SaintBobby

Personally, I don't think government should have any financial investments in sport or art. We've seen governemnt expenditure balloon - in part because of a whole range of pet projects. To some extent, I agree with alpine in that the 20,000 (or whatever it is) Saints supporters should not expect their lifestyle preference/hobby to be subsidised by the taxpayer. BUT: If you start from accepting that local councils do have a budget for culture and community projects (I don't think they should - but reluctantly accept that they do), then it strikes me that bailing out the city's football team is, potentially, a reasonable use of funds. 1. There may well be some indirect economic benefits to the city of sustaining the football team (I come down from London for nearly every home game, buy food and drink in Southampton, sometimes stay over in a hotel etc etc) 2. There may be some more "esoteric" community value in having a major football club in the city. If investing in parks, art, architecture or whatever is deemed to be of benefit to the life of the city, then it's not obvious to me why the city's football club should be automatically excluded from council aid. 3. Investing in sports infrastructure is accepted at national level (look at the huge spending on Wembley, the Olympics etc). I don't condone this colossal expenditure, but - again - it doesn't strike me that people should get under the collar about a puny £20m to save Southampton Football Club unless they have gone utterly and totally ballistic about the billions being sp*nked up the wall on the 2012 games. 4. A reasonably sizeable chunk of the Southampton tax-paying electorate (of which i'm not one) might well conclude that they would prefer a slightly diminished city council arts collection and a more robust future for the club. This is just speculation - but even just 5,000 or 10,000 people wanting council cash on their pet project is a pretty big part of the Southampton electorate. Many cultural/community projects with massively less support/traction do get council funding. If I was a Southampton taxpayer, I'd certainly favour the council flogging off part of their art collection and bailing out St. Mary's with the proceeds as an okay second-best option (my "first best" option would be just to cut the bloody tax bill). All that said, I think it's unlikely to happen and the story is media-self-generated. The Echo's story does, however, help to focus attention on what people's priorities really are. I suspect saving Saints is quite high up that list for quite a large number of Echo readers.

This ("must win") is very unlikely. The harsh truth is that we are very likely to be relegated whether we win, lose or draw at Watford. If the league has docked us ten points before kick-off, the game becomes even more academic.

Well, I think a £2bn owner would be good news obviously.... I imagine we'll get a lot of these rumours in the next few days, probably lots of chaff and very little wheat.

What a load of nonsense. Like every other in the world, the number of tickets we could sell (and the price we could sell them at) is closely linked to our performance. Yesterday's attendance DOES matter - because it shows the level of support that can be built. No one's going to buy the club on the evidence of one crowd of 27,000, but it does indicate we may be able to pull in big crowds (with the right pricing policy) in League One. That matters.

Amazing commitment to have flown in for that - what a disappointing day, but I'm holding on the fact that we still have a sizeable and committed fan base. My won view is that we're now screwed - report here: http://www.southampton-mad.co.uk/news/loadnews.asp?cid=TMNW&id=441324

Am afraid my verdict is pretty damning too: http://www.southampton-mad.co.uk/news/loadnews.asp?cid=TMNW&id=441324

Fair play, but the article says they have deferred, not forfeited, their wages

and are they now all totally worthless? Save Southampton Football Club: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=76035014328&ref=mf

I set it up with 2,000 invites sent so far (3 hours ago)

I hear ya....more the merrier probably...all on the same page, I hope!

See how this group goes...hope to get some Soton politicians onside soon. Watch this space.

just seen this...joined....also have this: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=76035014328&ref=nf

...please join.... http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=76035014328#/group.php?gid=76035014328&ref=nf

I tried to get buy-in from fans many moons ago. I crunched some numbers. You'll find the post here; http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=187205&highlight=saint+bobby#post187205 Clearly, the amount needed is much less now! I'm afraid I don't trust the "established" groups - I think the Saints Trust and SISA et al have just been abysmal. I agree that we need to just kick-start something....

Not sure that's right - Leeds were hit by a 15 point deduction after having suffered a ten point deduction in the previous season. Having passed the deadline, the issue becomes whether the (possible) ten point penalty is meaningful. From what I can gather (and putting aside the fact that we might well not get a deduction anyway....assuming we do): 1. If it turns out that the penalty was "meaningful" (e.g. we stay up by six points on the pitch, but therefore get relegated by four points because of the penalty), then we have served our sentence and start next season in League One with a blank sheet. 2. If the penalty was not "meaningful" (e.g. we get relegated by 4 points anyway, but it's now 14), we may get a further ten point deduction next season. 3. If we were to suffer and ride out the penalty (e.g. we are safe by 11 points, but thanks to the penalty, we only survive by one point), we would also be considered to have suffered and served our sentence (THIS SCENARIO IS THE LEAST LIKELY). 4. We may be penalised if we are seen to have attempted to cheat the rules.

This is sort of true from what I can gather, hypo. But - without getting into the legal technicalities (which are beyond me), the issue is whether SFC is a "going concern". The debts are not "wiped", it's the job of the administrator to appease the creditors and dispose of assets. SFC is one of the assets.

Southampton till I die Southampton till I die I know I am I'm sure I am Southampton till I die (repeat)

Right...and you're the same bloke who said with "absolute confidence" that we would go into admin in the first week of February. And then said you were proven right! Please just go away. Nothing to see her, people....

Right...and you're the same bloke who said with "absolute confidence" that we would go into admin in the first week of February. And then said you were proven right! Please just go away. Nothing to see her, people....

We could ground share with Eastleigh, surely? (capacity c. 3,000)

AFC Southampton 100%. Absolutely no question. Completely hope it doesn't come to that - but I'd probably become an even more fanatical Saints fan if it did. Guess you only realize how precious something is when you lose it - or are on the verge of losing it...

It was emphatically not proven correct. You didn't put your money where your mouth was and didn't take me up on the bet I offered. Simply saying "X is going to happen" when X looks a measurable possibility - and being out by 2 months is not impressive. Your information was nonsense and your source unreliable. The fact that you were not willing to bet a single penny on it indicates that you didn't believe it either. If I predict that Mr. Y - a very eldery person - will die on 1st May 2008, I am not accurate if he finally drops dead in July. Pathetic self-justification from a fantasist IMHO.

Reinforces my basic case then...

I don't understand what the campaign is..... What specifically is being advocated?

Honestly couldn't comment on the legalities on fraud etc., but my central point of naggigng concern is that the stadium is actually worth far, far less than the mortgage on it (that's even more the case if the mortgage is at 8.5%) I'm sure there's SOME value in possible student housing or redevelopment - but nothing like £23m IMHO. Were we to default on the mortgage, strikes me that Aviva would have to flog SMS for a lot, lot, less than £23m.