It's good to read some thoughtful posts here, I found myself liking several, even though they disagree with each other on several aspects.
It does rather look that there's a consensus the absence of a CEO is becoming an issue. I've always had a problem with the "CEO" title in football clubs; the job description doesn't fit that of CEO in normal businesses of similar size turnover because in most cases the business does not operate successfully without the financial benevolence of the owner. In most businesses the CEO is responsible for business strategy that generates the revenue to build for the long-term. That's impossible to do in most football clubs, yet unfortunately it hasn't stopped football paying eye watering salaries to so-called CEOs on the basis that that's what CEOs earn in other companies. So it's worth remembering that recruiting a decent CEO with the money in our budget will probably be just as challenging as recruiting a decent second striker. I think if we were to look carefully at other clubs we see that it took a while before new owners started delegating extensively to a CEO. Abramovich was very hands-on in the early days when they did things like stealing Parker, but he had no choice but to look to delegate to competent business managers later on, especially when coming under pressure from Uncle Vlad to spend more time running Kamchatka. (the far east Russian region, not a football club!). You can understand why an owner like Thomas who likes football, would feel he's earned the right to be his own CEO for a while. But I would guess that he will soon feel the pressure to delegate more, especially as posted by @WishIdStayedinthePub in the Savings and Investment thread, his company's earnings have taken a dip recently and small investors are suggesting that he is spending too much time on his football club.
The other point I'd like to make can be summarised in one word: Ipswich. I've not read that anyone has bothered to look in detail at what their fans are saying, but I doubt if it is much more reasonable than our overall response, if you include the hysteria of Charlton Twitter. For the moment, in the absence of any more understanding from the home of the Champions, it's reasonable to conclude from there that size of the budget is not the overriding factor in explaining our poor start. Nor is it likely to be any one other factor, or the fault of any one individual, even if I can understand the disquiet around Jacob Roddy.
Roman was at least largely based in London, plus Chelsea would have had a far higher level of senior staff, as a big PL club - they were a top 10 side before Roman appeared - than us languishing in L1/lower Championship. I very much doubt Roman would have been heavily involved in the detail behind ticket pricing, catering arrangements, coach times, hand dryers in the toilets, tannoy speakers etc.
There's still enough nonsense, slightly tarnishing the matchday experience, that could be fixed with a competent full time CEO, able to change things or bang heads together, the coach times for Gillingham being the latest example of problems which have been around for years. That's not something I would expect TS to personally sort - apart from anything else, he wouldn't know where Gravesend or Larkfield are!
It's good to read some thoughtful posts here, I found myself liking several, even though they disagree with each other on several aspects.
It does rather look that there's a consensus the absence of a CEO is becoming an issue. I've always had a problem with the "CEO" title in football clubs; the job description doesn't fit that of CEO in normal businesses of similar size turnover because in most cases the business does not operate successfully without the financial benevolence of the owner. In most businesses the CEO is responsible for business strategy that generates the revenue to build for the long-term. That's impossible to do in most football clubs, yet unfortunately it hasn't stopped football paying eye watering salaries to so-called CEOs on the basis that that's what CEOs earn in other companies. So it's worth remembering that recruiting a decent CEO with the money in our budget will probably be just as challenging as recruiting a decent second striker. I think if we were to look carefully at other clubs we see that it took a while before new owners started delegating extensively to a CEO. Abramovich was very hands-on in the early days when they did things like stealing Parker, but he had no choice but to look to delegate to competent business managers later on, especially when coming under pressure from Uncle Vlad to spend more time running Kamchatka. (the far east Russian region, not a football club!). You can understand why an owner like Thomas who likes football, would feel he's earned the right to be his own CEO for a while. But I would guess that he will soon feel the pressure to delegate more, especially as posted by @WishIdStayedinthePub in the Savings and Investment thread, his company's earnings have taken a dip recently and small investors are suggesting that he is spending too much time on his football club.
The other point I'd like to make can be summarised in one word: Ipswich. I've not read that anyone has bothered to look in detail at what their fans are saying, but I doubt if it is much more reasonable than our overall response, if you include the hysteria of Charlton Twitter. For the moment, in the absence of any more understanding from the home of the Champions, it's reasonable to conclude from there that size of the budget is not the overriding factor in explaining our poor start. Nor is it likely to be any one other factor, or the fault of any one individual, even if I can understand the disquiet around Jacob Roddy.
That's not something I would expect TS to personally sort - apart from anything else, he wouldn't know where Gravesend or Larkfield are!
It's good to read some thoughtful posts here, I found myself liking several, even though they disagree with each other on several aspects.
It does rather look that there's a consensus the absence of a CEO is becoming an issue. I've always had a problem with the "CEO" title in football clubs; the job description doesn't fit that of CEO in normal businesses of similar size turnover because in most cases the business does not operate successfully without the financial benevolence of the owner. In most businesses the CEO is responsible for business strategy that generates the revenue to build for the long-term. That's impossible to do in most football clubs, yet unfortunately it hasn't stopped football paying eye watering salaries to so-called CEOs on the basis that that's what CEOs earn in other companies. So it's worth remembering that recruiting a decent CEO with the money in our budget will probably be just as challenging as recruiting a decent second striker. I think if we were to look carefully at other clubs we see that it took a while before new owners started delegating extensively to a CEO. Abramovich was very hands-on in the early days when they did things like stealing Parker, but he had no choice but to look to delegate to competent business managers later on, especially when coming under pressure from Uncle Vlad to spend more time running Kamchatka. (the far east Russian region, not a football club!). You can understand why an owner like Thomas who likes football, would feel he's earned the right to be his own CEO for a while. But I would guess that he will soon feel the pressure to delegate more, especially as posted by @WishIdStayedinthePub in the Savings and Investment thread, his company's earnings have taken a dip recently and small investors are suggesting that he is spending too much time on his football club.
The other point I'd like to make can be summarised in one word: Ipswich. I've not read that anyone has bothered to look in detail at what their fans are saying, but I doubt if it is much more reasonable than our overall response, if you include the hysteria of Charlton Twitter. For the moment, in the absence of any more understanding from the home of the Champions, it's reasonable to conclude from there that size of the budget is not the overriding factor in explaining our poor start. Nor is it likely to be any one other factor, or the fault of any one individual, even if I can understand the disquiet around Jacob Roddy.
Romanwas at least largely based in London, plus Chelsea would have had a far higher level of senior staff, as a big PL club - they were a top 10 side before Roman appeared - than us languishing in L1/lower Championship. I very much doubt Roman would have been heavily involved in the detail behind ticket pricing, catering arrangements, coach times, hand dryers in the toilets, tannoy speakers etc.
There's still enough nonsense, slightly tarnishing the matchday experience, that could be fixed with a competent full time CEO, able to change things or bang heads together, the coach times for Gillingham being the latest example of problems which have been around for years. That's not something I would expect TS to personally sort - apart from anything else, he wouldn't know where Gravesend or Larkfield are!
Oh was "Roman", now? That would have made him "ordinarily resident" for UK income tax purposes. But never mind. The pointI wanted to make is that if you are a successful business person and you buy a football club for reasons of personal interest, and on top of that you love the whole football experience, it is understandable if at least at first you think, I can manage this. And then you find out that you can't, without using up a huge amount of time on irritating details, and often involving irritating people. I expect young (24!!!) Mr Louis-Dreyfuss will rapidly come to that conclusion as he starts to fully appreciate how much Sunderland is not (Olympique or the city) Marseille .
Do.people actually know what Ipswich and Wigan's wage bills are then, or, assumptions?
🙂
Assumptions primarily.
The rumour is/was that Wyke and Pigott are both on, in the region of, 10k a week. I suspect that is probably less with Pigott.
But compare those 2 with Stockley who cost a fee and the total wage + fee is probably very close to being the same. All 3 would have got signing on fees etc. That to me suggests preference, not budget.
If you take Wigan out the equation I would suggest that Charlton and Ipswich are very similar clubs in terms of costs and revenue, unless someone can tell me otherwise? It's very hard to guess as Ipswich have never posted accounts for a "normal" league 1 season.
Ipswich have made a net profit on player acquisitions and disposals. We have made a net loss of about a million quid.
If you strip out historic player income and paper money out of the accounts I would suggest both clubs would be at about break even before they pay the 1st team set up anything.
We know the average wage in league 1 is about 2.7k a week, from the salary cap, based in 25 players that's nearly 4 million a year. We also know most of our first team are on a lot more than that and us and Ipswich have significantly (hard to believe with us) more than 25 pros and relatively highly paid managers etc. So a normal wage bill would be in the region of 8ish million quid? Again correct me if I am wrong or my assumptions are.
So that's your pre player trading loss. Every year.
If you now pay your top 10 players 10 grand a week, instead of 5 that increases your wage bill, and therefor your loss, by about 2.5 million a year. Unless you buy crap you should have significantly more better players and there is no guarantee you will get promoted this season your chances significantly improve. All your effectively doing is push 3 years losses into 2 years. If it fails and you haven't got 1 or 2 players you can flog to cover the EXTRA loss you have totally ballsed it up and have bigger problems.
What you can't do is pay nearly doubt the odds in the championship because that couple of million extra quickly spirals into the 10s of millions and becomes impossible to manage.
Some really erudite posts and interesting information on the intrastructure of a football business; and if I may be allowed to add a salient point about Ged Roddy?
Mr Roddy has a twin brother called Ed, and they have always been known as Gedward.
@Cafc43v3r you say “Ipswich have made a net profit on player acquisitions and disposals. We have made a net loss of about a million quid.”
What sources have you used for that? I dont have anything to contradict it, because I dont know what reliable source would be available at this stage, but I can’t see that is anything more than an assumption.
A number of respected media commentators, including Kieran Maguire have alluded to Ipswich “really going for it”, and I certainly wouldn't contradict him without some very solid facts.
We paid a fee for Stockley, Kirk and Clare and haven't sold anyone. So I would say that's either right or close?
Ipswich received a fee for Dozzell, Downes and the youth team player to Norwich who's name escapes me. Transfer market, that ever reliable source, has them at net - 1 million but doesn't include Downes's fee nor the youth player.
The point about transfer fees was, in the scheme of things, there net spend isn't much different to us. Of the 16 signings 9 are either on loan or free, the other 7 have been covered by sales.
They clearly are really going for it but it's not the "shit or bust" that a lot have people here are suggesting because by not going for it they would have lost about 75% of what they will lose anyway.
Comparing them purley to us if neither of us go up they will probably lose about 3 million quid more than us. Which isn't unrealistic to cover by selling 1 or 2 players like Pigott or Fraser, for example. Their more risky signings like Carroll are only on 1 year contracts.
As proved during the Roland years not going for it, for a club of our size, is probably more expensive, in league 1, than having a proper go for 2 years.
All I have done is position a series of events and decisions against the personality cult which embodies the paralysis of this site.
I have no agenda here. I am long comfortable with the memories I have from following this club for over 60yrs. With current travel & other challenges it is unlikely I will be making any new ones in person any time soon. In all honesty our social media today is a real encouragement to find better things to do.
All I am simply asking people is to look beyond the noise. To stop positioning our recent travails as a result of some perceived gross incompetence or personal conspiracy and allow some space for a broader view.
I didn’t and don’t anticipate it to be popular. Why would I with religious fervency of repetitive negativity on here. What a different opinion? What’s he on?
I absolutely remove the emotional garbage surrounding business function & process. Look at the barriers and distortions it creates. The club has been riddled with it from the day certain individuals chose to believe their own headlines. As each went their separate way the agenda changed and each became diminished as indeed did the club.
And people want to talk about Sandgaard’s ego!
I have worked in comparable if less public environments. I have witnessed the damage it can cause. As I made clear throughout a modestly successful career to owners and investors in corporate matters there is one entity which comes first, second and third and it ain’t them. In this instance it is the club.
If investors/owners want to talk about their personal interests it is a very different conversation. Popular or not I have never conflated the two.
It is why I fought against Duchâtelet. I welcomed his initial involvement. There was nothing wrong with a network, there was nothing wrong with the economies of scale or the opportunities it presented. There is/ was nothing wrong with the principles of data based recruitment.
However in the manner in which he structured his finance and administration it became clear there was no interest in the corporate well being of the club merely the maintenance of the Staprix NV balance sheet - his personal balance sheet.
Equally I fully stand by my ESI comments at the time, (particularly in the factual assessment of Sharia Law based Investment Houses of which I have some client experience) because the then noise growing around the club was dangerous.
Once in the public domain you don’t get to control it. It needed calming down.Had some of it hit my desk as their corporate banker I will have given the company the trading day to provide a board minuted affirmation of an existing or new mandate before I stopped the account as a basic duty of care to the company and to the bank I represented.
At that point you immediately hugely complicate the ability to trade.
If there was malpractice then due legal and corporate process will have come into play soon enough. It did. I will put aside some appeared to almost revel in our impending demise but the hysteria served who exactly? Certainly not the name of Charlton Athletic Football Club.
In the event the primary players extraordinarily blew the whole thing up and we all then had to live with the consequences taking us to the brink of the clubs extinction.
The linkage between the ESI position and Mr Sandgaard is thus truly bizarre. You are really likening Sandgaard to Southall? How obtuse do you want to get? Just how desperate are you people to appear relevant?
We even have a renewed spat with the Trust. Have you any idea how pathetic that reads?
Someone claimed the other day this club is massive. Is it? In what way is it massive? Is Crystal Palace massive? They have been in the PL for how many years? Is Millwall massive? They have been the Championship for how many years?
Were we once massive? From a certain perspective possibly. Yet how many clubs have moved past us in the past decade? Could we possibly be massive? With the right sustainable strategy from a certain perspective - Absolutely.
Do I have the answers? No, do you?
Overall I do not disagree with the perception of the industry but no one with the resources people mention wanted to buy the club at the price it was on offer, all before further funding the venture, they assert is needed, did they? Did you forget that? Did you forget the Australians? The 2nd Mr Muir? How about Mr Dalman? Or X,Y or Z?
Just where, beyond one day at Wembley, in any of the actions and miserable fortunes of the past 12yrs do people feel we were anything more than a league one club. It has been a litany of chaos punctuated by 1 or 2 seasons of unsustainable quite literally borrowed over performance.
What has been the fundamental difference between the Premier League years and this cataclysmic decline? You tell me.
Putting aside the 14 managers, the circa 400 playing contracts, the turmoil of Dowie, Reed, Pardew, the Parkinson panel of 25, and the wiping out of thousands of small shareholdings the business was restructured in 2010 to position a football club as an adjunct to a property company.
Why? I don’t know but perhaps because collectively it was purchased by two sets of investors with property development aspirations with the latter having an interest in experimenting with a player trading concept.
Who allowed that? Who facilitated that? Why do you think those who then sat at the table still have some god given right to participate? Why should anyone give them the time of day?
You want to talk about Southall who allowed Jiminez to the table? Where was the due diligence there? Even the court in Kashouri v Jiminez couldn’t work out who owned the club. How many times has Jiminez been to court?
Over and above writing off investments large and small we saw the trading debt accrue from £10m in 2010 to £71mn in 2020 even accounting for the receipts of £25mn+ in respect of the player transfer receipts all underwritten by the fallback of the freehold assets of the stadium & training ground to the point ….the penultimate « investor » walked off with them.
So you know what? They are gone. They are no more. The financial dynamic has changed. The venture capital funding you want today, unless you pay circa £45mn for assets worth at best 2/3rds of that sum, is against……………fucking thin air. There ain’t no more fallback.
Oh sure there will a book value for the 15yr leases but in real-time there will very much be a limited and niche resale value.
What is this collective amnesia? What did people forget the thousands who took to the streets to protest the pernicious self obsessed administration of a Belgian eccentric. What do you think we were protesting about?
What you don’t think any business suffering 98% neglect can but deteriorate exponentially over (6yrs) time. It did. It registers. The neglect registers with the industry, with its people, with its employees and with its stakeholders.
What people really think you just get to flick a switch and it will all turn around? The current climate has been a decade in the making.
Mr Sandgaard appeared circa 370 days ago from nowhere into the maelstrom of the financial, quasi political, alleged malpractice and multi layered legal challenges which in very large part mirrored Bury FC with the exception the legal entitlements due to Staprix NV even empowered it to appoint its very own Administrator/ Liquidator.
Those anticipating the salvation of an equitable administration were either illiterate or lacked legal understanding.
Mr Sandgaard facilitated our escape through generating a public profile. Had he not it is doubtful he (apparently like so many other earnestly interested parties) would have even got to the table. Such an approach has always been a double edged sword. That some are so ready to use the other edge I suggests says considerably more about them than Mr Sandgaard.
To those who couldn’t get to the table there is just one place to look ………the mirror. Or just maybe people’s emotions just got in the way.
Above all of that all I hear are the cries of selective listening and disinterested thinking or maybe not. Ah no it’s (just as per 2010 & 2014) the whispers of the shadowy sidelined are re-emerging. If only this, if only that …we should be doing this, we should be doing that …but, but only if somebody would listen. Really?
This CEO, (and yes Mr Sandgaard is the CEO, for the numbskull who posted above, - in the real world international CEOs are far from uncommon) has been more available to stakeholders than any of his predecessors in living memory. If you genuinely have an idea to benefit the club WTF are you telling me for?
Although why would anyone, beyond polite pleasantries, make it a priority to listen to anybody who had any part to play in the debacle of the past 12yrs? What for? To revisit the travails & divisions however unjust? You think the industry 2021, post Covid, is the same as the industry 2006/7/8/9/10.
In most industries after 5yrs away from the main tables your shelf life is expired.
So I get it 12 months into this path people think things should be different.
What you think you just get to ride roughshod over all the legacy commitments, contracts and work practices? You do realise they have laws about that? All after the previous 9 months trading under ESI? In a COVID trading environment?
And while having invested in starting to repair the operational and structural neglect, handling no doubt legacy legal and financial issues endlessly climbing out of the woodwork, upgrading the medical and training infrastructure you now want a local CEO.
No you don’t - you just want the old days back. You want things to be the way things were. Except for the past 12 years « the way things were » was an unmitigated fucking disaster.
Would I prefer a local CEO I would but I respect why Mr Sandgaard has chosen the direction he has for no other reason than I have sat across from literally many hundreds of CEOs of all shapes & sizes with different weaknesses and strengths.
If this is the path he has chosen to travel so be it because I have sat in the Chair myself where you know every bugger on the planet thinks they know how to run the business better than you can….until of course they get to sit in that very same chair.
There is no one size fits all. At this stage still in a transition year of a first years trading after 18-24 months of chaos, governed by embargoes, illegal trading restrictions, alleged financial impropriety and within a global pandemic maybe just maybe it is actually time to let people recover, to see whether the SMT can grow even if people actually don’t like them.
Ah, there is that old emotional stuff getting in the way again - maybe that’s why there is a new HR professional in town.
What does all of this have to do with Ged Roddy? It defines the unhealthy culture, division and disconnect around the club. I positioned a perfectly commonplace corporate rationale for the recruitment being undertaken.
Is this the only answer to continue to call the bloke a fucking wanker and attack me.
So did nobody hear about the development pathway? Of course they did they just weren’t paying attention.
Just like until yesterday there were those who still acclaimed they didn’t understand what Mr Roddy does. WTF do people think the former lead strategist and head of the PL EPPP programme does?
Have you people some different corporate positioning over;
- the retention of Jackson? - the promotions of Euell and Hayes?
Shit this stuff really grabs the headlines doesn’t it? It gets more exciting.
What about - the May 18 retention list & contract offers? - bringing Stockley and Famewo back?
- the record number of new young professional contracts?
- the integrated preseason?
As for actual recruitment did Stockley, Famewo, Clare, MacGillivray, Kirk all arrive without the payment of transfer, loan or agent fees? No of course they didn’t. Yes but we want/ need more, more, more I hear the cry which after 3 league games sounds just a little desperate.
Has the last decade taught people nothing?
As yet we haven’t even finished this journey. Will everything be alright come the 1st September? Don’t know. Do you? We may just have to wait and see how the next journey through the season proceeds.
But hey that’s the unpredictability of sport (and business come to that). Isn't it?
No I don’t have the answers but I refuse to sign into this endless suffocating predictive text, especially if it is based solely on pursuing practices which unless you are cognitively challenged have diminished the position of Charlton Athletic Football Club and its well being to an unprecedented level.
I thus do have the basic respect for someone almost anyone who is actually spending his money in trying to find a way forward. Will Mr Sangaard succeed I have not a clue but I have nothing but pure contempt for those who have nothing to offer but lob bricks from the sidelines.
And with that I am sure you will be pleased to learn I actually do find I have better things to do.
That's all well and good but the fact remains that in terms of both results and performance the team is CURRENTLY a retrograde step to the one that finished last season. And the ones who have overseen this regression are entirely selected and recruited by Thomas Sandgaard thus he must bear at least part of the responsibility.
I repeat that I bear no ill will towards Sandgaard. I respect his achievements and am grateful for his actions in salvaging the club from an even worse predicament. That does not mean that I'm willing to pretend a dramatic decline (from his own period of control last season) is not worrying.
His motives are good. His intentions are good. I fully understand he is following a process and that he is attempting to improve things. I merely question whether he is succeeding.
That's all well and good but the fact remains that in terms of both results and performance the team is CURRENTLY a retrograde step to the one that finished last season. And the ones who have overseen this regression are entirely selected and recruited by Thomas Sandgaard thus he must bear at least part of the responsibility.
I repeat that I bear no ill will towards Sandgaard. I respect his achievements and am grateful for his actions in salvaging the club from an even worse predicament. That does not mean that I'm willing to pretend a dramatic decline (from his own period of control last season) is not worrying.
His motives are good. His intentions are good. I fully understand he is following a process and that he is attempting to improve things. I merely question whether he is succeeding.
It may be “retrograde” in terms of on the pitch performances, but it’s certainly a step forward that this is the main source of contention.
We paid a fee for Stockley, Kirk and Clare and haven't sold anyone. So I would say that's either right or close?
Ipswich received a fee for Dozzell, Downes and the youth team player to Norwich who's name escapes me. Transfer market, that ever reliable source, has them at net - 1 million but doesn't include Downes's fee nor the youth player.
The point about transfer fees was, in the scheme of things, there net spend isn't much different to us. Of the 16 signings 9 are either on loan or free, the other 7 have been covered by sales.
They clearly are really going for it but it's not the "shit or bust" that a lot have people here are suggesting because by not going for it they would have lost about 75% of what they will lose anyway.
Comparing them purley to us if neither of us go up they will probably lose about 3 million quid more than us. Which isn't unrealistic to cover by selling 1 or 2 players like Pigott or Fraser, for example. Their more risky signings like Carroll are only on 1 year contracts.
As proved during the Roland years not going for it, for a club of our size, is probably more expensive, in league 1, than having a proper go for 2 years.
I don't think any of my assumptions are far off?
I think they are as reasonable as any of us fans could make, in order to justify an assertion. And you might in the end be right. However I'd trust Kieran Maguire to have more knowledge of the matter than anyone on here.
The other thing to remember is that the EFL share the operating P&L's from previous season among all clubs in the division. So if budget is an issue it is either because Thomas has taken some kind of gamble that he can outperform the budget; or, the market has not behaved in the way they may have expected when setting the budget. There are reasons to think the latter, because again a lot of informed commentators believed that there would be a lot of good players let go because of Covid related financial pressure, and I am not sure that has come to pass...or a couple of clubs in this division (Ipswich and Wigan) are not behaving financially as generally assumed would be the case. But your guess is as good as mine. I'd just prefer to wait for a bit more solid evidence.
However one thing Ipswich tells us is that things can go badly wrong elsewhere despite new owners coming in and financing sweeping changes to the playing squad.So chucking more money at it is no panacea for getting out of this division.
We paid a fee for Stockley, Kirk and Clare and haven't sold anyone. So I would say that's either right or close?
Ipswich received a fee for Dozzell, Downes and the youth team player to Norwich who's name escapes me. Transfer market, that ever reliable source, has them at net - 1 million but doesn't include Downes's fee nor the youth player.
The point about transfer fees was, in the scheme of things, there net spend isn't much different to us. Of the 16 signings 9 are either on loan or free, the other 7 have been covered by sales.
They clearly are really going for it but it's not the "shit or bust" that a lot have people here are suggesting because by not going for it they would have lost about 75% of what they will lose anyway.
Comparing them purley to us if neither of us go up they will probably lose about 3 million quid more than us. Which isn't unrealistic to cover by selling 1 or 2 players like Pigott or Fraser, for example. Their more risky signings like Carroll are only on 1 year contracts.
As proved during the Roland years not going for it, for a club of our size, is probably more expensive, in league 1, than having a proper go for 2 years.
I don't think any of my assumptions are far off?
I think they are as reasonable as any of us fans could make, in order to justify an assertion. And you might in the end be right. However I'd trust Kieran Maguire to have more knowledge of the matter than anyone on here.
The other thing to remember is that the EFL share the operating P&L's from previous season among all clubs in the division. So if budget is an issue it is either because Thomas has taken some kind of gamble that he can outperform the budget; or, the market has not behaved in the way they may have expected when setting the budget. There are reasons to think the latter, because again a lot of informed commentators believed that there would be a lot of good players let go because of Covid related financial pressure, and I am not sure that has come to pass...or a couple of clubs in this division (Ipswich and Wigan) are not behaving financially as generally assumed would be the case. But your guess is as good as mine. I'd just prefer to wait for a bit more solid evidence.
However one thing Ipswich tells us is that things can go badly wrong elsewhere despite new owners coming in and financing sweeping changes to the playing squad.So chucking more money at it is no panacea for getting out of this division.
I don't disagree with any of that but my main point was: Ipswich aren't gambling much more than us.
The big difference is we are very unlikely to come up trumps, as Roland proved. If we are indeed running a too small budget for which it is to early to be sure.
2018/19 was far more luck than judgment and careful longterm planning.
I’ve held off ‘lobbing any bricks’ re roddy until yesterday as didn’t see that it would be very constructive and when there is anew broom in town there will always be a few noses put out of joint but if we hav3 a thread about him and r discussing possible reason# as to why the r3cruitmen5 and team performance is dissapointing, it felt right to add what I had been told by people who have been interacting with him - not staff but people who you should be trying to keep happy if u r in roddys position - they have a low opinion of him and Some of the things he has orchestrated to date
Airman Brown, you mention that maybe the budget may be a problem. To your knowledge, is Andrew Barclay still interested in investing in any way or in the future. To be clear I mean as well as Sandgaard not instead of?!
I can’t speak for AB. I would think that the issue for most people remains “invest in what”? The club currently is its goodwill and place in the EFL offset by its losses. Arguably the value of that to an investor is negative.
Have you seen any red flags with the current regime to make you concerned about anything yet @Airman Brown?
I don’t see anything that puts the future of the club at risk, so the answer to that is no. In addition I am personally involved in a dialogue that will hopefully address some longstanding issues for the benefit of both the club and fans. If people cannot see beyond that being about ego so be it. But I find the dialogue encouraging and I pass that on for what it’s worth.
Airman Brown, you mention that maybe the budget may be a problem. To your knowledge, is Andrew Barclay still interested in investing in any way or in the future. To be clear I mean as well as Sandgaard not instead of?!
I can’t speak for AB. I would think that the issue for most people remains “invest in what”? The club currently is its goodwill and place in the EFL offset by its losses. Arguably the value of that to an investor is negative.
Have you seen any red flags with the current regime to make you concerned about anything yet @Airman Brown?
I don’t see anything that puts the future of the club at risk, so the answer to that is no. In addition I am personally involved in a dialogue that will hopefully address some longstanding issues for the benefit of both the club and fans. If people cannot see beyond that being about ego so be it. But I find the dialogue encouraging and I pass that on for what it’s worth.
Airman Brown, you mention that maybe the budget may be a problem. To your knowledge, is Andrew Barclay still interested in investing in any way or in the future. To be clear I mean as well as Sandgaard not instead of?!
I can’t speak for AB. I would think that the issue for most people remains “invest in what”? The club currently is its goodwill and place in the EFL offset by its losses. Arguably the value of that to an investor is negative.
Have you seen any red flags with the current regime to make you concerned about anything yet @Airman Brown?
I don’t see anything that puts the future of the club at risk, so the answer to that is no. In addition I am personally involved in a dialogue that will hopefully address some longstanding issues for the benefit of both the club and fans. If people cannot see beyond that being about ego so be it. But I find the dialogue encouraging and I pass that on for what it’s worth.
The long standing issue of us playing in the third tier for the majority of the last decade of so, right?
Airman Brown, you mention that maybe the budget may be a problem. To your knowledge, is Andrew Barclay still interested in investing in any way or in the future. To be clear I mean as well as Sandgaard not instead of?!
I can’t speak for AB. I would think that the issue for most people remains “invest in what”? The club currently is its goodwill and place in the EFL offset by its losses. Arguably the value of that to an investor is negative.
Have you seen any red flags with the current regime to make you concerned about anything yet @Airman Brown?
I don’t see anything that puts the future of the club at risk, so the answer to that is no. In addition I am personally involved in a dialogue that will hopefully address some longstanding issues for the benefit of both the club and fans. If people cannot see beyond that being about ego so be it. But I find the dialogue encouraging and I pass that on for what it’s worth.
Comments
There's still enough nonsense, slightly tarnishing the matchday experience, that could be fixed with a competent full time CEO, able to change things or bang heads together, the coach times for Gillingham being the latest example of problems which have been around for years. That's not something I would expect TS to personally sort - apart from anything else, he wouldn't know where Gravesend or Larkfield are!
Our players can't
Our players can't control their feet
The rumour is/was that Wyke and Pigott are both on, in the region of, 10k a week. I suspect that is probably less with Pigott.
But compare those 2 with Stockley who cost a fee and the total wage + fee is probably very close to being the same. All 3 would have got signing on fees etc. That to me suggests preference, not budget.
If you take Wigan out the equation I would suggest that Charlton and Ipswich are very similar clubs in terms of costs and revenue, unless someone can tell me otherwise? It's very hard to guess as Ipswich have never posted accounts for a "normal" league 1 season.
Ipswich have made a net profit on player acquisitions and disposals. We have made a net loss of about a million quid.
If you strip out historic player income and paper money out of the accounts I would suggest both clubs would be at about break even before they pay the 1st team set up anything.
We know the average wage in league 1 is about 2.7k a week, from the salary cap, based in 25 players that's nearly 4 million a year. We also know most of our first team are on a lot more than that and us and Ipswich have significantly (hard to believe with us) more than 25 pros and relatively highly paid managers etc. So a normal wage bill would be in the region of 8ish million quid? Again correct me if I am wrong or my assumptions are.
So that's your pre player trading loss. Every year.
If you now pay your top 10 players 10 grand a week, instead of 5 that increases your wage bill, and therefor your loss, by about 2.5 million a year. Unless you buy crap you should have significantly more better players and there is no guarantee you will get promoted this season your chances significantly improve. All your effectively doing is push 3 years losses into 2 years. If it fails and you haven't got 1 or 2 players you can flog to cover the EXTRA loss you have totally ballsed it up and have bigger problems.
What you can't do is pay nearly doubt the odds in the championship because that couple of million extra quickly spirals into the 10s of millions and becomes impossible to manage.
TLDR: Ipswich aren't gambling much more than us.
Mr Roddy has a twin brother called Ed, and they have always been known as Gedward.
“Ipswich have made a net profit on player acquisitions and disposals. We have made a net loss of about a million quid.”
Ipswich received a fee for Dozzell, Downes and the youth team player to Norwich who's name escapes me. Transfer market, that ever reliable source, has them at net - 1 million but doesn't include Downes's fee nor the youth player.
The point about transfer fees was, in the scheme of things, there net spend isn't much different to us. Of the 16 signings 9 are either on loan or free, the other 7 have been covered by sales.
They clearly are really going for it but it's not the "shit or bust" that a lot have people here are suggesting because by not going for it they would have lost about 75% of what they will lose anyway.
Comparing them purley to us if neither of us go up they will probably lose about 3 million quid more than us. Which isn't unrealistic to cover by selling 1 or 2 players like Pigott or Fraser, for example. Their more risky signings like Carroll are only on 1 year contracts.
As proved during the Roland years not going for it, for a club of our size, is probably more expensive, in league 1, than having a proper go for 2 years.
I don't think any of my assumptions are far off?
All I have done is position a series of events and decisions against the personality cult which embodies the paralysis of this site.
I have no agenda here. I am long comfortable with the memories I have from following this club for over 60yrs. With current travel & other challenges it is unlikely I will be making any new ones in person any time soon. In all honesty our social media today is a real encouragement to find better things to do.
All I am simply asking people is to look beyond the noise. To stop positioning our recent travails as a result of some perceived gross incompetence or personal conspiracy and allow some space for a broader view.
I didn’t and don’t anticipate it to be popular. Why would I with religious fervency of repetitive negativity on here. What a different opinion? What’s he on?
I absolutely remove the emotional garbage surrounding business function & process. Look at the barriers and distortions it creates. The club has been riddled with it from the day certain individuals chose to believe their own headlines. As each went their separate way the agenda changed and each became diminished as indeed did the club.
And people want to talk about Sandgaard’s ego!
I have worked in comparable if less public environments. I have witnessed the damage it can cause. As I made clear throughout a modestly successful career to owners and investors in corporate matters there is one entity which comes first, second and third and it ain’t them. In this instance it is the club.
If investors/owners want to talk about their personal interests it is a very different conversation. Popular or not I have never conflated the two.
It is why I fought against Duchâtelet. I welcomed his initial involvement. There was nothing wrong with a network, there was nothing wrong with the economies of scale or the opportunities it presented. There is/ was nothing wrong with the principles of data based recruitment.
However in the manner in which he structured his finance and administration it became clear there was no interest in the corporate well being of the club merely the maintenance of the Staprix NV balance sheet - his personal balance sheet.
Equally I fully stand by my ESI comments at the time, (particularly in the factual assessment of Sharia Law based Investment Houses of which I have some client experience) because the then noise growing around the club was dangerous.
Once in the public domain you don’t get to control it. It needed calming down.Had some of it hit my desk as their corporate banker I will have given the company the trading day to provide a board minuted affirmation of an existing or new mandate before I stopped the account as a basic duty of care to the company and to the bank I represented.
At that point you immediately hugely complicate the ability to trade.
If there was malpractice then due legal and corporate process will have come into play soon enough. It did. I will put aside some appeared to almost revel in our impending demise but the hysteria served who exactly? Certainly not the name of Charlton Athletic Football Club.
In the event the primary players extraordinarily blew the whole thing up and we all then had to live with the consequences taking us to the brink of the clubs extinction.
The linkage between the ESI position and Mr Sandgaard is thus truly bizarre. You are really likening Sandgaard to Southall? How obtuse do you want to get? Just how desperate are you people to appear relevant?
We even have a renewed spat with the Trust. Have you any idea how pathetic that reads?
Do I have the answers? No, do you?
Overall I do not disagree with the perception of the industry but no one with the resources people mention wanted to buy the club at the price it was on offer, all before further funding the venture, they assert is needed, did they? Did you forget that? Did you forget the Australians? The 2nd Mr Muir? How about Mr Dalman? Or X,Y or Z?
Why? I don’t know but perhaps because collectively it was purchased by two sets of investors with property development aspirations with the latter having an interest in experimenting with a player trading concept.
Who allowed that? Who facilitated that? Why do you think those who then sat at the table still have some god given right to participate? Why should anyone give them the time of day?
You want to talk about Southall who allowed Jiminez to the table? Where was the due diligence there? Even the court in Kashouri v Jiminez couldn’t work out who owned the club. How many times has Jiminez been to court?
Over and above writing off investments large and small we saw the trading debt accrue from £10m in 2010 to £71mn in 2020 even accounting for the receipts of £25mn+ in respect of the player transfer receipts all underwritten by the fallback of the freehold assets of the stadium & training ground to the point ….the penultimate « investor » walked off with them.
Oh sure there will a book value for the 15yr leases but in real-time there will very much be a limited and niche resale value.
What you don’t think any business suffering 98% neglect can but deteriorate exponentially over (6yrs) time. It did. It registers. The neglect registers with the industry, with its people, with its employees and with its stakeholders.
Those anticipating the salvation of an equitable administration were either illiterate or lacked legal understanding.
To those who couldn’t get to the table there is just one place to look ………the mirror. Or just maybe people’s emotions just got in the way.
This CEO, (and yes Mr Sandgaard is the CEO, for the numbskull who posted above, - in the real world international CEOs are far from uncommon) has been more available to stakeholders than any of his predecessors in living memory. If you genuinely have an idea to benefit the club WTF are you telling me for?
Although why would anyone, beyond polite pleasantries, make it a priority to listen to anybody who had any part to play in the debacle of the past 12yrs? What for? To revisit the travails & divisions however unjust? You think the industry 2021, post Covid, is the same as the industry 2006/7/8/9/10.
In most industries after 5yrs away from the main tables your shelf life is expired.
So I get it 12 months into this path people think things should be different.
What you think you just get to ride roughshod over all the legacy commitments, contracts and work practices? You do realise they have laws about that? All after the previous 9 months trading under ESI? In a COVID trading environment?
And while having invested in starting to repair the operational and structural neglect, handling no doubt legacy legal and financial issues endlessly climbing out of the woodwork, upgrading the medical and training infrastructure you now want a local CEO.
No you don’t - you just want the old days back. You want things to be the way things were. Except for the past 12 years « the way things were » was an unmitigated fucking disaster.
Would I prefer a local CEO I would but I respect why Mr Sandgaard has chosen the direction he has for no other reason than I have sat across from literally many hundreds of CEOs of all shapes & sizes with different weaknesses and strengths.
If this is the path he has chosen to travel so be it because I have sat in the Chair myself where you know every bugger on the planet thinks they know how to run the business better than you can….until of course they get to sit in that very same chair.
There is no one size fits all. At this stage still in a transition year of a first years trading after 18-24 months of chaos, governed by embargoes, illegal trading restrictions, alleged financial impropriety and within a global pandemic maybe just maybe it is actually time to let people recover, to see whether the SMT can grow even if people actually don’t like them.
Ah, there is that old emotional stuff getting in the way again - maybe that’s why there is a new HR professional in town.
Is this the only answer to continue to call the bloke a fucking wanker and attack me.
- the promotions of Euell and Hayes?
Shit this stuff really grabs the headlines doesn’t it? It gets more exciting.
What about
- the May 18 retention list & contract offers?
- bringing Stockley and Famewo back?
No I don’t have the answers but I refuse to sign into this endless suffocating predictive text, especially if it is based solely on pursuing practices which unless you are cognitively challenged have diminished the position of Charlton Athletic Football Club and its well being to an unprecedented level.
I thus do have the basic respect for someone almost anyone who is actually spending his money in trying to find a way forward. Will Mr Sangaard succeed I have not a clue but I have nothing but pure contempt for those who have nothing to offer but lob bricks from the sidelines.
And with that I am sure you will be pleased to learn I actually do find I have better things to do.
I repeat that I bear no ill will towards Sandgaard. I respect his achievements and am grateful for his actions in salvaging the club from an even worse predicament. That does not mean that I'm willing to pretend a dramatic decline (from his own period of control last season) is not worrying.
His motives are good. His intentions are good. I fully understand he is following a process and that he is attempting to improve things. I merely question whether he is succeeding.
The other thing to remember is that the EFL share the operating P&L's from previous season among all clubs in the division. So if budget is an issue it is either because Thomas has taken some kind of gamble that he can outperform the budget; or, the market has not behaved in the way they may have expected when setting the budget. There are reasons to think the latter, because again a lot of informed commentators believed that there would be a lot of good players let go because of Covid related financial pressure, and I am not sure that has come to pass...or a couple of clubs in this division (Ipswich and Wigan) are not behaving financially as generally assumed would be the case. But your guess is as good as mine. I'd just prefer to wait for a bit more solid evidence.
However one thing Ipswich tells us is that things can go badly wrong elsewhere despite new owners coming in and financing sweeping changes to the playing squad.So chucking more money at it is no panacea for getting out of this division.
The big difference is we are very unlikely to come up trumps, as Roland proved. If we are indeed running a too small budget for which it is to early to be sure.
2018/19 was far more luck than judgment and careful longterm planning.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
15% potholes
Ive just seen a weird series of tweets on Twitter - I suspect it’s a spoof account, but makes ‘interesting’ reading - sorry I can’t embed the tweets
https://twitter.com/byumnam6/status/1428472540167643136?s=21
https://twitter.com/byumnam6/status/1428460714742665222?s=21