lenwilkins

Yup - except not MLT's fault

I wouldn't be too surprised if they are also looking at an alternative club at the same time. After all Marcus Evans looked at us and Ipswich; SISU looked at us and Coventry. I can see this one going the same way. This would explain the investor's reticence to reveal his name. Pinnacle may not even know if he does have another club up his sleeve as they are only the vehicle to possibly acquire Saints.

Dictionary: blar·ney (blär'nē) pronunciation Home > Library > Literature & Language > Dictionary n. 1. Smooth, flattering talk. 2. Deceptive nonsense.

So just as Fry has to carry on talking to all possible buyers, is it not likely that Mr Big is also looking at an alternative club to buy (using another Pinnacle type set up elsewhere in the country). After all SISU looked at both us and Coventry, Marcus Evans looked at both us and Ipswich and of course Help Me Rhonda looked at both us and Blackburn simultaneously. It would explain why the points deduction is an important issue - perhaps the other club don't have the same potential handicap. It would also explain the buyers reluctance to reveal his name. It would rather give his game away if it was known he was lookiing at more than one club. All conjecture of course.

Except for his personal pride and professional reputation as a rough and tough loose tie administrator bully boy (allegedly).

But is Fry happy to stick with them? Isn't the above Administrator talk for "pull your finger out and stop fecking around. We all knew the FL were never going to give up on the points deduction anyway"? Revealing the identity of the backer would show that the group are acting in a transparent way and would help to endear them to the people they need to rush out and buy Season Tickets in the next few weeks.

I agree with you completely FF. If Pinnacle want our support, it's about time we knew who we were supporting. I can't see any reason for secrecy as regards the identity of the backer at this late stage. All it is doing is sowing seeds of doubt (in my mind anyway).

I got the impression that a deal was being done that Barclays and Aviva would find acceptable. 'Pinnacle' are buying the whole of SLH & the major creditors will get x pence in the £, so there should be no need for a fire sale although a number of expensive players deemed surplus to requirements will go.

So it looks as if Fry did use Wacko's bid to push the price up, unfortunately for Pinnacle and us supporters, as their will now be less to spend on the club itself. Wacko clearly wasn't in the know enough to see them coming with their £500K though. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/4412970.Rival_consortium_was__close__to_taking_over_Saints/

I don't know why you have to come across as the Riddler in Batman Phil. It does look to me as if Fry nearly blew it by holding out for a better deal than he was going to get. I should think not paying salaries while he was in control would have been a serious blot on his copybook. My guess is that after Thursday he was in panic mode & desperate to do a deal that got the £500K in asap. Whether he could have got a better deal if he'd settled earlier is anybody's guess. Only my opinion of course but it rather looks like Pinnacle called his bluff and won. I wonder what concessions they got out of him? That said it's still great that the club looks as if it has a future even though we need to know who the money man is before we become too ecstatic.

I certainly wouldn't want to accuse Jacko of being part of a conspiracy here but if there was only one bidder (say Salz) the price would have been lower, hopefully leaving more for the future club to invest. I also imagine the deal would have been done and dusted by now which means Fry would be back in his office in Southend and no longer getting fees from Saints.

If Jackson's "bid" is keeping the asking price artificially high and Salz's group can't or won't pay an inflated price surely they have no choice but to wait until the former falls apart.

Good post - I can wait (I think).

I would think that Fry has blinked as well. I agree with Phil that the info has probobly leaked from the Fry camp judging by this in the Echo: The alternative viewpoint would be of course that Fry almost f*cked up and frightened all the interested parties off by his daft demand of £500K up front. There has to be some hitch with Pinnacle's proof of funds otherwise they would be entering DD in the same way. It will be interesting to see if Morph's friend gets his act together now before he misses the bus. Morph?

LOL well let's hope it's a cat and mouse thing. As fans we need to recognise that Fry is essentially the enemy: The more of any available pot that he realises for the creditors is the less that is available to fund the future of the club.

The problem seems to be the £500K which Fry wants them to commit irrevocably before they are allowed to see the books. Is that your assessment doggface? I can't blame them. It seems a big ask. The Administrator risks nothing but the bidder risks throwing away half a million pounds. Even in these inflationary times that buys a lot of holidays. In fact on reflection, they would be dumb to go along with it. imho of course

My guess is that Barclays would have lost sympathy with Lowe because he didn't sell players in the transfer window as they had asked him too and subsequently started bouncing cheques even though the account was only a little over the agreed overdraft figure. Do you think this is the case Weston?

I can't see anyone being willing to risk £500K in the way that Fry wants. I also think the figure of £14 million seems extremely optimistic and as Weston says, in the unlikely event of anyone coughing this up, whilst it is good for the creditors it will be to the detriment of the club and future investment. I can't say that the likes of Pinnacle or Jackson and Green inspire me with any confidence. Do we know who J&G's backers are? Are you still mates with Wacko Phil?

I think the work you did 'outing' Wilde for what he was, was excellent GM (as you also did with cross-dressing Dan the Blackburn man as well.) However if Wilde thought Merlion was a busted flush, he was at least clever enough to milk it for all it was worth. He was of course a complete disaster for Saints along with his inspired choices of Dulieu and Hone. (I think Hoos was the only one of the three who did a good job.) IMHO if you wanted to do a destruction derby on any business, the combination of Wilde and Lowe together would be pretty unbeatable. Perhaps they should do an anti-apprentice show on TV together.

I should have added who sacked Nigel Pearson and brought in a couple of unproven Dutchmen in our time of crisis. It was Lowe that cost us our place in the Championship not Crouch. Success and bigger crowds had Pearson stayed would have saved us from Administration imho.

If Lowe only got us relegated from the Premiership, who was Chairman when we got relegated from the Championship? Re-writing history is a well recognised practise but some things really are black and white.

Hitler loved his dog and Churchill used to drink too much. Sure we're all human. The facts are that Lowe f*cked us up and at present Crouch's cash (paying the wages) is all that's saving the club from oblivion. In my opinion that's a balanced view. Thanks Leon - you're up there with the Saints greats.

So the players could effectively kill the club by not forgoing their wages for a month?

I know that Stalin got p1ssed off waiting too.

So it's another new thread just to reiterate something already posted over 2 hours ago. http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=300299&postcount=362