Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Sandgaard ownership discussion 2022-3 onwards (Meeting with CAST p138)
Comments
-
Nor would I, but outside of this forum there does seem to be some what would, and unfortunately that number will increase if things don't progress on the pitch.Airman Brown said:
Personally I would neither support nor participate in protests against TS. While I don’t think he’s on the right track, I don’t question his intentions.Clarky said:I have read all the recent comments with interest but my mind remains the same as it did before I read them. RD was and still is the problem and the ongoing structural problems are purely down to his stubborness. There were obviously interested parties (Aussies/Barclay etc) who wanted everything lock, stock and barrel but it didn't happen because RD wouldn't talk, changed the goalposts and kept with his overinflated valuation. It was perfect for him to get rid of the operating losses and lease the ground and he eventually ends up with TS who got rid of penniless ESi and puts RD in a decent but not perfect position.
From a fans point of view TS did save the club and I am not sure what other option we had apart from administration but most could see through his "blow the league away" comment and realised that his 5 year plan was pretty much pie in the sky. We also know that as far as football owners go he isn't that wealthy and that he was going to lose millions but some still hold him to his overly optimistic comments.
Nobody knows what the future holds but I don't see a white knight in shining armour arriving anytime soon and even if that happens it will still be reliant on RD playing ball. I can understand the frustration some have with TS and the way he operates but I always remember it wasn't him who separated the club from its assets, what he did was give us a way out of a really nasty situation.
Finally, re the discussion on "hounding him out", whilst I don't believe that is happening the momentum against him will rise, and quickly if we don't succeed on the pitch, and if that doesn't happen I would not write off protests in the near future.
0 -
I didn't mean on here, outside of this forum it does get more heated. Besides I didn't say or didn't mean to infer that anybody has proposed protests but alluded to something that I think could easily happen if things on the pitch don't improve.MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't seen anybody propose protests. What some are doing is to point out flaws in his plan as they see them.0 -
Hope he fucking doesn'tFumbluff said:
Hope he sings all his answersScoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash0 -
Seriously, WHY ??? Look at me ?Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash0 -
Be interesting to see what sort of reception he gets.charltonbob said:
Seriously, WHY ??? Look at me ?Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash0 -
Wouldn't surprise me if he didn't waffle on about what a great club we are, we've signed some great players, mistakes have been made but though we've had decades of mismanagement we're now on the right track............. & then wifey will appear in her cheer leader outfit with martin close behind in mini skirt while showing his black box.superclive98 said:
Be interesting to see what sort of reception he gets.charltonbob said:
Seriously, WHY ??? Look at me ?Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash9 -
The other way around, surely?charltonbob said:
Wouldn't surprise me if he didn't waffle on about what a great club we are, we've signed some great players, mistakes have been made but though we've had decades of mismanagement we're now on the right track............. & then wifey will appear in her cheer leader outfit with martin close behind in mini skirt while showing his black box.superclive98 said:
Be interesting to see what sort of reception he gets.charltonbob said:
Seriously, WHY ??? Look at me ?Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash
(I'll get me tissues...)1 -
He will be talking to an empty stadium at that time , 2.35. There is only one thing I want to see on the pitch , a winning team. It's time to delivercharltonbob said:
Seriously, WHY ??? Look at me ?Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash5 -
Mind I refer back to these posts when we have a shite owner in the future who doesnt communicate again?
4 -
soapy_jones said:
The other way around, surely?charltonbob said:
Wouldn't surprise me if he didn't waffle on about what a great club we are, we've signed some great players, mistakes have been made but though we've had decades of mismanagement we're now on the right track............. & then wifey will appear in her cheer leader outfit with martin close behind in mini skirt while showing his black box.superclive98 said:
Be interesting to see what sort of reception he gets.charltonbob said:
Seriously, WHY ??? Look at me ?Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash
(I'll get me tissues...)
0 - Sponsored links:
-
I never said 95% are happy, I said they were happy to give Sandgaard an opportunity. Like I said, I don't think that automatically means they cannot criticise, it shouldn't be all or nothing. We've all moaned about our partners and/or friends, doesn't mean you want rid of them. I moan about Charlton all the bloody time, but I won't stop them supporting the club. Of course, that works best ways and for those defending Sandgaard at every opportunity they're welcome to that opinion. 99% of fans aiming any criticism towards Sandgaard would love to turn around in the future and admit they were wrong.paulfox said:
No not at all, but those people also need to respect others opinion and not try and shut them up if they disagree.Seems to be a lot of doubt and moaning if 95% are happy though. We are never going to have the perfect owner so sometimes better the devil you know.cafcfan1990 said:
Yes, we would be in danger of "hounding him out" if we were protesting or anything similar. Having doubts, questioning some of his decision making and criticising some of his actions is miles away from anything like hounding him out. Sandgaard is not being treated like Roland was (rightfully so). From what I can see/read, 95% of fans are more than happy to give him the opportunity to get things right, but that doesn't mean they can't have an opinion does it?paulfox said: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.7 -
You yourself said RD wouldn’t speak to them, so no, they couldn’t. TS could, so waiting on the secret mystery men would have kept us under ESI ownership and we may not exist anymore.Airman Brown said:
True but that’s because they didn’t see it as a sensible thing to do, rather than they couldn’t. I don’t think it’s sniping to recognise that the club still has a big structural problem.Stu_of_Kunming said:
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.
of course we can all recognise the club has issues, of course it does, it’s been a train wreck for most of the our recent history, but it goes a lot deeper than that for some people.1 -
Happy to see his money though?charltonnick said:
He will be talking to an empty stadium at that time , 2.35. There is only one thing I want to see on the pitch , a winning team. It's time to delivercharltonbob said:
Seriously, WHY ??? Look at me ?Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash0 -
I don’t understand all the personal digs.charltonbob said:
Seriously, WHY ??? Look at me ?Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash
Unless there’s something sadly lacking in the diggers?8 -
Yet again, for clarification, I’m not defending sandgaards actions, I’m defending his right to do as he wishes and to get things right. I don’t think people would admit they were completely wrong, they still may not end up being wrong. They would just say they were entitled to have doubts and celebrate like the rest like nothing had happened, then find something else to moan about. Winning games will dampen a lot of noise I’m sure. Let’s wait to see the comments once TS has been on the pitch today and see which were worthwhile and which were just bitching about him. People want they’re cake and eat it. Thanks for lols in advance by the way from the regulars.👍😂cafcfan1990 said:
I never said 95% are happy, I said they were happy to give Sandgaard an opportunity. Like I said, I don't think that automatically means they cannot criticise, it shouldn't be all or nothing. We've all moaned about our partners and/or friends, doesn't mean you want rid of them. I moan about Charlton all the bloody time, but I won't stop them supporting the club. Of course, that works best ways and for those defending Sandgaard at every opportunity they're welcome to that opinion. 99% of fans aiming any criticism towards Sandgaard would love to turn around in the future and admit they were wrong.paulfox said:
No not at all, but those people also need to respect others opinion and not try and shut them up if they disagree.Seems to be a lot of doubt and moaning if 95% are happy though. We are never going to have the perfect owner so sometimes better the devil you know.cafcfan1990 said:
Yes, we would be in danger of "hounding him out" if we were protesting or anything similar. Having doubts, questioning some of his decision making and criticising some of his actions is miles away from anything like hounding him out. Sandgaard is not being treated like Roland was (rightfully so). From what I can see/read, 95% of fans are more than happy to give him the opportunity to get things right, but that doesn't mean they can't have an opinion does it?paulfox said: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.0 -
All hot air to create silly debate.Clarky said:
Nor would I, but outside of this forum there does seem to be some what would, and unfortunately that number will increase if things don't progress on the pitch.Airman Brown said:
Personally I would neither support nor participate in protests against TS. While I don’t think he’s on the right track, I don’t question his intentions.Clarky said:I have read all the recent comments with interest but my mind remains the same as it did before I read them. RD was and still is the problem and the ongoing structural problems are purely down to his stubborness. There were obviously interested parties (Aussies/Barclay etc) who wanted everything lock, stock and barrel but it didn't happen because RD wouldn't talk, changed the goalposts and kept with his overinflated valuation. It was perfect for him to get rid of the operating losses and lease the ground and he eventually ends up with TS who got rid of penniless ESi and puts RD in a decent but not perfect position.
From a fans point of view TS did save the club and I am not sure what other option we had apart from administration but most could see through his "blow the league away" comment and realised that his 5 year plan was pretty much pie in the sky. We also know that as far as football owners go he isn't that wealthy and that he was going to lose millions but some still hold him to his overly optimistic comments.
Nobody knows what the future holds but I don't see a white knight in shining armour arriving anytime soon and even if that happens it will still be reliant on RD playing ball. I can understand the frustration some have with TS and the way he operates but I always remember it wasn't him who separated the club from its assets, what he did was give us a way out of a really nasty situation.
Finally, re the discussion on "hounding him out", whilst I don't believe that is happening the momentum against him will rise, and quickly if we don't succeed on the pitch, and if that doesn't happen I would not write off protests in the near future.0 -
If I knew Mrs S was to trott out as a cheerleader I'd be the first in the ground.charltonbob said:
Wouldn't surprise me if he didn't waffle on about what a great club we are, we've signed some great players, mistakes have been made but though we've had decades of mismanagement we're now on the right track............. & then wifey will appear in her cheer leader outfit with martin close behind in mini skirt while showing his black box.superclive98 said:
Be interesting to see what sort of reception he gets.charltonbob said:
Seriously, WHY ??? Look at me ?Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash1 -
Its comments like this that really grate on me. Seriously, why does it matter? If you are going to the game stay in the concourse and have a beer and ignore what he is saying on the pitch, it really is that simple. And then tomorrow when you read on here what he said you can have another dig at him. Win, win for you!charltonbob said:
Seriously, WHY ??? Look at me ?Scoham said:TS being interviewed on the pitch tomorrow.
https://www.charltonafc.com/news/eight-things-do-derby-clash14 -
Agree with above.
I enjoy the debate over TS’s strategies (or lack of). That’s fair game, and they’re conversations that should be had.But when you spend your time moaning about guitars, interviews and his personality in general I think get over yourselves, or in the case of Twitter, which is reaching new levels of toxicity, grow up ffs.15 -
What we’re after is a highly ambitious, passionate, realistic and down to earth billionaire Charlton fan who gives us the second biggest budget (so we can’t be accused of buying the league), stays quiet in the background while openly and regularly communicating with the fan base, innovates by using tried and trusted methods, and utilises the skills of supporters but not too much so they can’t be accused of running the club with volunteers.
10 - Sponsored links:
-
Most importantly, we need an owner who puts together a team and staff that wins games.Scoham said:What we’re after is a highly ambitious, passionate, realistic and down to earth billionaire Charlton fan who gives us the second biggest budget (so we can’t be accused of buying the league), stays quiet in the background while openly and regularly communicating with the fan base, innovates by using tried and trusted methods, and utilises the skills of supporters but not too much so they can’t be accused of running the club with volunteers.
Even then, everything that you've mentioned, wont be enough if we keep finishing in mid-table at this level.0 -
.Stu_of_Kunming said:
They didn’t need to speak to RD to buy the football club - it was owned by ESI1. Do you think RD agreed the sale from ESI1 to ESI2?
You yourself said RD wouldn’t speak to them, so no, they couldn’t. TS could, so waiting on the secret mystery men would have kept us under ESI ownership and we may not exist anymore.Airman Brown said:
True but that’s because they didn’t see it as a sensible thing to do, rather than they couldn’t. I don’t think it’s sniping to recognise that the club still has a big structural problem.Stu_of_Kunming said:
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.
of course we can all recognise the club has issues, of course it does, it’s been a train wreck for most of the our recent history, but it goes a lot deeper than that for some people.
Barclay and Varney spoke to both incarnations of ESI - the deal did not progress because LDT said RD had sold the club and so there was nothing to discuss. RD was content to rely on the existing lease and did not want to sell the freeholds.Varney actually enabled TS to get into the conversation because he intervened with the EFL, who didn’t take TS seriously, using his relationship with Rick Parry. Otherwise Sandgaard’s interest was going nowhere either.4 -
That goes without saying, but even if that happens this season it won’t be enough for some.ForeverAddickted said:
Most importantly, we need an owner who puts together a team and staff that wins games.Scoham said:What we’re after is a highly ambitious, passionate, realistic and down to earth billionaire Charlton fan who gives us the second biggest budget (so we can’t be accused of buying the league), stays quiet in the background while openly and regularly communicating with the fan base, innovates by using tried and trusted methods, and utilises the skills of supporters but not too much so they can’t be accused of running the club with volunteers.
Even then, everything that you've mentioned, wont be enough if we keep finishing in mid-table at this level.1 -
I have no real knowledge of Garners abilities but still think, as it stands, he's been badly let down in this transfer window.
Time will tell I suppose, but if the sh*t does hit the fan on the pitch relatively early on it will be interesting to see who's jugular the fans go for?.
The managers or the owners?2 -
In what way, budget? Or number of signings? We released most players who were out of contract, realistically we weren’t going to move on several out of contract players.carly burn said:I have no real knowledge of Garners abilities but still think, as it stands, he's been badly let down in this transfer window.
Time will tell I suppose, but if the sh*t does hit the fan on the pitch relatively early on it will be interesting to see who's jugular the fans go for?.
The managers or the owners?1 -
Bit of both really. One goes hand in hand with the other I suppose.Scoham said:
In what way, budget? Or number of signings? We released most players who were out of contract, realistically we weren’t going to move on several out of contract players.carly burn said:I have no real knowledge of Garners abilities but still think, as it stands, he's been badly let down in this transfer window.
Time will tell I suppose, but if the sh*t does hit the fan on the pitch relatively early on it will be interesting to see who's jugular the fans go for?.
The managers or the owners?
For instance, Letting Washington go was a big mistake. Not replacing him is an even bigger one. And I wasn't even Washington's biggest fan!
The whole thing looks seriously unbalanced to me. No depth in lots of areas. Excess depth in others. It just has a feel,to me anyway of one that is not capable of doing much.0 -
I think people will just stop going if that happens. You’ll see attendances of 8,000 and fewer.carly burn said:I have no real knowledge of Garners abilities but still think, as it stands, he's been badly let down in this transfer window.
Time will tell I suppose, but if the sh*t does hit the fan on the pitch relatively early on it will be interesting to see who's jugular the fans go for?.
The managers or the owners?
6 -
But they wouldn’t buy the football club without the assets, which is fair enough, but the end result is the same, a purchase wasn’t possible.Airman Brown said:.Stu_of_Kunming said:
They didn’t need to speak to RD to buy the football club - it was owned by ESI1. Do you think RD agreed the sale from ESI1 to ESI2?
You yourself said RD wouldn’t speak to them, so no, they couldn’t. TS could, so waiting on the secret mystery men would have kept us under ESI ownership and we may not exist anymore.Airman Brown said:
True but that’s because they didn’t see it as a sensible thing to do, rather than they couldn’t. I don’t think it’s sniping to recognise that the club still has a big structural problem.Stu_of_Kunming said:
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.
of course we can all recognise the club has issues, of course it does, it’s been a train wreck for most of the our recent history, but it goes a lot deeper than that for some people.
Barclay and Varney spoke to both incarnations of ESI - the deal did not progress because LDT said RD had sold the club and so there was nothing to discuss. RD was content to rely on the existing lease and did not want to sell the freeholds.Varney actually enabled TS to get into the conversation because he intervened with the EFL, who didn’t take TS seriously, using his relationship with Rick Parry. Otherwise Sandgaard’s interest was going nowhere either.I have nothing against PV and would welcome any group involving him at Charlton, sadly that wasn’t a viable option, so we’re left with the only viable option.
Is it as good as any other option? Probably not. Is it better than the alternative at the time of ESI v1/2, absolutely, imo.1 -
My concern is that it isn’t going to be viable over time, not whether Sandgaard is better than ESI, which is a straw man argument. Literally no one, except perhaps Matt Southall, Chris Farnell and Paul Elliott, would claim otherwise. And they wouldn’t agree on which ESI was best.Stu_of_Kunming said:
But they wouldn’t buy the football club without the assets, which is fair enough, but the end result is the same, a purchase wasn’t possible.Airman Brown said:.Stu_of_Kunming said:
They didn’t need to speak to RD to buy the football club - it was owned by ESI1. Do you think RD agreed the sale from ESI1 to ESI2?
You yourself said RD wouldn’t speak to them, so no, they couldn’t. TS could, so waiting on the secret mystery men would have kept us under ESI ownership and we may not exist anymore.Airman Brown said:
True but that’s because they didn’t see it as a sensible thing to do, rather than they couldn’t. I don’t think it’s sniping to recognise that the club still has a big structural problem.Stu_of_Kunming said:
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.
of course we can all recognise the club has issues, of course it does, it’s been a train wreck for most of the our recent history, but it goes a lot deeper than that for some people.
Barclay and Varney spoke to both incarnations of ESI - the deal did not progress because LDT said RD had sold the club and so there was nothing to discuss. RD was content to rely on the existing lease and did not want to sell the freeholds.Varney actually enabled TS to get into the conversation because he intervened with the EFL, who didn’t take TS seriously, using his relationship with Rick Parry. Otherwise Sandgaard’s interest was going nowhere either.I have nothing against PV and would welcome any group involving him at Charlton, sadly that wasn’t a viable option, so we’re left with the only viable option.
Is it as good as any other option? Probably not. Is it better than the alternative at the time of ESI v1/2, absolutely, imo.1 -
We’re clearly in a stronger position than last year when we had the likes of Ghandour and Clayden on the bench as our attacking options. Kirk and Fraser are effectively like new signings given how little they played last season. We’ve had to sign targets when they became available, you can’t wait until you’ve offloaded the players they’re replacing.carly burn said:
Bit of both really. One goes hand in hand with the other I suppose.Scoham said:
In what way, budget? Or number of signings? We released most players who were out of contract, realistically we weren’t going to move on several out of contract players.carly burn said:I have no real knowledge of Garners abilities but still think, as it stands, he's been badly let down in this transfer window.
Time will tell I suppose, but if the sh*t does hit the fan on the pitch relatively early on it will be interesting to see who's jugular the fans go for?.
The managers or the owners?
For instance, Letting Washington go was a big mistake. Not replacing him is an even bigger one. And I wasn't even Washington's biggest fan!
The whole thing looks seriously unbalanced to me. No depth in lots of areas. Excess depth in others. It just has a feel,to me anyway of one that is not capable of doing much.
I expect we’ll bring in at least a couple more while also letting at least one or two go which should solve some of those issues. The squad was never going to be finished by this point, that’s how it works at this level rather than being a mistake by TS.
It also depends how you see certain players, I think Clare will do well as a right back for example and don’t see Sessegnon preferring his right foot as big an issue as others do. I said during the Swansea game Leaburn should cause opponents problems this season and I won’t be surprised if one or two others step up to the first team.
I don’t know if it’ll come off but I can see what they’re trying to do, it feels like there’s more logic to it than there was last year. I do feel we need these last few signings to add some real quality, while that’s concerning it was also the case for Powell and Bowyer’s promotion sides.
10
