On Monday December 12th CAST hosted a meeting of Charlton fans via a Zoom webinar. 550 supporters participated in the meeting and were able to contribute by addressing the meeting directly or making written comments (of which there were over 200). A representative selection of written comments is included in this summary in italics.
The meeting reviewed a draft "Addicks' Charter" and a number of amendments were made to it both during and after the meeting. A revised draft for wider consultation will be available on this website early on Thursday 15th December.
Heather McKinlay (CAST Chair) welcomed everyone to the meeting and stressed that, although CAST was hosting, this was a meeting open to all fans. The best future for CAFC lies with having a united fanbase. Whatever our backgrounds and beliefs, we are united in our love for Charlton Athletic. She said that the meeting was not for complaining or looking back at our history but for deciding next steps.
Heather Alderson (CAST vice-Chair) outlined the aims and objectives of the meeting:
- To agree a charter from Charlton fans regarding the way we would like our club to be run in the future
- To agree that an ultimatum based on that charter be delivered to Thomas Sandgaard at the Fans’ Forum on Thursday.
- To seek an understanding of the appetite of fans to reignite the OUR CLUB campaign with the aim to give fans a potential stake in the club or as a minimum a seat at the table in any future ownership structure.
Heather McKinlay introduced the panel of speakers:
Fans Forum representative Jon Whitfield outlined why so many fans currently feel dismay and alienation at the state of the club. We have a fifth manager incoming. There has been a potential disregard for employment law. There is a lack of fan engagement and a lack of investment. There is also a lack of tangible strategy, apart from breaking even. Thomas needs to listen to those who have invested financially and emotionally in Charlton over the generations. Someone needs to start listening to the fanbase. If this football thing is so easy, then let's try to get it right.
Some written comments from the floor:
My key question for Thomas is will he finally accept that he is making too many mistakes to see any success from his actions and will he therefore start to bring in some key personnel with English football experience (Chief Exec/MD etc) whilst he is owner to finally resolve the main issues he has created? (i.e. managerial appointments, investment in players, getting fans through the turnstiles etc). And if he isn't willing to change his strategy, does he accept that selling the club is the only way of moving it forwards?
Why do you think Thomas has changed? What is the read-through? As you mentioned, he came in and wanted all the attention and to engage with fans. Now he seems to stay out of the spotlight, doesn’t want engagement. Is there any sense of why this is? What it means?
I think TS had good intentions when he bought the club, but he was naive and underestimated it. But it hasn’t worked out. How can we give him face to leave the club (he saved us, we do owe him for that) and move on?
How can we keep fans engaged, despite the dwindling attendances? Is there anything, we as fans can do to help? Many people are quite bluntly ‘fed up’ and it’s sad to see, as seasons go by…
Firstly, all the abuse being directed at TS is bound to be counter-productive. What we don't want to happen is for him to be so upset that he sells to another band of spivs.
Former CAFC content manager, Olly Groome explained that football clubs need to be harmonious from top to bottom with proper leadership that staff, players, managers and supporters can all believe in. If a club hasn’t got that and there’s no sign of that ever being the case, you probably need a change. A football club needs to trust their employees and treat them with respect, making it a place where they want to work and succeed, because not every staff member will be a fan of the club they work for. The experienced ones, who may have the best interests of the club at heart, need to be listened to. Speaking generally, putting family members and partners in positions of power, without any understanding or ability to do the job properly, is a recipe for disaster. Stubbornness and the belief that you can do no wrong can be deadly. Not taking the advice of those who can be in a position to advise is a failing. The most telling thing for any football club, but also any business, is when outsiders join the organisation and turn around three weeks later and leave. That can never lead to success. A lot of things need to happen at any business as far as their core values go. If that isn’t happening, that needs to be addressed one way or the other.
Written comment from the floor:
People should be going to work in a positive environment . There seems to be a bullying culture at the club now and a specific name that crops up every time.
Sky journalist and Charlton fan Ben Ranson explained that he is speaking from an outsider’s perspective and that it is fascinating to see the coverage Charlton gets, but also the resistance he gets to ideas pitched regarding the club. During the Duchâtelet protests, it was a real challenge for him even to get a camera along, but the protests did open the media’s eyes to the fact that they could report on fan protests without that impugning the club itself. Sky has a responsibility to report on the clubs and talk to them. What Ben has noticed is that when new owners come in to any club there is a honeymoon period of a couple of years before the strain starts to show, particularly when results aren’t going well. He pointed out that sporting journalists do try to ask the questions, but organisations and fans can make it easier by giving them tangible things to report on and keeping the dialogue alive.
Written comment from the floor:
What type of content would Ben think might catch the interest of the media?
VOTV editor and former CAFC employee Rick Everitt explained that the current situation is hard to pin down. Thomas Sandgaard has been looking for investment in the club for some time, initially as a minority stake. He has been talking about the revenue potential for that reason. When he has come out with statements about doubling and trebling the crowds in League One (which nobody believes) he is talking to people he’d like to encourage to invest. He has been heavily knocked back because nobody takes it seriously. Rick said that he believes that Thomas has been talking to Americans, but that has stalled because he wants to retain a 20% ownership stake and a management structure, which large investors aren’t interested in. If the people coming from outside could own the Valley that might work, but that seems unlikely to go anywhere. Rick said he is aware of the talk about the EFL currently considering the approval of a takeover, but he is not aware of any evidence that is true.
In terms of the situation with Peter Varney, Rick said that we should not be getting carried away with the idea of seeing investors in the box wearing Charlton scarves, like the Australians. What Peter is trying to do is to demonstrate to those with the resources to buy the club that there is a substantial potential there if you come and run it in the right way. People shouldn’t even assume that there are negotiations going on, but you either put your trust in Peter or you don’t, and those who know him well do trust him. People shouldn’t assume, though, that the day after a sold-out Brighton game we will see a takeover.
Rick said that the situation we are in is as serious as we’ve ever seen. We could be relegated and, if Thomas continues down this trajectory, relegation is entirely possible. He doesn’t have the cultural and professional insight into the club to run it himself. The members of his family he has brought in don’t have it either. This is all about what he wants to do. Rick said that he doesn’t think that Thomas is a bad person. He has qualities that have been lacking in previous owners, but he just doesn’t have the nous to make a success of it. Whether or not he realises he is at the end of his ownership, he is running out of road. He will go on losing more and more money and will eventually have to give it up. Rick said he hopes that we can make a case as supporters, that there is a substantial opportunity for somebody to come in. We’ve got a Premiership ground and we’re in London, which are important things for potential investors, if Duchâtelet will discuss it.
Rick said that he doesn’t think it’s currently a good idea to have protests, because it gives the idea that we will protest at every ownership. That’s not a good narrative or an accurate one to be presenting to the media. At this stage, we need to see what happens in the next couple of months or six weeks, and see who, if anyone, is going to be appointed as manager.
Some written comments from the floor:
I agree with Rick, not sure protesting now will help us. What we need to agree tonight is what we will do and how as fans we present a united front.
I don't believe protesting now is the right thing to do as of now. It could have a negative effect on the team and create a toxic atmosphere in The Valley. If this happens results could continue to dive and we are at serious risk of relegation. I ask the Trust to put out a statement to urge fans to hold off on protests for now and try and get as many fans at the Brighton game to show TS and potential buyers how good it can be with full stadium.
Should things continue to slide protests of some kind are inevitable. I take Rick’s point however Liverpool and Man U fans’ protests don’t seem to stop them being attractive.
I'm hearing the call by Rick and others about not protesting in case new potential owners are put off. But if not now, when is the right time? We want him out asap, right? Honestly I don't think protests will put off buyers for the simple reason that they're going to be optimistic and have the self-belief that they will do it better than the previous lot
I agree with Rick saying that we should not protest. We also need to tread carefully with TS because if he decides to stop funding the club we are back to where we were 2 years ago.
Is there a possibility of the club being evicted from the Valley? Recent events at Coventry have me worried. (Lauren Kreamer (CAST board member) answered that she didn’t see likelihood of this scenario at present)
Rebecca Sandles explained that she is a season ticket holder for the women’s team. The women’s team is doing well; how much TS can claim responsibility for that is another question. The women’s team is sitting third in the Championship. Rebecca said that much as she is delighted for the women’s team, she is concerned that if the men’s team isn’t doing well, the women’s team will suffer. It’s good news for the women, but at the same time, the fate of the women’s team is closely linked to the fate of the club overall.
Contributions were then invited from the floor
MK explained that he is somebody who took his dad’s ashes to the Valley and that is how much the club means to him. He asked whether there is someone who is prepared to act as a conduit between Thomas and the fanbase. Heather McKinlay explained that part of CAST’s mission and purpose is engaging with the ownership, but we feel as though it has become very difficult for us to be able to influence Thomas as he doesn’t wish to be influenced in how he runs the club. We do have the Fans’ Forum, and CAST attends the Fans’ Forum, as does Jon Whitfield and a number of other supporter group representatives. There is a Fans Forum scheduled for this Thursday, so we are going to talk about what we want to share to Thomas on behalf of the attendees of this meeting, and hopefully the fanbase at large.
Lucy Bishop shared her and Lewis Catt’s view of how things are progressing as fan advisors. She said that it was sad that the fans aren’t getting much engagement from Thomas, but that the fan advisors aren’t seeing that from him, and the lines of communication are open to her and Lewis. They have spoken with Thomas about Ben Garner’s dismissal, and Thomas assured them that conversations and interviews are underway but it is likely to be a matter of weeks not days. She said a sale or a takeover isn’t imminent, as far as they could tell, but that’s conjecture on their part.
Thomas has told them that the story from The Sun over the weekend about an agency bid is “garbage”.
Written comments from the floor:
I have the distinct feeling that Garner wasn't sacked solely on results. The question remains- what manager worth his salt would come to the club in its current state?
In terms of the January transfer window if Thomas is going to take a long time to appoint a manager then the manager wouldn't get enough time to see what he would need to improve the squad. Can we push this on at the Fans Forum please?
The key question I would suggest for the meeting with Thomas is how can we head into a transfer window without a manager? If, as he says, it will take weeks surely it increases the relegation risk.
Lucy explained that the fan advisors are trying to represent what they are being told and it’s not always an easy role, but they are going to continue in that role. She said that they always try to represent questions as they are put by fans and try to maintain a professionalism, which can lead to accusations that they are not being firm enough.
Written comment from the floor:
Good that Lucy / Lewis still have good communication. Can you ask them if they have full trust that what TS tells them is honest?
MV asked about Raelynn and her role within the club. Lauren Kreamer said that she is very heavily involved. MV said that it is concerning if two clueless people are running our football club and we are therefore rudderless. We are without a leader, without anyone who knows anything about running a football club. Heather McKinlay agreed that we had reached a point where Thomas no longer has the ability or desire to run the club properly. That’s an extremely challenging situation for us to find ourselves in again.
Heather Alderson moved the meeting onto the ‘Addicks’ Charter’ and asked what that would look like for us. She explained that she and Jon were prepared to take the Charter to Thomas on Thursday at the Fans’ Forum, and tell him that if he doesn’t support it, we will campaign vigorously and precisely for him to sell the club. She read out the draft charter and asked for views from the floor.
TM referred to ticket pricing and affordable football based on the UK average or the CAFC average. SM agreed and added that communication throughout the structure is imperative; we don’t presently know what’s happening with the club and it’s the biggest concern for him. Many comments referred to the Valley and Sparrows Lane and many others referred to the Academy.
MS said he is all for a Charter but thinks that truth and trust are missing. Unless Thomas is prepared to be straight with us, we’re not really going to get anywhere. DH said that the points on the Charter are all really positive but wanted to understand how it would work and what effect it would have. Heather Alderson explained that it could work on two or three levels. Firstly, it can work in the short term to be very clear about what we expect relative to what we’re getting from Thomas, although it’s unlikely that he’ll just agree to it. Secondly, it can be used as a memorandum of understanding between the football club and the supporter base. That sounds a bit official, but it’s an exchange of letters, almost, which is ‘this is what we expect from you’ and there might be a return. Thirdly, if you don’t know much about Charlton Athletic, you could look at this and see what we’re about – we love our football, we care about our Academy, we value our community; it puts us in the shop window.
RC said that the Charter is admirable, but we’ve got to find a way of getting rid of Thomas. He said that we won’t be listened to. Heather McKinlay explained that we will take this to the Fans Forum and if he does just dismiss it, we will then proceed to next steps. We are going into it with our eyes open and there is no easy answer, but this is part of a wider process.
LH asked whether others would accept a new owner coming in but getting rid of the women’s team. Heather McKinlay explained that CAST did a survey of all fans earlier in the year, and around 75% of fans felt positive or neutral about the women’s team and 20-25% said they weren’t interested at all in it. Rebecca Sandles explained that the cost of running the women’s team as opposed to the men’s is fractional. It’s an easier win than the men’s game and it’s part of the family that is the Charlton club that Rebecca has supported for over forty years. While many people are not interested in the women’s team it’s about supporting the family of the club.
Written comments from the floor:
Womens' football is a growth area across the world. We would be wise to be involved
Only 4% of respondents (6% of women) said that they closely follow the women's team and attend games. 22% (34% women) said they follow them and may attend a match in future. 50% (43% women) keep an eye out for their results but do not plan to attend a match. 24% (17% women) are not really interested - it is all about the men's team for them.
GN asked whether we feel that there should be a fan stake in the club or a place for a fan on the board. Heather Alderson said that fans being on the board is part of the Fan-Led Review, so that’s hopefully something that will come into effect. While we appreciate what the Fan Advisors do, they are appointed by the club and there is a better and more complete way of doing what they do.
RP flagged that there are always budgetary constraints and that the CEO would need to report to Thomas. Heather Alderson said that the feeling that CAST and many others have picked up is that if the club were being run from SE7, the decision-making would be better. At the moment, we’ve got a situation where our owner is dictating the method of play, has got his son in the dugout, and is also dictating the budget. The intention of the first two points is to put the club on a more professional footing and one which puts the football first with professional management of the back office.
Some written comments from the floor:
A charter makes clear to the owner what the fans expect of him. It puts our feelings on an agenda. It should be offered as an olive branch. The ball is then in TS's court. He might own the club but he needs to understand he is a guest in the club’s patch. We, his hosts, should always take the stance that we want success together. Compromise, maybe, on our expectations of an owner and TS imposing an American business stance.
For those who said no to the charter, what are their ideas and how do they expect the club to move forward ?
I like the idea of a charter but if a new owner came in and spent crazy money on Charlton and the squad (I know it’s unlikely) but I wouldn’t care if he didn’t do 5 of those things
I would suggest that the charter is the wrong term for this document. It is really a vision and values statement.
How will you engage as many fans as possible, especially the fans who don’t participate in social media in finalising the Charter?
A poll was taken on the draft charter:
Poll – Does the statement on the screen represent your view?
- Yes, completely (23%)
- Yes, mostly (62%)
- Neutral/unsure (10%)
- No, not really (4%)
- No, not at all (1%)
Heather McKinlay said that after the meeting further work would be done on finessing the charter and taking comments into account before publication for wider consultation with fans.
Heather Alderson explained the Fans’ Forum format and how it works. She explained that we propose to take the following to Thomas on Thursday:
“We are asking you now to:
- Sort it out on the pitch for the men’s team by appointing a manager to build a squad and play to win without family and ownership interference.
- Sort it out in the boardroom- appoint a CEO to run the club from SE7.
- Sort it out when it comes to club culture – put Charlton Values at the heart of the club. Sort it out when it comes to fan engagement – listen, learn and feedback.
- Sort it out when it comes to community & business engagement – plan to bring the ground and training ground back into the club.
- Sort it out when it comes to ticket pricing – make it affordable.
- Sort it out when it comes to future investment and keep one club.
If you can’t commit to these, we can’t commit to you and will campaign for you to sell the club.”
Written comments from the floor:
How can the trust ensure this week that we get to the bottom of the issues with TS and not be fobbed off with his normal hyperbole? The answers must this time be questioned and challenged.
Be careful what you wish for. He owns the club and we need to keep his goodwill until he does sell.
Jon Whitfield emphasised that this is not just CAST, and that he has no axe to grind. It is important to emphasise all of these points to Thomas, but people can also express themselves in whatever way they feel is right. We have to do whatever it takes to put our club back into the hands of somebody who cares about our club and isn’t going to run it into the ground.
Poll – Should this be taken to Thomas as an ultimatum at the Fans’ Forum?
- Yes (82%)
- Unsure/don’t mind (12%)
- No (6%).
Heather McKinlay introduced the topic of fan ownership and explained that CAST had launched the Our Club initiative when it seemed in 2020 that it might go into administration or worse. While it wasn’t necessary at that time, it did make us all think about the role supporters have to play in running and owning a club. She asked what people’s gut reaction is to fan ownership when it comes to Charlton.
Poll – What are your feelings regarding fan ownership for Charlton Athletic?
- I am opposed to all forms of fan ownership (4%)
- I am neutral/unsure (13%)
- I am in favour of some form of minority fan ownership (61%)
- I am in favour of full fan ownership (22%)
CAST Treasurer Nigel Kleinfeld said that it was an interesting result. He said he had been heavily involved in research into fan and partial fan ownership when it might have been needed before.
He then presented CAFC’s financial position based on publicly available information:
The club does not own its stadium or training ground. These are rented from a “Duchâtelet company” on a 15-year lease from January 2020 at £400K p.a. He said he believed the lease has break clauses after 5 and 10 years and that the continuity of the lease appears to be dependent on paying the rent.
He said that CAFC continues to publish information just about as late as it can. The last published accounts are to June 2021 and we cannot expect the June 2022 Accounts until March 2023. Public information is therefore out of date.
(By Contrast Plymouth Argyle published their June 22 figures in September 2022.)
At June 2021, CAFC was in deficit by some £11M, noting that £7M is still owing to the former directors’ dependent on reaching the Premier League. The accounts disclosed that £10.5M had been borrowed in essence from Thomas Sandgaard Via Clear Ocean Capital and that the debt finances the deficit and day to day running.
CAFC’s holding company “Clear Ocean Capital” had published its June 2021 Accounts (late) in September 2022 and that these accounts disclose that in essence Thomas Sandgaard had lent a further £5.45M between June 2021 and September 2022. Nigel surmised that it was to cover CAFC losses. These accounts also disclosed that the terms of these loans had changed to make them repayable on demand. Nigel did not think CAFC had the current ability to repay the loans if called upon.
He then moved on to CAFC’s profit and loss account for the June 2021 year.
He stated that the figures might appear a bit confusing because of the notional unwinding of the Duchâtelet position regarding stadium improvements and loan. Ignoring this, there was a pre-tax trading loss of over £4M.
He said the June 2021 accounts for the women’s club show it as stable and in surplus because of a legacy received from Alan Watts of £677K. The accounts disclose that £558K of this had been lent to “Clear Ocean Capital” at 30 June 2021.
Nigel concluded that it would appear that CAFC is in deficit with no ability to repay its owner if he decides to stop supporting it. Additional investment appears necessary to progress CAFC and, at face value, the owner currently appears reluctant to do this.
Heather McKinlay mentioned Portsmouth, whose Supporters’ Trust intervened when they went into administration, and Hearts, whose fans grouped together and had one local entrepreneur who stepped in to buy the club. Fans of Hearts contributed a monthly amount and have taken over the running of the football club, on the basis that they appoint and employ qualified people to do so. The figures that we have, show that there are a lot of challenges around the potential of fan ownership.
Jon Whitfield said that he is sick of the idea that we need to be thankful for people having come in and saved our club. We are waiting for another saviour, but why? Why aren’t we taking hold of our own destiny as fans? We’re hanging on every word of people telling us we’re going to get back to the Premier League and getting us to believe what they’re saying. We’ve had fifty shades of rubbish from a lot of people over the years. We need to protect Charlton Athletic, not just for ourselves but for future generations. But how do we do that? We need the people who own our club to think more like supporters, which is easy to say but harder to do. Supporters need to be the owners. It could be the Bundesliga 50+1 model. It might look like AFC Wimbledon with the Dons Trust owning a percentage of the club. It could look like the Foundation of Hearts. It could look like Exeter City or Chesterfield. There are opportunities. We have just celebrated 30 years of being back at the Valley and there were times people thought that would never be possible. Our fanbase is pretty unique. The doggedness of the fanbase could drive us forward. We would also need qualified people to run the operation.
Olly Groome agreed that it would be the ideal scenario for any football club in the perfect world to have someone with the interests of the club at heart but it’s a very difficult thing to achieve, particularly in the EFL. But, if you have the funds and the drive to do it, why not?
Heather McKinlay said that this is a starting point for this kind of approach and she would be keen to understand more about people’s views. She said that we would need to assess feelings across the wider fanbase as those attending this webinar are likely to be among the more highly engaged.
DB expressed the view that we are unlikely to be able to find £50m to buy the ground and to repay Thomas for his significant investment. The ongoing losses are another concern. The ordinary fan isn’t going to be able to sustain those, and we therefore need a wealthy benefactor of some kind. Communication and engagement are key, as is being open and honest. The biggest problem that we have with Thomas is not necessarily where we are right now, but what he said at the start. The club was about to be extinct, and he was a bit of a knight in shining armour, whether we like that or not now. He had good intentions. It hasn’t worked out. He was probably naïve and thought it was a walk in the park, and it isn’t. How we move forwards with a constructive relationship, hopefully with a new owner, is what’s important.
DH asked why, if fan ownership isn’t viable, it keeps cropping up. Heather McKinlay explained that the scale of the debt and having to deal with Thomas and Duchâtelet make it enormous. DH said that you have to start off just with the club, but if the finances are too much, it’s not an option. Nigel explained that we did a big study of Portsmouth at the time, and while they raised a fair bit of money from supporters, they found between ten and fifteen very wealthy people (not all of whom were Portsmouth supporters) and they had a different share structure. They all had a vote in doing it together and it worked. Eventually, they sold to an American owner and the money that they had raised was passed onto the football club, so that it was used for the future of the club. It was a joint effort. DH agreed and said that we need to identify the rich fans who make it viable. HM said that we would keep the issue firmly on the agenda.
Here are some other written comments from the floor:
Is moving to a fan ownership or part ownership really that far out of the equation? No idea how it works, but it wouldn't be the first time fans have done this.
Of course we would all love it, but the options re fan ownership is not helpful. How can we afford that? And I voted in full for clarity…but we would need a very rich fan to do that…
Fan ownership isn't really feasible is it ? We’d just stagnate in League One if not worse. Minority fan ownership sounds good but full fan ownership we'd need significant investment from wealthy fans.
Fan ownership should be 100% what every true fan should aspire to achieve at his/her club. Remember that owners are only custodians and will come & go, whilst football club fans are here for life !!
I agree it is more viable than we believe and there will be larger number of wealthy supporters than envisaged
I believe it’s important to have a fan representative on the Board. I know that was in place and was taken away when we lost our Premier League status. I think this is very important. It seems since then the fans views just really haven’t been taken seriously
In theory fan ownership is a good idea. But could the fans ever raise enough money season after season to be able to afford to buy good quality players, pay their, often unreasonable , wage demands & finance everything else that needs to be done throughout the season? As much as I would love to be a part owner of my club, I think we would all need to be millionaires to give the club any chance of being competitive again.
Talking of fans putting money into the club, I contributed a couple of thousand pounds in the 90s for the club to buy Sparrows Lane. I lost that when the club went bust but Roland now owns the land. A lesson needs to be learned
MW explained that he’s been a Charlton supporter for 63 years and said that the Fans’ Forum feels like a crossroads for the club. We shouldn’t be worrying about the temperature of the water in the toilets or the Bovril or whatever else. MW said that he supports and follows CAST and thinks that this Thursday is a catalyst where Thomas has to answer some serious questions about the future of Charlton Athletic and he doesn’t want to see the small stuff get in the way of the big fact. Thomas has made decisions that are completely unfathomable, and he mustn’t be let off the hook. If he doesn’t want to answer, that is its own answer. Heather Alderson agreed and said that the big questions are the top priority and are the things that will get the focus.
Heather McKinlay summed up:
We have got the Charter and while it needs finessing, that’s something we can put to Thomas at the Fans’ Forum, but which we can also take forward in working with any new ownership. We have also opened a serious discussion about fan ownership.
She closed the meeting by encouraging fans to turn up in the short term and show their support for the team.
A final written comment from the floor:
Not a question, but listening to the people on this call gives me a lot of hope for the future. All of you are doing a great job in trying to secure our future of our club. And we need to remember we will all be around long after TS has gone. Very proud to be Charlton tonight.
After the meeting closed we received an email from a participant which we endorse:
“I think strong crowds at the Valley are crucial. This would show us in a great light to new owners and show our positivity plus hopefully making the bank balance look a little better. If you can afford it you must get down the ground and support the team whilst realising the football isn’t great. Man City did it, Leeds did it and look where they are now.”
If you are not already among the 2,700 Charlton supporters who are members of CAST, do join today - it only costs £5 annually and helps to strengthen the voice of the Addicks.