Frank's cousin

The simple answer is surely... 1. What is the revenue required from 23 home games to ensure we not only break even, but have a little cash leftover to reduce the overdraft each month and have a small pot for some player transfers? As an example say over the year its 10 mil Divide this by 23 games = 435K a match income Take off the revenue generated by say 10000 ST at an average of 350 per ST (£15.20) a game = £152000 per game from ST sales So £435k-£152k = £283K to be raised per game from general sales IF we say 30K -10k = 20k seats to sell which = an Average of £14 per ticket Think this would thus need to equate to about £2O per full priced adult, £14 concessions and £5 under 12s and say £11 under 16s? Would these prices get us a full house in the CCC? Thats the problem.

Jeez so trying to understand a middleground - appreciate that whilst mistakes are made, there was some merit in it is suddenly drivvel? Some call it diplomacy You basically want me to give a black or white answer - OK, Q. Should Lowe go? A. YES Q. Has Lowe made mistakes...big mistakes? A. YES Q. Do you understand the idea behind Lowe's approach even if it has been unsuccessful in its execution? A. YES Q. Do you believe that protests will get us rid of Lowe? A. NO Q. How do we get rid of Lowe A. Buy his shares and those of his cronies at a fair price?(realism) Q. Do you Love Lowe? A. NO, I dont know him and from what we hear he spouts an awful lot of arrogant and insulting rubbish - someone really needs to teach him communication and PR skills Q. It seems to me that you do Love Lowe and dont want him to go? A. NO, I do not love him an would like him to go ifonly so we have unity, BUT that does not mean I cant appreciaed what he tried even if its failing. Also being a realist, until someone buys his shares he will be involved at the club Q. Surely Pearson was the best option, afterall he kept us up and showed passion and understanding of the CCC? A. I would have had no problem had Pearson stayed, I liked his passion and his calm intelligent response and communication Lowe could have learned alot from him... - but it would also have been a gamble, afterall his actual points tally in his games in charge is not that much better than Stuart Grays - probably a smaller gamble than going with teh Dutch dou TBF. BUt hindsight is a wonderful thing. Q. What you have no concerns about JP? Look at the table FFS!!! A. When appointed, I was intrigued, I have alswyas liked the continental style/approach believing the English game is still antiquated in many respects with too much old school holding abck progress, especially when you consider things like the conveyour belt of talent they had at Ajax. Sure he was an unknown and a big risk, but it might work, what diod we have to lose? we knew it was going to be kids and early indications were quite positive.... its not worked so we need some change - Kids and new coaches do need a couple of seasons though but I acknowledge we dont ahev that luxury right now if we are to survive - sad in a way though - continuity and continued development would I believe see this young squad develop - yes it needs a striker and a decnt defender but we are not as far off as the points on the board suggest - but yes it is ultimately about points. Q. So why cant you just accept Lowe must go and JP with him then? A.There is a difference between aceppting that they should go... and teh reality of the fact LOwe wont until he is bought out and JP will be here until Lowe panics. Q. Thats just Lowe luvvie speak sitting on the fence surely? A|. NO IT FECKIN IS NOT ;-)

I was listening until you got to this bit....... there is absolutely NOTHING in my previous post that warrants this response..I asked a question that was all. and NO the reason for being excited at the start of the season HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OS - it had to do with watching a few games pre season and the first few league games and seeing our kids pass the ball so please dont make stuff up to suit your POV. No one as far as I can see is advocating a head in sand approach - the fact that we are srruggling for points tells its own story and that something needs to change to ensure we survive and pretty darn quick. At all levels ideally, but we dont live in dreamworld where just because we dislike him lowe will disappear up his own a*se - he is here and will be here until someone buys his shares - accept it FFS - If he does not change the manager and we get relegated, yes he will need to be accountable, if he does not change the manager and we survive and say improve next season will YOU be prepared to change your mind? Thats all I'm asking for or advocating exactly what you seem to be requesting - AN OPEN MIND - because folk can protest all they like, until someone purchases Lowes and his cronies shares he will be influential at the club. that is not being supportive, its a statement of fact. Some fans seem to give LOwe TOPO much credit - considering him the architecht of some grand scheme to feck us up. The truth is hes just an average businessman, who has a share in the club and is currently on the board - has his own ideas on how to run a club which is at odds with most fans and the football establishment - but has arguably some good ideas. Has failed in the execution of his plan for a variety of reasons and was kickout out. the club continued to spiral downhill and hes come back in to rescue his sharevalue - simple really. The best way for his to rescue his sharevalue is stablizing the clubs losses, and then footbaling success - which we have to admit is pretty much what fans want right now. He just has his own way of doing it which we dont agree with...end of story. HOw that equate sto him being the devil' a*sehole or that hideous overused and frankly sick 'cancer at the club metaphor' is beyond me. Afterall we are talking about a game.

Key for me, especially when we are not doing so well, would be to get kids in cheap with each adult - really important to get kids into saints before they get into the prem top 4, and by reducing the cost of tking the nippers to the game it would attract more full paying adults me thinks: £18 single adult £20 single adult + 1 child £35 2 adults 2 kids (Family ticket ) - extra kid £2 £10 unaccpomapanied U16s, OAPs etc

Possibly, but I was trying to keep it to the best crop of what we either had at the time or in the academy - eg without spending any money.

UP Do you have any REAL idea why the decision was made, or do you think it was purely because it was a Crouch appointmnet and Lowe had his own idea and was determined to see it through and Wilde was just a patsy? I ask, because, I would have liked to see what Pearson could do, but also felt excited by trying the Dutch guys, especially the way we were playing at teh start of the season, where I think most felt, that if we carried on playing like that, the results would surely come... which sadly they have not. Its easy to say this decison was a mistake in hindsight, and their is no guarrantee that we would be in any better position under Pearson than we are now, given that the squad would have looked pretty much the same. The argument that Pearson 'deserved' a chance is fair, only if we also say that Gray and Wigley 'deserved' their chances surely?

Ok Davis Baird Cranie Svensson Bale Wallcott Lampard Ballack Bridge Beattie Jones ;-)

NO worries, its only the fact we all care that makes come across as a bit daft at times...the passion ...and giving up the fags for me....

Too true, and this did make me smile, because it is common sense I guess - Lets be honest though, our problem has been that we have selected managers who are risky - LM was risky having never played the game, but had a strong mentor in Ted. we appointed Bally, NIchol etc not really tried and tested in managerial capacity - it worked, we appointed HOddle, considered a good choice and it sort of worked, but he ditched us, Strachen... thought of as risky as he had failed at Coventry etc but that worked.... its really tbe fair down to Wigley and Gray - no different really from the risk of appointing Nichol - logically good in that promoting from with in potentially more loyal and dedicated and respected coaches.... Sturrock was an odd one never know what really happened there, Reknapp onsidered a coup, but failed, Burley, considered a good apointmnet but obviously could do nothing without cash. Peasron a big risk, untried, but showed promise with that squad, JP a Huge risk, but given that so is having a squad of nothing but kids wo knows. I do think he is doing OK with the resources he has - kids bound to be inconsistent. I think we also need some realism - we are no onger a club that will attract or can afford some of more experienced managers that we see favoured by fans. As alway, continuity is the key

Interesting - only was trtying to put togtehre a side based on the youth as this is something we were all about apparantly - approciate teh mid field is lightweight, but it is the area where most experience anis needed and thus good players are expensive - just a hypotherical thought though.

Maybe they will do a 'Radiohead' with fans paying on the way out what they felt it was worth ;-)

With the latest lot of nostalgia floating around, and my recent ramblings about LOwe strategy on youth, I was thinking that perhaps in a parallel universe there is a saints side that won the cup in 2003, where Strachan saw the future in the talent we had in the youth and is still manager and the teamsheet for Saturday's visit to Highbury consists of: Davis (Neimi retired last season) Baird Svensson (capt) Cranie Bale Wallcott, Surman, Lallana Bridge Beattie Jones

OK 1. 'Inner Santum'? - sorry far from it, the only person i have ever directly spoken with onone ocasion was Mr Wilde - and that was perhaps not as enlightening as I would have naively perhaps hoped - although it did provide some insights into his ideas -Ideas I might add that I would not ahev a problem with IF done in teh interests of the club and on for personal benefit. Apart form that, I have on a few ocasions met Duncan (FF) if that counts? ;-) 2. As far as I am aware Lowe has NOT put his personal cash into the club without something in return as you mention shares - but nor has Wilde or Crouch (to any great extent). And you are right in assuming that we would ALL welcome cash injection right now from any source - but is it realistic to expect any of these guys to make a contribution... we need 5-10 mil a year to help rebuild, and even if they clubbed together they would not have this kind of money available - its one thing expecting a billionnaire to contribute 10 mil, but quite another to expect someone to put in 2 mil, if this is close to their net worth. I guess expecting Rupert to put in 2 mil, is no different from teh club asking all fans to contribute say 50% of your net income form teh next 3 -4 years? My gripe with Wilde was not because he did not have investment or because he was not prepared to put cash in, but because he 'promised' it and based his strategy upon it and thus his appointed board acted perhaps a little rash in a big spend supporting BUrley when we simply should have kept that cash for the rainy days to come? He promised further investmnet and this could be considered to have been misleading - I appreciate he was 'let down' by those 'talked' a big game, but surely he should have had this in written in stone before using it as a strategy to win over fans? 3. I have never said he is teh BEST person to run the show. But he is teh one we have and realistically the best cahnce of change will come with the club being attractive to outside purcahsers by being either on the verge of promotion or promoted, which is why I believe we shoudl be doing all we can to support the side financially even if you want Lowe out - as well as giveing the club a fighting chance of avoiding the drop. What I have defended and will continue to do so is that I do see alot of merit in the overall approach that he tried but in the last 4 years has failed us - Poor implementation and timing as alluded to elsewhere - that of not being reckless, of wanting to challenge the quite irresponsible approach taken by many clubs of hiking up debts tospend on players and wages to satisfy the ambitions of fans but risking the financial future of the club - yes its a very fine line betwen ensuring you have sufficuient quality to survive and hopefull progress and over spending, especially in the prem, but is it always right to do as the others do simply because they are doing it? Many other clubs also have backers who underwrite such investment which we simply did not have. So teh approach was to try and supplement this by developing youth and sports science infrastructure - a long term plan which in principle was logically sound. Sadly, it did not work out, some of which was down to Ruper, sure, but some was also down to resistence to change from within the club and the game itself, the media and fans feeling uncomfortable with it. All I am trying to convey is that these were IMHO sound ideals irrespective of who inniated them. This is not covering up mistakes made, or making excuses for cras and arrogant statements towards fans, and LOwe deserves much of teh criticism aimed against him, but if being totally fair, not all of it as we conveniently forget that some ideas were good, and teh part that bad luck and misfortune also played. Top that off with the mistakes that the Wilde board made financially and desitre for Crouch to be seen as the 'ambitious' high risk but fan friendly chair and we have where we are now. Because of this and the current share ownership - which we cant do anything about unless we win the Euro millions and offer to buy teh shares, I believe that still the best way forward is unity - these three working togther from the inside not ****ing in from the outside and not necessarily agreeing on everything but WILLING to do all they can for teh good of the club. The fact that they cant see eye to eye is the worst part of this and mkes no contribution to the the future of the club. If you still belive that's supporting lowe, sobeit, I cant add anything more. I support that club and will support anyone who does what they can to help no matter how painful it might be.

Come on... please give this a break, how is acknowledging that the factors affecting whether or not players leave is down to mor ethan just the boards attitude, defending Lowe FFS? If the board decide to sell when we dont need to and the player is happy to stay and they do it purely to feed the coffers and thus the dividends, I will be the first to stand up and declare them a bunch of moneygrabbing a*seholes, but in all the occasions where we have seen good players go its been because: 1. the player wants to go or 2, we desperately need the money OK so there is the odd occasion where the player wants to leave becaus eof the situation at a club rather than the money, but that is rare.

I think sometimes we do forget these are young players thouigh who are more likely to be effected by any adverse reaction to mistakes - you notice the nervousness that can creep in with the lads who are usually very confident on the ball, looking to get rid quick and thus our passing game breaks down. But confidence is also affected by the the style and formation. go with two yup front and get told to as Derry says to maximise width - use the pitch and get to the byline and things go better - its no coincidence that we have looked more ineffective since we seem to have pulled back on the more free attacking style from the first month or so, where we looked good, but maybe a bit naive - now we just look naive and opften poor as a result - If you are going to ghet beat, might as well bet get beat in style! ;-)

Fanthe flames, Thanks for at least talking the time to put your opinion/argument in context and in a clear way - contrary to opinion, I do respect what you say when put across in this way, but I wiould still argue that you are missing the point i am trying to make, and if thats because it lacks clarity I aplogise, but surely my language/communications skills are not the issue. 1. I do NOT see Lowe as the saviour of this club - I acknowledge and have doen in many previous pposts that there many better placed and experienced folk out there that could and would do a better job. The problem is none have come forward and made a claim - and in part this is because many will know that being a club chairmen of a club such as ours is a thankless task - balancing the financial restrictions dictating strategy v fan expectation is IMHO currently an impossible task. 2. I beg for you to see though that I DIFFERENTIATE between ideas and those who ideas they are - if the situation was reveresed and it was Wilde or CRouch advocating the ideas that in my opinion are good (even if Lowe has compromised them in implementation) - I would be EQUALLY supportive of those ideas - note not the person, but strategy. 3. Like all ideas and approaches, they are only as good as their execution - and in the how well suited they are to a particular set of circumstances - I believe that up until 2003, the plan was working to some extent either by luck or judgement we were on the up. The 1st team squad was realtively good, we had a good manager in place who had a good working relationship with the board, we had the buzz of the new ground and a cup run and an an academy squad that was in the top 4 in the country - and surely when you look at it from that perspective it looks like SFC was being run correctly for a club of our size? And that was despite teh animosity against Lowe from some fans, be they the SMALL number who had an uissue from the start re the reverse takeover shenanigans, or those LOwe had himself alienated by is PR gaffs and insults. 4. I acknowledge that the mistakes in manager selection in 2004/5 that Lowe made directly contributed to relegation and for this he must bare responsibilty. I will however, defend the strategy of not going mad with cash we did not have, but again he needs to take responsibilty for allowing these managers to build a bloated squad of average, rather than 2-3 better players - (yet had he insisted on that, we would have had the uproar that he was again interfereing with manager choices?) BUT we also need to acknowledge the problem caused by injuries, poor form, morlae and plain bad luck that also contributed to the problem. 5. Buisness practise/experience- you ask for examples that demonstrate Lowe has teh appropriate business accumen to successfully run a club. OK, the fact is that when he took over he had nothing that wa srelevent on his CV, nor did Wilde, nor does Crouch, because as many have stated even if Lowe was a master in fields, there are unique qualities required in football - the delicate balance between managing expectations of the fans versus those of the business as a whole given we had investment needs such as SMS and the academy etc... In addition, the Theory of extending potential revenue sources from other commercial sources is also a good one. 6. Please tell me you can see that what I am defending is an approach and the ideas - and that its the problems in the implementation of these ideals that has caused our problems, and YES Lowe's personality and inabilty to listen to those with more experience taht have been the major factor in these problems. Lowe is NOT the saviour, but he is currently the one in charge as no one else seems willing to do the necessary and put their money where their mouth is. I have said it and will say it again - the best of the current bunch is not Lowe, but ideally 3 grown ups burying the hatchet and working together constructively as each has something to give. Sadly as Duncan points out,that option was never on the table and is now impossible. PS. gave up smoking recently so over sensitive and more iritable than normal!

Its a little sad when we see start almost wanting crap to happen to score points off each other though is it not? There are afterall only three factors which will influence whether lallana or Surman will go, in no particular order: 1. Someone makes a bid 2. We are desperate for the money 3. The players themselves demand a move Strangely, I believe these factors would still be there whoever was in the boardroom...

Tell me, would you welcome the Risdale approach? Is that more in keeping with your ideals of running a football club? Of course most fans struggle with managemnet that appears to 'lack ambition' by not spending what it does not have - of course most fans struggle with accepting ideas that are at odds with what the 'establishment' believes is the only way to succeed (also one of many ways to administration).... fans want instant results, its about results FFS we know that - we are fickle, one minute quetioning the boards sanity in appointing Strachan, the next making him a god...its in a fans nature. Its fine running a club for the fans and fans alone if happy and content in the lower amateur leagues, but the control of the game is with the media powerbrokers and agents and that means the decisions taken by boards will inevitably be in some cases unpopular with fans - I admit I am an apologist for that, but as mentioned above, if you think there is more to it than that, again sadly misguided....

Funny as feck that Fanny, truely remarkable how you manage to be so blinkered (stupid/ignorant?) as to completely and continually misinterpret my posts....anyone would think you had a prejudiced agenda? The simple FACT remains: Wilde: strategy based on 'guarranteed' investment waiting in the wings - some merely questioned these claims - could not have been happier if this had actually been true.... Crouch: the passion man - did not communicate his strategy, and resisted reduction in spending to reduce losses initially - why? because he seemed to dazzled by teh idea of being the 'popular choice' with much fan friendly rhetoric Lowe: strategy based on living within a clubs means - develop youth, sell the best and get the best from the rest by improving sports science etc. Now, I agree with Lowe's strategy - never said otherwise, but have also acknowledged elsewhere on numerous occaisions that it was Lowe's inabilty to listen to expert advice and adapt and fine tune this approach to meet the vagaries of modern game that resulted in the failure of many (not all) but many ideas and approaches. Crouch and Wilde both have positives to add from what i have read and heard, despite my reservations ABOUT THEIR COMMUNICATED strategies or lack their of and the biggest frustration of them all is that these guys could not find common ground back in 06 and work together for the benefit of SFC. If you believe you first sentence rather that it just being a provocative wind up - then quite frankly you really are a bit dim...

HI Duncan how are things? I think this whole episode shows that the biggest mistake made by the fans overall and this continues today is that we saw this as too clearly a contest. A contest between Lowe and wilde/Crouch and now Lowe/Wilde and Crouch. There were a few at the time that tried to argue for caution - fine, agree that Lowe is not right and has to go, but just because fans wanted Lowe out and felt he should go now, did not mean that it made Wilde suddenly RIGHT for the club, or Crouch for that matter or even those who may have a historic connection. It was just assumed they woudld be because they were not Lowe and seemed to talk the right wayt o fans. The two were never and are not now linked. For that reason, some of us questioned Crouch and Wilde, only to be labelled the classice 'Lowe luvvies' and the rest as they say is history. Its almost comic book stuff, as you say. You say you are loosely tethered to the Crouch camp... my question would be why? When he was around last time my perennial question was show us your strategy, which from a fans perspective consisted of wheeling out Laurie Mac who made as far as I can see feck all contribution. He may well be a decent guy and a decent fan, but I have not seen anything that communicates his plan, good bad or indifferent. The same could be said for Wilde both then and now - it was the biggest criticism - he had nothing concrete just platitudes and was NOT lowe. We know little more know, apart from perhaps his long term goal for perperty speculation (obviously a deadend strategy for the time being). With Lowe, at teh very least you knew his strategy, even if you did not agree with it or considered it flawed in total or in part, but you knew it - Youth, sports science, sell to fund, Coach rather than old school manager etc.... Depending on your point of view on all this tended to make up your mind on teh validity of it - and then there were those (probably teh majority) that were just sick and tired of the divisions and thus felt teh only way to resolve it was to get rid....again I woudl ahve had no beef with taht, had it not been for the final line of the sentence.... 'get rid...anything is better than Lowe'.

So a players have a say as to who is their boss? - Sorry, unworkable. The players need to have respect for the authority of the manager/coaches etc.... and would fans want other 'fans' steering the ship along their ingrained political ideology? Fair enough clubs were formed that way, but they did not stay that way for a reason - the times changed - football is now big buiness and if you want to be part of that you have to run a club with that in mind, or go and support Havent and Waterlooville.

No sensible person ever has an issue with fans criticising Lowe for the ****-ups he has made or his attitude towards the fans at times.... I just think that too often there are 'falsehoods' declared as facts that spread like wild fire and are too easily lapped up as they provide extra nails for the coffin. Thats what I dont like as I dont think its helpful to have a downer on everything, when there are some good ideas that with the right tweaks and balance should be beneficial to SFC. Just becauise Lowe does not seem to listen to additional expert advice on some things.... which would have fine tuned good but flawed ideas into good and workable, does not make the ideas itself bad..... coupled with ****** such as the perennial 'where has all the money gone' (Read the audited accounts and its shows quite clearly that it goes on player wages and bonuses FFS - with the implication being the other old lie 'in lowes back pocket' - Jeez) or bolox that Lowe deliberately sold Bridge and thus was determined to **** off Strachan etc and it just gets some folks back up. That's why some of us can be considered 'apologists' - no other reason really, and certainly no agenda, I just feel IMHO that there are some good ideas that could and should have worked, but were often stifled in their execution by one of the following: 1. Lowes inabilty to maybe listen to fine tune and make the concepts more appropriate and workable within the culture of the game - his arogance if you like 2. Media and thus fan ridicule - because he is 'not a football man' 3. Timing 4. Money I have not included luck or lack of it as successful implementation or lack of it should never be down to luck.

Did you cry? ;-) (sorry FF - but like me I am sure you have bneen called worse!) I find Lowe funny - the old 'sapping our strength with every strike they land' is classic farce. Looking back at fans comments and Lowe's comments etc.... i am starting to form the opinion that perhaps apart from a few extremists who do have an issue with his background and the reverse takeover - most of the problems with Lowe is actually down to the simple fact that he truely believes in his approach to running a club which simply sits at odds with the opinion of fans and many observers - because in many cases it flies in the face of the traditional approach, or as we see it, the tried and tested one. I believe Lowe had the attitude that given our size and infrastructure, the only way we could remain and be more competitive was to do things differently or be innovative - which scared the hell out of fans - and the failures of these plans have been more frequent than the successes which is why we now think he has no clue. Cant fault how these opinions are formed really as its logical given our current lowly status. But in mitigation, some of the failures at least have been unduly influenced by factors beyond our control...but thats another debate. I guess my 'apologist' approach never had anything to do with supporting the man, but in seeing the logic in doing things differently - I liked the idea of a strong youth development approach, investment in sports science, have always liked the idea of continental system, of managers being there to get the best out of the players the club has, not completely changing things at great expense when they come and go... especially as they have no loyalty either - and its seems a perverse excuse of managers who blame their lack of success on the inability to spend vast quantities of money - for me we should judge our managers on the IMPROVEMENTand the results they get with the resources they have - but I guess thats unrealistic as well as as fans our demands and expectations are so much more ambitious. As in all walks of life we are always far more forgiving of those that have success - had we achieved more positives with the approaches, the comments and crazy ideas whole response from fans to his arrogance, rants and insults of the customers, would in reality be forgotten or considered an amusing aspect of his character.... because of the very obvious position we find ourselves in, any deviations from what is considered the standard excepted approach is considered a fatal flaw.

Which I have never said he was - The point we have to try and remember is that He is Currently in charge - and at this moment in time I believe its more imprtant that we support by attending and helping financially to avoid the drop and admin, as thats all we can realistically do. Protesting, staying away etc is everyones right, but they do sod all in helping the club whatever folk feel about it maybe having an effect on Lowe's future.

Interesting thoughts John, but I also think we are over complicating things somewhat - When living in Oxfordshire a few years back, I had a mate who actually worked for Lowe at his country pad - a man U fan (typical ;-)) who had had direct conversations about football with Lowe. His opinion was that Lowe had stated he had grown to be a fan, said it was impossible not to be drawn in and immersed in it - that one of his proudest moments was Cardiff 03, and the sea of yellow and the way we were praised in the press etc, but that often being a fan was very much at odds with what he felt was necessary from a business perspective.... I do think he is human, and a fan to some extent. Does he think we are ALL stupid sheep that you can treat like crap and they still come back? NO, does he believe there are SOME fans that are stupid? Probably by the way he reacts to the criticism from certain circles. Would he get out now if he could? I do believe he would get out now if he could guarantee his own and his backers their money back - its for this reason he stays, because he would rather look after his own cash than have someone else do it. And I do think a lot has to do with ego and pride. Anyone as arrogant as Rupert with have pride in abundance - I guess there is Nothing he would like more than to stick two fingers to the 'Lunatic Fringe' as we sore up the premier league - I honestly believe he thinks he can deliver this. But the biggest part of the problem is that the majority of fans don’t believe he can, don’t agree he has the right strategy etc and to date the results seem to justify the fans concerns - in addition, most have lost any small amount of trust they had as they perceive that the same mistakes are being made again.... My take previously was that in many cases these 'mistakes' were if not directly the result of, but certainly effected by the finance - both when in the prem and now. I have no doubt that Lowe would love to sign a 25 mil player and have morinho managing saints if money was no object he would spend - his ego would demand it, but in the real world his approach has been prudence, and I guess that its this that sits at odd with most fans views - after all we believe its because of this we are in this mess - simple really. What next? NO crystal ball I'm afraid, just hope, and have faith that JP can turn it around, that Saga will get goals again as last season, and we survive etc... Lowe unveils a major investor and we get promoted next season?.... well we can all dream cant we? ;-)