Frank's cousin

Fair enough - but was only talking hypotheticlly if he suddenly found a stash of used notes under his bed and was overcome in a fit of generosity.

Which part of 'we will only survive if we actually do find new investment ' dont you and your big IQ understand? Yup Lowe has gone as a result of dministration - admionistration that could lead to liquidation if no buyer is found - something which you seem prepared to put up with JUST to satisfy your hatred of one man? So who will you support if we go under, or perhaps who is it you reallly support now?

We need details of contracts though, with basic, bonuses and then total - I would suggest JOhn was a big earner...

BUt we also still need someone to buy SMS Ltd - especially if these offers have been for SFC Ltd only - otherwise we may not have a home!

Sure we can say he got footballing decisions wrong - irrespective of whether you believe Perason would have done any better, we simply dont know the impact teh finances had on these decisons, and what Pearson and Crouch would have had to work with had they stayed on - unless we have details of the player contracts and the accounts, we dont know for sure, and can only speculate...

Come on guys - 'sometimes we hurt the things we love love most'... ;-) Seriously, I never doubted Lowe did actually care about Saints - he was just naive and often too ego driven to seek the right advice to make more appropriate decisions - couple that with an excellent ability to say exactly the wrong thing...all the time and its no wonder things have turned out as they have. There has been no malice in anything done by Lowe or Crouch and even Wilde had something to add (albeit an sneaky interest in JF), its just various levels of misjudgement...which sadly in football can have such diasterous consequences - when we were relegated under LM in the early 70s, we did not turn on Bates or Lawrie, mostly because teh consequences were mostly bruised egos as opposude to a 30mil drop in revenue - thee was not that gulf. I hope he does not return in any way - because it is seriously time to move on, but if he did contibute is some way in teh background to helping things get back on track, I would certainly not be cutting off my nose to spite my face - we need all the help we can get.

That is the biggest problem with him and why he never will have any popular appeal of any note - the simple fact that he never accepts his part in all this. I do not as you will know, believe he is to blame for everything, nor do I believe his errors of judgement and mistakes have been made in anything other than good faith and in many respects out of his own belief that they would work out for the benefit of the club.... but some of these decisions have been naive at best and as many have pointed out when things do fail and teh consequences are diasterous it tends to be quickly called incompetence. I dont actually think Lowes biggest failings have been this year - because I still dont know how much impact the finances TRUELY had in making him take those decsions - his biggest error was believing wigley and the squad would ahve enough to keep us in the prem and realising too late that change was urgently needed. But thats all history. I believe the truth is that what started under lowe (not with any malaice) was componded by Wilde (Not with any malice) and ignored by Crouch (letting heart rule head) in that he could have prevented Wildes slightly cavalier approach to the spending when chair of the football board....by the time Lowe came back, it was probably, looking at this now, too late - getting high earners off the books was only going to really work if they were sold off permanently - the loans were really only delaying the onset of the increasing overdraft.... how would we have reacted last summer had Lowe actually sold these players? Not well I guess and that's fair enough. I know you believe at the very least we mmight have been better placed in the league had Crouch and Pearson stayed... Seriously unless you are a fortune teller this is impossible to predict because we simply dont know what squad he would have had left to pick from, or had Crouch kept the squad more compact but with teh experience how quickly we would have been in the same boat due to servicing those contracts - without access to such detail its simply impossible to determine the answers to this... and it would naive to think any direct communication on this would not have been tainted with a hint of bias.... Lowe in interviews will never back down and do the very things that have appeal to fans, humilty, acknowledgment of failings and importantly seek advice and help from greater footballing minds - ego is to big - and althiough thats not in itself a crime, if it prevents seeking appropriate advice it becomes a big problem - that would have been what I would have said to him - |I cant hate someone I dont know, and certainly not over football, es[pecially when the intent was not failure, just the result - he was certainly coming over as dissapointed and with some bitterness, which is at least an emotional response - anyone who truely never gave a flying feck about us would have just thought 'feck um'. BUt to be honest its what awaits us in the future that now intrigues - Not sure if Mr Crouch will return in some guise, but the only thing i would say on that front is - get some bastard in with you who is prepared to take teh flak for the unpopular decisons that will be necessary for some time to come - and make sure hes disposable!

Fair points - where I disagree is to the importance/relevence of the 'togetherness' and community spirit. Yup these are important and yes they can be influenced by the board 0- but ....only if we let it. There are many soundbites and cliches banded around in football and too often they are sghouted one minute and ignored the next as its convenient to do so... the best of these here would be how 'fans ARE the club, its life blood, its soul' etc - well if that is true, then the fans should be able to be together and in good spirit irresepective of which clowns are in the board room and what they are up to.... we as fans DO have that abilty to make teh atmosphere if we chose to... its simply too easy to blame someone else for our own frailities and lack of enthusiasm when the going is tough. If sainst fans want to demonstrate how they are so good they can do, irrespective of the chairman. What is so often overplayed (and not without agenda in MHO) is that fans have been 'divided' - bollx. Thats just another cliche tused to either support or undermine the board - the reality has always been that a few of us on here arguing the same old same old has little impact on teh atmosphere at teh club, the protest of a 1000 or so are popular because its a spirit of togtherness for sure, but for the vast majority, its not divisions, its simply different POV which encourages healthy and often entertaining debate over a pint pre and post match - the only reason it gets so 'heated' is because of the interwebnetflameablity and a few stirrers on both sides - the rest of us would be doing this with a smile and pint - and it certainly wont stop uus going and cheeriong and CREATING the right atmosphere when we go to matches. Sure, bad form, bad results cause fan misery, but thats been going on since the first ball was kicked and teh first miserable moraose fans turned up to watch! ;-) its nothing new. Again it becomes even more frustrtaing when you believe something could be done with different controllers in the boardroom, but the reality is the lifeblood of the club should be pumping through the fans whatever division we are in as it did in tey old 3rd division south days as well as the 'glory' of the prem. We the fans cant do anything about who now buys us, we cant suddenly make bad players good, or change poor manger decisions, but we CAN and SHOULD take the responsibilty for the atmosphere we create, for the spirit and sense of community we feel, because thats the one thing THEY CANT TAKE AWAY, because we should be dicttaing it, NOT the board. It belongs to us, and I think too many of those who became bored with the losses, poor entertainment, or genuinely simply could not afford to go as often have had a convenient excuse in Mr Lowe. One thing is for sure. Next seasson, if we still exist, that excuse will be gone

and thats fair enough, and sundance did score a bit of an own goal, but its pretty clear really, that the attendences fell sharply from 2006/7 to 2007/8 seasons and again 2008/2009 - as our performances on teh pitch declined and the credit crunch hits home. Sure because of the views held on Lowe, this also contributed to a further small decrease, and did provide a good excuse - personally, I dont think fans need an excuse, if they cant afford it or justify the price, then that is a PERFECTLY sound reason fro reducing teh games you attend - and the if we are honest its also bound to be influenced by perceived value for money. You will probably argue that had Lowe not returned and we had kept Pearson, gates would have been bigger, weven if results had been the same? I would disagree, I think we would ahve seen the same fall off this year if we had had the same results - You may not believe we would be in the same position had Pearson/Crouch been here, as he would have kept on the likes of Saga, Euell, Rasiak etc... Now Having no direct access to the books, I cant comment on what was and what wasn't necessary re cut backs, but it cant have escaped your notice that the facts seem to dictate, that pre Christmas when some of the more experienced players were out on loan, we were holding our own financially, and after Christmas when we cant palm them off, the situation gets worse and admin follows - what i want to understand is what happened, and was there anything else that could have been done to avoid it? We dont need to be naive about, we know Wilde only wanted back in to get control of his own destiny, he did not like the idea of Crouch dictating things especially during that phase of potential club sale or asset sell off, his only way was go in with Lowe who would have been desperate to save his shareholding value and probably ego driven to be seen as some sort of saviour. You seem convinced that had Crouch and Pearson stayed, we would not now be in this position - I disagree, I think it became inevitable as soon as Wilde and his old board approved teh 7.5 mil spend that year and we failed to get promoted as those contracts bled us dry as soon as the parachute payments stopped... I dont think there is anything different really that Crouch could have done, even if he had kept Pearson and not got the extra kids in, we would still have had to ship out the biggest earners. Had Crouch prevented the Wilde splurge (because he must have had an inkling that the Wilde 'investors/manifesto' was full of holes) before hand when he was involved on the football board with Lawrie, It would have been unpopular with fans BUT he would have had my respect for it, because it was not the time to blow a huge hole in the accounts - but neither he nor the football board recognised that folly, and that is ultimately why I have always had issues with him, because this can be interpreted as a heart ruling head or populist approach, rather than the need for prudent pragmatism. darn... gone down an off topic route, but it all ties in. Fans will ALWAYS be more naturally supportive of the risk takers - percieved as showing 'ambition' - but the flip side of that risk was an overdraft that was as we have seen has become unsustatinable with the player contracts that this brought in. Lowe, was always going to be unpopular when coming back, let alone when cutting the squad to pay kids, and not keeping Pearson on - a decision that was certainly in part based on his own ideas of Youth development, but also in a major way no doubt because of the cost. The crowds stayed away, because the effect this had on the football as early promise dissipitated. So yes you could blame Lowe for this years decreasing crowds, but only if you completely ignore the financial pressure we were under brought on by Wildes initial overspend... something Mr Crouch could/should have had an influence over - but he 'we had our club back' and football first policies to uphold so everything was rosey.... To me it shows we are well rid of ALL of them, but also why I hope if Crouch is involved an any rescue bid, he has someone at his side that WILL be prepared to make the unpopular decisions and have teh authority to do so, because it would be naive to think that any rescue package is suddenly going to make us winners again overnight and see big cash injections into the playing squad.

Alpine I would like you to study my previous post agian - read carefully, perhaps getting the help of an adult to read it slowly to you. Because , you will then hopefully see that I have not expressed any merit or otherwise in this scheme. The fact reamins that MANY fans particularly those with your particular PoV believe football clubs to be at the heart of the community, indeed the notion of 'we've got our club back' stems from this community culture, as such I was merely pointing out that if this is true and to be believed, why should it not take preference in this case over art that although culturally just as important probably interests less than the 30,000 who would support a staidium ownship scheme... please read in future and not make up rubbish...

Sadly I do, If you asked the 12000 extra Saturday they would all say it was because Lowe has gone.... yet I think its for most a convenint excuse because of justifying the cost in these times and the crap on offer. Next seaosn will be the test of how many fans we really have - as there will only be no Lowe to pin it on.

Cant be arsed reading through all the guff argument so do please enlighten.... because from where it makes feck all difference but the ever so slight increase in gates is MORE than likely to be simply the run extras - as opposed to some Crouch love in thats all... Our numbers are simply down to cost v value / entertainment + 50 of lowe protest returns.... like I said teh only true measure will be next season.

bit like your contribution...... If a football club is TRUELY part of a community's culture, then is the council/community owning a part of it that allows the club to survive any less valid than Art? Not quite sure what your objection would be......

harsh ...but fair

The beauty of stats - make them tell you what you want... Do you at least recognise that the Crouch figures include the run in and importantly the last game of season sell out - traditionally higher in gate? ;-) Surely nmow teh key is what sort of gate we get next season - I suspect if its CCC it will bebetween 15-20k and if its league 1 12-15k Basically, our gate is about product for sure, but thats in part due to the division we are in not just teh way we are playing - + economic climate - its no surprise that the moment teh cost in reduced to £15 we get more through the turnstiles....

This really is LOLable - as your recall of what i was saying is ...at best slightly wrong, at worst made up tio suit your purpose... It might have escaped your notice, but opinions on here for real fans were never about being right or wrong, but about different perspectives on what would be best for the club - most could see that. You dont have any right to say whether I was wrong or right as you continually failed to understand waht I was saying and merely invented it .... Oh and yes I do consider the following to be right, back then and now: 1. Th club needs to be run within its means - a prudent policy rather than fan friendly spend and risk 2. The future is in youth - spending on the academy is good, it provides players for the team and income when the are sold - the Ajax model is the ultimate of this and for a club of our size its a potentially decent option 3. Sports science - learn from other sports whenever possible and bring in experts when we can afford them - modern sport is about money, but if you have none seek other advantages no matter how small 4. No one has explained how Saha and Malbranque wages would have been accomodated within the wage policy that is alluded to and underpins poin no.1 5. SMS - a great move for the club after over 20 years of ****ing about - does not matter who/what/went on before, it finally happened allowing more fans to see games which is a good thing. 6. Total football - would have been nice - did not work with kids not developed or skilled enough - loved teh idea nd was supportive of it - it failed, end of? 7. Pearson - loved the bloke, would have loved him to stay, but jury was out as to whether heould turn out good or not, but probably less a risk than JP and Wotte - so not sure what Lowe was upto there - suspect a simple issue of gettig rid of a Crouch appointment 8. Crowch/Wilde - spent money we did not have = bad! I stood by these yesterday and I stand by this today - thats my opinion. You chose to consider this wrong , thats your opinion, but how you turn this into support of an individual who with you seem to be obssessed is beyond me....

Ahr I see - low odds me thinks in the Heineken lady...

Hey? Details please

Doont even go there, some on here willbe having a heart attack just on that snippet! ;-)

Who he? details and i will add to list above

OK so todate with odds? Salz/Crouch - probably favourites Evens? Gavyn Davies - ? Suspect in with one of the others? 5-1 Fulthrope/Merrington - funds? 3-1 Souness? not sure of backer as his previous guy went to Wolves 8-1 Heineken Lady? no knowldege of this one Iranian/Isreali Brothers? Really - would this not be worse that Lowe/Crouch in terms of potential hostilities? ;-) 20-1 Richard Branson - now putting money into Brawn GP - 50-1 Paul Allen - naturrally the only choice for SFC! 1000-1 All odds to increase exponentially if LifeLongSaint is involved. ;-)

Duncan wont mind me saying this, but he did say on Saturday that now he couldn't ever see Lowe returning in any way...but then he admitted he had said that this time last year! ;-) TBH, I cant see it, of the three, he is actually the one who will have emerged with less of a loss, compared to CRouch (2mil) and Wilde (1.8mil) - I suspect That CRpuch may well dip his toe in again as part of a consortium, but which one is anyones guess...

So todate we know about: Salz; Backed by? Souness; Backed by? Fulthrope/Merrington; backed by? can we list the others?

I think in our case the abst way for creditors to max out on what is owed is for the club to be able to continue and potentailly get promoted back to the CCC or prem, because our biggest creditor is AVIVA - the rumours i have heard tend to be focusing on buying the club only, and not necessarily SMSLtd - what AVIVAwiould take for the stadium is anyones guess, but surely it would amke better sense for them to strike a deal that gets them ALL thier money back? Why not extend the terms to 40 years so there is a managable repayment - with a reduction in terms if we are a prem club etc? common sense really.. SO my guess is the administrator will be looking not just as who offers the most for SFC ltd, because he is duty bound to AVIVA and BARCLAYS first and foremost and simply selling of SFC Ltd for 4 mil - the only real revenue generating complany within the holding group, would not do this.... I suspect teh winner will have to make provision for this debt in some way and it will be better for the club if they do so as we avoid any points penalty NB. As I understand it, the points penalty will only come into force is as a result of administration its deamed the club has wiped out significant debt - if a buyer can come in buy the club, and negotiate new terms with AVIVA and Barclays without simply wiping that out, it would be the best deal all round...

As there are alledgedly 19 interseted parties (inevitdably including the tirekickers with or without Barry Briefcase) should we not have an rumour 'list' below that we can scrub the also rans from or use to run a sweepstake? ;-) OK so todate with odds? 1. Salz/Crouch - probably favourites Evens? 2. Gavyn Davies - ? Suspect in with one of the others? 5-1 3. Fulthrope/Merrington - funds? 3-1 4. Souness? not sure of backer as his previous guy went to Wolves 8-1 5. Heineken Lady? - Dutch Royal family as friends, is that what is know as 'Total fantasy'? 1000-1 6. Iranian/Isreali Brothers? Really - would this not be worse that Lowe/Crouch in terms of potential hostilities? ;-) 20-1 7. Richard Branson - now putting money into Brawn GP - 50-1 8. Paul Allen - naturrally the only choice for SFC! 1000-1 so if its 19 who are the others? NB. All odds to increase exponentially if LifeLongSaint is involved. ;-)