Fitzhugh Fella

makes an interesting read http://plasticsaints.myfreeforum.org/recent_events_are_where_do_we_go_from_here__about8549.html

we could do with a few action men and power rangers v Palace tomorrow!

Get's a mention in today's Oberver.

the SOS appeal gets a mention in today's Observer.

Indeed

At last Saturday's game, 18 consortiums were at the match. Either in the boardroom, directors box or overflowing into the stands. Madness, the sooner some of these goons get out of the way to let proper serious people through the better. Idiots like Jackson are messing things up and decent people are falling by the wayside. Hope that is intelligible enough for you.

Perhaps they have lost their apetite after seeing the bunfight. Perhaps they have realised football has moved on and they don't like what they see. Perhaps they were (in hindsight) never the right people to run the club. Perhaps they have realised it's best just to be fans. Perhaps I should never have got my hopes up. Sorry to be kind of obtuse here but I am trying to tread delicately and will have to hope you can get my drift from reading between the lines. I feel, if and when we do get bought, it will be from an outsider interest rather than someone already known, although this last bit is pure speculation from me.

I am hearing some disturbing news. I don't think Consortium A are interested any more. I hear the boardroom was a bit of a bunfight last week. My worse fears in my original post have been realised.

But is, as sure as hell, better than nothing. Sure we would all rather a decent, trustworthy and wealthy consortium take us over but if that doesn't happen then should we all just call it a day?

The bottom line is however, if no consortium is forthcoming and there is no initiative from the fans then we have no football club. This is no time for semantics.

This really is a worthwhile exercise because if all of a sudden everthing suddenly goes pear shaped and Fry declares "no consortium have delivered therefore the club will fold" (God forbid), then we - the fans - need to be in a position to offer at least some sort of reprieve, albeit for a few days. Derry has done some sterling work over the last week and it is vital the fans are seen to be proactive over this. Rgds Duncan

Tbh SlickMick - the points business is of secondary interest to me right now - in the greater scale of things we could make up that 10 points in a month but being sold to a unscrupulous consortium will take longer than a month to put right.

If that was his intention Mark, why did he not just lend the club the money for them to buy it in the first place? I am going off memory here, although I did speak to Mr Corbett in the late 80s, and I seem to remember there being quite a long period of time before the land transferred ownership but would not put my house on it, admittedly. The point was that he could have sold it to other parties for a lot more than he sold it to Saints, so it was an act for which we should be grateful, nio matter how long ago it was. As for MC I think she only came to be a director because she was asked as part of Mike Wilde's PR stunt to impress the fans. I haven't spoken to her since the resignations of the Board but I would be really surprised if she had any plans or desires to return in a director's capacity. I quite agree with your last paragraph - while I am not shedding tears at the apparent demise of the PLC, I am concerned that Fry will - in the fans' eyes - possibly choose the "wrong" consortium.

I don't want to re-ignite the whole Corbett debate Mark, but to be fair to John Corbett your assessment is not quite accurate. When he bought the land (at a very good price) it was his then intention for it to remain in his possesion. It was only quite a few years later that he decided to let the club have it (at the same price he paid) for future investment. The gesture of letting the club have it at the same price, even though it was worth more, was the benevolent act that later got misconstrued that he "gave" the club the land.

Done!

I agree SlickMick but he was spotted lording it around SMS on Saturday shaking everyone's hand and generally acting like he was coming to the rescue.

I accept your point Trousers and certainly in the case of Cedar Press it is a valid one but when it comes to the big guns such as Aviva or Barclays I should think the former certainly could well do without our future business and Barclays probably wouldn't shed too many tears.

19C, you can rest assured the one consortium I was referring to does not (to the best of my current knowledge) include anyone who has previously been a director of either the PLC or Football Board.

OK Legod, perhaps not an immediate return, but as someone has said further up the thread, the price could be a lot lower than £18m - and picking up a stadium, Staplewood, Jacksons Farm, the Academy Lodge and some saleable players for, say half that, could well tempt someone who intentions were short term and shallow as far as SFC were concerned.

The frightening thing is I hear that "Lifelong" is still very "active" and is almost certainly wrapped up in at least one of the consortiums. This sort of thing is why I remain anxious that Fry makes the "right" decision.

Apologies for starting a new thread on this but with the number of potential consortiums now said to be in the region of 35 I am concerned at how Mr Fry is going to be able to make the right choice (By right I mean in the best interests of the football club). As far as I am aware his duty is to get the best return for the creditors. The more interest there is the more he can drive the price up. If at the end of the day he has a choice between Consortium A who are offering to cough up £12m to settle all debts and Consortium B who are prepared to go to £18m surely he would have to go for option B? But what if Consortium A are a well-respected group of local successful business men who are genuinely committed to the future of SFC while the B bunch are just a group of wealthy speculators who would not invest in the team while looking to sell on for a quick profit? I assume most on this forum would want Consortium A but I am sure at the end of the day Fry would have to go for option B. Consortium A may then be forced to come back and up their bid but the extra money they submit would then not be available to invest in the team building we will certainly need once the dust from this season has settled. I know the identity of one consortium out there and think they to probably be just "what the doctor ordered" for our club but I am concerned they will be "outbid" by much less scrupulous operators better equiped to meet Fry's and the creditors "rising by the minute" expectations! I hope I am wrong.

Your last sentence sets a worrying tone. The more consortiums there are the more the price for the club rises leaving less money for the football side of things after any transaction. The administrator is just chasing cash for the creditors - is he worried where that cash comes from?

Yea but their job is to get as much money for the creditors not choose who may be the best for the football club. The more consortiums there are the more we should be concerned.

I think the fewer consortiums the better. More will only drive the price up leaving lest for investment in the team. Incidentally Rupert was telling people a few days ago he reckoned the club could be bought by someone who had £15m.

This night serves zero purposes? Umm according to the Echo they are hoping to raise £10,000. That will at least help to pay all the long-suffering backroom staff at SMS who must be worried sick about their jobs! If you think that is worthy of derision then I feel for you.