purposes than football.
Who's at fault for not contractually linking both together?
My guess is Murray.
it's now clearly being used as a stick to beat us with.
Might have made RD seriously consider any offers to buy lock & stock?
I get when we had gangsters running the club. But in the wholesome, well run years?0 -
It seems you want to live in the past.ElfsborgAddick said:
You were a supporter of Meire?Crusty54 said:
Evidence that they are not.ElfsborgAddick said:
Oh please, you are not telling me they are suitable for the job and that Sandgaard has not deliberately given them posts because of who they are.Crusty54 said:
Can you provide any evidence that Martyn is not carrying out his duties correctly?ElfsborgAddick said:
Sandgaard needs to remove his son and wife from the club and bring in experience, people who know what they are doing.MuttleyCAFC said:We should still be grateful to Sandgaard. There was a chance we could have ceased to exist and he removed it. Also, he has invested in the club and in my view, wiser investment of the same scale and we would be in a much better place.
Behind the scenes it has been a bit chaotic as well as in front of them as 4 managers testify to. Stability seems to be a word Sandgaard doesn't understand. He has bought and owns this expensive toy and wants to play with it. The problem is, we have an emotional attachment to it and the fans, lets face it, area a big reason why people buy into a loss making business like football. Well lower league football at least. For the adulation and triumph when you get it right.
After that we can move forward, behind the scenes anyway.
Have you any idea what Raelynn Maloney is working on? I have spoken her and she is doing some trouble shooting like identifying why season tickets to the same address are posted separately. This is down to old computer systems. Changes happening for next season. She knows and understands the internal set up pretty well.
My Branch Manager was given the post because of his dad being the owner of the company, it's an absolute mess and the poor fella does not know what day of the week it is.
Was you a supporter of Meire btw?
There are many successful family businesses.
She's long gone.0 -
He doesn't want to get some revenge. He just wants his money back to prove he knows best, but is deluded thinking that he'll get it.DOUCHER said:
No but he seems to be acting stubbornly - something u can afford to do when u have his resources and want to get sone revengeAirman Brown said:
I don’t think it’s that great for him, to be honest. He could have banked £30m up front with more to come in future based on performance - he’s currently getting £500,000 a year plus potential performance bonuses which TS has shown no evidence he can trigger.DOUCHER said:
I didn’t say he was but u suggest he now has us by the bolloxAirman Brown said:
Except he was an arse when he arrived and before that in terms of other clubs. There’s no evidence his irrationality was confined to Charlton.DOUCHER said:
Well looks like pissing him right off has backfiredOAirman Brown said:
For now, but based on the false assumption which he keeps repeating for a reason: that he can triple the revenue and sell the ground out in L1 and, as he has also said, win promotion from the Championship without competing on wages.Stu_of_Kunming said:
He owns and is bankrolling the club, something no one else was able and or willing to do, even the secret silent billionaires.Airman Brown said:
The problem with that for me is that TS doesn’t own anything at Charlton that is worth any money. The only way that changes as far as I can see is by getting to the PL.AndyG said:
Bloody hell something we agree on mate 😉Airman Brown said:
That’s why ultimately I think it will be resolved, but not by TS whose approach is based on a complete misreading of the commercial opportunities outside the PL.AndyG said:We all know that RD over values the club but if you look at things in a different way to normal life and more from the crazy world of football.
If someone has crazy wealth and wants to buy a football club that meets all the requirements of being a top premiership club with enough investment from aforementioned wealth them £50m is a drop in the ocean. It isnt even the cost of a decent premiership player. There are a handful of clubs in lower leagues that meet that criteria and I would argue that we are one of them.
I'm not saying RD's valuation is anywhere near correct but I'm not in the category of people that have crazy wealth obviously. If I was then £50m shouldn't be a major hurdle in the world of football ownership
Ofcourse you are correct with the best will in the world TS doesnt have the money to get us anywhere near. But I do think we owe the man as he stepped in a dealt with the crooks and RD when nobody else would or was able. I see him as a holding owner to hopefully sort the shite out and then sell whilst making himself a nice few quid with my blessing
I agree, he is the owner we have and there is no point endlessly going over alternative scenarios any more than revisiting 2006. But it is important to understand why he is the owner - because like ESI he would rent the ground - and that this puts the club is a weak position going forward, even though it has removed the immediate threat of Southall, Farnell and co, which is clearly a good thing.No one else other than ESI would buy the club without the ground. That is still the case and means that unless Sandgaard turns water into wine, which I doubt he can, we still have.a problem. There is no value in the business.If TS fails he’ll either lose the rent or have to accept a similar or worse deal to the one he could have had 2017-2020, because the basis of his valuation is a property scheme that won’t fly.4 -
Agree. He is a fool chasing his losses.swordfish said:
He doesn't want to get some revenge. He just wants his money back to prove he knows best, but is deluded thinking that he'll get it.DOUCHER said:
No but he seems to be acting stubbornly - something u can afford to do when u have his resources and want to get sone revengeAirman Brown said:
I don’t think it’s that great for him, to be honest. He could have banked £30m up front with more to come in future based on performance - he’s currently getting £500,000 a year plus potential performance bonuses which TS has shown no evidence he can trigger.DOUCHER said:
I didn’t say he was but u suggest he now has us by the bolloxAirman Brown said:
Except he was an arse when he arrived and before that in terms of other clubs. There’s no evidence his irrationality was confined to Charlton.DOUCHER said:
Well looks like pissing him right off has backfiredOAirman Brown said:
For now, but based on the false assumption which he keeps repeating for a reason: that he can triple the revenue and sell the ground out in L1 and, as he has also said, win promotion from the Championship without competing on wages.Stu_of_Kunming said:
He owns and is bankrolling the club, something no one else was able and or willing to do, even the secret silent billionaires.Airman Brown said:
The problem with that for me is that TS doesn’t own anything at Charlton that is worth any money. The only way that changes as far as I can see is by getting to the PL.AndyG said:
Bloody hell something we agree on mate 😉Airman Brown said:
That’s why ultimately I think it will be resolved, but not by TS whose approach is based on a complete misreading of the commercial opportunities outside the PL.AndyG said:We all know that RD over values the club but if you look at things in a different way to normal life and more from the crazy world of football.
If someone has crazy wealth and wants to buy a football club that meets all the requirements of being a top premiership club with enough investment from aforementioned wealth them £50m is a drop in the ocean. It isnt even the cost of a decent premiership player. There are a handful of clubs in lower leagues that meet that criteria and I would argue that we are one of them.
I'm not saying RD's valuation is anywhere near correct but I'm not in the category of people that have crazy wealth obviously. If I was then £50m shouldn't be a major hurdle in the world of football ownership
Ofcourse you are correct with the best will in the world TS doesnt have the money to get us anywhere near. But I do think we owe the man as he stepped in a dealt with the crooks and RD when nobody else would or was able. I see him as a holding owner to hopefully sort the shite out and then sell whilst making himself a nice few quid with my blessing
I agree, he is the owner we have and there is no point endlessly going over alternative scenarios any more than revisiting 2006. But it is important to understand why he is the owner - because like ESI he would rent the ground - and that this puts the club is a weak position going forward, even though it has removed the immediate threat of Southall, Farnell and co, which is clearly a good thing.No one else other than ESI would buy the club without the ground. That is still the case and means that unless Sandgaard turns water into wine, which I doubt he can, we still have.a problem. There is no value in the business.If TS fails he’ll either lose the rent or have to accept a similar or worse deal to the one he could have had 2017-2020, because the basis of his valuation is a property scheme that won’t fly.0 -
But this is an assumption in itself. Just because he wants to sell out the ground and wants to triple the revenue doesn't mean his ownership is contingent on doing it.Airman Brown said:
For now, but based on the false assumption which he keeps repeating for a reason: that he can triple the revenue and sell the ground out in L1 and, as he has also said, win promotion from the Championship without competing on wages. Whether he has the appetite or the ability to put in £50m or £100m to try to get there, we’ll see.Stu_of_Kunming said:
He owns and is bankrolling the club, something no one else was able and or willing to do, even the secret silent billionaires.Airman Brown said:
The problem with that for me is that TS doesn’t own anything at Charlton that is worth any money. The only way that changes as far as I can see is by getting to the PL.AndyG said:
Bloody hell something we agree on mate 😉Airman Brown said:
That’s why ultimately I think it will be resolved, but not by TS whose approach is based on a complete misreading of the commercial opportunities outside the PL.AndyG said:We all know that RD over values the club but if you look at things in a different way to normal life and more from the crazy world of football.
If someone has crazy wealth and wants to buy a football club that meets all the requirements of being a top premiership club with enough investment from aforementioned wealth them £50m is a drop in the ocean. It isnt even the cost of a decent premiership player. There are a handful of clubs in lower leagues that meet that criteria and I would argue that we are one of them.
I'm not saying RD's valuation is anywhere near correct but I'm not in the category of people that have crazy wealth obviously. If I was then £50m shouldn't be a major hurdle in the world of football ownership
Ofcourse you are correct with the best will in the world TS doesnt have the money to get us anywhere near. But I do think we owe the man as he stepped in a dealt with the crooks and RD when nobody else would or was able. I see him as a holding owner to hopefully sort the shite out and then sell whilst making himself a nice few quid with my blessing4 -
But that’s not a problem of his doing, is it, it’s down to RD, The Spivs and to a point Murray and co.Airman Brown said:
For now, but based on the false assumption which he keeps repeating for a reason: that he can triple the revenue and sell the ground out in L1 and, as he has also said, win promotion from the Championship without competing on wages. Whether he has the appetite or the ability to put in £50m or £100m to try to get there, we’ll see.Stu_of_Kunming said:
He owns and is bankrolling the club, something no one else was able and or willing to do, even the secret silent billionaires.Airman Brown said:
The problem with that for me is that TS doesn’t own anything at Charlton that is worth any money. The only way that changes as far as I can see is by getting to the PL.AndyG said:
Bloody hell something we agree on mate 😉Airman Brown said:
That’s why ultimately I think it will be resolved, but not by TS whose approach is based on a complete misreading of the commercial opportunities outside the PL.AndyG said:We all know that RD over values the club but if you look at things in a different way to normal life and more from the crazy world of football.
If someone has crazy wealth and wants to buy a football club that meets all the requirements of being a top premiership club with enough investment from aforementioned wealth them £50m is a drop in the ocean. It isnt even the cost of a decent premiership player. There are a handful of clubs in lower leagues that meet that criteria and I would argue that we are one of them.
I'm not saying RD's valuation is anywhere near correct but I'm not in the category of people that have crazy wealth obviously. If I was then £50m shouldn't be a major hurdle in the world of football ownership
Ofcourse you are correct with the best will in the world TS doesnt have the money to get us anywhere near. But I do think we owe the man as he stepped in a dealt with the crooks and RD when nobody else would or was able. I see him as a holding owner to hopefully sort the shite out and then sell whilst making himself a nice few quid with my blessing
I agree, he is the owner we have and there is no point endlessly going over alternative scenarios any more than revisiting 2006. But it is important to understand why he is the owner - because like ESI he would rent the ground - and that this puts the club is a weak position going forward, even though it has removed the immediate threat of Southall, Farnell and co, which is clearly a good thing.No one else other than ESI would buy the club without the ground. That is still the case and means that unless Sandgaard turns water into wine, which I doubt he can, we still have.a problem. There is no value in the business.0 - Sponsored links:
-
It doesn't really matter if it was or wasn't his doing, he's the one who has to try and deal with it now. And if he doesn't, there is trouble ahead.Stu_of_Kunming said:
But that’s not a problem of his doing, is it, it’s down to RD, The Spivs and to a point Murray and co.Airman Brown said:
For now, but based on the false assumption which he keeps repeating for a reason: that he can triple the revenue and sell the ground out in L1 and, as he has also said, win promotion from the Championship without competing on wages. Whether he has the appetite or the ability to put in £50m or £100m to try to get there, we’ll see.Stu_of_Kunming said:
He owns and is bankrolling the club, something no one else was able and or willing to do, even the secret silent billionaires.Airman Brown said:
The problem with that for me is that TS doesn’t own anything at Charlton that is worth any money. The only way that changes as far as I can see is by getting to the PL.AndyG said:
Bloody hell something we agree on mate 😉Airman Brown said:
That’s why ultimately I think it will be resolved, but not by TS whose approach is based on a complete misreading of the commercial opportunities outside the PL.AndyG said:We all know that RD over values the club but if you look at things in a different way to normal life and more from the crazy world of football.
If someone has crazy wealth and wants to buy a football club that meets all the requirements of being a top premiership club with enough investment from aforementioned wealth them £50m is a drop in the ocean. It isnt even the cost of a decent premiership player. There are a handful of clubs in lower leagues that meet that criteria and I would argue that we are one of them.
I'm not saying RD's valuation is anywhere near correct but I'm not in the category of people that have crazy wealth obviously. If I was then £50m shouldn't be a major hurdle in the world of football ownership
Ofcourse you are correct with the best will in the world TS doesnt have the money to get us anywhere near. But I do think we owe the man as he stepped in a dealt with the crooks and RD when nobody else would or was able. I see him as a holding owner to hopefully sort the shite out and then sell whilst making himself a nice few quid with my blessing
I agree, he is the owner we have and there is no point endlessly going over alternative scenarios any more than revisiting 2006. But it is important to understand why he is the owner - because like ESI he would rent the ground - and that this puts the club is a weak position going forward, even though it has removed the immediate threat of Southall, Farnell and co, which is clearly a good thing.No one else other than ESI would buy the club without the ground. That is still the case and means that unless Sandgaard turns water into wine, which I doubt he can, we still have.a problem. There is no value in the business.0 -
Absolutely, but when people are constantly sniping, I think it’s worth remembering no one else was willing to do what TS did.thenewbie said:
It doesn't really matter if it was or wasn't his doing, he's the one who has to try and deal with it now. And if he doesn't, there is trouble ahead.Stu_of_Kunming said:
But that’s not a problem of his doing, is it, it’s down to RD, The Spivs and to a point Murray and co.Airman Brown said:
For now, but based on the false assumption which he keeps repeating for a reason: that he can triple the revenue and sell the ground out in L1 and, as he has also said, win promotion from the Championship without competing on wages. Whether he has the appetite or the ability to put in £50m or £100m to try to get there, we’ll see.Stu_of_Kunming said:
He owns and is bankrolling the club, something no one else was able and or willing to do, even the secret silent billionaires.Airman Brown said:
The problem with that for me is that TS doesn’t own anything at Charlton that is worth any money. The only way that changes as far as I can see is by getting to the PL.AndyG said:
Bloody hell something we agree on mate 😉Airman Brown said:
That’s why ultimately I think it will be resolved, but not by TS whose approach is based on a complete misreading of the commercial opportunities outside the PL.AndyG said:We all know that RD over values the club but if you look at things in a different way to normal life and more from the crazy world of football.
If someone has crazy wealth and wants to buy a football club that meets all the requirements of being a top premiership club with enough investment from aforementioned wealth them £50m is a drop in the ocean. It isnt even the cost of a decent premiership player. There are a handful of clubs in lower leagues that meet that criteria and I would argue that we are one of them.
I'm not saying RD's valuation is anywhere near correct but I'm not in the category of people that have crazy wealth obviously. If I was then £50m shouldn't be a major hurdle in the world of football ownership
Ofcourse you are correct with the best will in the world TS doesnt have the money to get us anywhere near. But I do think we owe the man as he stepped in a dealt with the crooks and RD when nobody else would or was able. I see him as a holding owner to hopefully sort the shite out and then sell whilst making himself a nice few quid with my blessing
I agree, he is the owner we have and there is no point endlessly going over alternative scenarios any more than revisiting 2006. But it is important to understand why he is the owner - because like ESI he would rent the ground - and that this puts the club is a weak position going forward, even though it has removed the immediate threat of Southall, Farnell and co, which is clearly a good thing.No one else other than ESI would buy the club without the ground. That is still the case and means that unless Sandgaard turns water into wine, which I doubt he can, we still have.a problem. There is no value in the business.5 -
Whatever happens next, the Club (which is what we care about right), will be in a better position to be sold under TS's limited form of ownership - Stable squad, contract length of players good, investment in Sparrows Lane, academy recognition. It's not brilliant but it has stabilised since having mysterious crooks attached to the club (which our key players indicated was the reason they ran their contracts down). Lets not conflate this point with chat about League position or Ex director loans, etc.
If a Billionaire fancies coming in now, he can be as silent or unsilent in his approach to purchasing Charlton. I've often seen and heard of people with too much money spending more on a house just to lay a marker down, show off, or just because they can.1 -
The 'club' is only worth what Sandgaard is willing to sell it for.mendonca said:Whatever happens next, the Club (which is what we care about right), will be in a better position to be sold under TS's limited form of ownership - Stable squad, contract length of players good, investment in Sparrows Lane, academy recognition. It's not brilliant but it has stabilised since having mysterious crooks attached to the club (which our key players indicated was the reason they ran their contracts down). Lets not conflate this point with chat about League position or Ex director loans, etc.
If a Billionaire fancies coming in now, he can be as silent or unsilent in his approach to purchasing Charlton. I've often seen and heard of people with too much money spending more on a house just to lay a marker down, show off, or just because they can.
Remember this is an asset that sold for less than £5 just a couple of years ago.
You're basically buying a drain on finances in its current form, regardless of what Sandgaard has supposedly put in.
There's no 'going rate' in this scenario.It's all down to his discretion and whether he wants to cut his ongoing losses.2 -
TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash
1 -
@carly burn agree, although not if there are silent billionaires lurking around Charlton.0
-
Would we be in danger of hounding out another owner? And regretting it? Rightfully the action was taken against RD, The same people now are having doubts about TS, who appears to be a different type of person. If he was, who do people expect to pick up the mantle. Feels like we are going around in circles. Any people with doubts need to be 100% sure and have facts that this guy isn’t for us, otherwise it’s just unhelpful noise and maybe let him try and get things right. I don’t care if it’s TS or anyone else as long as the club on and off the pitch are in the right place.Keep the lols coming hypocrites.😜👍11
-
Hope he sings all his answersScoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash2 -
The family activity zone does have pheonix nights feel about it.Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash0 -
It’s inflatable flith, that’s what it iscarly burn said:
The family activity zone does have pheonix nights feel about it.Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash2
