Frank's cousin

Is it right to assume that as the sms loan is like a mortage so Aviva will ahve first claim against the stadium irespective of who else is owed?

BUt from What you can read into the accounts we dont need to worry so much about that as awe have no footballing debt, and its only barclays and aviva we need to satisfy if they dont agree we will be liquidated....

Need an answer from an 'administrator; really, I woudl guess it would be their duty to accept the deal that provides creditors with the greatest chance of getting their money back. In football though we also need to bare in mind that unless all fottballing debts are paid in full (eg. Final paymnets on transfers and loan fees, player wages etc) then you suffer a further substantial points deduction.

Thanks Rich for the clarification. think its important that folf undersatnd teh REAL implications of this. I do have some questions though that you might be able to help with. My understanding is that the baord are currently doing what they believe will stave of relegation, they have tried to cut operating costs and overhead to a level that is within the current revenue stream.... if this is not teh acse and we are still incurring further monthly losses (and lower gate receipts DO impact on this) then it cant belong before they are legally forced to call in teh administrators as we woudl eb in effect be trading whilst insolvement. So in come the administrators - we have been told that teh club is at least making provision for VAT and PAYE Corporation tax etc (from teh last audited accounts statemnet to teh LSE) so in theory they would be paid up in full. Assetts such as players would be sold + Jacksopns farm etc to then being to clear the overdraft with Barclays and other creditors... q. Do we actually have huge unpaid bills? As far as I can tell from the previous accounts out two greatest liabilties are the stadium loan with Aviva and teh overdraft with Barclays, an overdraft we have because we DO pay our employees and our suppliers? So selling assests to clear teh overdraft is one thing, but what happens to the AVIVA laon? the land as it is not worth the value of the loan so there its not a case of selling teh stadioum and leasing it back from someone else, that usually only happens where there are no loans against the ground. So Aviva really want us to be able to continue to pay the loan off - they do not want a useless stadium or sell the land for 25p in the pound of the laon - if that.For them it would thus be in their best interests that we continue to trade paying the 1.7 mil or so a year in repayments whatever division we are in? I think its obvious that we have not cashed in assets such as Jacksons farm because of a) current land prices/property crunch and b) Its worth one heck of a lot more is rezoned for housing - long term asset managemnet of the wilde kind.... How do you think administrators would deal with the stadium situation? If we had already paid it off, then it would be sold for 4mil worth of land to help pay creditors and in that case not a bad thing if someone could be found who leased it abck to us for 30 years or so, but a knightmare if someone who simply wanted to stick a giant tescos on it.... thoughts?

To me Nineteen seemed VERY Rupert like in style... if it was by smome chance Him, fair play, but its time to encourage adult, mature debate no matter how frustrated fans may be.

Like it... but I guess what Derry is alluding to, is that you ahve a choice, you can either eat your faggots plain - or with some imagination, an onion, stock cube, bit of seasoning you can bet a better result!

Derry is spot on. When we were last successful? 2003? Mazza and bridge providing width on the left, Dodds and Various on right - getting to the byline, overlapping and strong crosses for beatts + an other - width opening defences home and away - OK we aint got that quality now, but this is basic method of creatin space.

... I do this all the time... typos so to speak but I promise I have no aliases... ;-)

I appreciate what you are saying, but it is unfair to compare JP v Pearson, because we can only make assumptions about what restrictions Peasron would have had to work with - the same? etc... Also, sure when in the prem, we had less financial restrictions, but the actual risk of appointment is nonetheless the same if i may be pedantic - Look I know some have suggested that Lowe wanted YES men - but why then appoint STrachan who was hardly a shrinking violet yet their relationship was very good according to Strachan And Hoddle was on close to a mil a year so hardly a cheap option - I suggest its more to do with 'Lowe's vision + financial restrictions. He has very strong views on the management system based on control of finance eg. not happy to let managers get hold of the purse strings - If we forget his personality that many have issues with, forget the very small minority that have issues with his background whatever they may deny, the issue is quite simple, we disagree with Lowe on his decisions from a footballing perspective - Its that simple. I just wish Lowe was open and happy to debate this, explain strategies and decisons and respect how fans disagree - or be more open to the debate. Sadly wishful thinking...

It is true to some extent that fans are never satidfied with cahirman unless they are providing the open cheque book to manager we approve of...

But thats the price paid for an open forum and freedom of speech - console yourself with the fact that the Club is so skint it cant afford the £5 sign up so will only be posting 3 times a day ! ;-)

Its not the medling - its the impact it has Its not the appointments - its the success or failure Hes made mistakes and not acknowledged them Hes failed to communicate with fans the strategy and rationale for these decisions - which leaves gaps to be filled in by assumption, rumour and gossip x paranoia Perceived arrgance/lack of humilty = unpopular character - fine when things going well, disasterouse when not.

Crouch use to post on Saintsforever under a psuedonym... Look, I know what you are saying and to some extent I agree, but can you honestly say that some of the extreme 'campaigning' by very prominent posters and indeed teh 'bullying' tactics are not akin to PR? - Its certainly a lot stronger than banter.... So its alright for CRouch to use fans to spin his ideas, but not Lowe via a PR company? Sorry same thing to me. Just suggests crouch must be smarter as he's getting his for free! ;-)

Jeez.. come on guys be a bit more circumspect overall - What is this site if nothing but PR/propoganda for a particular fan view - sure here are some facts reported, but also one hell of a lot of bull and spin - so why do we feel affronted when the club do their bit? Surely we are old/intelligent/ugly enough to recognise these and mature enough to debate with them and keep the moral high ground by avoiding the immature slanging matches? I would like to hope so. Our arguments are worth nothing if we need to resort to ignorance and insult

1. I dot believe he is. Many other contributing factors 2. Lowe has not admitted his part in this 3. Lowe has REPEATED the mistakes 4. Struggled to communicate the rationale for strategies so fans ASSUME its cheap option 5. NO humility perceived as arrogant 6. Some latent prejudices

Several intelligent ans well reasoned arguments 'nineteen'. In response, however, firstly I am happy to confirm I use virtually my full name on here as in Frank Cousins, but thats purely because I believe I have nothing to hide from my opinions. You are entitled in y eyes to your opinion on the actions of Rupert Lowe in running SFC. I will even go along with you and support that up until 2004 the efforts by Lowe and the board had indeed seen the club progress - but we cant underestimate the impact of the huge increases in TV revenues during those years of his tenure - I also, in the minority, appreciate ant accept that we also needed to live within our means if we were to avoid teh pitfalls of debt that was common in premiership sides. It was at that time alot easier to defend Mr Lowe's decisons as a fan - the positives under his tenure were still fresh in the memory - the sea of yellow at Cardiff, even close to 33000 in a friendly against Micheal Ballack's Bayern - gates opened to avoid crowd problems! I would even argue that and defend the fact that despite what in hindsight was an error, the appointmnet of Steve Wigley who for all his loyalty was not ready for such a challenge, as part of the responsibuilty of a decent employer - providing opportunity - but what most fans found difficult to reconcile was that nothing seemed to have been learnt from a similar appointmnet of Stuart Gray - yes we know financial consideration must have influenced the decisionsm,, but why repeat the error? and why did Lowe not admit to that major blunder as being a major factor in relegation? Its this lack of humility and perceived arrogance that prevents many fans from acknowledging the positives and maintains a strong feeling of resentment, even amongst more sensible fans. This is compounded by posts such as yours that offer an almost unflinching loyalty toards Rupert irresepctive of the decisions made that turn out to be misguided... I will skip the invening years because as fans these now become irrelevenat to our current predicament. Fans are struggling to understand WHY a perfectly decent intelligent coach such as JP was given and still holds the managers role. An honest man who many on here respect but who simply is too naive of the culture of the CCC to see us progress - indeed the current danger of relegation is naturally causing resentment and anger to a fanbase already at the end of its tether after the turmaoil of recent years. Its not JPs fault we know that, but we can not understand how/why Mr lOwe is once again refusing to act early enough - sorry but this thing is standard in football and is not really likely to unsettle banks - the dwindling crowds will have more an effect on that - and a new manager may see that change. Its Mr Lowes perceived arrogance once again that it will be 'OK' or his unfliching belief in his idea that is preventing the common sense solution - so is it any wonder there is a continued backlash. I would never condone what happened on Saturday, nor do I appreciate teh abuse and verbal bullying that fan such as myself get, on here just for supporting an idea, let alone a person. but you have to appreciate that Lowe in his ackward and often dismissive communication with fans makes him at this time almost impossible to defend. I know hes not the devil, I know he probably does have an affection for SFC and a desire to see it rise from the ashes, but surely the best way of demonstraing that is humilty... focus on what he is experienced and good at in the CEO role and seek advice and help on the footballing side of things and review the manager situation. Otherwise, I cant see a way back for this club.

Point deductions: -10 for going into admin - If taken before 3rd week in march points deducted this season so ideally we would be more than 10 points above the relegation zone - now unlikley after that would be deducted next season so would start on -10 the -17 additional deduction is when a club fails to pay ALL football related debts in full - which is an FA rquirement as far as I understand it - often clubs struggle here because HMCR MUST be paid first as they will NOT accept CVAs. At present the club has stated provision has been made on a monthly basis (in the audited accounts if I read it rightly) for all VAT/PAYE costs etc. and I dont believe we have any debts to other clubs, but I believe player contracts also come under the 'footballing debt'

Cant believe this site at times... we NEED to stay up.... woudl you have said at teh start of the season, given the resources and the fact we only had teh kids that a sensible objective for JP should be survival? I think that would have been fair.... so should we not judge on that front and give the side every opportunity to succeed in that objective?

Wes, I know we dont always agree but you do always present a valid, logical argument for you POV. My response to this would be that yes even 'senseible' supporters feel JP should go and that includes me (but I dont take any pleasure from seeing someone lose their job, especially someone like JP who has always conducted himself well and with dignity and intelligence), but I dont agree it was a Bizarre appointment at the start - more a risky experiment that has unfortunately failed. No more risky that when Lowe appointed Wigley or Gray - or when Crouch apointed that unknown Pearson (hindsight makes judging these decisions easy ;-)). Its at the crux really, I just struggle to explain sometimes that for whatever reason, I have no problem with some of the approaches and ideas the club has tried in the past and have tried to remain optimistic about their chances of success - for me thats what is important to ME as a fan, afterall it IS only a game when alls said and done. Naturally, having this appraoch with Lowe at the helm means for not just dissapointment in their failure, but being ridiculded for supporting the IDEA in the first place - as some simply cant distinguish between the idea and who had it! In some cases I also get the perception that because LOwes record seems so utterly sh!te in the footballing side of things, that nothing will get past the starting gate if his name is attached to it... and I can understand that to some extent... We know football is a workld of IFs, buts and Maybes - We like to believe that Pearson would have worked better. maybe he would, we simply dont know... sure educated guesses can be made, but their is no certainty,especially as he was untried, and untested and we were only 1 game away from relegation - would he and Crouch be viewed differently now had that happened? I think they would in some quarters and that is all I am trying to convey.

Sorry Alps ...wrong again... My 'balance' if thats what you want to call it simply means I READ every word rather than hang on it, engage a brain and respond - I merely questioned the purpose of being so irate about an obvious plant?

I totally agree that the board should have the guts to stand up and express their views properly - They should stand by their actions and decisons and be prepared to defend them against any criticism... BUt the purpose of PR in this case is probably because they (mistakingly?) believe that should they come on here under their own name, they would not really be listened to by the majority, or shot down in flames ? Can you see the likes of Alpine saying ' Thanks Andrew for taking the time to respond to our concerns, however I disagree....' when a simple 'feck off' will suffice...?

Sorry Alpine, but PR plant or not, this is as far as I am aware an open forum for all views to be expressed - yes even those you dont agree with. I am flumuxed as to why posters find the idea of 'PR Plants' so odd on these sites anyway - if nothing else they provide an insight into how the club is thinking and thuis it provides information. The above post is not without its emotional content - a hint of bitterness which suggest its closer to the the club than a simple PR scripted post - but that does not mean its all invalid as some of you are dismissing. There is a definate atmosphere of 'intimidation' towards those that dont want to be 'bullied' into taking the 'forum line', or suggest middle ground and offer mor 'balanced' views - and what are our posts anyway? Whatever side of the line you stand on, posts are in effect all 'PR' from that perspective - communicating your vuiewsand opinions and hoping that there are folk that will listen and possibley see the merit in what you say?

Well 80% are not! ;-) I voted for Dowie. If I had to make that decison and I could make the figures match, or get teh banks blessing, I would ask JP to direct the academy and bring in Dowie now.

Up I can undersatnd that from a results perspective - Pearson defo deserved his chance - afterall I have always advocated that giving the younger managers a go is not such a bad idea. But i cant help feeling that your VERY strong support of him is somehow linked to the fact he was Crouchs appointment and Lowe got rid, rather than being based on Pearsons credentials - afterall at the time he was appointed he as unknown to us, had no experience etc, eg Crouch had done exactly what Lowe has done in the past - appoint an unknown quantity with limited experience that could be considered teh cheap option. The fact we survived on the last day, was aPlus point, but had we been relegated would his standing still ahve been so high with you, or would you have blamed Crouch for making a mistake in chosing an untried and untested and unknown manager? Sure in hindsight, Pearson is starting to look like the real deal, and with every game leicester win, it makes Lowe's Lowes dissmissal look an ever bigger mistake...and yes with that benefit it would be great to have him here, but you have to surely admit had we not survived on that last day, his record would have benn no better than wigley or Gray and if being consistent in our criticism, Crouch would have in effect simply repeated the 'cheap risky' option of Lowe. This does not naturally excuse Lowe from the current situation, but I fail to see how Pearson's initial appointment could be considered as any less risky than Wigley or Gray or JP at the time. The benefit of looking at this through the retrospectoscope is what highlights LOwe's error which you are keen to reinforce which is fair enough... but that does not mean Crouch was somehow gifted in his decison making....merely 'lucky'.

Interesting that JP gets more than some 'established names'... and I voted Dowie!