Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Peter Varney asking for big crowd for Brighton match (Potential Buyers?)
Comments
-
Remember what happened when ESI took over. It got leaked & then everyone was urging the EFL to get a move on as January was fast approaching & we didn't want to miss out on big signings in the January window.Redrobo said:If the EFL get their finger out maybe we can welcome the new owner at the Brighton game.
Well......the EFL said "ok then, we sanction the takeover" but forgot to tell the fans that ESI had not passed all of the "fit & proper" test as the source of the money could not be evidenced......and therefore we would be under a transfer embargo !!!!
We've been down this road more than once. I wont believe ANYTHING until actual signings are revealed.
18 -
Seems an expensive way to be petty.randy andy said:
TS was pissed BG went public with his complaints and knowing the new owners will bring in the own man saw no reason not to be petty and exercise his displeasure?Exiled_Addick said:Why sack a manager if you've just agreed to sell the club?
Count me in "I don't believe it" camp. Been here too many times with these vague internet rumours.9 -
If it was just Reams saying this then I’d think it was a wind up in typical Reams fashion but it seems it could have legs as @SoundAsa£ and others have heard the same thing. Let’s wait and see.3
-
Hasn’t there been a rumour of a break clause or one where Sandgaard could get rid of Garner cheap because he failed to meet a target? If that’s true it would make sense that Sandgaard sacked him and the buyers whacked on 50/100k than coming in and having to sack him themselves.Exiled_Addick said:
Seems an expensive way to be petty.randy andy said:
TS was pissed BG went public with his complaints and knowing the new owners will bring in the own man saw no reason not to be petty and exercise his displeasure?Exiled_Addick said:Why sack a manager if you've just agreed to sell the club?
Count me in "I don't believe it" camp. Been here too many times with these vague internet rumours.Another possibility is new owners didn’t want to come in and sack the manager as their first action. Sandgaard does it, new owners come in and get to hire their choice.11 -
I know nothing and am happy for it to stay that way4
-
Maybe. All seems a bit wishful thinking to me though.cafcfan1990 said:
Hasn’t there been a rumour of a break clause or one where Sandgaard could get rid of Garner cheap because he failed to meet a target? If that’s true it would make sense that Sandgaard sacked him and the buyers whacked on 50/100k than coming in and having to sack him themselves.Exiled_Addick said:
Seems an expensive way to be petty.randy andy said:
TS was pissed BG went public with his complaints and knowing the new owners will bring in the own man saw no reason not to be petty and exercise his displeasure?Exiled_Addick said:Why sack a manager if you've just agreed to sell the club?
Count me in "I don't believe it" camp. Been here too many times with these vague internet rumours.Another possibility is new owners didn’t want to come in and sack the manager as their first action. Sandgaard does it, new owners come in and get to hire their choice.And a bit coincidental that just as the majority mood starts to turn towards protest and we see a Sandgaard out banner at a match there’s is a new “takeover imminent rumour”.
I have nothing to go on but my gut, and my gut tells me it’s bollocks. But my gut isn’t always right either.6 -
Reams is usually on the ball, nobody is ever 100% spot on.7
-
Sponsored links:
-
I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on, I'm just not sure what. Maybe at the Brighton game he walks to the centre circle before kick off, strums a few chords of Addicks to victory and then pulls off his latex mask to reveal he was RD all along and walks down the tunnel pissing himself with laughter.16
-
no harm in the trust meeting, back up plans are always useful since we don't know exactly how creditable this information is.Scoham said:
The meeting is Monday so great news if it’s a non-event by then. The next four days will be crucial.Callumcafc said:Source from the other forum goes on to say in a later comment: “Looks like CAST and their zoom meeting will be a non-event. Too late as usual.”
Weird to have a dig at CAST in such a way. Almost makes it feel as though the rumour was only started to tee up a dig at the trust later on.2 -
I wouldn’t read too much into it. He had no history of using social media before launching his Charlton interest, it’s only ever been used for that, and he stopped in May when things were getting more mixed. No guarantee it was even him tweeting (though I suspect it was).CAFCBell said:I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on,.4 -
@SoundAsa£ catching strays on that other site.0
-
To be fair, that would be worth £15 to see.CAFCBell said:I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on, I'm just not sure what. Maybe at the Brighton game he walks to the centre circle before kick off, strums a few chords of Addicks to victory and then pulls off his latex mask to reveal he was RD all along and walks down the tunnel pissing himself with laughter.1 -
Thomas has never used social media at all. Raelynn was behind his Twitter account.AFKABartram said:
I wouldn’t read too much into it. He had no history of using social media before launching his Charlton interest, it’s only ever been used for that, and he stopped in May when things were getting more mixed. No guarantee it was even him tweeting (though I suspect it was).CAFCBell said:I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on,.
It’s doubtful he ever sees or has a true handle on what the mood across social media is, although I’m sure he’s aware now.
68 -
Is that true of his LinkedIn as well?Ollywozere said:
Thomas has never used social media at all. Raelynn was behind his Twitter account.AFKABartram said:
I wouldn’t read too much into it. He had no history of using social media before launching his Charlton interest, it’s only ever been used for that, and he stopped in May when things were getting more mixed. No guarantee it was even him tweeting (though I suspect it was).CAFCBell said:I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on,.
It’s doubtful he ever sees or has a true handle on what the mood across social media is, although I’m sure he’s aware now.0 -
Not 100% on his LinkedIn but it wouldn’t surprise me.Cafc43v3r said:
Is that true of his LinkedIn as well?Ollywozere said:
Thomas has never used social media at all. Raelynn was behind his Twitter account.AFKABartram said:
I wouldn’t read too much into it. He had no history of using social media before launching his Charlton interest, it’s only ever been used for that, and he stopped in May when things were getting more mixed. No guarantee it was even him tweeting (though I suspect it was).CAFCBell said:I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on,.
It’s doubtful he ever sees or has a true handle on what the mood across social media is, although I’m sure he’s aware now.14 -
Superb. All these people that thought they were talking to TS in their DMs got catfished 😂Ollywozere said:
Thomas has never used social media at all. Raelynn was behind his Twitter account.AFKABartram said:
I wouldn’t read too much into it. He had no history of using social media before launching his Charlton interest, it’s only ever been used for that, and he stopped in May when things were getting more mixed. No guarantee it was even him tweeting (though I suspect it was).CAFCBell said:I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on,.
It’s doubtful he ever sees or has a true handle on what the mood across social media is, although I’m sure he’s aware now.30 -
Sponsored links:
-
Also @Ollywozere - belated congratulations on your new job.28
-
Awkward!!! I've sent him a tweet saying I fancy his wifeOllywozere said:
Thomas has never used social media at all. Raelynn was behind his Twitter account.AFKABartram said:
I wouldn’t read too much into it. He had no history of using social media before launching his Charlton interest, it’s only ever been used for that, and he stopped in May when things were getting more mixed. No guarantee it was even him tweeting (though I suspect it was).CAFCBell said:I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on,.
It’s doubtful he ever sees or has a true handle on what the mood across social media is, although I’m sure he’s aware now.63 -
Oh no, that’s made my day that has. And it’s only just gone 8am 😂The Red Robin said:
Superb. All these people that thought they were talking to TS in their DMs got catfished 😂Ollywozere said:
Thomas has never used social media at all. Raelynn was behind his Twitter account.AFKABartram said:
I wouldn’t read too much into it. He had no history of using social media before launching his Charlton interest, it’s only ever been used for that, and he stopped in May when things were getting more mixed. No guarantee it was even him tweeting (though I suspect it was).CAFCBell said:I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on,.
It’s doubtful he ever sees or has a true handle on what the mood across social media is, although I’m sure he’s aware now.
8 -
I don’t believe for a minute that Varney would play a part in any shenanigans, which for me adds credence to these claims.Exiled_Addick said:
Maybe. All seems a bit wishful thinking to me though.cafcfan1990 said:
Hasn’t there been a rumour of a break clause or one where Sandgaard could get rid of Garner cheap because he failed to meet a target? If that’s true it would make sense that Sandgaard sacked him and the buyers whacked on 50/100k than coming in and having to sack him themselves.Exiled_Addick said:
Seems an expensive way to be petty.randy andy said:
TS was pissed BG went public with his complaints and knowing the new owners will bring in the own man saw no reason not to be petty and exercise his displeasure?Exiled_Addick said:Why sack a manager if you've just agreed to sell the club?
Count me in "I don't believe it" camp. Been here too many times with these vague internet rumours.Another possibility is new owners didn’t want to come in and sack the manager as their first action. Sandgaard does it, new owners come in and get to hire their choice.And a bit coincidental that just as the majority mood starts to turn towards protest and we see a Sandgaard out banner at a match there’s is a new “takeover imminent rumour”.
I have nothing to go on but my gut, and my gut tells me it’s bollocks. But my gut isn’t always right either.
My glass definitely half full.1 -
Me too except Scoham's post pointing to DubaiCAFC's post of 1st Dec, pre Stockport, is encouraging, plus separate origins of similar rumours, i.e from others.Exiled_Addick said:
Maybe. All seems a bit wishful thinking to me though.cafcfan1990 said:
Hasn’t there been a rumour of a break clause or one where Sandgaard could get rid of Garner cheap because he failed to meet a target? If that’s true it would make sense that Sandgaard sacked him and the buyers whacked on 50/100k than coming in and having to sack him themselves.Exiled_Addick said:
Seems an expensive way to be petty.randy andy said:
TS was pissed BG went public with his complaints and knowing the new owners will bring in the own man saw no reason not to be petty and exercise his displeasure?Exiled_Addick said:Why sack a manager if you've just agreed to sell the club?
Count me in "I don't believe it" camp. Been here too many times with these vague internet rumours.Another possibility is new owners didn’t want to come in and sack the manager as their first action. Sandgaard does it, new owners come in and get to hire their choice.And a bit coincidental that just as the majority mood starts to turn towards protest and we see a Sandgaard out banner at a match there’s is a new “takeover imminent rumour”.
I have nothing to go on but my gut, and my gut tells me it’s bollocks. But my gut isn’t always right either.
https://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/comment/4841012#Comment_4841012
0 -
Well there you go. I could tell it wasn’t being done by a professional, but doubted he’d be interested. So that makes perfect sense. Cheers OllyOllywozere said:
Thomas has never used social media at all. Raelynn was behind his Twitter account.AFKABartram said:
I wouldn’t read too much into it. He had no history of using social media before launching his Charlton interest, it’s only ever been used for that, and he stopped in May when things were getting more mixed. No guarantee it was even him tweeting (though I suspect it was).CAFCBell said:I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on,.
It’s doubtful he ever sees or has a true handle on what the mood across social media is, although I’m sure he’s aware now.3 -
Stopped after "understand that not to be correct" then. Perhaps not a surprise!Ollywozere said:
Thomas has never used social media at all. Raelynn was behind his Twitter account.AFKABartram said:
I wouldn’t read too much into it. He had no history of using social media before launching his Charlton interest, it’s only ever been used for that, and he stopped in May when things were getting more mixed. No guarantee it was even him tweeting (though I suspect it was).CAFCBell said:I think TS absence on social media is a massive indicator that something is going on,.
It’s doubtful he ever sees or has a true handle on what the mood across social media is, although I’m sure he’s aware now.
Any chance of getting Rui Pinto transferred to the EFL?0 -
Not heard anything from Airman about the rumour?. What's your understanding of this Airman? are we about to be sold?.0
-
My understanding is he was using it for a while but then Raelynn took over it, and censored it so he didn’t see all the negativity.
She tried to deflect the majority of the abuse and only feed back the positives. Presumably she has run out of things to tell him9 -
BoomSwisdom said:My understanding is he was using it for a while but then Raelynn took over it, and censored it so he didn’t see all the negativity.
She tried to deflect the majority of the abuse and only feed back the positives. Presumably she has run out of things to tell him12
