Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

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

13839414344170

Comments

  • JohnnyH2 said:
    Leuth said:
    We need sandgaard out, protests required against 
    And so the cycle of abuse continues. It's all we know at this point
    How is one poster asking for protests on a forum a cycle of abuse?
    You don’t do Twitter, I take it? Or FB (that cesspit of a medium is too much for me too)
  • NabySarr said:
    The problem is, even if TS sells us. You’d only get another idiot take over. You’d have to be an idiot to take over us in our current state, TS is an idiot but the next owner will be as well, or worse it will be another crook like ESI
    Given our recent history with owners, it's a reasonable concern, but I (again, naively, perhaps) think there could be person or group that would be able to invest the kind of money we would need to make progress on the pitch and up the leagues. It would be both complicated and expensive to resolve the complicated aspects of the deals with RD, but it's not completely unimaginable. Other clubs have been through comparatively worse than us and come out of the other side. Others have had fallen deeper down. It's all driven by investment and responsible leadership - of which, neither feel particularly prominent in the strategies for the club right now.

    We're absolutely spinning our tyres as a mid-table (or edge of playoffs, with some luck) L1 club, but many of us feel the the potential could be there and I would hope that other potential owners see that, if TS does want to sell. I feel that we have relative stability compared to where we were and the action that TS is taking is to make us a more attractive offer to new owners.

    He's doing the less risky elements of that first. You can fire staff and push ticket prices up without huge backlash. You can't sell prized assets like Leaburn for a quick buck and not expect serious come back from the fans, manager and other players. Again, from his perspective, I think he is trying to stabilise financially but that is unacceptable for pretty much everyone else. The credit of good will does run out when the promises are empty and investment is nominal. I don't think he deserves any abuse he has received so far, but he should be challenged on not delivering.

    In his head, he may think he is doing the right thing, but I think that sitting on our hands and doing our own form of football austerity is not sustainable.
  • edited September 2022
    There is a saying that I read a bodybuilder say once.  Lean, Big, Natural- pick 2.  Essentially saying that unless your are a genetic outlier of significant proportion the objective of achieving all 3 is all but pie in the sky thinking.

    With Charlton it could be simplified to break even; get promoted from League 1 - pick one.  

    The latest proposed objective (of many that have yet to be delivered since he tookover) is to break even whilst it is assumed progressing the club forwards without explicitly saying promotion.  

    I can't see how this can be achieved for a club our size in league one without a significant genetic outlier of Garner working miracles.


    A 2 year project as Garner has cited whilst the man pulling the strings has cited his main objective is to break even in league one.  Given that I can't see attendances increasing materially with potential for the opposite in the absence of a barnstorming season on the pitch the only way to do that is slash costs.  He has already reduced the SMT to Gallen, his partner and son and and there don't appear to be any c suite level appointments directing the club or its strategy in any area since the departures of the Roddys, Mumfords and Jokats.

    Several long serving Charlton fan employees have left the front and back office in the past year and I don't expect replacements will be on the same money or silly money if so.  

    You can't buy anything in the shop online other than kits...I've tried all summer and since start of the season... and so the only revenue stream is tickets, hospitality etc again which will likely shift proportionate to success on the pitch....regardless of daily emails, texts and calls trying to upsell to season ticket holders.

    Therefore the only other way to increase revenue is sell players at a profit...Leaburn maybe? and reduce costs by continually reducing squad costs.

    As each season passes it will be harder and harder to achieve an already questionable objective of breaking even in League one and can only see further cuts/ leaner transfer windows over next 2 years under this objective.  Assuming the objective is anything other than this months latest nonsensical soundbite that won't materialise.

    To break even in this league you are essentially looking at downgrading the club to a Fleetwood or Accrington to getting anywhere near achieving that.  Not the key objective of 99.9% of Charlton fans and all the talk of pressing attractive football (albeit with little end product) will do little to make that appealing to an ever dwindling fan base.

    The maths and reality of it don't add up and talk of 2 year projects is just kicking the can down the road giving the fans something to hope for which will unlikely materialise if the same approach is taken i.e. minimal spend by which time Garner will have likely moved on citing taken as far as he can or something more diplomatic or getting booted as the latest scapegoat for failure to deliver under this set up to fail strategy.

  • JohnnyH2 said:
    Leuth said:
    We need sandgaard out, protests required against 
    And so the cycle of abuse continues. It's all we know at this point
    How is one poster asking for protests on a forum a cycle of abuse?
    You don’t do Twitter, I take it? Or FB (that cesspit of a medium is too much for me too)
    I do Twitter not Facebook. 

    I was responding to the point which I presumed was about on here, apologies if I was too thick to get it.

    As for the abuse on social media, it's not right, I don't take part in it, but if TS does not like it, don't read it and certainly don't take part (which his partner still does)

    On the flip side when he went for his walkabout round Adams Park he got a round of applause from what appeared a large number of away support and some even chanted his name. 
  • edited September 2022
    I always thought the reason we didn't really protest against the spivs is it was obvious they had no money and were trying to sell the club so what would be protesting for? To get them to do what they were trying to do? With Roland we were trying to get him to sell which he didn't really do. Instead he made a terrible business decision in offloading the playing part of the club to a bunch of crooks with an almost criminal lack of dilligence and as Airman has said, his shadow is still hanging over us. 

    The question is, is Sandgaard trying to drastically cut costs because he has realised he can't succeed or is he genuinely trying to make us profitable in League One? I don't think he can really believe that is possible but the cost cutting is most likely part of trying to offload a club with no real assets. So as that is the case, not sure what good protests against him would do, much as the spivs. I think this is clearly a decision that has been made relatively recently, as why appoint Garner if you were looking to get out?

    If a case could be made for further protests, it would probably be back to Duchatelet but we gave that our best shot and the bloke is as mad as a hatter so it would almost certainly be a waste of our time and money. We have to hope somebody comes in. I think there is a lot of untapped potential in terms of growing the club but it has to be somebody with reasonably deep pockets. If we were to get to the promised land, I think the club would be very sellable given its location and catchment area and that is where the riches lie.
    Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.

    Awful for us though. 
    Yes, you are probably right but he did it to a club that is a big part of people's lives and which employed people. It should not be legal to do this IMO. Sell the whole club or keep it all, not sell the loss making part of it to the first crook who comes along. Totally lacking in morals and ethics and something he would have done whether there were protests or not because the reason he bought the club, his master plan, turned out to be a load of bollocks and he wanted money he had wasted in it back beyond what the worth of the assets were or are.
  • Sponsored links:


  • shirty5 said:
    NabySarr said:
    When is the next fans forum or opportunity to question Sandgaard? I feel like this is where we need the Trust to step up and publicly ask Sandgaard for a meeting or Q and A as we need answers on budget, expectations, future plans, ticket pricing, staff issues etc…
    Thursday week (15th) but if it’s anything like the minutes from the last one, don’t get your hopes up. Would love to be proved wrong though. 

    He won’t do this but a q anthed a with Sandgaard in Crossbars with fans. Then you can’t say your question was not asked. 


    Having spoken with Thomas personally I also put the question and answer session to him on behalf of international addicks. He thought it agood idea for international day. 
    This was back in July when I asked him.
  • shirty5 said:
    NabySarr said:
    When is the next fans forum or opportunity to question Sandgaard? I feel like this is where we need the Trust to step up and publicly ask Sandgaard for a meeting or Q and A as we need answers on budget, expectations, future plans, ticket pricing, staff issues etc…
    Thursday week (15th) but if it’s anything like the minutes from the last one, don’t get your hopes up. Would love to be proved wrong though. 

    He won’t do this but a q anthed a with Sandgaard in Crossbars with fans. Then you can’t say your question was not asked. 


    Having spoken with Thomas personally I also put the question and answer session to him on behalf of international addicks. He thought it agood idea for international day. 
    This was back in July when I asked him.
    I'm led to understand from one of the IA that there has been very limited, if any recent response ,to the request from the group's "leader" to discuss/firm up arrangements for said day at The Valley.

    I wonder whether, knowing that IA won't be a source of income, our owner's interest has somewhat faded....

    Yet another bright idea that wasn't thought through properly ? 
  • I always thought the reason we didn't really protest against the spivs is it was obvious they had no money and were trying to sell the club so what would be protesting for? To get them to do what they were trying to do? With Roland we were trying to get him to sell which he didn't really do. Instead he made a terrible business decision in offloading the playing part of the club to a bunch of crooks with an almost criminal lack of dilligence and as Airman has said, his shadow is still hanging over us. 

    The question is, is Sandgaard trying to drastically cut costs because he has realised he can't succeed or is he genuinely trying to make us profitable in League One? I don't think he can really believe that is possible but the cost cutting is most likely part of trying to offload a club with no real assets. So as that is the case, not sure what good protests against him would do, much as the spivs. I think this is clearly a decision that has been made relatively recently, as why appoint Garner if you were looking to get out?

    If a case could be made for further protests, it would probably be back to Duchatelet but we gave that our best shot and the bloke is as mad as a hatter so it would almost certainly be a waste of our time and money. We have to hope somebody comes in. I think there is a lot of untapped potential in terms of growing the club but it has to be somebody with reasonably deep pockets. If we were to get to the promised land, I think the club would be very sellable given its location and catchment area and that is where the riches lie.
    Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.

    Awful for us though. 
    He absolutely done us up like a Kipper
    Enjoy the moment , he told us.
  • boggzy said:
    JohnnyH2 said:
    JohnnyH2 said:
    Leuth said:
    We need sandgaard out, protests required against 
    And so the cycle of abuse continues. It's all we know at this point
    How is one poster asking for protests on a forum a cycle of abuse?
    You don’t do Twitter, I take it? Or FB (that cesspit of a medium is too much for me too)
    I do Twitter not Facebook. 

    I was responding to the point which I presumed was about on here, apologies if I was too thick to get it.

    As for the abuse on social media, it's not right, I don't take part in it, but if TS does not like it, don't read it and certainly don't take part (which his partner still does)

    On the flip side when he went for his walkabout round Adams Park he got a round of applause from what appeared a large number of away support and some even chanted his name. 
    This is our problem. So many are clueless.
    And the current alternative to Sandgaard is????
  • Get back to you with answer.
  • JamesSeed said:
    Should be sticking massive EV panels on the roof of the stands and using the electricity generated to cover our energy bills.  There must be a pretty quick pay back given the size of the roofs.  Would have though it would generate a meaningful short to medium term saving.
    Not too sure about short term gain and it depends on how long you mean by medium term.
    But take The Valley.  Stick a load of EV panels on the roof.  The roof space is enormous and it would have no impact on players, fans etc.  There MAY even be grants available (although suspect not currently).

    Then Stick a load of car chargers in our car park.  TS could then recoup significant cost by charging fans/players to charge their cars when parked there (do it at a reasonable rate slightly less than it would cost at home as it is all profit if you have generated the power yourself) = even quicker pay back. 

    He could even rent it out during the week when it would otherwise be under utilised.

    Landlords are doing this on offices and the like already, so the economics must work.

    Plus businesses will be taxed more on their carbon emissions in future years through sustainable taxonomy so it would be future proofing us from that too.

    Of course, not owning The Valley is not ideal but I still think the pay back would work.
    Supermarkets are offering free charging while you shop, so it’d need to be at a pretty low rate, which might not recoup the cost of installing to charging points. It costs around £15 to fully charge a car at home, so perhaps they could get away with charging £10 at The Valley. Not really a big earner. Plus of course not many fans have electric cars at this time. 
    They’d be better off using the panels to power the whole ground, and saving having to pay inflated energy bills over the next couple of years. 
    Well of course.  But there would be spare electricity given the size of the roofs and an extra £10 x 50 spaces or so on a match day, plus renting during the week is all easy revenue.  Not a massive earner but worth it and as I said it also future proofs us against taxonomy.
    I’d imagine the set-up cost would be into six figures and not all of the roofs, if any, would have the optimum orientation or slope. Most of the electricity would be fed into the grid because the club wouldn’t be able to use it, unless there was further substantial investment in batteries.

    There wouldn’t be any power generated at the time the floodlights were needed and the percentage of electric cars using the car park on matchdays will be small.

    Nothing wrong with the principle but probably impossible to make it work for the club financially.
    There's probably two things wrong with the principle. First I doubt very much that the stand roofs have sufficient load-bearing integrity. Why would they?  Second the roofs have see-through panels: this to help the grass get extra light throughout the winter months. You wouldn't want to be covering them up. (I suspect the extra leccy used by the massed ranks of grow lights would kind of make the project pointless!)
  • Clarky said:
    boggzy said:
    JohnnyH2 said:
    JohnnyH2 said:
    Leuth said:
    We need sandgaard out, protests required against 
    And so the cycle of abuse continues. It's all we know at this point
    How is one poster asking for protests on a forum a cycle of abuse?
    You don’t do Twitter, I take it? Or FB (that cesspit of a medium is too much for me too)
    I do Twitter not Facebook. 

    I was responding to the point which I presumed was about on here, apologies if I was too thick to get it.

    As for the abuse on social media, it's not right, I don't take part in it, but if TS does not like it, don't read it and certainly don't take part (which his partner still does)

    On the flip side when he went for his walkabout round Adams Park he got a round of applause from what appeared a large number of away support and some even chanted his name. 
    This is our problem. So many are clueless.
    And the current alternative to Sandgaard is????
    So if I don't know the answer to that, is it best I just applaud him, while he's shown time and time again he's an egotist utterly full of bullshit, seemingly has no interest in seeing us promoted (see transfer window), and turned The Valley as a workplace into (by all accounts) a horrible place to work?
  • cabbles said:
    Rob7Lee said:
    For me TS's credits ran out a long long time ago, anyone who can't see he's basically Roland 2 with much more meddling needs to give their head a wobble. You could argue in the last 2 years Roland was much better than TS! LdT was certainly better!

    For me, on the playing side, bar possibly the keeper we are lighter in every position than our promotion season under Bowyer.

    No one's near Bielik, Aribo or Cullen. I'd argue Sarr was a better CH than what we have currently IMHO, no question Bauer was, Taylor as much as he annoyed me was far superior up top, Pratley was way underrated in my view and better than what we have especially with his experience which we sorely lack.

    We may have finished third, but I don't see us getting within 6 places of that finish with what we have now.

    It feels like there are better teams as well in League 1 now.

    I joked that Garner would be gone by Christmas, I'm less confident now that that was only a joke!
    This for me.  The worst part is TS could so easily have made a better stab at this if he wasn’t treating it like a toy.  As a successful businessman, I don’t understand why he seems to think this is different to running a business and hasn’t appointed operational, experienced football people to run the club.  

    If Zynex bought another company to compliment his medical supplies business, would he try to run that without a GM, a VP of Sales, a CMO and dictate the commercial strategy himself?  Would he turn up in the staff canteen at lunch with his guitar and throw you rifts in with staff over their lunch.  No!  Well I can’t say for certain, but I can’t imagine so.

    So why are we any different.  If anything, because we are money pit, I would’ve thought the sensible approach would be to go above and beyond to find the right people to help.  
    And yet this is (nearly) what he did 9 months ago. https://zynexmed.investorroom.com/2021-12-23-Zynex-Announces-Acquisition-of-Kestrel-Labs

    He did keep the two founder/boffins on as VPs but everything else seems to be down to him.

    And since then, of course,  he has been largely in the UK.
  • Clarky said:
    boggzy said:
    JohnnyH2 said:
    JohnnyH2 said:
    Leuth said:
    We need sandgaard out, protests required against 
    And so the cycle of abuse continues. It's all we know at this point
    How is one poster asking for protests on a forum a cycle of abuse?
    You don’t do Twitter, I take it? Or FB (that cesspit of a medium is too much for me too)
    I do Twitter not Facebook. 

    I was responding to the point which I presumed was about on here, apologies if I was too thick to get it.

    As for the abuse on social media, it's not right, I don't take part in it, but if TS does not like it, don't read it and certainly don't take part (which his partner still does)

    On the flip side when he went for his walkabout round Adams Park he got a round of applause from what appeared a large number of away support and some even chanted his name. 
    This is our problem. So many are clueless.
    And the current alternative to Sandgaard is????
    Unlikely to make themselves known at the present time, but, bearing in mind that I'm not ITK:-

    Someone else with more money than sense;
    A Merchant Banker, or Laurence Bassini;
    Jim Dadvidson & Cheryl Baker; (Joint Venture)

    I would suggest Roland and Thomas combining forces and pooling resources to transform us into an unstoppable force with their collective breadth of knowledge and financial clout, but I fear that might create a two headed monster instead.
  • Sponsored links:


  • I think a London based club despite the ground and training ground issues is always going to attract interest. I guess it would depend on what kind of figure TS would want given he owns very little that's worth any value? 

    If we are sitting in 12th in February I do wonder if TS begins to wonder if this is worth another year of £8m losses in League 1 with lessening crowds.
  • boggzy said:
    Clarky said:
    boggzy said:
    JohnnyH2 said:
    JohnnyH2 said:
    Leuth said:
    We need sandgaard out, protests required against 
    And so the cycle of abuse continues. It's all we know at this point
    How is one poster asking for protests on a forum a cycle of abuse?
    You don’t do Twitter, I take it? Or FB (that cesspit of a medium is too much for me too)
    I do Twitter not Facebook. 

    I was responding to the point which I presumed was about on here, apologies if I was too thick to get it.

    As for the abuse on social media, it's not right, I don't take part in it, but if TS does not like it, don't read it and certainly don't take part (which his partner still does)

    On the flip side when he went for his walkabout round Adams Park he got a round of applause from what appeared a large number of away support and some even chanted his name. 
    This is our problem. So many are clueless.
    And the current alternative to Sandgaard is????
    So if I don't know the answer to that, is it best I just applaud him, while he's shown time and time again he's an egotist utterly full of bullshit, seemingly has no interest in seeing us promoted (see transfer window), and turned The Valley as a workplace into (by all accounts) a horrible place to work?
    No, it is your choice not to as it is theirs to do so, doesn't make them anymore clueless than you for having a different opinion.
  • shirty5 said:
    NabySarr said:
    When is the next fans forum or opportunity to question Sandgaard? I feel like this is where we need the Trust to step up and publicly ask Sandgaard for a meeting or Q and A as we need answers on budget, expectations, future plans, ticket pricing, staff issues etc…
    Thursday week (15th) but if it’s anything like the minutes from the last one, don’t get your hopes up. Would love to be proved wrong though. 

    He won’t do this but a q anthed a with Sandgaard in Crossbars with fans. Then you can’t say your question was not asked. 


    Having spoken with Thomas personally I also put the question and answer session to him on behalf of international addicks. He thought it agood idea for international day. 
    This was back in July when I asked him.
    I'm led to understand from one of the IA that there has been very limited, if any recent response ,to the request from the group's "leader" to discuss/firm up arrangements for said day at The Valley.

    I wonder whether, knowing that IA won't be a source of income, our owner's interest has somewhat faded....

    Yet another bright idea that wasn't thought through properly ? 
    Okay been told International Fans Day is against Ipswich Town 27th Oct.
    No mention of question and answer session.
    But will ask again if this is possible as that would put more on attendance.
  • Unfortunately I  really fear for our future. Sandgaard owns nothing at the club apart from the name. Hopefully someone like @Airman Brown can dissuade me of this view, but unless there is a rich person like Barclay around, the only way Sandgaard  gets rid is to sell it on to chancers like Bassini and Southall.

    That's my nightmare scenario. It could get a lot, lot worse.
  • I always thought the reason we didn't really protest against the spivs is it was obvious they had no money and were trying to sell the club so what would be protesting for? To get them to do what they were trying to do? With Roland we were trying to get him to sell which he didn't really do. Instead he made a terrible business decision in offloading the playing part of the club to a bunch of crooks with an almost criminal lack of dilligence and as Airman has said, his shadow is still hanging over us. 

    The question is, is Sandgaard trying to drastically cut costs because he has realised he can't succeed or is he genuinely trying to make us profitable in League One? I don't think he can really believe that is possible but the cost cutting is most likely part of trying to offload a club with no real assets. So as that is the case, not sure what good protests against him would do, much as the spivs. I think this is clearly a decision that has been made relatively recently, as why appoint Garner if you were looking to get out?

    If a case could be made for further protests, it would probably be back to Duchatelet but we gave that our best shot and the bloke is as mad as a hatter so it would almost certainly be a waste of our time and money. We have to hope somebody comes in. I think there is a lot of untapped potential in terms of growing the club but it has to be somebody with reasonably deep pockets. If we were to get to the promised land, I think the club would be very sellable given its location and catchment area and that is where the riches lie.
    Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.

    Awful for us though. 
    Don’t agree. He knew he was on the hook for the £7m loans if the club went bust and it’s a lot easier for him to collect rent than spend five to ten years trying to redevelop a site which will always be problematic due to access.
    Perhaps after receiving a decent rent for his assets for several years and recovering some of the money he lost (wasted!), RD may review his position on the value of the assets. He is unlikely to find a buyer all the time his valuation is so much above market value.
  • Unfortunately I  really fear for our future. Sandgaard owns nothing at the club apart from the name. Hopefully someone like @Airman Brown can dissuade me of this view, but unless there is a rich person like Barclay around, the only way Sandgaard  gets rid is to sell it on to chancers like Bassini and Southall.

    That's my nightmare scenario. It could get a lot, lot worse.
    No, someone with serious money works out it’s the cheapest way to acquire a Premier League club in London and blows RD and TS away. Such people are out there, but no promises.
    Isn’t this exactly the reason RD hasn’t sold SL and the Valley?

    IMHO he is waiting for this scenario based on the club’s potential and not the value of the land for property speculation.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!