Self-harming Charlton

First, a positive - Thomas Sandgaard has been persuaded to reduce ticket prices at the Valley for the remaining matches of the season. When I saw the first messages yesterday, I read it as £19.92 for every ticket for the rest of the season. That would have made so much sense and, I believe, would have been there or thereabouts on the optimum price x volume combination to increase gates and overall revenue (Twenty's plenty etc).

Unfortunately, the £19.92 price is only a promotion for the annual 'back-to-the-Valley' game against mighty Cheltenham Town. The actual ticket price saving that the Fans Advisors appear to have won from Mr Sandgaard is a £4 reduction. Those buying irrespective will gladly take the £4 but it's nowhere near enough to get others (like me) to consider it good value for League One and get off our backsides and get to the Valley, especially with the current dire performances.

Hopefully the take-up for the Cheltenham game will help make this point. I will be there for this game irrespective of where we are in the table by then.

Secondly, more annoying rumours that Sandgaard has cut another £140,000 from the Academy budget. More questions for the Fans Advisors (punctures their balloon) and I am sure the Supporters Trust will again be looking for an explanation. Once again this is another case of very naive decision-making and communication. It is impossible to make cuts in an operation like a football club without people noticing and asking questions. If you are going to do this, you need to plan the comms and control the narrative. Explain what you are doing proactively and you have half-a-chance of taking the audience with you. Instead. we now have Valley Gold members again questioning where their donations go and the point of it when the owner himself is cutting back.

As I have said before, I really don't understand what is driving Sandgaard. His stake in the club is worth zero because of the club's debt and ongoing operating loss is more than the value of its assets (primarily the playing staff). On the basis that all he can realistically do is trim the size of the loss, the sale price is still zero. 

The recently published full accounts from 2020-21 don't tell us much we didn't already know.  It was a distorted year given Covid and games played behind closed doors. However, it looks like Sandgaard paid ESI a £1.1m ransom to get control. That's depressing to learn but I guess it was a necessary evil. Perhaps he feels he can negotiate something similar in passing the club on but timing must be key given the size of the operating losses - £1m will be eaten up every couple of months at present.

In summary then, still no way out of the vicious circle we are in and Operating losses will be mounting as actual attendances continue to decline. Unless Sandgaard is prepared to be radical, his only hope is Ben Garner who is now under mounting pressure himself because of results. Replacing Garner would also add to the debt with no surety that anyone else could get a bigger tune from what looks increasingly like a League Two squad of players.