Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Sandgaard ownership discussion 2022-3 onwards (Meeting with CAST p138)
Comments
-
then if the protests had no effect on forcing the hand of the owners to get out, what was the point of them.Cardinal Sin said:
Load of tosh. How can supporters be blamed for who came in and got control of the club? If Sandgaard got us promoted in his first year we could have been in the PL by now. Would you seriously be saying it was all down to CARD?msomerton said:
Well Airman. You may not recall the calls for the spivs to get out at the end of and even during the games towards the end of their time.Airman Brown said:
Not sure how protests got us Duchatelet - time travel?msomerton said:I am not convinced by Sandagaard, But all protests have got us, is Duchalet, ESI and Sandagaard so not much point in going down that road.
But I take it you agree with the fact that protests got us ESI and Sandagaard.
I wasted my time walking out on 73mins, or standing in the car park in the rain.0 -
Mediocre.Ilovelondontown said:
Think this is spot on we’re not as big as some supporters think we are, other than pl days our support is pretty mediocre, most teams that make it to pl will sell out attracting new support but if you start going down league’s it’s just the hard core left as we are seeing now, most teams or our size will sell out at Wembley , if we got there again this season we will take a lot longer to sell our allocationMillwallFan said:
Sorry, but where do you get that from? There’s plenty of genuinely big clubs who have dropped in to the third tier in recent history, and they’ve gone through difficult periods at that level, but big crowds kept coming through the gates. Sunderland, Ipswich, Leeds, Sheffield utd, Derby now, Southampton,Norwich, just to name a few off the top of my head.Dave2l said:J BLOCK said:
I'm not wrongElfsborgAddick said:J BLOCK said:
Infuriating because on paper we are one of the most attractive clubs to buy in England, yet we end up with failing owner after failing owner. Look at Hull, team in the arse end of no where, bought recently by an owner who is backing them on the pitch.Airman Brown said:
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.bolloxbolder said: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.
we are one of the most attractive clubs to buy in England. What have you been drinking this afternoon?
Potential huge investment. Our fanbase is certainly big enough. We are an attractive club to buy.
No owner has the bollocks, courage or dedication to give it the required effort.
Its now just someone shooting himself in the foot by only attempting to break even.
Didn't do his homework. A few years ago he seemed confident and it appeared that he at least had a brain.Charlton aren’t in the same league when you compare your fan base with those mentioned above, and plenty others as well. Even in your PL days your crowds had to be bolstered by shipping bus loads of plastics in from the Home Counties.Seriously, the delusion that some of you have (not all, granted) that charlton are somehow a big club or a sleeping giant, it’s not how the rest of the footballing world view you.And no, we’re not either. But we don’t claim to be!
You're digging out our support?
How many season tickets did you expect us to sell this season after the last few seasons weve had?
How many fans did we have up at Bolton Saturday?
Over the previous years what sort of numbers have we taken to Bolton?
After the last half a dozen seasons weve had and still 8000 season tickets sold as well as taking over 600 to Bolton you're saying our support is mediocre.
I'm not having it5 -
Honestly, at that point I would just give up. Unluckiest club going.soapboxsam said:No ITK info on the will of Roland Duchatelet but if it isn't Roderick then Katrien Miere may yet return to carry on the job she started when Roland goes even deeper than his Belgium Bunker.
Katrien Miere owner.0 -
How is 600 to Bolton anything other than mediocre?clb74 said:
Mediocre.Ilovelondontown said:
Think this is spot on we’re not as big as some supporters think we are, other than pl days our support is pretty mediocre, most teams that make it to pl will sell out attracting new support but if you start going down league’s it’s just the hard core left as we are seeing now, most teams or our size will sell out at Wembley , if we got there again this season we will take a lot longer to sell our allocationMillwallFan said:
Sorry, but where do you get that from? There’s plenty of genuinely big clubs who have dropped in to the third tier in recent history, and they’ve gone through difficult periods at that level, but big crowds kept coming through the gates. Sunderland, Ipswich, Leeds, Sheffield utd, Derby now, Southampton,Norwich, just to name a few off the top of my head.Dave2l said:J BLOCK said:
I'm not wrongElfsborgAddick said:J BLOCK said:
Infuriating because on paper we are one of the most attractive clubs to buy in England, yet we end up with failing owner after failing owner. Look at Hull, team in the arse end of no where, bought recently by an owner who is backing them on the pitch.Airman Brown said:
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.bolloxbolder said: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.
we are one of the most attractive clubs to buy in England. What have you been drinking this afternoon?
Potential huge investment. Our fanbase is certainly big enough. We are an attractive club to buy.
No owner has the bollocks, courage or dedication to give it the required effort.
Its now just someone shooting himself in the foot by only attempting to break even.
Didn't do his homework. A few years ago he seemed confident and it appeared that he at least had a brain.Charlton aren’t in the same league when you compare your fan base with those mentioned above, and plenty others as well. Even in your PL days your crowds had to be bolstered by shipping bus loads of plastics in from the Home Counties.Seriously, the delusion that some of you have (not all, granted) that charlton are somehow a big club or a sleeping giant, it’s not how the rest of the footballing world view you.And no, we’re not either. But we don’t claim to be!
You're digging out our support?
How many season tickets did you expect us to sell this season after the last few seasons weve had?
How many fans did we have up at Bolton Saturday?
Over the previous years what sort of numbers have we taken to Bolton?
After the last half a dozen seasons weve had and still 8000 season tickets sold as well as taking over 600 to Bolton you're saying our support is mediocre.
I'm not having it5 -
Was certainly very good at claiming he was able to improve players, normally after one of them had a good game.razil said:
I think you need to change your name to grumpy_addick nowadays..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!
Agree re Bowyer players, plus he could turn a game, and seemed to be able to improve players, don't see a lot of that in other managers
I would revise your prediction to well before Christmas..Not so good with players after they had a bad game.4 -
Because someone has offered £50m and that’s a lot more than £500k once a year?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable.1 -
Would love to know what value TS would put on the Club at present. Got a feeling we're gonna end up with over inflated asking prices for both the brick and motar AND the Club in the not too distant.
If he just "wanted his money back", he'll be looking at approx £16m come the 25th September, assuming the £8m a year loss figure being banded about is correct....4 -
Not if TS goes on for another 101 yearsScoham said:
Because someone has offered £50m and that’s a lot more than £500k once a year?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable. 0 -
You’ve basically just described mediocre in one post. (Mediocre isn’t bad by the way. It just means middle of the road, average, which is pretty much how most neutrals would describe charlton. Not a small club, but not a big one either).clb74 said:
Mediocre.Ilovelondontown said:
Think this is spot on we’re not as big as some supporters think we are, other than pl days our support is pretty mediocre, most teams that make it to pl will sell out attracting new support but if you start going down league’s it’s just the hard core left as we are seeing now, most teams or our size will sell out at Wembley , if we got there again this season we will take a lot longer to sell our allocationMillwallFan said:
Sorry, but where do you get that from? There’s plenty of genuinely big clubs who have dropped in to the third tier in recent history, and they’ve gone through difficult periods at that level, but big crowds kept coming through the gates. Sunderland, Ipswich, Leeds, Sheffield utd, Derby now, Southampton,Norwich, just to name a few off the top of my head.Dave2l said:J BLOCK said:
I'm not wrongElfsborgAddick said:J BLOCK said:
Infuriating because on paper we are one of the most attractive clubs to buy in England, yet we end up with failing owner after failing owner. Look at Hull, team in the arse end of no where, bought recently by an owner who is backing them on the pitch.Airman Brown said:
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.bolloxbolder said: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.
we are one of the most attractive clubs to buy in England. What have you been drinking this afternoon?
Potential huge investment. Our fanbase is certainly big enough. We are an attractive club to buy.
No owner has the bollocks, courage or dedication to give it the required effort.
Its now just someone shooting himself in the foot by only attempting to break even.
Didn't do his homework. A few years ago he seemed confident and it appeared that he at least had a brain.Charlton aren’t in the same league when you compare your fan base with those mentioned above, and plenty others as well. Even in your PL days your crowds had to be bolstered by shipping bus loads of plastics in from the Home Counties.Seriously, the delusion that some of you have (not all, granted) that charlton are somehow a big club or a sleeping giant, it’s not how the rest of the footballing world view you.And no, we’re not either. But we don’t claim to be!
You're digging out our support?
How many season tickets did you expect us to sell this season after the last few seasons weve had?
How many fans did we have up at Bolton Saturday?
Over the previous years what sort of numbers have we taken to Bolton?
After the last half a dozen seasons weve had and still 8000 season tickets sold as well as taking over 600 to Bolton you're saying our support is mediocre.
I'm not having itTaking Bolton as an example, seeing as you mention them. They’ve had a pretty rough 10 or so years as well and was only in administration in 2019. They sold over 13,000 season tickets for this season (they had 19,000 there v you lot) and will probably bring double to the valley that you took to them on Saturday.13 -
My old football manager was from Burnley. I remember him once saying to me, "Chunes, do you know why the stadiums are all so big up north?"
"Why?"
"Because there's nothing else to do on a Saturday."
18 -
Sponsored links:
-
Isn’t Roland responsible for aspects of the upkeep of the stadium, as landlord?Scoham said:
Because someone has offered £50m and that’s a lot more than £500k once a year?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable.0 -
Because this is the projected flood area from 2030?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable.
8 -
The thing is, if it woud cost (ridiculously) £70m to buy the assets, £500k a year rent would take 140 years to pay off Roland's value. That seems to be a decent deal unless my maths are wrong.1
-
Pretty sure TS is?JamesSeed said:
Isn’t Roland responsible for aspects of the upkeep of the stadium, as landlord?Scoham said:
Because someone has offered £50m and that’s a lot more than £500k once a year?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable.0 -
Only a decent deal if you go by RD's valuationMuttleyCAFC said:The thing is, if it woud cost (ridiculously) £70m to buy the assets, £500k a year rent would take 140 years to pay off Roland's value. That seems to be a decent deal unless my maths are wrong.0 -
But even with a valuation of £30m, it would take 60 years. I would imagine Roland is content to have money coming in and be protected from multi-million pound losses but it doesn't seem to me to be a great deal from his perspective. He needs the club to be successful to find anybody willing to buy the assets from him I suspect, even at a price significantly lower than his valuation.0
-
Lewis Coaches said:
The club have to re-apply and when we spoke with TS in early August he was unsure whether to or not. It takes a while for the assessment / decision so is that what you mean re May?
Weggie AddicksWeegie Addick said:CAST met with TS in early August. Write up here where he was explicit re the financial plan and also commented re the Academy / Cat 1.https://www.castrust.org/2022/08/cast-meeting-with-thomas-sandgaard-2/I believe at the outset he had a set amount of ££ to invest in his football project. I suspect we have hit that ceiling hence the focus now on breakeven.It’s a tough gig being a Charlton fan right now. If you care about the future of this club, then stump up a fiver and join the Supporters’ Trust if you’re not already in. We have around 2,700 members - about 10% of a full Valley. Our mission is to protect, preserve and promote CAFC for this and future generations. Regardless of who the owner is.
I have read this report and still do not understand the situation re Cat1 status still being open to join.
My understanding was that we had missed the boat and the next opportunity would be May 2025.
Why was this not picked up or am I incorrect.0 -
Issue is you are looking at things logically. At £500Kpa rent there is no way the ground supports a value of £50M on an income multiple - it's a 1% yield, it's mental.MuttleyCAFC said:But even with a valuation of £30m, it would take 60 years. I would imagine Roland is content to have money coming in and be protected from multi-million pound losses but it doesn't seem to me to be a great deal from his perspective. He needs the club to be successful to find anybody willing to buy the assets from him I suspect, even at a price significantly lower than his valuation.
But RD is irrational. His valuation in his mind may be based on some theoretical future alternative use but in reality it is based purely on what he needs to get his losses back - that is not how valuations work.
4 -
I’m no expert, but I’m pretty sure that if the organization I worked for had a £50m asset that was only returning 1% pa, they would make discount it and move it on. I’m assuming TS thinks RD will get there eventually, although I doubt he’ll want to pay the price.Of course, Roly knows as well as us, it isn’t worth anywhere near his valuation. That’s just his accumulated loss that he can’t bring himself to realize in the accounts, because that would be an admission of a significant failure for a man of his genius.10
-
Agreed. But when he meets his maker, the asset may pass on to somebody not quite as mad. And if he could sell to a property developer, he would of course but he can't because of restrictions to how the ground can be used and access. So the people wanting to buy it will only be whoever owns the club so not a lot of competition there.
Anyway, £500k a year does not seem to be our biggest issue as long as that is a long term agreement. BTW, it is the same for Sandgaard. If he sells, the money he has lost cannot be part of a valuation. Surely a loss making business without the assets is worth nothing.2 -
Sponsored links:
-
Chunes said:My old football manager was from Burnley. I remember him once saying to me, "Chunes, do you know why the stadiums are all so big up north?"
"Why?"
"Because there's nothing else to do on a Saturday."
Even though it was an intended joke, he is right about that.
Football is more of a religion in the North of England. They live and breathe it.
Whereas we mostly just moan about it.
6 -
Too logical.SomervilleAddick said:I’m no expert, but I’m pretty sure that if the organization I worked for had a £50m asset that was only returning 1% pa, they would make discount it and move it on. I’m assuming TS thinks RD will get there eventually, although I doubt he’ll want to pay the price.Of course, Roly knows as well as us, it isn’t worth anywhere near his valuation. That’s just his accumulated loss that he can’t bring himself to realize in the accounts, because that would be an admission of a significant failure for a man of his genius.
This is a person who is probably still holding out hope that he'll get his £1 off Southall.3 -
Is that with the barrier down?cafcfan said:
Because this is the projected flood area from 2030?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable.4 -
Who and when? Find that very hard to believe.Scoham said:
Because someone has offered £50m and that’s a lot more than £500k once a year?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable.0 -
The water just seeps around it anyway.Fumbluff said:
Is that with the barrier down?cafcfan said:
Because this is the projected flood area from 2030?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable.
Thought this from the first time I clapped eyes on it as a 7 year old, at it's grand opening, attended by the Queen and Red Ken.0 -
I know you’re not having a dig, but it almost sounds like you’re having a dig :-)Scoham said:
Pretty sure TS is?JamesSeed said:
Isn’t Roland responsible for aspects of the upkeep of the stadium, as landlord?Scoham said:
Because someone has offered £50m and that’s a lot more than £500k once a year?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable.MillwallFan said:
You’ve basically just described mediocre in one post. (Mediocre isn’t bad by the way. It just means middle of the road, average, which is pretty much how most neutrals would describe charlton. Not a small club, but not a big one either).clb74 said:
Mediocre.Ilovelondontown said:
Think this is spot on we’re not as big as some supporters think we are, other than pl days our support is pretty mediocre, most teams that make it to pl will sell out attracting new support but if you start going down league’s it’s just the hard core left as we are seeing now, most teams or our size will sell out at Wembley , if we got there again this season we will take a lot longer to sell our allocationMillwallFan said:
Sorry, but where do you get that from? There’s plenty of genuinely big clubs who have dropped in to the third tier in recent history, and they’ve gone through difficult periods at that level, but big crowds kept coming through the gates. Sunderland, Ipswich, Leeds, Sheffield utd, Derby now, Southampton,Norwich, just to name a few off the top of my head.Dave2l said:J BLOCK said:
I'm not wrongElfsborgAddick said:J BLOCK said:
Infuriating because on paper we are one of the most attractive clubs to buy in England, yet we end up with failing owner after failing owner. Look at Hull, team in the arse end of no where, bought recently by an owner who is backing them on the pitch.Airman Brown said:
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.bolloxbolder said: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.
we are one of the most attractive clubs to buy in England. What have you been drinking this afternoon?
Potential huge investment. Our fanbase is certainly big enough. We are an attractive club to buy.
No owner has the bollocks, courage or dedication to give it the required effort.
Its now just someone shooting himself in the foot by only attempting to break even.
Didn't do his homework. A few years ago he seemed confident and it appeared that he at least had a brain.Charlton aren’t in the same league when you compare your fan base with those mentioned above, and plenty others as well. Even in your PL days your crowds had to be bolstered by shipping bus loads of plastics in from the Home Counties.Seriously, the delusion that some of you have (not all, granted) that charlton are somehow a big club or a sleeping giant, it’s not how the rest of the footballing world view you.And no, we’re not either. But we don’t claim to be!
You're digging out our support?
How many season tickets did you expect us to sell this season after the last few seasons weve had?
How many fans did we have up at Bolton Saturday?
Over the previous years what sort of numbers have we taken to Bolton?
After the last half a dozen seasons weve had and still 8000 season tickets sold as well as taking over 600 to Bolton you're saying our support is mediocre.
I'm not having itTaking Bolton as an example, seeing as you mention them. They’ve had a pretty rough 10 or so years as well and was only in administration in 2019. They sold over 13,000 season tickets for this season and will probably bring double to the valley that you took to them on Saturday.I think one issue is that there is a generation of Charlton fans who experienced the Premier League years, and it’s hard to maintain morale when stuck in a third division that’s not easy to escape from, especially when we’ve not had decent owners for such a long time. It’s human nature, rather than entitlement I think.A club’s history plays a part in how big a club is seen to be, and our history isn’t too shabby. But unless we find an owner as willing to invest as yours has done, or Sandgaard changes his strategy, it’s hard to see a way out of our current ‘mediocre’ situation. If we do find a way, then I can see our gates improving at the same time as our status.3 -
No.JamesSeed said:
Isn’t Roland responsible for aspects of the upkeep of the stadium, as landlord?Scoham said:
Because someone has offered £50m and that’s a lot more than £500k once a year?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable.1 -
He has a son that can take over.Dave2l said:The club is waiting for Roland to die.
I don't wish the bloke any harm. I hope he passes away like normal and when the time is right.
It will then move on and the frustration of all off field bollocks problems, will be minimised at least a little bit!
Could be 5 years, could be 150 -
I don’t hate Sandgaard at all but I do hope he sells the club before the start of next season. He doesn’t know how to run a football club and if even he did, he can’t afford it.Davo55 said:I feel faintly encouraged by the vague rumours that Sandgaard is looking to sell. I don't hate him as much as many on here because although he has obviously made massive mistakes, I feel these are mainly due to arrogance, naivety and ignorance rather than spite (Duchatelet) or sheer crookedness (ESI). The very clear signs that he has drawn the line under funding any kind of ambition for the club means we are in for a constant slow decline if he stays. *
I'm wondering (rather optimistically, I realise) if his walk around to the Charlton fans at Wycombe was the first part of his farewell tour? After all, don't all Rock Gods have one of those
* Edit - and frankly he's such a knob that he's become a bit of a embarrassment15 -
I meant he’d have a reason to sell rather than retain the asset if someone offered that amountStu_of_Kunming said:
Who and when? Find that very hard to believe.Scoham said:
Because someone has offered £50m and that’s a lot more than £500k once a year?Stu_of_Kunming said:
No, but why would he want to ever sell when he’s clearing 500k a year and retains the asset.Scoham said:
So are we now saying RD was right, £50m is a realistic price and that it’s a case of waiting for the buyer to appear?Stu_of_Kunming said:
So he does nothing, collects rent with little to no risk of the club going bust. He knows someone will almost certainly always come in and save the day.Airman Brown said:
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.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Unfortunately I think RDs deal was a brilliant one, for himself, he kept everything of value and dumped the loss making business.MuttleyCAFC said: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.
Awful for us though.
a brilliant deal, it’s indisputable.0
