Maybe there’s something wrong with me, but I’m completely unmoved by all of it. I’m not going to get all dewy eyed about the TS statement and I can’t get excited about our many new owners. Duchatelet was extremely rich and it didn’t mean a thing because he didn’t give a shit about Charlton, so temper your enthusiasm on that front. If we sign some decent players and are around the top 6 all season I’ll be happy enough, but I think the last ten years have really taken it out of me and I suspect I’m not alone on that score.
All day long mate.
The owners could be the richest in the world, it matters nothing, it is how you spend it. Dushitelet spent a LOT of money, but did not spend it wisely.
Another example of lacking a SMT that knew what they were doing. RD could have still been the owner if he’d just put an experienced team in to run the club rath than KM and TD
I wonder why Sutherland is only an interim appointment?
Possibly it's intended that Tony Davison comes in to do it. That's his role at the Northampton Saints Rugby Club and he was seen sitting with CM at the Gillingham game. They worked together at Sunderland too and he is vastly experienced. Maybe he's said 'no' and Sutherland is a stop gap appointment.
IMOH it is deliberate dividing Davison and Charlie, They have history together.
I wonder why Sutherland is only an interim appointment?
Possibly it's intended that Tony Davison comes in to do it. That's his role at the Northampton Saints Rugby Club and he was seen sitting with CM at the Gillingham game. They worked together at Sunderland too and he is vastly experienced. Maybe he's said 'no' and Sutherland is a stop gap appointment.
IMOH it is deliberate dividing Davison and Charlie, They have history together.
If I was superstitious I might take todays log in issues on the website as omen of how the new ownership will work out.
Well you can look at it as a positive. I like to see good decisions under pressure and putting it on You Tube was one of those. The pressure was there wasn't any time and messing about trying to make up your mind what to do could have made it messy.
That's the thing with this new coalition. It is very likely that new people will come on board as will people leave, but the ownership will remain in multiple hands. As at Palace recently a bloke who owns a part share has just spent £5B on a NFL team and I December another of their owners bought a Baseball team for £3B. Another of their owners bought Lyon for £800m last year. Clearly multiple people jumping on board can work out fine but it's having the right people that matters. https://talksport.com/sport/1504722/crystal-palace-josh-harris-chelsea-nfl-washington-commanders/
Trouble is football is an expensive business. There aren’t enough multi billionaires to go around so the choice is dodgy nation state ownerships or consortiums of wealthy people. I think there will be more of this model in the future. Never going to please everyone but no ownership is ever going to do that
There is nothing inherently wrong with having a multi-ownership concept.
Every listed company in the UK has a large number of shareholders. Many of those, certainly in terms of the percentage of shares held, are institutional investors, who in turn, are operating on behalf of other investors. In addition a company like Rolls Royce has 18% of its shares held by retail investors, while directors in the company hold a meagre 1%.
In principle, there's no reason why this should not work in a football club. Like for a FTSE 100 listed company, the key thing is to have the right people on the ground doing the actual work and for the "investors" to give those people the resources they need to do the job.
I must be missing something here. What difference does it make if one of them lives or has connections to Texas ? do we not like Texan's ?
Because there was once a prospectus floating around trying to get small time investment lined up in our club, that was apparently distributed in Texas, and spoke of closing stands/the academy/moving the club/turning us into Crystal Palace B team/changing the kit colours to purple and beige hoops or whatever that everyone got very uppity about, but the vast majority of us haven't been able to see.
I'd hope once the takeover is fully ratified those with it can share it once and for all
Has anyone actually seen this mythical prospectus?
Ipswich are essentially owned by the Arizona Teacher's State Pension fund, so are basically a consortium of small investors headed up by a couple of bigger players. Did this mean that they're doomed to be used and abused by "the money" and asset stripped etc (a full on hedge fund owning you means you NEED to not have loses really). Or are they OK because no one involved was caught wearing salmon coloured trousers on TV and didn't go to posh school?
Sandgaard was letting us wither and die. Thank you for saving us from Admin and ESI, thank you for your misplaced belief in us. We know you generally meant well and couldn't handle things not going to plan. Enjoy the rest of your days!
We now have a chance of being a more professional outfit, with real actual experienced football people being in charge. That's what we've being crying out for for years! Things are looking up for us for once, try to enjoy it and see what happens!
Saying Ipswich are owned by a pension fund is the same as saying Charlton are partly owed by a recycling company.
The entity that provides an initial source of the funds does not qualify it as an owner. Even less so with Ipswich where the funds arrive via a public investment fund and are donated in the form of debt not equity.
Sorry, I was wrong. It's not the Teacher's Pension fund, the "ultimate beneficial owner of the Blues is a US investment fund called ORG, which manage funds on behalf of large US pension pot - the Arizona Public Safety Personnel Retirement System - and who own 90% of Gamechanger 20 Ltd" is where the money for Ipswich comes from.
Frustrated with negativity about it being a consortium (oh my god!!) and strategic partners who have deeper pockets and more interest in progressing the club than the previous few owners. The fact that they put up with TS 'more money for me stunt' in January and came back to the table, and proved they could run the club more professionally during their stint in January with experienced SMT in place should bode well for the future.
Live, love, laugh and be happy!
Imagine the frustration of @Cardinal Sin, then. He's one of the two well-known and respected Lifers who have seen the prospectus and is getting a bit bored with endlessly having to repeat on here to yet another person who asks in a kind of dismissive way, that yes, he has seen it. I get that if a poster is not on here often it isn't really feasible to go back too far on a thread, and the search function on this platform is pretty useless IMO. But chuffing hell, CS latest clarification on this was only max 48 hours ago.
For the record, I'm not against consortia, for the reasons @cafcfan lays out better than I could. I also keep being told that the Bolton consortium is a positive example. I also think that those fans who are interested, should dig deep into exactly who is in it and try to establish why, especially if it has been put together by someone with the bus load of baggage that Charlie Methven comes with. Why would you seek to stamp on that?
So virtually everyone has an approach of let's wait and see what happens. The depressed are depressed about it and will always be depressed about everything.
I must be missing something here. What difference does it make if one of them lives or has connections to Texas ? do we not like Texan's ?
Because there was once a prospectus floating around trying to get small time investment lined up in our club, that was apparently distributed in Texas, and spoke of closing stands/the academy/moving the club/turning us into Crystal Palace B team/changing the kit colours to purple and beige hoops or whatever that everyone got very uppity about, but the vast majority of us haven't been able to see.
I'd hope once the takeover is fully ratified those with it can share it once and for all
Has anyone actually seen this mythical prospectus?
Ipswich are essentially owned by the Arizona Teacher's State Pension fund, so are basically a consortium of small investors headed up by a couple of bigger players. Did this mean that they're doomed to be used and abused by "the money" and asset stripped etc (a full on hedge fund owning you means you NEED to not have loses really). Or are they OK because no one involved was caught wearing salmon coloured trousers on TV and didn't go to posh school?
Sandgaard was letting us wither and die. Thank you for saving us from Admin and ESI, thank you for your misplaced belief in us. We know you generally meant well and couldn't handle things not going to plan. Enjoy the rest of your days!
We now have a chance of being a more professional outfit, with real actual experienced football people being in charge. That's what we've being crying out for for years! Things are looking up for us for once, try to enjoy it and see what happens!
Saying Ipswich are owned by a pension fund is the same as saying Charlton are partly owed by a recycling company.
The entity that provides an initial source of the funds does not qualify it as an owner. Even less so with Ipswich where the funds arrive via a public investment fund and are donated in the form of debt not equity.
Sorry, I was wrong. It's not the Teacher's Pension fund, the "ultimate beneficial owner of the Blues is a US investment fund called ORG, which manage funds on behalf of large US pension pot - the Arizona Public Safety Personnel Retirement System - and who own 90% of Gamechanger 20 Ltd" is where the money for Ipswich comes from.
Frustrated with negativity about it being a consortium (oh my god!!) and strategic partners who have deeper pockets and more interest in progressing the club than the previous few owners. The fact that they put up with TS 'more money for me stunt' in January and came back to the table, and proved they could run the club more professionally during their stint in January with experienced SMT in place should bode well for the future.
Live, love, laugh and be happy!
Imagine the frustration of @Cardinal Sin, then. He's one of the two well-known and respected Lifers who have seen the prospectus and is getting a bit bored with endlessly having to repeat on here to yet another person who asks in a kind of dismissive way, that yes, he has seen it. I get that if a poster is not on here often it isn't really feasible to go back too far on a thread, and the search function on this platform is pretty useless IMO. But chuffing hell, CS latest clarification on this was only max 48 hours ago.
For the record, I'm not against consortia, for the reasons @cafcfan lays out better than I could. I also keep being told that the Bolton consortium is a positive example. I also think that those fans who are interested, should dig deep into exactly who is in it and try to establish why, especially if it has been put together by someone with the bus load of baggage that Charlie Methven comes with. Why would you seek to stamp on that?
I wonder why Sutherland is only an interim appointment?
Possibly it's intended that Tony Davison comes in to do it. That's his role at the Northampton Saints Rugby Club and he was seen sitting with CM at the Gillingham game. They worked together at Sunderland too and he is vastly experienced. Maybe he's said 'no' and Sutherland is a stop gap appointment.
IMOH it is deliberate dividing Davison and Charlie, They have history together.
What does this mean ?
I'd had a couple when I posted that! What I was meant to post was that I think Davison was sat away from Methven to deflect any attention. They have worked together in the past.
There is nothing inherently wrong with having a multi-ownership concept.
Every listed company in the UK has a large number of shareholders. Many of those, certainly in terms of the percentage of shares held, are institutional investors, who in turn, are operating on behalf of other investors. In addition a company like Rolls Royce has 18% of its shares held by retail investors, while directors in the company hold a meagre 1%.
In principle, there's no reason why this should not work in a football club. Like for a FTSE 100 listed company, the key thing is to have the right people on the ground doing the actual work and for the "investors" to give those people the resources they need to do the job.
We shall see how this pans out won't we?
On the other hand we had Nimer and Southall as joint/multi-owners and we know how that ended.
The main shareholders seem to be GB/JF and Warren Rosenfeld who we presume own around 70% between them and therefore a controlling stake. Collectively they are ones who have committed the most money upfront and will be trousering most of the losses.
I'd be interested to know what their relationship is to one another. I assume that GB and JF know each other from the corporate world and have done business together in the past so have some trust and understanding. How do they know Rosenfeld? Calbag is based in Oregon not California and is a scrap metal company not a hedge fund, there doesn't appear to be an immediate synergy there. It could be that GB and JF hold stakes in Calbag (which is private/non-listed) or maybe they have just been mates for sometime. At any rate I hope they all get on before our money pit of a football club stretches their friendship ties.
I must be missing something here. What difference does it make if one of them lives or has connections to Texas ? do we not like Texan's ?
Because there was once a prospectus floating around trying to get small time investment lined up in our club, that was apparently distributed in Texas, and spoke of closing stands/the academy/moving the club/turning us into Crystal Palace B team/changing the kit colours to purple and beige hoops or whatever that everyone got very uppity about, but the vast majority of us haven't been able to see.
I'd hope once the takeover is fully ratified those with it can share it once and for all
Has anyone actually seen this mythical prospectus?
Ipswich are essentially owned by the Arizona Teacher's State Pension fund, so are basically a consortium of small investors headed up by a couple of bigger players. Did this mean that they're doomed to be used and abused by "the money" and asset stripped etc (a full on hedge fund owning you means you NEED to not have loses really). Or are they OK because no one involved was caught wearing salmon coloured trousers on TV and didn't go to posh school?
Sandgaard was letting us wither and die. Thank you for saving us from Admin and ESI, thank you for your misplaced belief in us. We know you generally meant well and couldn't handle things not going to plan. Enjoy the rest of your days!
We now have a chance of being a more professional outfit, with real actual experienced football people being in charge. That's what we've being crying out for for years! Things are looking up for us for once, try to enjoy it and see what happens!
Saying Ipswich are owned by a pension fund is the same as saying Charlton are partly owed by a recycling company.
The entity that provides an initial source of the funds does not qualify it as an owner. Even less so with Ipswich where the funds arrive via a public investment fund and are donated in the form of debt not equity.
Sorry, I was wrong. It's not the Teacher's Pension fund, the "ultimate beneficial owner of the Blues is a US investment fund called ORG, which manage funds on behalf of large US pension pot - the Arizona Public Safety Personnel Retirement System - and who own 90% of Gamechanger 20 Ltd" is where the money for Ipswich comes from.
Frustrated with negativity about it being a consortium (oh my god!!) and strategic partners who have deeper pockets and more interest in progressing the club than the previous few owners. The fact that they put up with TS 'more money for me stunt' in January and came back to the table, and proved they could run the club more professionally during their stint in January with experienced SMT in place should bode well for the future.
Live, love, laugh and be happy!
Imagine the frustration of @Cardinal Sin, then. He's one of the two well-known and respected Lifers who have seen the prospectus and is getting a bit bored with endlessly having to repeat on here to yet another person who asks in a kind of dismissive way, that yes, he has seen it. I get that if a poster is not on here often it isn't really feasible to go back too far on a thread, and the search function on this platform is pretty useless IMO. But chuffing hell, CS latest clarification on this was only max 48 hours ago.
For the record, I'm not against consortia, for the reasons @cafcfan lays out better than I could. I also keep being told that the Bolton consortium is a positive example. I also think that those fans who are interested, should dig deep into exactly who is in it and try to establish why, especially if it has been put together by someone with the bus load of baggage that Charlie Methven comes with. Why would you seek to stamp on that?
Yeah, wasn't going to go wading through the countless posts arguing for arguments sake, the spitefulness towards some and the ultra doom and gloom of others.
We have a genuine chance of clearing the debris from the pathetic excuses for owners that we've been subjected to and the damage they have done to our great club, some people can't seem to recognise that. The new lot don't get a few pass, but likewise they can't be immediately lumped into the category of chancers, incompetent or straight up crooks before they've actually had a chance to do anything.
The fact that they righted the ship during January and put proper football people in senior positions and got everything working on a much more professional level shows they have got some idea of what they're doing.
Thinking about it, what no-one has really picked up on is that none of the major players have actually said anything publicly. Or even in the recent statements actually had a quote attributed to them. To this point that are just names.
At the very least Freidman or Brener could have released a 2 minute video introducing themselves.
Very underwhelmed.
I would be very happy if the Global Partners money men stayed in the background doing their financial thing.
What I do find reassuring, is that they've appointed people experienced and knowledgeable to run the day-to-day operational football side of things. After a decade or more of rank amateurs and shysters, we should at least recognise that the intention is to run the club in a proper and structured way.
Proof of the pudding is in the eating and all that ...... but I don't see why we have to negatively pre-judge the newcomers, just because we're jaundiced and wounded after the Prem years.
We have to give them a bit of time and a chance to prove themselves one way or another. But it's the football team, performances annd results that I'm now focused on. That's surely what football is really all about?
But they haven't really appointed anyone have they ? They're just investors possibly sold a dream by charlie boy who has given his mates a pay check/cheque.
Thinking about it, what no-one has really picked up on is that none of the major players have actually said anything publicly. Or even in the recent statements actually had a quote attributed to them. To this point that are just names.
At the very least Freidman or Brener could have released a 2 minute video introducing themselves.
Very underwhelmed.
I would be very happy if the Global Partners money men stayed in the background doing their financial thing.
What I do find reassuring, is that they've appointed people experienced and knowledgeable to run the day-to-day operational football side of things. After a decade or more of rank amateurs and shysters, we should at least recognise that the intention is to run the club in a proper and structured way.
Proof of the pudding is in the eating and all that ...... but I don't see why we have to negatively pre-judge the newcomers, just because we're jaundiced and wounded after the Prem years.
We have to give them a bit of time and a chance to prove themselves one way or another. But it's the football team, performances annd results that I'm now focused on. That's surely what football is really all about?
But they haven't really appointed anyone have they ? They're just investors possibly sold a dream by charlie boy who has given his mates a pay check/cheque.
Apart from: Managing Director - Jim Rodwell Group Finance Director - Ed Warrick Technical Director - TBC (Probably Andy Scott again) Director of Performance - TBC Interim Commercial Manager - Steve Sutherland Non Executive Director - Paul Elliott Non Executive Director - Gavin Carter
Only Gavin Carter of that list is an investor, and he's been given a token place on the board.
We can argue about their credentials all you want, but they're a darn sight more experienced than Duchatelet, Miere, Driesen, Sandgaard (& Jr.), Maloney, and many other names that have come beforehand
Thinking about it, what no-one has really picked up on is that none of the major players have actually said anything publicly. Or even in the recent statements actually had a quote attributed to them. To this point that are just names.
At the very least Freidman or Brener could have released a 2 minute video introducing themselves.
Very underwhelmed.
I would be very happy if the Global Partners money men stayed in the background doing their financial thing.
What I do find reassuring, is that they've appointed people experienced and knowledgeable to run the day-to-day operational football side of things. After a decade or more of rank amateurs and shysters, we should at least recognise that the intention is to run the club in a proper and structured way.
Proof of the pudding is in the eating and all that ...... but I don't see why we have to negatively pre-judge the newcomers, just because we're jaundiced and wounded after the Prem years.
We have to give them a bit of time and a chance to prove themselves one way or another. But it's the football team, performances annd results that I'm now focused on. That's surely what football is really all about?
But they haven't really appointed anyone have they ? They're just investors possibly sold a dream by charlie boy who has given his mates a pay check/cheque.
Apart from: Managing Director - Jim Rodwell Group Finance Director - Ed Warrick Technical Director - TBC (Probably Andy Scott again) Director of Performance - TBC Interim Commercial Manager - Steve Sutherland Non Executive Director - Paul Elliott Non Executive Director - Gavin Carter
Only Gavin Carter of that list is an investor, and he's been given a token place on the board.
So you think all of those people have been appointed by Friedman etc
We can argue about their credentials all you want, but they're a darn sight more experienced than Duchatelet, Miere, Driesen, Sandgaard (& Jr.), Maloney, and many other names that have come beforehand
Thinking about it, what no-one has really picked up on is that none of the major players have actually said anything publicly. Or even in the recent statements actually had a quote attributed to them. To this point that are just names.
At the very least Freidman or Brener could have released a 2 minute video introducing themselves.
Very underwhelmed.
I would be very happy if the Global Partners money men stayed in the background doing their financial thing.
What I do find reassuring, is that they've appointed people experienced and knowledgeable to run the day-to-day operational football side of things. After a decade or more of rank amateurs and shysters, we should at least recognise that the intention is to run the club in a proper and structured way.
Proof of the pudding is in the eating and all that ...... but I don't see why we have to negatively pre-judge the newcomers, just because we're jaundiced and wounded after the Prem years.
We have to give them a bit of time and a chance to prove themselves one way or another. But it's the football team, performances annd results that I'm now focused on. That's surely what football is really all about?
But they haven't really appointed anyone have they ? They're just investors possibly sold a dream by charlie boy who has given his mates a pay check/cheque.
Apart from: Managing Director - Jim Rodwell Group Finance Director - Ed Warrick Technical Director - TBC (Probably Andy Scott again) Director of Performance - TBC Interim Commercial Manager - Steve Sutherland Non Executive Director - Paul Elliott Non Executive Director - Gavin Carter
Only Gavin Carter of that list is an investor, and he's been given a token place on the board.
So you think all of those people have been appointed by Friedman etc
I think you're missing the wood for the trees with this. Whether The Consortium made the appointments directly or its Chuck M giving mates a job, either way on paper at least they have superior experience and capability in football than a lawyer (Meire), fellow crooks (ESI), or an egotistical businessman trying to micromanage (Sandgaard).
It might very well still turn out badly but there's enough there to suggest that the intentions are good/honest. I'm not suggesting a mass application of tongues to arse but maybe hold off on the torches and pitchforks routine for just a little bit longer....
Thinking about it, what no-one has really picked up on is that none of the major players have actually said anything publicly. Or even in the recent statements actually had a quote attributed to them. To this point that are just names.
At the very least Freidman or Brener could have released a 2 minute video introducing themselves.
Very underwhelmed.
I would be very happy if the Global Partners money men stayed in the background doing their financial thing.
What I do find reassuring, is that they've appointed people experienced and knowledgeable to run the day-to-day operational football side of things. After a decade or more of rank amateurs and shysters, we should at least recognise that the intention is to run the club in a proper and structured way.
Proof of the pudding is in the eating and all that ...... but I don't see why we have to negatively pre-judge the newcomers, just because we're jaundiced and wounded after the Prem years.
We have to give them a bit of time and a chance to prove themselves one way or another. But it's the football team, performances annd results that I'm now focused on. That's surely what football is really all about?
But they haven't really appointed anyone have they ? They're just investors possibly sold a dream by charlie boy who has given his mates a pay check/cheque.
Apart from: Managing Director - Jim Rodwell Group Finance Director - Ed Warrick Technical Director - TBC (Probably Andy Scott again) Director of Performance - TBC Interim Commercial Manager - Steve Sutherland Non Executive Director - Paul Elliott Non Executive Director - Gavin Carter
Only Gavin Carter of that list is an investor, and he's been given a token place on the board.
So you think all of those people have been appointed by Friedman etc
I think you're missing the wood for the trees with this. Whether The Consortium made the appointments directly or its Chuck M giving mates a job, either way on paper at least they have superior experience and capability in football than a lawyer (Meire), fellow crooks (ESI), or an egotistical businessman trying to micromanage (Sandgaard).
It might very well still turn out badly but there's enough there to suggest that the intentions are good/honest. I'm not suggesting a mass application of tongues to arse but maybe hold off on the torches and pitchforks routine for just a little bit longer....
Thinking about it, what no-one has really picked up on is that none of the major players have actually said anything publicly. Or even in the recent statements actually had a quote attributed to them. To this point that are just names.
At the very least Freidman or Brener could have released a 2 minute video introducing themselves.
Very underwhelmed.
I would be very happy if the Global Partners money men stayed in the background doing their financial thing.
What I do find reassuring, is that they've appointed people experienced and knowledgeable to run the day-to-day operational football side of things. After a decade or more of rank amateurs and shysters, we should at least recognise that the intention is to run the club in a proper and structured way.
Proof of the pudding is in the eating and all that ...... but I don't see why we have to negatively pre-judge the newcomers, just because we're jaundiced and wounded after the Prem years.
We have to give them a bit of time and a chance to prove themselves one way or another. But it's the football team, performances annd results that I'm now focused on. That's surely what football is really all about?
But they haven't really appointed anyone have they ? They're just investors possibly sold a dream by charlie boy who has given his mates a pay check/cheque.
Apart from: Managing Director - Jim Rodwell Group Finance Director - Ed Warrick Technical Director - TBC (Probably Andy Scott again) Director of Performance - TBC Interim Commercial Manager - Steve Sutherland Non Executive Director - Paul Elliott Non Executive Director - Gavin Carter
Only Gavin Carter of that list is an investor, and he's been given a token place on the board.
So you think all of those people have been appointed by Friedman etc
I think you're missing the wood for the trees with this. Whether The Consortium made the appointments directly or its Chuck M giving mates a job, either way on paper at least they have superior experience and capability in football than a lawyer (Meire), fellow crooks (ESI), or an egotistical businessman trying to micromanage (Sandgaard).
It might very well still turn out badly but there's enough there to suggest that the intentions are good/honest. I'm not suggesting a mass application of tongues to arse but maybe hold off on the torches and pitchforks routine for just a little bit longer....
I am confident Sutherland cares about Charlton however good or bad he might be at his job.
One thing you can’t fault Steve Sutherland over is he is a life long fan of Charlton. Having been taken along to The Valley at a very young age by his father Fred also a life long fan.
Comments
Not ITK but can that not be possible?
https://talksport.com/sport/1504722/crystal-palace-josh-harris-chelsea-nfl-washington-commanders/
Every listed company in the UK has a large number of shareholders. Many of those, certainly in terms of the percentage of shares held, are institutional investors, who in turn, are operating on behalf of other investors. In addition a company like Rolls Royce has 18% of its shares held by retail investors, while directors in the company hold a meagre 1%.
In principle, there's no reason why this should not work in a football club. Like for a FTSE 100 listed company, the key thing is to have the right people on the ground doing the actual work and for the "investors" to give those people the resources they need to do the job.
We shall see how this pans out won't we?
For the record, I'm not against consortia, for the reasons @cafcfan lays out better than I could. I also keep being told that the Bolton consortium is a positive example. I also think that those fans who are interested, should dig deep into exactly who is in it and try to establish why, especially if it has been put together by someone with the bus load of baggage that Charlie Methven comes with. Why would you seek to stamp on that?
And ive invested.
What I was meant to post was that I think Davison was sat away from Methven to deflect any attention.
They have worked together in the past.
The main shareholders seem to be GB/JF and Warren Rosenfeld who we presume own around 70% between them and therefore a controlling stake. Collectively they are ones who have committed the most money upfront and will be trousering most of the losses.
I'd be interested to know what their relationship is to one another. I assume that GB and JF know each other from the corporate world and have done business together in the past so have some trust and understanding. How do they know Rosenfeld? Calbag is based in Oregon not California and is a scrap metal company not a hedge fund, there doesn't appear to be an immediate synergy there. It could be that GB and JF hold stakes in Calbag (which is private/non-listed) or maybe they have just been mates for sometime. At any rate I hope they all get on before our money pit of a football club stretches their friendship ties.
We have a genuine chance of clearing the debris from the pathetic excuses for owners that we've been subjected to and the damage they have done to our great club, some people can't seem to recognise that. The new lot don't get a few pass, but likewise they can't be immediately lumped into the category of chancers, incompetent or straight up crooks before they've actually had a chance to do anything.
The fact that they righted the ship during January and put proper football people in senior positions and got everything working on a much more professional level shows they have got some idea of what they're doing.
Managing Director - Jim Rodwell
Group Finance Director - Ed Warrick
Technical Director - TBC (Probably Andy Scott again)
Director of Performance - TBC
Interim Commercial Manager - Steve Sutherland
Non Executive Director - Paul Elliott
Non Executive Director - Gavin Carter
Only Gavin Carter of that list is an investor, and he's been given a token place on the board.
It might very well still turn out badly but there's enough there to suggest that the intentions are good/honest. I'm not suggesting a mass application of tongues to arse but maybe hold off on the torches and pitchforks routine for just a little bit longer....
Having been taken along to The Valley at a very young age by his father Fred also a life long fan.
Some episodes still available here. https://charlton.chat/podcasts.