Malabus wrote: ↑05 Oct 2023, 17:59
Great episode. Can't not disagree with any of the points that were made.
That's probably one of the best episodes of the season so-far.
Malabus wrote: ↑05 Oct 2023, 17:59
Great episode. Can't not disagree with any of the points that were made.
That's probably one of the best episodes of the season so-far.
Thanks for getting Pete from Iglu on. I had no idea that stuff was there in the different stands. Never seen any advertising by the Club despite being on the mailing list and a ST holder.
Have the Club given all marketing/advertising duties to Pete and his team?
Thanks for getting Pete from Iglu on. I had no idea that stuff was there in the different stands. Never seen any advertising by the Club despite being on the mailing list and a ST holder.
Have the Club given all marketing/advertising duties to Pete and his team?
They were definitely mentioned in the pre-Fleetwood email I got. And in match previews.
I'm guessing the new bar at the opposite end of the CF from the Sports Bar will be Derby only today? I don't think there's been a game yet this season where the CF concourse has been split in half so maybe Pete and the team don't realise?
Listening to this in parts.
Just got to the bit where MH is talking about 16 players out of contract at the end of this season. Add in 7 loans so who are the 6 who’ve got contracts into next season?
Presume Street, Bonds, Freestone and Keena, who’s the other two?
Although the subject matter may bring a tear or three to the eye, this (drawn to my attention by a Charlton supporting friend) is a good example of what we could/should do more of..
Ugh. I wish there was a vomit emoji on this forum.
Not for your post or the idea, but seeing the first 5 seconds of the video. I'm sure I'm not the only one who just doesn't ever want to see or hear about him if it isn't to do with CTFC.
PittvillePundit wrote: ↑19 Oct 2023, 10:50
Although the subject matter may bring a tear or three to the eye, this (drawn to my attention by a Charlton supporting friend) is a good example of what we could/should do more of..
We did used to have a Media Manager and things did improve for a while, with regular good content. Not happened since he left, though, so I presume we haven't recruited a replacement.
Loved the Heated Debate! I think Si and JP actually agreed, but were excluding a fundamental point from the discussion - the nature of the 'Gentleman's Agreement'.
Surely the point of it was to accept £250k in return for Alfie not leaving in January. But what was Alfie getting out of that? The fact that Alfie would benefit from that lower transfer fee in higher wages, perhaps? Something that sweetened the pill to stay. Our hope was that Championship clubs would come in in the summer and start a bidding war and inflate the fee. But as JP said, that didn't happen so we took the hit.
So, Si, you're right that we said "We'll take X" and there was always a risk that was all we'd get. But that was a fundamental part of the trade-off with Alfie.
It was, but then a massive part of me thinks we should have held our ground. He effectively had two years left on his deal (1 year plus our option) but the minute he’s kicked his toys out of the pram we’ve backed down.
I know contracts are almost not worth the paper they’re written on these days, but the board were naive in my view.
I don't think anything will ever change my mind that just like with Mike Duff we had our pants pulled down over a player who should have fetched a much bigger fee. It's clear the reason why other clubs didn't come in because Alfie's agent made it clear he wanted to return to the South East, that's why Derby didn't make a bid.
Jerry St Clair wrote: ↑16 Nov 2023, 06:58
Loved the Heated Debate! I think Si and JP actually agreed, but were excluding a fundamental point from the discussion - the nature of the 'Gentleman's Agreement'.
Surely the point of it was to accept £250k in return for Alfie not leaving in January. But what was Alfie getting out of that? The fact that Alfie would benefit from that lower transfer fee in higher wages, perhaps? Something that sweetened the pill to stay. Our hope was that Championship clubs would come in in the summer and start a bidding war and inflate the fee. But as JP said, that didn't happen so we took the hit.
So, Si, you're right that we said "We'll take X" and there was always a risk that was all we'd get. But that was a fundamental part of the trade-off with Alfie.
No bidding war because on the last day of the season Alfie did an interview post-match saying “I love Charlton, I have always loved Charlton” etc. If his agent told clubs he only wanted to go to Charlton then no one would bother bidding.
Si Robin wrote: ↑16 Nov 2023, 07:06
It was, but then a massive part of me thinks we should have held our ground. He effectively had two years left on his deal (1 year plus our option) but the minute he’s kicked his toys out of the pram we’ve backed down.
I know contracts are almost not worth the paper they’re written on these days, but the board were naive in my view.
Yep, the big unknown is how Alfie would have reacted if we'd said "You're under contract, you're going nowhere". He doesn't strike me as a player who'd down tools, but maybe he made it very clear he'd be very unhappy if forced to stay.
A really complex situation and possibly unique as record-breaking goal scorers are once-in-a-generation commodities, so we're unlikely to face a similar conundrum anytime soon.
The broader issue around Moore is much more important, IMHO. We're a selling club (both players and staff) so we need a robust, constantly evolving succession plan for all of our valuable assets.