um pahars Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 Maybe the divided, constantly arguing fan base could potentially make a bidder walk away. If someone walked away, citing this site (or even The Echo blog) as their reason for doing so, then I have to question their conviction in the first place. Given the sh1t we have put up with in recent years then I would have hoped that any future owner could have had some empathy with us. On top of that, football always has been a hotbed of opinion, disagreement and passion, so ife they get cold feet over some posts on here then you have to wonder what they would be like when the sh1t really hits the fan. Of course I would never advocate nor condone personal attacks on individuals (particularly those going out of their way to try and help us), but let's not get too over dramatic here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Wayman Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 Endless speculation without a single fact to support it. What is the matter with you people. Do you have death wish or something. have you not heard of self fulfilling prophesies? My advice to all is leave it in the hands of the people who know bets how to resolve this thing. If Pinnacle are a bunch of chancers as many are suggesting on here now they will get booted into touch by Mr Fry and there is nothing we can do about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 but that depends on a willing purchaser. There are almost certainly more willing purchasers for 20 acres of land on the edge of the New Forest, 12acres in an area being developed for housing and 6 in Southampton City Centre, adjacent to the water than there are for a flat on its back Lg1 football club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer Engine Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 Maybe the divided, constantly arguing fan base could potentially make a bidder walk away. I'm not so sure. If you look at any footie forum people seem to argue about fresh air - it's just the nature of the beast. If I had the money to buy Saints, I would and I wouldn't even bother looking on this or any other forum - becasue my mind would have been made up by the numbers and potential numbers (combined with a sprinkling of the neccesary madness of course). And when (if!) it comes to the first home game of the season - we'll be roaring the lads (literally) on with one voice - and that is all that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amesbury Saint Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 There are almost certainly more willing purchasers for 20 acres of land on the edge of the New Forest, 12acres in an area being developed for housing and 6 in Southampton City Centre, adjacent to the water than there are for a flat on its back Lg1 football club. Having just spent 3 years working on a planning application, which was passed on Thursday night, for a residential development dont assume that change of use is a straightforward matter, especially regarding the site of the football ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 Endless speculation without a single fact to support it. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rover Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 I think most now accept the Swiss consortium are our last chance but there is a danger they will turn their backs on us next week. Why? Because Mark Fry is insisting they accept the deal agreed by the now discredited, never going to happen Pinnacle bid. Should the Swiss be held to the same agreement drawn up and agreed by someone who never had a snowball's chance in hell of delivering? I know time is short but Fry's unrealistic demands (trying to save his own bacon after being taken in by Pinnacle) could scupper our one last chance of survival. No one likes having a gun pointed at their head. Fair point Duncan but it's just Fry doing his hard man posturing to the media isn't it? Good for his image and all that - especially as it must have been severely dented by his apparent gullibility over the source of Pinnacle's funds. If the Swiss are the only deal in town and they offer more than he is likely to get in a fire sale of the assets, he has no choice but to accept what they offer. He might think he's all powerful but at the end of the day he's just a mere number cruncher who has to accept the best offer available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 Having just spent 3 years working on a planning application, which was passed on Thursday night, for a residential development dont assume that change of use is a straightforward matter, especially regarding the site of the football ground. I never said it was. House builder's land banks routinely buy agricultural land on the fringes of conurbations expecting to hold it for 20 years until planning control relaxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 I think most now accept the Swiss consortium are our last chance but there is a danger they will turn their backs on us next week. Why? Because Mark Fry is insisting they accept the deal agreed by the now discredited, never going to happen Pinnacle bid. Discredited by the sloppy journalism of the Echo and a few *****s on a fans messageboard. Until the facts are known they should not be discounted. Do any of us know that Fialka doesn't have a rich backer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 Discredited by the sloppy journalism of the Echo and a few *****s on a fans messageboard. Until the facts are known they should not be discounted. Do any of us know that Fialka doesn't have a rich backer? Jeez give up on it. Why would any seriously wealthy backer interested in buying the club go through a middle man who knows nothing about football / takeovers / law / accountancy who in turn is linked to another middleman who knows nothing about football / takeovers / law / accountancy. Would you seriously entrust your money and purchase to those two or would you recruit somebody qualified and experienced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amesbury Saint Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 I never said it was. House builder's land banks routinely buy agricultural land on the fringes of conurbations expecting to hold it for 20 years until planning control relaxes. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7988233.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8120255.stm An industry in great shape at the moment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7988233.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8120255.stm An industry in great shape at the moment! So you think the market for lossmaking Lg1 football clubs in admin is stronger than for green site land? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Man Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 Anyone read this from our old 'friend' St David. It makes some interesting points including the claim that Pinnacle have relied on Leon for all the funding to date. How reliable his info is, is another question of course... Well, feck me, I have never once posted on this forum, and I will probably lose saintlee as a good friend here, but I pinched his password this evening to sign in (so Lee change your password. As most of you are aware I am not one of the most respected posters on the forum, but tonight I have been extremly angered at some of the posts over the past few weeks. 1) I fully endorse John Misslebooks sentimentd 2) Tristan for once stop being a knob, Pinnacle have paid zero cash, all the money so far has come from Leon, this includes, 2 months wage payments and includes the payments to the teams for our friendly matches. This has come from Leon and NOT Pinnacle. 3) Mark Fry has clearly stated that the FL issue is simply accept the -10 points and we will give you the golden share. 4) Pinnacle lost there money consortium three weeks ago. 5) If you think the issue is -25 then you are all very much deluded. 6) The Swiss along with the Middle East consortium are finding it very hard to proceed for one reason only. Mark Fry have an agreement with the creditors based on Pinnacles proposals that have been agreed by the creditors. The Swiss and the Middle East consortiums can not agree to fulfill Pinnacles promise. Mark Fry has stated here is the contracts agree these terms (that Pinnacle have put forward). and we have a deal. How can anyone do a deal on a Pinnacle deal with a muppet as a front man? 7) Mark Fry has stated to potential bidders, you have to do a deal on Pinnacles terms, no exclusivity, and no time to do due diligence. Tristin and Mr (name censored, please contact admin), you truly think this clubs on a rollercoaster than think about the Swiss and Middle East bids who have a barrel of a gun pointing at there temples! Ok point put over, as I have said, sorry to Lee Marchant for nicking his password. David Extanxe http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=347419&postcount=66 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 So you think the market for lossmaking Lg1 football clubs in admin is stronger than for green site land? I just happen to think they're both rather depressed markets, and throw in a sale under firesale conditions and I don't think either will be realising much. The crunch point will be the figure Fry and the major creditors have put on the break up value and whether anyone can match it. I just think the break up value will be fairly low, but then worry that even this low figure will not be matched by someone willing to take us over as going concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 I just think the break up value will be fairly low, but then worry that even this low figure will not be matched by someone willing to take us over as going concern. I agree. Thats my concern too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amesbury Saint Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 So you think the market for lossmaking Lg1 football clubs in admin is stronger than for green site land? no but you stated "There are almost certainly more willing purchasers for 20 acres of land on the edge of the New Forest, 12acres in an area being developed for housing and 6 in Southampton City Centre, adjacent to the water than there are for a flat on its back Lg1 football club. " and "I never said it was. House builder's land banks routinely buy agricultural land on the fringes of conurbations expecting to hold it for 20 years until planning control relaxes. " My point is that the housing building industry is not in great shape now to be buying land to hold for 20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 £15m for a League Two club?? Which is where we'll realistically be in 12 months. Yeah, bargain... :S Bullsh*t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 I think most now accept the Swiss consortium are our last chance but there is a danger they will turn their backs on us next week. Why? Because Mark Fry is insisting they accept the deal agreed by the now discredited, never going to happen Pinnacle bid. Should the Swiss be held to the same agreement drawn up and agreed by someone who never had a snowball's chance in hell of delivering? I know time is short but Fry's unrealistic demands (trying to save his own bacon after being taken in by Pinnacle) could scupper our one last chance of survival. No one likes having a gun pointed at their head. don't think he is insisting that at all - all he is saying is that it will be straight deal -no exclusivity period, in fact think it is acknowledged that the deal will be quite a different structure. I would say Pinnacle are losing a PR battle with their reasons, mixed messages and delays etc - but they have not yet been discredited Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leslie Charteris Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 I would say Pinnacle... ...have not yet been discredited True, but they haven't admitted that they are potless and they haven't shown that they have any real money either. Which is it, Tony, Mikey or whoever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 They have shown "substantial wealth" to Fry - who counts more than to GM and the echo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leslie Charteris Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 Ah yes, timing is everything! As you have posted on another thread: http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/4462780.Fry_happy_Fialka_wealth_is_real/?ref=rss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 todays echo does say 3 identical contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 Ah yes, timing is everything! As you have posted on another thread: http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/4462780.Fry_happy_Fialka_wealth_is_real/?ref=rss true! reading the echo's full story now, Fry talks about the group as a whole having shown him considerable wealth - Fialka is just part of that. Wonder if the confusion is Fialka was the sole contact to TL but his wealth was supported by others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwaySaint1 Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 (edited) If the Swiss are going to do a deal then the cheque will have to be for under 10 million. The Swiss group have been in talks to buy another football club in Europe but talks seem to of failed during early last week. We are still not first on their shopping list but if the price is right then they have a cheque ready to hand over. The administrators are going to have to work fast if they want to close a deal and except what they offer before they go back to their first choice club. I am not even sure if the money is Swiss,I have been informed that the Swiss guy heading up the group is not mega rich,but the arab sheik that he spends most of his days working for doing bank restructure buyouts is worth a few bob. Sorry if it all sounds ********,just passing on what I have been told. If you go back through my posts you will see I was talking about the Swiss deal etc while everyone was still working on Pinnacle buying us. Edited 27 June, 2009 by AwaySaint1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 On the whole, how much are our assets worth and what will creditors accept thing... Genuine question... Could the offer be structured to the creditors in such a way that payments are deferred and possibly even absed on performance? Let's say, for sake of argument, that a firesale would net Aviva £2m. Then that's it, they close the file and write off the rest of the £24m debt. But supposing a deal could be structured with Aviva over a 25-year period. They get £1million now and then, say, £100,000 per annum for every year we spend in League One, £250,000 for every season we spend in CCC and £1m for every season we spend in the Premiership. Maybe I haven't got these figures right, maybe the creditors would never entertain such a deal, but it seems to me that a structured deal might offer LESS money than a fire sale, but still be MORE attractive to the creditors. QED. If a fire sale would produce £x for the creditors, a new bidder could offer less than this and still have their deal accepted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horley CTFC Saint Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 Fry is hardly going to stand in front of a camera and say " yes your right we have 7 days to get this club sold otherwise its game over so please someone offer me something / anything." The price will now start to drop IMO as Fry gets desparate to do a deal. if he doesnt manage to get a sale he will get no further business from barclays / aviva in a recession. I think it will go to the wire and he will accept a lower price. Sounds sensible - looks like the FL could be accused by the creditors of costing them money which would be interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Jason Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 I think most now accept the Swiss consortium are our last chance but there is a danger they will turn their backs on us next week. Why? Because Mark Fry is insisting they accept the deal agreed by the now discredited, never going to happen Pinnacle bid. Should the Swiss be held to the same agreement drawn up and agreed by someone who never had a snowball's chance in hell of delivering? I know time is short but Fry's unrealistic demands (trying to save his own bacon after being taken in by Pinnacle) could scupper our one last chance of survival. No one likes having a gun pointed at their head. So what will your stance be come Tuesday when the Legend which is Matthew Le Tissier takes office as Chairman? I read your posts and they are generally good, but I find this one incredibly judgemental and arrogant. Is it not at all possible that Pinnacle are telling the truth, they have the money, the chairman and manager in place, but they are not prepared to spend their OWN money until they are happy with the wording of the football leagues contract? Just a thought, I know I'd want to be sure before signing! Note. Mr. Fry was happy enough to take £500k from them after being convinced they had the funds, a lot of money of money from someone who (according to a lot of posters on here) that has very little! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
up and away Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 I think most now accept the Swiss consortium are our last chance but there is a danger they will turn their backs on us next week. Why? Because Mark Fry is insisting they accept the deal agreed by the now discredited, never going to happen Pinnacle bid. Should the Swiss be held to the same agreement drawn up and agreed by someone who never had a snowball's chance in hell of delivering? I know time is short but Fry's unrealistic demands (trying to save his own bacon after being taken in by Pinnacle) could scupper our one last chance of survival. No one likes having a gun pointed at their head. You have been correct all along regarding Pinnacle, but I am still hoping against any logic that they manage to complete, exactly as I was with Wilde. Even if pinnacle do come good, the very fact they were prepared to risk all only underlines your points. All the signs were there but I could see no point in being negative towards them until they allowed the exclusion period to pass with lame excuses. Having MLT and Crouch involved, coming on here, not really the recipe for a sound business start for someone with £M100's? The problem with Fry is that he can do nothing else within the time he has remaining. He has to place the ultimatum or liquidate, that is the nature of the beast and he would be culpable if he did anything else. Where he has been grossly culpable is the promotion of the position that the FL were incorrect in applying the 10 point deduction. What should have happened with either Fry or Tony Lynham is to have got the services of Krasner involved, as they did at Bournemouth. He seems to make a living out of such consultancies and the cost would not have been exorbitant for a couple of days work. We may be very lucky with the Swiss but it is a very big ask in such a short space of time. As daft as it sounds, our best chance may still lie with Pinnacle but that is just a reflection of our chances than anything else. Too many people got carried away with the situation and that is a major down side to being a fan involved with issues such as these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Nice Posted 27 June, 2009 Share Posted 27 June, 2009 What if the creditors have set a base figure which they will not go below as it was close to break up value? I am guessing Pinnacle claimed they would pay this figure. Jackson and Green appear to be in the installments stage which the creditors do not like. The claim was that Swiss missed out by hours. Then I see no reason, why they cannot walk in and take the whole thing. I presume the Swiss though are still eyeballing DD paperwork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now