|
|
Post by houndal on Feb 28, 2023 12:05:41 GMT
Is that the same warrick who thinks a club losing £6m a year isn’t suffering a cash problem? What Warrick said was that the club did not need funding for February. Presumably the League cup run, the monies from the transfers of Stockley and O'Connell and the EFL central payment (half is paid in January) contributed to that. Who pays next months bills? And the following months? |
|
|
|
Post by clarky on Feb 28, 2023 12:06:49 GMT
Dick is right they are not walking away, Sandgaard won't sell to them, Methven said as much on LinkedIn today.
|
|
|
|
Post by wellingaddick on Feb 28, 2023 12:13:50 GMT
What Warrick said was that the club did not need funding for February. Presumably the League cup run, the monies from the transfers of Stockley and O'Connell and the EFL central payment (half is paid in January) contributed to that. Who pays next months bills? And the following months? The million dollar question (pardon the US pun). I guess Warrick might have thought that the CM takeover would've been completed by then. Depends on whether Sandgaard can either afford to, or manages to find some investment! |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Feb 28, 2023 12:14:17 GMT
What Warrick said was that the club did not need funding for February. Presumably the League cup run, the monies from the transfers of Stockley and O'Connell and the EFL central payment (half is paid in January) contributed to that. Who pays next months bills? And the following months? Sandgaard obviously. What point are you trying to make though? |
|
|
|
Post by houndal on Feb 28, 2023 12:24:03 GMT
Who pays next months bills? And the following months? Sandgaard obviously. What point are you trying to make though? My point is at some stage Sandgaard will stop ploughing more money in/down the drain. Given that currently any investment/loan is potentially mired in legal wrangling.s, I expect Sandgaard will take the easy way out and let admin take over. I hope I am wrong, but fear the worst. Ultimately we know he cares nothing for our club. |
|
|
|
Post by squareball on Feb 28, 2023 12:27:20 GMT
Is that the same warrick who thinks a club losing £6m a year isn’t suffering a cash problem? What Warrick said was that the club did not need funding for February. Presumably the League cup run, the monies from the transfers of Stockley and O'Connell and the EFL central payment (half is paid in January) contributed to that. Who hired him? Is his notion that the club didn’t need funding a conflict of interest? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2023 12:29:56 GMT
Sandgaard obviously. What point are you trying to make though? My point is at some stage Sandgaard will stop ploughing more money in/down the drain. Given that currently any investment/loan is potentially mired in legal wrangling.s, I expect Sandgaard will take the easy way out and let admin take over. I hope I am wrong, but fear the worst. Ultimately we know he cares nothing for our club. We won’t be going into Administration. |
|
|
|
Post by AndyAddick on Feb 28, 2023 12:31:13 GMT
Who pays next months bills? And the following months? Sandgaard obviously. What point are you trying to make though? the fact that TS is p155ing money away quicker than he makes it ! 500k a month IRC ? |
|
|
|
Post by wellingaddick on Feb 28, 2023 12:33:46 GMT
What Warrick said was that the club did not need funding for February. Presumably the League cup run, the monies from the transfers of Stockley and O'Connell and the EFL central payment (half is paid in January) contributed to that. Who hired him? Is his notion that the club didn’t need funding a conflict of interest? He stated that the club did not need funding for February only, as enough money had been generated from football activities I mentioned in my post. He didn't mention March or beyond, so I fail to see where there is a conflict of interest. As to who hired him, he came along with the CM group. |
|
|
|
Post by houndal on Feb 28, 2023 12:37:19 GMT
My point is at some stage Sandgaard will stop ploughing more money in/down the drain. Given that currently any investment/loan is potentially mired in legal wrangling.s, I expect Sandgaard will take the easy way out and let admin take over. I hope I am wrong, but fear the worst. Ultimately we know he cares nothing for our club. We won’t be going into Administration. You have greater faith than me DP. |
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Feb 28, 2023 12:41:08 GMT
Dick is right they are not walking away, Sandgaard won't sell to them, Methven said as much on LinkedIn today. They still want to buy the club but under 'agreed terms' which means a 100% buy out but Sandgaard won't have it. For that reason I think they will walk away. Im hoping that is the case. Im not on Linkedin but for those that are can you ask the nice honest Dane or American as he likes to call himself, when he intends paying RD his 17m. Asking for a friend. |
|
|
|
Post by squareball on Feb 28, 2023 12:44:16 GMT
Who hired him? Is his notion that the club didn’t need funding a conflict of interest? He stated that the club did not need funding for February only, as enough money had been generated from football activities I mentioned in my post. He didn't mention March or beyond, so I fail to see where there is a conflict of interest. As to who hired him, he came along with the CM group. Obviously there’s a difference of opinion between the groups regarding the finances of a club losing half million a month. He could easily decide in favour of his own group knowing full well that the club is in desperate need of funds because there’s a few quid in the kitty? I imagine it’ll be a point of interest to the lawyers if a court case happens. It’s a key point in the breakdown of the deal. |
|
|
|
Post by squareball on Feb 28, 2023 12:46:03 GMT
Dick is right they are not walking away, Sandgaard won't sell to them, Methven said as much on LinkedIn today. They still want to buy the club but under 'agreed terms' which means a 100% buy out but Sandgaard won't have it. For that reason I think they will walk away. Im hoping that is the case. Im not on Linkedin but for those that are can you ask the lunatic when he intends paying RD his 17m. Asking for a friend. There’s no way TS will sell 100% . In fact at this stage l don’t think he’ll sell 100% to anyone! |
|
|
|
Post by clarky on Feb 28, 2023 12:49:05 GMT
Dick is right they are not walking away, Sandgaard won't sell to them, Methven said as much on LinkedIn today. They still want to buy the club but under 'agreed terms' which means a 100% buy out but Sandgaard won't have it. For that reason I think they will walk away. Im hoping that is the case. Im not on Linkedin but for those that are can you ask the lunatic when he intends paying RD his 17m. Asking for a friend. Think the latest now from Methven is that they are walking away and just want their money back. |
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Feb 28, 2023 12:50:12 GMT
Sandgaard obviously. What point are you trying to make though? My point is at some stage Sandgaard will stop ploughing more money in/down the drain. Given that currently any investment/loan is potentially mired in legal wrangling.s, I expect Sandgaard will take the easy way out and let admin take over. I hope I am wrong, but fear the worst. Ultimately we know he cares nothing for our club. I made the very same point January 2022. In light on continuing losses and sweet FA chance of delivery on the pitch Sandgaard would look for new investment or to sell up. It appears that he had an offer for 90% of the club but then said some wins and a sizeable reduction in the wage bill. The assertion is that he decided to change horses - we may find out more in due course. The simplest way out for Sandgaard is to accept the £8.5M offer. We all know that if he keeps going in charge that only an increase in the budget AND bringing in a competent SMT will improve our chances of making the play-offs. For sure he cares nothing for CAFC, but he will care about £10M. And then there's the unexplained option/contract to acquire the assets from Staprix / Baton 2010. One thing is clear: Sandgaard will NOT want administration as he loses control AND will lose any offers to buy the club. In the meantime he has to fund the losses and it's unlikely that more than 3,000 will renew their STs until they know more about next season. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Feb 28, 2023 13:06:31 GMT
My point is at some stage Sandgaard will stop ploughing more money in/down the drain. Given that currently any investment/loan is potentially mired in legal wrangling.s, I expect Sandgaard will take the easy way out and let admin take over. I hope I am wrong, but fear the worst. Ultimately we know he cares nothing for our club. We won’t be going into Administration. If it means getting rid of that prick Sandgaard I would take going into Administration right now . |
|
|
|
Post by wellingaddick on Feb 28, 2023 13:11:05 GMT
He stated that the club did not need funding for February only, as enough money had been generated from football activities I mentioned in my post. He didn't mention March or beyond, so I fail to see where there is a conflict of interest. As to who hired him, he came along with the CM group. Obviously there’s a difference of opinion between the groups regarding the finances of a club losing half million a month. He could easily decide in favour of his own group knowing full well that the club is in desperate need of funds because there’s a few quid in the kitty? I imagine it’ll be a point of interest to the lawyers if a court case happens. It’s a key point in the breakdown of the deal. Warrick was working for the CM group, so was obviously reporting to them. No doubt that funding was his responsibility and his duty to decide where and when monies were needed. I'm sure no investor or potential owner is going to be impressed with a CFO, if they are asked for half a million quid to fund February when the club did have the money in the kitty. |
|
|
|
Post by richmondse10exile on Feb 28, 2023 13:12:50 GMT
Dick is right they are not walking away, Sandgaard won't sell to them, Methven said as much on LinkedIn today. They still want to buy the club but under 'agreed terms' which means a 100% buy out but Sandgaard won't have it. For that reason I think they will walk away. Im hoping that is the case. Im not on Linkedin but for those that are can you ask the nice honest Dane or American as he likes to call himself, when he intends paying RD his 17m. Asking for a friend. Seeing as the ownership diagram with CM's Cayman body and Sandgaard Capital holding shares now seems to be being ackowledged by CM (or at least not disavowed entirely) the shift you are mentioning is to a 100% buyout. I have seen some of the reactions by you to any one questioning you on here and don't want to incur that. So to be very specific I'm asking is this one of the updates you said you were keeping under your hat until the dust settles? That would be welcome news as I think most fans would take a wealthy set of owners in control rather than management by committee and TS / MS still interfering. |
|
|
|
Post by clarky on Feb 28, 2023 13:18:52 GMT
They still want to buy the club but under 'agreed terms' which means a 100% buy out but Sandgaard won't have it. For that reason I think they will walk away. Im hoping that is the case. Im not on Linkedin but for those that are can you ask the nice honest Dane or American as he likes to call himself, when he intends paying RD his 17m. Asking for a friend. Seeing as the ownership diagram with CM's Cayman body and Sandgaard Capital holding shares now seems to be being ackowledged by CM (or at least not disavowed entirely) the shift you are mentioning is to a 100% buyout. I have seen some of the reactions by you to any one questioning you on here and don't want to incur that. So to be very specific I'm asking is this one of the updates you said you were keeping under your hat until the dust settles? That would be welcome news as I think most fans would take a wealthy set of owners in control rather than management by committee and TS / MS still interfering. Seeing as Sandgaard won't sell to them it ain't happening. |
|
|
|
Post by squareball on Feb 28, 2023 13:20:57 GMT
Obviously there’s a difference of opinion between the groups regarding the finances of a club losing half million a month. He could easily decide in favour of his own group knowing full well that the club is in desperate need of funds because there’s a few quid in the kitty? I imagine it’ll be a point of interest to the lawyers if a court case happens. It’s a key point in the breakdown of the deal. Warrick was working for the CM group, so was obviously reporting to them. No doubt that funding was his responsibility and his duty to decide where and when monies were needed. I'm sure no investor or potential owner is going to be impressed with a CFO, if they are asked for half a million quid to fund February when the club did have the money in the kitty. I think you’re missing the point. A CFO working for TS would likely say the opposite . However like everything else we have no idea what was or wasn’t in the kitty just the usual difference of opinion between the two parties. Clearly the CM group would easily win their case and wouldn’t be walking away, especially if they have a long term plan if they could easily prove that the club didn’t need cash. Obviously the trust is gone between both sides. It’s going to be interesting to see what the CM group has to say tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Post by wellingaddick on Feb 28, 2023 13:30:21 GMT
Warrick was working for the CM group, so was obviously reporting to them. No doubt that funding was his responsibility and his duty to decide where and when monies were needed. I'm sure no investor or potential owner is going to be impressed with a CFO, if they are asked for half a million quid to fund February when the club did have the money in the kitty. I think you’re missing the point. A CFO working for TS would likely say the opposite . However like everything else we have no idea what was or wasn’t in the kitty just the usual difference of opinion between the two parties. Clearly the CM group would easily win their case and wouldn’t be walking away, especially if they have a long term plan if they could easily prove that the club didn’t need cash. Obviously the trust is gone between both sides. It’s going to be interesting to see what the CM group has to say tomorrow. I'm merely taking the point of the CFO who was working for the club at the time. A CFO working for Sandgaard might have had a different opinion, but then, did Sandgaard ever have a CFO? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2023 13:34:34 GMT
Have I missed something ?
Perhaps it was on the usual place where billionaires and millionaires thrash out multi-million pound contracts, known as LinkedIn ?
But when did this pre-contract agreement take place that TS was selling 100%. I thought it was 90% or 82% or 80%, but never 100%.
Anyone ?
|
|
|
|
Post by squareball on Feb 28, 2023 13:44:47 GMT
I think you’re missing the point. A CFO working for TS would likely say the opposite . However like everything else we have no idea what was or wasn’t in the kitty just the usual difference of opinion between the two parties. Clearly the CM group would easily win their case and wouldn’t be walking away, especially if they have a long term plan if they could easily prove that the club didn’t need cash. Obviously the trust is gone between both sides. It’s going to be interesting to see what the CM group has to say tomorrow. I'm merely taking the point of the CFO who was working for the club at the time. A CFO working for Sandgaard might have had a different opinion, but then, did Sandgaard ever have a CFO? No he didn’t but that means nothing currently. |
|
|
|
Post by squareball on Feb 28, 2023 13:52:43 GMT
Have I missed something ? Perhaps it was on the usual place where billionaires and millionaires thrash out multi-million pound contracts, known as LinkedIn ? But when did this pre-contract agreement take place that TS was selling 100%. I thought it was 90% or 82% or 80%, but never 100%. Anyone ? You missed nothing. The document appeared after a new member arrived. It was dismissed as a wind up. It’s doing the rounds now according to the media guy. Because he mentioned it fans are more likely to believe it. It’s authenticity hasn’t been verified yet. Literally everything is clouded in rumour and possibility. My guess is that once the CM group make a statement then we’ll be even less likely to know what is going on. But we’ll see soon enough. We can’t trust anything TS says nor CM . It’s a guessing game and a total mess. |
|
|
|
Post by wellingaddick on Feb 28, 2023 13:53:51 GMT
I'm merely taking the point of the CFO who was working for the club at the time. A CFO working for Sandgaard might have had a different opinion, but then, did Sandgaard ever have a CFO? No he didn’t but that means nothing currently. Exactly, we only have Warrick's assessment of the financial state of the club, which I have been alluding to. |
|
|
|
Post by houndal on Feb 28, 2023 14:19:12 GMT
My point is at some stage Sandgaard will stop ploughing more money in/down the drain. Given that currently any investment/loan is potentially mired in legal wrangling.s, I expect Sandgaard will take the easy way out and let admin take over. I hope I am wrong, but fear the worst. Ultimately we know he cares nothing for our club. I made the very same point January 2022. In light on continuing losses and sweet FA chance of delivery on the pitch Sandgaard would look for new investment or to sell up. It appears that he had an offer for 90% of the club but then said some wins and a sizeable reduction in the wage bill. The assertion is that he decided to change horses - we may find out more in due course. The simplest way out for Sandgaard is to accept the £8.5M offer. We all know that if he keeps going in charge that only an increase in the budget AND bringing in a competent SMT will improve our chances of making the play-offs. For sure he cares nothing for CAFC, but he will care about £10M. And then there's the unexplained option/contract to acquire the assets from Staprix / Baton 2010. One thing is clear: Sandgaard will NOT want administration as he loses control AND will lose any offers to buy the club. In the meantime he has to fund the losses and it's unlikely that more than 3,000 will renew their STs until they know more about next season. Sandgaard is truly caught between a rock and a hardplace. No he won't want admin, but given his refusal to sell 100% he has to fund himself half a million a month. And that is just to keep us where we are, with no investment. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2023 14:30:22 GMT
Have I missed something ? Perhaps it was on the usual place where billionaires and millionaires thrash out multi-million pound contracts, known as LinkedIn ? But when did this pre-contract agreement take place that TS was selling 100%. I thought it was 90% or 82% or 80%, but never 100%. Anyone ? You missed nothing. The document appeared after a new member arrived. It was dismissed as a wind up. It’s doing the rounds now according to the media guy. Because he mentioned it fans are more likely to believe it. It’s authenticity hasn’t been verified yet. Literally everything is clouded in rumour and possibility. My guess is that once the CM group make a statement then we’ll be even less likely to know what is going on. But we’ll see soon enough. We can’t trust anything TS says nor CM . It’s a guessing game and a total mess. Thank you. Yes I have seen the diagram, but to my eye it shows TS retaining 10%, or am I misinterpreting it ? |
|
|
|
Post by kings hill addick on Feb 28, 2023 14:52:56 GMT
I made the very same point January 2022. In light on continuing losses and sweet FA chance of delivery on the pitch Sandgaard would look for new investment or to sell up. It appears that he had an offer for 90% of the club but then said some wins and a sizeable reduction in the wage bill. The assertion is that he decided to change horses - we may find out more in due course. The simplest way out for Sandgaard is to accept the £8.5M offer. We all know that if he keeps going in charge that only an increase in the budget AND bringing in a competent SMT will improve our chances of making the play-offs. For sure he cares nothing for CAFC, but he will care about £10M. And then there's the unexplained option/contract to acquire the assets from Staprix / Baton 2010. One thing is clear: Sandgaard will NOT want administration as he loses control AND will lose any offers to buy the club. In the meantime he has to fund the losses and it's unlikely that more than 3,000 will renew their STs until they know more about next season. Sandgaard is truly caught between a rock and a hardplace. No he won't want admin, but given his refusal to sell 100% he has to fund himself half a million a month. And that is just to keep us where we are, with no investment. I dont want to be rude but many posters have already explained, in detail, with numbers to back it up, why Sandgaard will not put the club into Administration. Maybe go back and have a read of them? |
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Feb 28, 2023 15:02:14 GMT
You missed nothing. The document appeared after a new member arrived. It was dismissed as a wind up. It’s doing the rounds now according to the media guy. Because he mentioned it fans are more likely to believe it. It’s authenticity hasn’t been verified yet. Literally everything is clouded in rumour and possibility. My guess is that once the CM group make a statement then we’ll be even less likely to know what is going on. But we’ll see soon enough. We can’t trust anything TS says nor CM . It’s a guessing game and a total mess. Thank you. Yes I have seen the diagram, but to my eye it shows TS retaining 10%, or am I misinterpreting it ? I don't think anyone is answering this because it's pretty self explanatory. You're not misinterpreting it. You're however over thinking it. |
|
|
|
Post by clarky on Feb 28, 2023 15:07:05 GMT
You missed nothing. The document appeared after a new member arrived. It was dismissed as a wind up. It’s doing the rounds now according to the media guy. Because he mentioned it fans are more likely to believe it. It’s authenticity hasn’t been verified yet. Literally everything is clouded in rumour and possibility. My guess is that once the CM group make a statement then we’ll be even less likely to know what is going on. But we’ll see soon enough. We can’t trust anything TS says nor CM . It’s a guessing game and a total mess. Thank you. Yes I have seen the diagram, but to my eye it shows TS retaining 10%, or am I misinterpreting it ? The 100% didn't come from the conversation on LinkedIn that I saw. The diagram was mentioned and not denied, in fact Methven mentioned two, not three, of the richest people in the world (but not according to Forbes) being on board. Cawley alluded to the 24.1% figure with Methven"s share being 10%. Cawley also said the deal was dead in the water. A subsequent telephone conversation between Methven and a member of other forum backed up what Reams has been saying and because of TS stubbornness, he apparently refused to take a call from Friedman, they have now walked away and it is now all about getting their money back. Methven referred to the fact that we could well be left with Sandgaard, Storrie, possibly the agent and Spiegel who is alleged to be still looking for investors. And I am sure £5m and not £14m as mentioned which if true would suggest Sandgaard is keeping the majority stake. Varney was mentioned but apparently he is not at the table. Again this is only one side but Methven is speaking again and probably more to follow tomorrow. |
|
