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

swordfish said:

Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:

swordfish said:

Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:

DOUCHER said:

The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics -  great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t  own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit 

What the fcuk are you on about?

I understood it to mean that we're sometimes linked with seriously loaded buyers, often when things have started to unravel under previous owners, but it never comes to pass for whatever reason, so we shouldn't kid ourselves it might anytime soon. I'll call it, 'playing the Barclay card', whether that's fair on him or not, which I don't believe it is, but I can see where @DOUCHER is coming from and I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not getting involved in apportioning any blame for it though. It's just frustrating.

I was particularly struck by the line "they and they're (sic) cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit".
I'd love to know precisely what he means by that.

Edit: I mean, beyond the superficial, boohoo for not buying us. What "cheerleaders"?

He's probably sitting with his feet up having a cup of coffee and a small cake laughing at us trying to make sense of his post 😎

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics -  great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t  own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit 

The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.

well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument  

Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics -  great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t  own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit 

The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.

well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument  

Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.

agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners  

For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics -  great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t  own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit 

The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.

well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument  

Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.

agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners  

For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.

the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club  

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics -  great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t  own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit 

The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.

well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument  

Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.

agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners  

For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.

the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club  

AndyG said:

What is beyond any doubt is................................... Being a CAFC fan is bloody exhusting !!!!!

KBslittlesis said:

And it’s all meaningless if both the owner of the club & the land don’t want to sell.
Which appears to be the case currently 🤷‍♀️

Stu_of_Kunming said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics -  great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t  own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit 

The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.

well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument  

Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.

agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners  

For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.

the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club  

Do you honestly believe any of these people were actually interested? serious billionaires, ready to blow cash and they can’t even get a meeting with RD, come on. 

Airman Brown said:

SomervilleAddick said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics -  great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t  own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit 

The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.

well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument  

Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.

agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners  

For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.

the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club  

The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.

Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released, 

I've been told that TS refused point blank to employ the number of academy staff specified in the regulations, so no matter what he did with buildings he was never going to succeed. This information came from a football source outside the club. I've no reason to think it isn't true, but I can't confirm it.

CAFCsayer said:

J BLOCK said:

Airman Brown said:

SomervilleAddick said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics -  great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t  own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit 

The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.

well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument  

Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.

agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners  

For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.

the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club  

The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.

Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released, 

I've been told that TS refused point blank to employ the number of academy staff specified in the regulations, so no matter what he did with buildings he was never going to succeed. This information came from a football source outside the club. I've no reason to think it isn't true, but I can't confirm it.

The man is an idiot. 

I'm not sure I believe that one... why would you sink money into something and then knowingly break a rule that you know is going to make your investment a waste of time

CAFCsayer said:

J BLOCK said:

Airman Brown said:

SomervilleAddick said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

Airman Brown said:

DOUCHER said:

The only conclusion I can come to with all of this is jacko laid it on the line, said what was needed, TS had decided that wasn’t going to happen, he looked for a cheap manager option who could bring in cheap players and he also cut staff costs, raised ticket prices and will look to find a buyer who hopefully would be fooled into buying the club on some temporary business metrics -  great - more years of shit and more years of looking for a saviour whilst being made apparently impossible by RD owning the grounds - millwall don’t  own fuck all and they’ve got an owner who is willing to fund a decent side - I don’t want to hear any more about these fantasist potential buyers that are always lurking to destabilise things but never stump up when they have the opportunity - they and they’re cheerleaders are partly responsible for putting us in this shit 

The freehold to Millwall’s ground is publicly owned, which is more secure than a private landlord and a common model, especially in Europe. I’d have thought the actual buyers were the fantasists, as experience has shown.

well, you've always stated its virtually 'undevelopable' Airman so you can't ahve it both ways when it suits the argument  

Nothing in London is "undevelopable" but some sites are more difficult than others, which affects the cost, the number and type of units feasible, and hence the value of the land for residential use. Self-evidently a plot of land with good access to main roads and a motorway is likely to be more attractive to a developer than The Valley.

agreed - lets call it unviable and indeed, impossible if the football club owner doesn't quit the valley - so why are these mega rich potential investors so keen to have the ground and training ground - hasn't bothered man city's owners  

For the same reason the ex-directors secured their loans on the land, presumably. In any event, the problem it is giving us is that it opens the door to £1 purchasers because the club itself is worth nothing in a sale.

the bigger problem is it 'appears' to be putting off all these mega rich potential owners - utter nonsense if they were just interested in running a football club  

The training ground has needed substantial sums spent on it to achieve category one status. TS thought he'd found a way to do it cheaper. He hasn't succeeded. No one is spending £10m plus on an asset held on a relatively short lease, so then you've got to find another training ground and start again. Similarly The Valley, which will need investment in line with an owner's ambitions, particularly the Jimmy Seed Stand. Same problem.

Do we know why they were rejected for cat. 1? Was it a facilities issue, or organizational/ staff? I don’t think the reasons were ever released, 

I've been told that TS refused point blank to employ the number of academy staff specified in the regulations, so no matter what he did with buildings he was never going to succeed. This information came from a football source outside the club. I've no reason to think it isn't true, but I can't confirm it.

The man is an idiot. 

I'm not sure I believe that one... why would you sink money into something and then knowingly break a rule that you know is going to make your investment a waste of time