Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Sandgaard ownership discussion 2022-3 onwards (Meeting with CAST p138)
Comments
-
Whats she’s a ‘Dr’ of exactly?carly burn said:
Doctor shacked up with huge producer of medical relief products.se9addick said:
She must have serious money then.LargeAddick said:
From recent rumours it may be Raelynn doing the funding.se9addick said:
Has Sandgaard “suddenly stopped”? I assume he’s still providing pretty significant funding or we would be heading towards administration now.MuttleyCAFC said:Something changed. In the beginning he was happy to spunk money on dubious spends, then suddenly he stopped. It is obvious that a big reason we missed out on a striker was we had to free up money elsewhere first but couldn't. It begs the question why we brought in so many midfielders if we knew it was spending all the budget. I would say it is either because Garner is an idiot or the budget changed. My money is on the latter.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
If that's not a license to print money I don't know what is!0 -
I understand that, contrary to appearances, they are NOT a couple.carly burn said:
Doctor shacked up with huge producer of medical relief products.se9addick said:
She must have serious money then.LargeAddick said:
From recent rumours it may be Raelynn doing the funding.se9addick said:
Has Sandgaard “suddenly stopped”? I assume he’s still providing pretty significant funding or we would be heading towards administration now.MuttleyCAFC said:Something changed. In the beginning he was happy to spunk money on dubious spends, then suddenly he stopped. It is obvious that a big reason we missed out on a striker was we had to free up money elsewhere first but couldn't. It begs the question why we brought in so many midfielders if we knew it was spending all the budget. I would say it is either because Garner is an idiot or the budget changed. My money is on the latter.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
If that's not a license to print money I don't know what is!4 -
She has a PhD in Counselling Psychology: https://www.linkedin.com/in/raelynnmaloneyphd/The Red Robin said:
Whats she’s a ‘Dr’ of exactly?carly burn said:
Doctor shacked up with huge producer of medical relief products.se9addick said:
She must have serious money then.LargeAddick said:
From recent rumours it may be Raelynn doing the funding.se9addick said:
Has Sandgaard “suddenly stopped”? I assume he’s still providing pretty significant funding or we would be heading towards administration now.MuttleyCAFC said:Something changed. In the beginning he was happy to spunk money on dubious spends, then suddenly he stopped. It is obvious that a big reason we missed out on a striker was we had to free up money elsewhere first but couldn't. It begs the question why we brought in so many midfielders if we knew it was spending all the budget. I would say it is either because Garner is an idiot or the budget changed. My money is on the latter.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
If that's not a license to print money I don't know what is!2 -
She’s posted on social media on her birthday in the past thanking her darling with pictures of the two of them snuggled up.Fanny Fanackapan said:
I understand that, contrary to appearances, they are NOT a couple.carly burn said:
Doctor shacked up with huge producer of medical relief products.se9addick said:
She must have serious money then.LargeAddick said:
From recent rumours it may be Raelynn doing the funding.se9addick said:
Has Sandgaard “suddenly stopped”? I assume he’s still providing pretty significant funding or we would be heading towards administration now.MuttleyCAFC said:Something changed. In the beginning he was happy to spunk money on dubious spends, then suddenly he stopped. It is obvious that a big reason we missed out on a striker was we had to free up money elsewhere first but couldn't. It begs the question why we brought in so many midfielders if we knew it was spending all the budget. I would say it is either because Garner is an idiot or the budget changed. My money is on the latter.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
If that's not a license to print money I don't know what is!
unless they’ve recently split?0 -
I was in the Directors Box for the Cambridge match and sat right behind them. Judging by the way she was hanging off him and showing affection 😘 I would say that they are most definitely a coupleFanny Fanackapan said:
I understand that, contrary to appearances, they are NOT a couple.carly burn said:
Doctor shacked up with huge producer of medical relief products.se9addick said:
She must have serious money then.LargeAddick said:
From recent rumours it may be Raelynn doing the funding.se9addick said:
Has Sandgaard “suddenly stopped”? I assume he’s still providing pretty significant funding or we would be heading towards administration now.MuttleyCAFC said:Something changed. In the beginning he was happy to spunk money on dubious spends, then suddenly he stopped. It is obvious that a big reason we missed out on a striker was we had to free up money elsewhere first but couldn't. It begs the question why we brought in so many midfielders if we knew it was spending all the budget. I would say it is either because Garner is an idiot or the budget changed. My money is on the latter.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
If that's not a license to print money I don't know what is!0 -
From one extreme ( applying/finding more coaches for Cat 1) to the other.....supaclive said:
Sounds like no-one is safe from his penny pinching.
Oh, there is one exception, of course....1 -
You sure about that?Fanny Fanackapan said:
I understand that, contrary to appearances, they are NOT a couple.carly burn said:
Doctor shacked up with huge producer of medical relief products.se9addick said:
She must have serious money then.LargeAddick said:
From recent rumours it may be Raelynn doing the funding.se9addick said:
Has Sandgaard “suddenly stopped”? I assume he’s still providing pretty significant funding or we would be heading towards administration now.MuttleyCAFC said:Something changed. In the beginning he was happy to spunk money on dubious spends, then suddenly he stopped. It is obvious that a big reason we missed out on a striker was we had to free up money elsewhere first but couldn't. It begs the question why we brought in so many midfielders if we knew it was spending all the budget. I would say it is either because Garner is an idiot or the budget changed. My money is on the latter.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
If that's not a license to print money I don't know what is!0 -
Bearing in mind that the academy is part-funded by grants and Valley Gold, £140k would be a sizeable slice of Charlton's commitment.4
-
Didn't want your stupid Category 1 anyway
10 - Sponsored links:
-
Seems a bit inappropriate, but it was a boring game I suppose..._MrDick said:
I was in the Directors Box for the Cambridge match and sat right behind them. Judging by the way she was hanging off him and showing affection 😘 I would say that they are most definitely a coupleFanny Fanackapan said:
I understand that, contrary to appearances, they are NOT a couple.carly burn said:
Doctor shacked up with huge producer of medical relief products.se9addick said:
She must have serious money then.LargeAddick said:
From recent rumours it may be Raelynn doing the funding.se9addick said:
Has Sandgaard “suddenly stopped”? I assume he’s still providing pretty significant funding or we would be heading towards administration now.MuttleyCAFC said:Something changed. In the beginning he was happy to spunk money on dubious spends, then suddenly he stopped. It is obvious that a big reason we missed out on a striker was we had to free up money elsewhere first but couldn't. It begs the question why we brought in so many midfielders if we knew it was spending all the budget. I would say it is either because Garner is an idiot or the budget changed. My money is on the latter.
Now I think Garner was not a disasterous appointment, but a big issue with it is he is less able to be openly critical in the same way as Adkins. It is about being more willing to toe the line. I know some will disagree with me but I don't think we are that far off with the squad. We could improve defensively but a decent striker for the level would make a significant difference to us. I think there are two issues, one I know, and the first is Sandgaard doesn't understand why. The other is whether Sandgaard has the money or indeed has decided not to spend. I don't know which of those applies.
If that's not a license to print money I don't know what is!9 -
Any idea how close we are to exceeding the 60% wages as a proportion of turnover rule under the EFL Salary Cost Management Protocol?Airman Brown said:Bearing in mind that the academy is part-funded by grants and Valley Gold, £140k would be a sizeable slice of Charlton's commitment.
If we're forecasting we might be within 5% of it, we might be under close scrutiny and in danger of having a transfer embargo imposed.
With TS having overestimated turnover, it might go part way to explaining some of the wage cost cutting and why he's taking advice on pricing now. Just a thought.0 -
Don’t think the academy is part of any calculation.swordfish said:
Any idea how close we are to exceeding the 60% wages as a proportion of turnover rule under the EFL Salary Cost Management Protocol?Airman Brown said:Bearing in mind that the academy is part-funded by grants and Valley Gold, £140k would be a sizeable slice of Charlton's commitment.
If we're forecasting we might be within 5% of it, we might be under close scrutiny and in danger of having a transfer embargo imposed.
With TS having overestimated turnover, it might go part way to explaining some of the wage cost cutting and why he's taking advice on pricing now. Just a thought.0 -
Well anyway, as the rule is only applicable to 'player' wages, it wouldn't be a reason to cut other costs. I was just curious to know how much headroom there was under it for future signings, that's their wages, not their transfer fees, as Garner has spoken of the need to offload before bringing in before IIRC.Airman Brown said:
Don’t think the academy is part of any calculation.swordfish said:
Any idea how close we are to exceeding the 60% wages as a proportion of turnover rule under the EFL Salary Cost Management Protocol?Airman Brown said:Bearing in mind that the academy is part-funded by grants and Valley Gold, £140k would be a sizeable slice of Charlton's commitment.
If we're forecasting we might be within 5% of it, we might be under close scrutiny and in danger of having a transfer embargo imposed.
With TS having overestimated turnover, it might go part way to explaining some of the wage cost cutting and why he's taking advice on pricing now. Just a thought.
1 -
Disgraceful if true.supaclive said:
Why should the Academy have to carry the can for Sandgaards ineptitude and failure?
How much did it cost him to hire and then fire the likes of Roddy, Mumford and Jokat???2 -
Who else is gonna pay the bills? Like it or not, hes on the line to fund everything and clearly nothing is safe from cut backs.carly burn said:
Disgraceful if true.supaclive said:
Why should the Academy have to carry the can for Sandgaards ineptitude and failure?
How much did it cost him to hire and then fire the likes of Roddy, Mumford and Jokat???0 -
Doesn't our academy make a profit?0
-
Joachim Sandgaard giving it large on twitter. Clowns the lot of em.6
-
What’s he saying , fuck you charlton muppets, that’s my Las Vegas retirement fund my old man’s spunking on you ungrateful twuntsKentishAddick said:Joachim Sandgaard giving it large on twitter. Clowns the lot of em.12 -
1 - Sponsored links:
-
Aaaah it’s only part of the issue young Terrence Fuckwit the third24
-
One of the issues JSandgaard, not THE issue. I am really staggered by the private and public displays of naivety. Looking for scapegoats me thinks when the failings are a combination of their own making and economic climate. The former can still be adjusted to improve the situation, but track record thus far suggests the capabilities are not within the club to make that happen.9
-
Great look having your son rubbish the volunteer fan adviser(s) you appoint…76
-
JS - unbelievable5
-
Bit ironic this academy budget cutting when you look at how the under 18s did this morning. Make the most of it.7
-
Imagine - a Sandgaard complaining about someone blowing hot air. It’s almost like he’s never met his father33
-
Indeed but a fire sale of our best Young Guns in January is on the cards....Pelham123 said:Bit ironic this academy budget cutting when you look at how the under 18s did this morning. Make the most of it.2 -
4 -
It’s only a couple of weeks since Leo Rifkind made ill advised comments which were quickly dismissed as not representing the views of the club and now one of Sandgaard’s sons is piping up. When do we just accept that this is really what the clubs leadership thinks of us?10
-
Never heard of Joachim Sandgaard.
Cant be a very popular Son if his Dad isn't giving him a job here36
