Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Enthusiastic Spending, Poor Execution
SouthNorwoodAddick
Posts: 107
There were few surprises in the Charlton accounts but there were a couple of interesting (depressing) facts to be gleamed.
https://southnorwoodaddick.com/2023/04/17/enthusiastic-spending-poor-execution/
1) Charlton spent more on players than most of the division did last season.
2) Charlton's wage bill was the second highest it has ever been in the third tier. (The Russell Slade squad of 2016/17 was actually more expensive)
3) Sandgaard spent more on firing Adkins & Jackson than Duchatelet did on players in the 2019 promotion season (565k vs 543k)...
https://southnorwoodaddick.com/2023/04/17/enthusiastic-spending-poor-execution/
1) Charlton spent more on players than most of the division did last season.
2) Charlton's wage bill was the second highest it has ever been in the third tier. (The Russell Slade squad of 2016/17 was actually more expensive)
3) Sandgaard spent more on firing Adkins & Jackson than Duchatelet did on players in the 2019 promotion season (565k vs 543k)...
16
Comments
-
Good (although depressing) analysis.
There seemed to be a narrative developing a few months ago that some people were parroting which suggested Sandgaard was “greedy” (wasn’t there a weird banner on Floyd Road that compared him to Scrooge or something?). The story went that he was “pocketing” the transfer income that we had seen, some of it imagined, and was running the club for his own profit.That is clearly and categorically not the case. Sangaard isn’t running the club well, but he is doing so at his own considerable cost. Imagine what we could have done with the spending in the charts above had sensible people been running the various parts of the operation.14 -
I have always maintained that I haven't got an issue with total spending but the stupid way it has been spent. This only reinforces that view.8
-
Interested analysis and surprising.0
-
Who the hell did we spend 1.75 million on?0
-
Pathetic0
-
I hate how we throw money at players who supposedly entertain us yet when the people who try to save lives have to protest to get an increase on their salary.
As a typical hypocritic I support a shite team in this sport who wants us to have an owner who throws money at us till success happens. Just to be in the same league as the spanners will be an achievement.0 -
Stockley - no longer herejimmymelrose said:Who the hell did we spend 1.75 million on?
Kirk - loaned out
Lavelle - loaned out, doesn’t play much for Burton
Clare - still here, no guarantee we’ll renew his contract
Chuks - always injured, plays 30 mins at most when fit
Fraser - ok signing with a few goals from midfield0 -
I read the thread title and thought it was the brief version of the Wikipedia page on Henry VIII1
-
Transfer fees are nearly always undisclosed these days, so it's all based on what is reported but I'm guessing the bulk of it was made up of Kirk £500K, Lavelle £200K, Aneke £300K, Fraser £400K and Clare £50K. The permanent signing of Stockley - estimated at £400K - was in mid-June 2021, so at least a chunk of that fee would have been in the previous accounting period. I don't know how clubs account for signing on fees etc. Ironically, the one really good signing in the summer of 2021 George Dobson, didn't involve a fee.jimmymelrose said:Who the hell did we spend 1.75 million on?
With the probable exception of Clare (who blows hot and cold), each of those signings has been on a spectrum between mediocre and lamentable. Jayden Stockley did very well in 21/22 but he was poor this season (possibly due in part to his back injury) and I expect that we recouped only a fraction of the £400K or so that we paid for him from Fleetwood. Maybe £100-150K ? How much would we recoup for Fraser now if we decided to sell him ? Maybe a similar level of fee, given that his stock has fallen in the last two seasons.
Given the club's appalling track record on recruitment and the overall scale of the losses, it's perhaps more understandable why Sandgaard has declined to fund any more transfer fees - albeit some of the damage at least has been self-inflicted by the vanity appointment of his son, Martin - not that any of us really know what's going on behind the scenes.
It would be interesting to see how we compared with other teams in League 1 in terms of transfer receipts, as we received substantial sums for Mason Burstow and also for the Grant sell-on fee. I expect very well.
Apart from squandering a large sum of money on poor recruitment, those signings will also be on salaries commensurate with the excessive fees paid, meaning it will be very difficult to move the players on without the club making a further contribution - whether it be through a reduction or waiving of any transfer fee or the payment of a lump sum to the player to reflect their lower salary at the new club. It's an albatross that will be around our necks for the next two seasons and one which will inhibit inevitably further recruitment this summer.4 -
I have always thought that footballers wages and those of the Armed Services and Emergency Services were not the ideal ratio. Not confined to just football and Emer Services, but I guess that could open a wider political debate about wages in general.Karim_myBagheri said:I hate how we throw money at players who supposedly entertain us yet when the people who try to save lives have to protest to get an increase on their salary.
As a typical hypocritic I support a shite team in this sport who wants us to have an owner who throws money at us till success happens. Just to be in the same league as the spanners will be an achievement.
Remembrance Day commemoration always reminds me the heroes are not the ones playing football0 - Sponsored links:
-
we have certainly spent poorly on player recruitment over the past 5/6years and then proceeded to overpay a poorly performing and overmanned squad1
-
It was the same with the Belgian prick.MuttleyCAFC said:I have always maintained that I haven't got an issue with total spending but the stupid way it has been spent. This only reinforces that view.1 -
Ask and you shall receive - when it comes to selling players Charlton are very good compared to the rest of the division. (or very unambitious, depending how you look at it).Blucher said:jimmymelrose said:Who the hell did we spend 1.75 million on?
It would be interesting to see how we compared with other teams in League 1 in terms of transfer receipts, as we received substantial sums for Mason Burstow and also for the Grant sell-on fee. I expect very well.
However, unlike incoming transfers, clubs that post reduced accounts don't have to include sale figures so quite a few are blank.
2 -
In the accounts this includes agent fees and loans, not just transfer spendjimmymelrose said:Who the hell did we spend 1.75 million on?0 -
Just shows how REALLY bad last season was. 2nd highest spenders but played crap football & had to sack 2 managers sue to dire results.
This season hasn't been that much better, although since Jan we've picked up more points & look like securing a top half finish 🙄.
Just shows that Sandgaard really has no clue.1 -
Does anyone have a league table based on only the Dean Holden period?golfaddick said:Just shows how REALLY bad last season was. 2nd highest spenders but played crap football & had to sack 2 managers sue to dire results.
This season hasn't been that much better, although since Jan we've picked up more points & look like securing a top half finish 🙄.
Just shows that Sandgaard really has no clue.0 -
10th in the leaguejimmymelrose said:
Does anyone have a league table based on only the Dean Holden period?golfaddick said:Just shows how REALLY bad last season was. 2nd highest spenders but played crap football & had to sack 2 managers sue to dire results.
This season hasn't been that much better, although since Jan we've picked up more points & look like securing a top half finish 🙄.
Just shows that Sandgaard really has no clue.
5
