Pompey Takeover Saga

[saintjay77]

There are bloody loads of them. POL ban them instantly (as Guided Missile found out when he "cunningly" posed as a Pompey fans and was spotted first post) but on TBA and others there are plenty. And they make me look like Bertrand Russell

 

 

 

The ST form is a lovely symbolic gesture but I wonder how many who gave you the form still attended games anyway paying on the day? The fact the gates went up doesn't show much other than a sense of relief he'd gone. Otherwise how do you explain that if it was only Lowe keeping your fans away you only got an average of 21K the season before this one when Lowe wasn't there?

 

 

 

The trust brought the article from the Rumafia.com website (along with other information) to the attention of the FL when CSI were doing due diligence. As you might remember a couple of Pompey fans unvovered the link months before it appeared on here. teh FL said they were aware of the stories but a lot of the rumours on te website had been proven to be completely bogus in Russia (the FL had apparently already checked it out). HTH

 

 

 

No doubt even if the whole world were starving and a cost effective way of mining moon cheese had been found all 6bn of the warth's population would boycott the foodstuff as Rupert Lowe once chose the cheeseboard as a dessert.

 

Your refusal to answer my hypothetical question says more about what you really think than words probably ever could.

 

Again, most of you seem to have completely ignored what I've actually written and seem to suggest this is a "which club is bigger" argument when all I pointed out was that after you laughed at us getting a crowd of 13,500 you got similar crowds a couple of seasons back. You've then blustered on justifying it as it was all protests and boycotts ad nauseum when all I'm pointing out is that if fans of any club are unhappy at the way their club is being run they'll vote on their feet and not attend matches. You've talked about lack of trust in your board etc but Pompey have had no stability for years yet somehow you seem to suggest this shouldn't affect attendences for us.

 

Let's just point out that your crowds were already falling after relegation from the PL and that resulted as you slipped down the table in more fans staying away. Just accept it

 

With yet another ignorant post I can hear everyones head thud on their desk.

 

Not comparing clubs or situations or anything in this. I just find it amazing that despite several people pointing out organised boycotts and protests you still refuse to accept an obvious reason for our numbers dropping. Several people have agreed with you in that numbers dropped cause of the poor product along with boycotts and protests and many more reasons yet you just completely ignore there ever was a boycott.

 

I get the idea that no matter what way it is explained you will never get it and will continue to argue your pointless drivel until the thread is closed before death by boredom happens.

 

We know there was a boycott at our club and have pointed you to the facts. We know your fans have not boycotted your club and are just fed up.

 

That in it's self shows up the press banging on about the best fans in the world which is where this argument stems from. But for the sake of a raise in suicide attempts can we move on from this as it looks like you don't want to accept facts any more than we want to accept you don't have webbed fingers and toes.

[dingbattigger]

And while you are all responding to his posts about Saints, no-one is discussing Pompey. Genius

[Saint in Paradise]

When I was much younger than I am today I was taught not to mock mentally ill people. Corp Ho is obviously

mentally ill so I wish everyone would just ignore him and stop mocking him. It's bad form chaps.

 

.

[bridge too far]

And while you are all responding to his posts about Saints, no-one is discussing Pompey. Genius

 

Just ignore him - don't rise to the bait.

 

That will annoy him far more than any attempt at rational argument.

[Weston Super Saint]

Is this a good time for the mods to put the corpse on 'global' ignore, that would be even funnier

[JackFrost]

Is this a good time for the mods to put the corpse on 'global' ignore, that would be even funnier

 

Seconded

[um pahars]

The ST form is a lovely symbolic gesture but I wonder how many who gave you the form still attended games anyway paying on the day? The fact the gates went up doesn't show much other than a sense of relief he'd gone. Otherwise how do you explain that if it was only Lowe keeping your fans away you only got an average of 21K the season before this one when Lowe wasn't there?

 

We used to have a role call during the game (done outside the ground, on the net etc) and we regularly had over 75% signing up. It was a comprehensive, tight and well organised boycott. At many games we had over 2,000 turning up to take part in protests instead of going to the game (with another couple of thousand sending their apologies from home - we used to check they weren't at the game).

 

Additionally, we had sent all the season tickets to the Club and those involved were informed they were no longer allowed to buy tickets individually as a redress by the Club.

 

21k would be a fair average for us in the Championship at that time (recently relegated, team being dismantled), I'll take that (still ****es on your current "crowds" LOL). I'll also take the short term rise to 24,000+ was a combination of relief and the boycotters returning.

Edited 24 August, 2011 by um pahars

[keithd]

When I was much younger than I am today I was taught not to mock mentally ill people.

 

.

 

when i was much younger than I am today my mum taught me about who to support.

 

then spoke about a gun my dad had! i was shocked.

[Wes Tender]

Just ignore him - don't rise to the bait.

 

That will annoy him far more than any attempt at rational argument.

 

I agree that the time has come not to respond to his trolling on this particular debate on whether we had a boycott or not. After all, only an idiot responds to hypothetical scenarios that are as ridiculous as those proposed by Corpse.

 

If he wishes to debate something else between our two clubs, then fair enough, but Um Pahars' response to his obvious lack of knowledge about the Lowe boycotts is game set and match as far as I'm concerned. Anything else from him will be just p*ss and wind.

[Weston Super Saint]

So, basically the corpse is trying to argue that even during our boycott, we had more fans prepared to go and support the team than the dirty cheating skates had during their last season playing premiership football.

 

Forgive me, but isn't he supposed to be putting up arguments FOR his team, and the 'greatest fans in the whole world', rather than against them?

 

The Pompey village must really miss their idiot when he's posting on here!

[SaintBobby]

It's pretty simple isn't it?

 

Crowds went down under Lowe because:

 

1. Saints were performing poorly and playing crap football AND

2. There were substantial organised protests and boycotts against Lowe

 

It seems to me impossible to quantify the exact number separately attritubatable to factor 1 as opposed to factor 2.

 

Nevertheless, on any remotely feasible like-for-like comparison, Saints are a far better supported club than Portsmouth.

 

It's impossible to ever get an exact comparison - as the two clubs aren't ever going to be at exactly the same position in the league, with exactly the same boardroom politics going on, playing exactly the same quality of football at exactly the same time.

 

However, we can clearly say that if things are even remotely equal then Southampton's levels of attendance are very dramatically and markedly higher than Portsmouth's.

 

Comparisons were hard when we were at the Dell - because even if we sold out every match and had 50,000 baying fans queueing round the block, our average attendance would only be 15,000.

 

Similarly if Fratton Park was selling out every game, comparisons would be difficult because you wouldn't know how many more fans Porstmouth could accommodate if they had a greater capacity. But as they are not tending to get remotely close to filling their ground, it is clear that Fratton's capacity is not diminishinmg their numbers.

 

They remain one of many clubs teetering on the brink of financial disaster and avoiding entering adminsitration again before the end of the season will require some very fancy footwork. In the long term, they are probably viable as a middling League One team with some forays into the Championship.

 

Saints long-term future is probably between bottom half of Premiership and top half of Championship.

[mack rill]

QUOTE=Weston Super Saint;1126451]Is this a good time for the mods to put the corpse on 'global' ignore, that would be even funnier

 

hmm funny that when corp stoped posting you stripes kept bleating on,(wheres corp whore) Now hes back you want him ignored. Just admit it you come on this fred just to see if hes around

[View From The Top]

I swear he's finally flipped or he really is as thick as I've always believed.

 

Perhaps he should ask his friend at the club, who he sees socially every two weeks or so, for some advice.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

QUOTE=Weston Super Saint;1126451]Is this a good time for the mods to put the corpse on 'global' ignore, that would be even funnier

 

hmm funny that when corp stoped posting you stripes kept bleating on,(wheres corp whore) Now hes back you want him ignored. Just admit it you come on this fred just to see if hes around

 

We come on here to bait him just to see what crepe he'll turn up with next. At least you, that Masonic chap and maybe one more give a reasoned debate.

[Frank's cousin]

and the funniest thing of all is that however unpopular Rupert was, and whatever ludicrous financial decisions he made, compared with the insolvent trading and blatant criminality that has gone on down the road he now looks like a financial genius and an honourable gentleman.

 

pompey have improved Rupert's PR image ten fold.

 

He drove us into a wall because he made mistakes.

They drove over the cliff because they were greedy and twisting the rules.

They then did it again.

And are still doing it now.

 

Or as Ho will point out, there is no difference between the two situations.

Yeah, whatever.

 

zzzzzzzzz........Ho continues to try and bore the thread into submission.

And what hurts most is he didn't quote me today, I can't have been offensive enough, this one will qualify for a response surely.....

 

This really for me highlights part of the frustration and thus the continued 'cheat' chants that many fans have with those pompey fans that still seem unable to accept their club bought success on credit that they never intended to repay... because there was never any clarity as to where thsoe funds used were really coming from.

 

For all Lowe's mistakes, they were just mistakes, but as soon as it was realised that without major cost cutting we woudl go under, He at least tried to do everything possible in insisting we played the kids etc... and yet despite never missing any stadium payments, never missing any HMRC payments or wages to staff and players, and with a slow but reasonable reduction in the overdraft, we went down, paid our punishment, but still nearly went under without a stroke of luck from Markus arriving. Pompey just kept spending.

 

But it does raise another interseting point: Our current accounts. NOt being an accountant, I am a little confused as to the way the accounts shows liabilities to our owner - becasue as I understand from turnover and operating cost figures we are breaking even or thereabouts, but have funds available for major infrastructure projects such as staplewood etc. Someone might be able to explain this better, but as I see it there were loans to teh club from ML for such projects, which is fair enough, but what we dont know is whether this is something that is expected to be repayed or whether its simply there as its better for tax reasons at this time.

 

Having said that, at least we know where the money has come from, who it is owed to and that it was provided to the club by the owner, an owner who has NEVER used credit or debt to fund expansion and growth in any of his businesses... and whose business dealing are reknowned for their integrity and ethical approaches.

 

I was always heavily criticised as a 'Lowe luvvie' durinmg those various times.... and despite pointing out that I was never supporting an individual, but believed we were doing some things right - eg living within our means and investinng when we could in infrastructure and academy etc... and also at the time I was happy to accept teh consequences of relegation from playing the kids, if it meant we would avoid administration or worse - yes this would look like a support of Lowe, but I said at the time and I stand by it now... IMHO these were the things he did right. Had we done a pompey, stayed at a decaying Dell, spent 40 mil a year plus on players and wages and maybe flirted with the top 6 he would have had more fans but we would ahve been brike very quickly... as it was had we not come up against an Arsenal side in a cup final, but a crappy smaller team, we may well have had a trophy we could have been proud of.... because it woudl have been won by a side that lived entirely within its means... and not many can say that.... that infrastructure investment was also a contributing factor as to why we were worth MLs investment... because it was all in place - no need to spend 100mil + on a 30k seater teh difficukties of finding land suitable for a training ground and academy set up... I am sutre there are many Leeds fans who like pompey fans say the debt and downfall was worth it for a taste of that success... but in both cases it will always be tarnished by the real cost - that of cheating creditors.

[Corporate Ho]

We used to have a role call during the game (done outside the ground, on the net etc) and we regularly had over 75% signing up. It was a comprehensive, tight and well organised boycott. At many games we had over 2,000 turning up to take part in protests instead of going to the game (with another couple of thousand sending their apologies from home - we used to check they weren't at the game).

 

Additionally, we had sent all the season tickets to the Club and those involved were informed they were no longer allowed to buy tickets individually as a redress by the Club.

 

21k would be a fair average for us in the Championship at that time (recently relegated, team being dismantled), I'll take that (still ****es on your current "crowds" LOL). I'll also take the short term rise to 24,000+ was a combination of relief and the boycotters returning.

 

Plenty of talk about me ignoring what people have written on here so think it's only fair to point out that you all seem to be saying it was OK for your crowd numbers to fall due to a chairman's unpopularity but when it happens to Pompey for over twenty or thirty years it's not acceptable for fan numbers to drop.

I'm not saying there wasn't a boycott, the "mythical" bit I mentioned was that the fact you were getting gates of 14K was you saying that was solely due to an organised, orchestrated boycott. That the 7K fans you'd lost from the previous season were all because of an orgainsed boycott and not because of people being fed up with crap product. I'd love to have been at the boycott for the roll call and not quite sure how the club actively policed not selling tickets on the day to any of the people who'd handed in ST forms but if you say it happened . . .

So that's 2500 people. Even if we assume that numer is robust (and I don't see how you could expect anyone to believe that all 2500 stayed away for every game) that still leaves 4500 who weren't part of the organised boycott.

Last question - I know the boycott was to get rid of Lowe - why did you want him removed?

 

 

So, basically the corpse is trying to argue that even during our boycott, we had more fans prepared to go and support the team than the dirty cheating skates had during their last season playing premiership football.

 

Forgive me, but isn't he supposed to be putting up arguments FOR his team, and the 'greatest fans in the whole world', rather than against them?

 

The Pompey village must really miss their idiot when he's posting on here!

 

I've said over the last couple of pages what I'm arguing but none of you dullards seems to be able to grasp the simple point of it.

 

You're complaining that crowds went down both because of a boycott but also because you had an owner/ chairman who wouldn't invest in the club and the standard of football and investment was poor. Pompey fans have had to endure that situation for over twenty years now but somehow you don't seem to think the same rules that applied to your crowds should apply to ours. That's not a difficult concept for you to grasp, surely?

 

You point out that we haven't a full squad yet, that we've lacked investment for two or three years, that we have a stadium that's less than state of the art yet still say we have a crap fanbase. If you were in the same situation do you genuinely expect me to believe that you'd be getting crowds any bigger than ours?

 

It's not an argument about who has better fans or who's the bigger club. It's a simple statement of the obvious

[sfcuk fan]

I dont care about you, I dont care about yoooo hoooo, Corporate Ho, I dont care about you !

 

DFCSB !

 

 

.

[JackFrost]

Plenty of talk about me ignoring what people have written on here so think it's only fair to point out that you all seem to be saying it was OK for your crowd numbers to fall due to a chairman's unpopularity but when it happens to Pompey for over twenty or thirty years it's not acceptable for fan numbers to drop.

I'm not saying there wasn't a boycott, the "mythical" bit I mentioned was that the fact you were getting gates of 14K was you saying that was solely due to an organised, orchestrated boycott. That the 7K fans you'd lost from the previous season were all because of an orgainsed boycott and not because of people being fed up with crap product. I'd love to have been at the boycott for the roll call and not quite sure how the club actively policed not selling tickets on the day to any of the people who'd handed in ST forms but if you say it happened . . .

So that's 2500 people. Even if we assume that numer is robust (and I don't see how you could expect anyone to believe that all 2500 stayed away for every game) that still leaves 4500 who weren't part of the organised boycott.

Last question - I know the boycott was to get rid of Lowe - why did you want him removed?

 

 

 

 

I've said over the last couple of pages what I'm arguing but none of you dullards seems to be able to grasp the simple point of it.

 

You're complaining that crowds went down both because of a boycott but also because you had an owner/ chairman who wouldn't invest in the club and the standard of football and investment was poor. Pompey fans have had to endure that situation for over twenty years now but somehow you don't seem to think the same rules that applied to your crowds should apply to ours. That's not a difficult concept for you to grasp, surely?

 

You point out that we haven't a full squad yet, that we've lacked investment for two or three years, that we have a stadium that's less than state of the art yet still say we have a crap fanbase. If you were in the same situation do you genuinely expect me to believe that you'd be getting crowds any bigger than ours?

 

It's not an argument about who has better fans or who's the bigger club. It's a simple statement of the obvious

 

Yep that's confirmed it.

 

He's now resorted to trying to pollute our eyesight with Times New Roman

[gaz]

When a club does well, its down to ''the club''.

When a club racks up massive debt, cheats the taxman and the public, then worms its way out, its down to ''the owners''.

 

Thats why the footballing world hates DFCSB and why this thread continues to be gold. Many more miles of comedy to come. Page 1000 isn't too far away.

 

Forget about attendances, boycotts and all that jazz. They just don't get it, and never will.

[um pahars]

[Even if we assume that numer is robust (and I don't see how you could expect anyone to believe that all 2500 stayed away for every game) that still leaves 4500 who weren't part of the organised boycott.

 

You've got your numbers the wrong way round. We were regularly getting about 75% of the season ticket boycotters on our role call outside the ground during matches, plus a further 1,500-2,000 who would have attended on a match by match basis staying outside as well.

 

We regularly gave in a list of 4,000 individuals to reception during half time throughout that season. Add in those who were boycotting but couldn't justify the travel costs (we used to get them to sign in remotely) and it was north of 5,000 who were actively boycotting. It was very impressive.

 

Last question - I know the boycott was to get rid of Lowe - why did you want him removed?

 

We din't like his penchant for Harris Tweed.

[sidthesquid]

Plenty of talk about me ignoring what people have written on here so think it's only fair to point out that you all seem to be saying it was OK for your crowd numbers to fall due to a chairman's unpopularity but when it happens to Pompey for over twenty or thirty years it's not acceptable for fan numbers to drop.[/size

First time Corpy has made me laugh out loud.

I think if someone boycotts the club for twenty or thirty years because of the various chairmen they are trying to say that they are not really fans at all. My wife has boycotted the Saints for at least thirty years - possibly she hated our chairmen , or perhaps she just doesn't like football.

[um pahars]

First time Corpy has made me laugh out loud.

I think if someone boycotts the club for twenty or thirty years because of the various chairmen they are trying to say that they are not really fans at all. My wife has boycotted the Saints for at least thirty years - possibly she hated our chairmen , or perhaps she just doesn't like football.

 

LMFAO.

 

Good spot.

 

Using that logic we could be MASSIVE if the millions who have been boycotting Saints over the last 30 years suddenly turned up.

[rallyboy]

give it up Ho, some of your arguments like some of the few, just don't wash.

We are bored trying to explain attendances and boycotts, the difference in the two clubs plight etc - the facts have been laid out, if you can't accept them just move on, let it go.

Please.

Accept the fact that we have bigger support, in the modern era of one club loyalty it has always been that way, probably always will be.

We may even be the bestest, but who cares, that is for the likes of Claridge to go on about.

 

Understand that the media are just being patronising and making out there is a little plucky underdog with undying support, even if the figures suggest otherwise - it fits their cartoon style - grab a simple theme and milk it to death.

 

They will now adopt Swansea, or perhaps Norwich who in particular do have really impressive support and would deserve such a tag.

Coming soon - the plucky little canary tweaking the tail of the mighty Chelsea - the media have forgotten pompey already, its over mate, other than court cases, the club is the day before yesterday's chip wrapper.

You still have your club, that should be a bonus, but you need to let go of the past.

 

Let's get this thread back to the funny stuff not the boring.

Court cases, tax evasion, pending prison terms, delayed CVAs, deranged managers, ridiculous signings of old fat men, and continued spending despite debts remaining unpaid.

I miss people like Avram, especially when he used to lose games really badly, spout rubbish, then give little Avram a run out at the club's expense.

How about when we discovered the pompey kitman was on more than our manager, or when the potless Sheik dressed as an ice cream vendor or when the administrator signed autographs! - let's get the comedy back.

Happy days.

[Dark Munster]

 

hmm funny that when corp stoped posting you stripes kept bleating on,(wheres corp whore) Now hes back you want him ignored. Just admit it you come on this fred just to see if hes around

 

There were one or two here who indeed did seem to miss Corpse during his self-imposed exile. They were very much in the minority. I think I may have remarked to those pining for his return: be careful what you wish for (or words to that effect).

 

There was even one poster who had the temerity to suggest that Corpse to pay the £5 a year to enable unlimited posting. I'm not sure if that was extreme masochism or a very sick sense of humour.

[eurosaint]

Plenty of talk about me ignoring what people have written on here so think it's only fair to point out that you all seem to be saying it was OK for your crowd numbers to fall due to a chairman's unpopularity but when it happens to Pompey for over twenty or thirty years it's not acceptable for fan numbers to drop.

I'm not saying there wasn't a boycott, the "mythical" bit I mentioned was that the fact you were getting gates of 14K was you saying that was solely due to an organised, orchestrated boycott. That the 7K fans you'd lost from the previous season were all because of an orgainsed boycott and not because of people being fed up with crap product. I'd love to have been at the boycott for the roll call and not quite sure how the club actively policed not selling tickets on the day to any of the people who'd handed in ST forms but if you say it happened . . .

So that's 2500 people. Even if we assume that numer is robust (and I don't see how you could expect anyone to believe that all 2500 stayed away for every game) that still leaves 4500 who weren't part of the organised boycott.

Last question - I know the boycott was to get rid of Lowe - why did you want him removed?

 

 

 

 

I've said over the last couple of pages what I'm arguing but none of you dullards seems to be able to grasp the simple point of it.

 

You're complaining that crowds went down both because of a boycott but also because you had an owner/ chairman who wouldn't invest in the club and the standard of football and investment was poor. Pompey fans have had to endure that situation for over twenty years now but somehow you don't seem to think the same rules that applied to your crowds should apply to ours. That's not a difficult concept for you to grasp, surely?

 

You point out that we haven't a full squad yet, that we've lacked investment for two or three years, that we have a stadium that's less than state of the art yet still say we have a crap fanbase. If you were in the same situation do you genuinely expect me to believe that you'd be getting crowds any bigger than ours?

 

It's not an argument about who has better fans or who's the bigger club. It's a simple statement of the obvious

 

Hasn't stopped you spending though, has it ?

This concept (generally known as 'cheating'!) is what you fail to grasp !!

[70's Mike]

Hasn't stopped you spending though, has it ?

This concept (generally known as 'cheating'!) is what you fail to grasp !!

 

 

In a nut shell

[Gemmel]

There were one or two here who indeed did seem to miss Corpse during his self-imposed exile.

 

Munster, there was no exile..... just a lack of confidence in posting. During the most amusing episodes in this thread (Court cases, administrators, charity dodging, missing owners etc etc) a few notible posters would enquire as to his where abouts and a quick search could see that he was logging in on a regular basis.

[Gemmel]

Anyway, We have been allowed to be distracted.

 

Do we have any news or updates on the court case. Did arry ever attend? I seem to remember that it has been postponed to September - Is that right?

 

I'm not sure the form of one win in four, will be enough to successfully overcome any points deductions.

[Corporate Ho]

First time Corpy has made me laugh out loud.

I think if someone boycotts the club for twenty or thirty years because of the various chairmen they are trying to say that they are not really fans at all. My wife has boycotted the Saints for at least thirty years - possibly she hated our chairmen , or perhaps she just doesn't like football.

 

Using that logic we could be MASSIVE if the millions who have been boycotting Saints over the last 30 years suddenly turned up.

 

Sorry if you're too dumb to understand the point I was making. I wasn't saying Pompey fans had been boycotting for the last 30 years (although given the criteria you lot judge a boycott by maybe they have). I was just pointing out that Pompey have had to put up with a series of owners who have done nothing for the club, failing to improve infrastructure and just lining their own pockets. It's resulted in many fans just drifting away after becoming disaffected with it and also failing to attract new, younger fans because of high ticket prices. Your crowds fell by nearly half in just two or three years when the same happened to you (for whatever reason and however you want to dress it up). You were lucky enough to attract Liebherr as a new owner. If you';d been bought by Pinnacle or SISU are you really telling me your crowds wouldn't have dwindled?

 

Hasn't stopped you spending though, has it ?

This concept (generally known as 'cheating'!) is what you fail to grasp !!

 

Err, yes, it has. Our last year in the PL was distinguished by us bringing in about 3 players for a total of around £2m (a massive outlay) and last year I'm not sure we spent anything at all. And before you bleat on about Lawrence and Kitson, they were PX deals, we didn't pay for them and although their wages were higher than the £10K a week wage cap that was initially proposed the fact that we went with a smaller squad meant that our total wage bill was still approved by the FL under the terms of the CVA. That seems to be a difficult concept for you lot to grasp but every deal and all wages we pay have to be approved by the FL. Again, any transfers we pay for now have to be approved by the FL. So how are we cheating?

 

Let's put this one to bed. Despite God knows how many times people have banged on to me about "we did the right thing, we played the kids" that's exactly why you were protesting/ boycotting/ staying away. Lowe was trying to balance the books and stop you drifting into administration and you didn't like it. You weren't "competitive" as one of your posters has said on here, you weren't buying better players. You wanted more "investment". Despite your high and mighty moral stance the simple truth of the matter is you didn't want your club to be run within it's means.

 

What a complete and utter ****ing bunch of hypocrites you are

[suewhistle]

He's back! Can't be bothered to read it though...

[saintjay77]

Sorry if you're too dumb to understand the point I was making. I wasn't saying Pompey fans had been boycotting for the last 30 years (although given the criteria you lot judge a boycott by maybe they have). I was just pointing out that Pompey have had to put up with a series of owners who have done nothing for the club, failing to improve infrastructure and just lining their own pockets. It's resulted in many fans just drifting away after becoming disaffected with it and also failing to attract new, younger fans because of high ticket prices. Your crowds fell by nearly half in just two or three years when the same happened to you (for whatever reason and however you want to dress it up). You were lucky enough to attract Liebherr as a new owner. If you';d been bought by Pinnacle or SISU are you really telling me your crowds wouldn't have dwindled?

 

 

 

Err, yes, it has. Our last year in the PL was distinguished by us bringing in about 3 players for a total of around £2m (a massive outlay) and last year I'm not sure we spent anything at all. And before you bleat on about Lawrence and Kitson, they were PX deals, we didn't pay for them and although their wages were higher than the £10K a week wage cap that was initially proposed the fact that we went with a smaller squad meant that our total wage bill was still approved by the FL under the terms of the CVA. That seems to be a difficult concept for you lot to grasp but every deal and all wages we pay have to be approved by the FL. Again, any transfers we pay for now have to be approved by the FL. So how are we cheating?

 

Let's put this one to bed. Despite God knows how many times people have banged on to me about "we did the right thing, we played the kids" that's exactly why you were protesting/ boycotting/ staying away. Lowe was trying to balance the books and stop you drifting into administration and you didn't like it. You weren't "competitive" as one of your posters has said on here, you weren't buying better players. You wanted more "investment". Despite your high and mighty moral stance the simple truth of the matter is you didn't want your club to be run within it's means.

 

What a complete and utter ****ing bunch of hypocrites you are

 

[JackFrost]

Sorry if you're too dumb to understand the point I was making. I wasn't saying Pompey fans had been boycotting for the last 30 years (although given the criteria you lot judge a boycott by maybe they have). I was just pointing out that Pompey have had to put up with a series of owners who have done nothing for the club, failing to improve infrastructure and just lining their own pockets. It's resulted in many fans just drifting away after becoming disaffected with it and also failing to attract new, younger fans because of high ticket prices. Your crowds fell by nearly half in just two or three years when the same happened to you (for whatever reason and however you want to dress it up). You were lucky enough to attract Liebherr as a new owner. If you';d been bought by Pinnacle or SISU are you really telling me your crowds wouldn't have dwindled?

 

 

 

Err, yes, it has. Our last year in the PL was distinguished by us bringing in about 3 players for a total of around £2m (a massive outlay) and last year I'm not sure we spent anything at all. And before you bleat on about Lawrence and Kitson, they were PX deals, we didn't pay for them and although their wages were higher than the £10K a week wage cap that was initially proposed the fact that we went with a smaller squad meant that our total wage bill was still approved by the FL under the terms of the CVA. That seems to be a difficult concept for you lot to grasp but every deal and all wages we pay have to be approved by the FL. Again, any transfers we pay for now have to be approved by the FL. So how are we cheating?

 

Let's put this one to bed. Despite God knows how many times people have banged on to me about "we did the right thing, we played the kids" that's exactly why you were protesting/ boycotting/ staying away. Lowe was trying to balance the books and stop you drifting into administration and you didn't like it. You weren't "competitive" as one of your posters has said on here, you weren't buying better players. You wanted more "investment". Despite your high and mighty moral stance the simple truth of the matter is you didn't want your club to be run within it's means.

 

What a complete and utter ****ing bunch of hypocrites you are

 

[CB Saint]

Sorry if you're too dumb to understand the point I was making. I wasn't saying Pompey fans had been boycotting for the last 30 years (although given the criteria you lot judge a boycott by maybe they have). I was just pointing out that Pompey have had to put up with a series of owners who have done nothing for the club, failing to improve infrastructure and just lining their own pockets. It's resulted in many fans just drifting away after becoming disaffected with it and also failing to attract new, younger fans because of high ticket prices. Your crowds fell by nearly half in just two or three years when the same happened to you (for whatever reason and however you want to dress it up). You were lucky enough to attract Liebherr as a new owner. If you';d been bought by Pinnacle or SISU are you really telling me your crowds wouldn't have dwindled?

 

 

 

Err, yes, it has. Our last year in the PL was distinguished by us bringing in about 3 players for a total of around £2m (a massive outlay) and last year I'm not sure we spent anything at all. And before you bleat on about Lawrence and Kitson, they were PX deals, we didn't pay for them and although their wages were higher than the £10K a week wage cap that was initially proposed the fact that we went with a smaller squad meant that our total wage bill was still approved by the FL under the terms of the CVA. That seems to be a difficult concept for you lot to grasp but every deal and all wages we pay have to be approved by the FL. Again, any transfers we pay for now have to be approved by the FL. So how are we cheating?

 

Let's put this one to bed. Despite God knows how many times people have banged on to me about "we did the right thing, we played the kids" that's exactly why you were protesting/ boycotting/ staying away. Lowe was trying to balance the books and stop you drifting into administration and you didn't like it. You weren't "competitive" as one of your posters has said on here, you weren't buying better players. You wanted more "investment". Despite your high and mighty moral stance the simple truth of the matter is you didn't want your club to be run within it's means.

 

What a complete and utter ****ing bunch of hypocrites you are

 

[holepuncture]

What a complete and utter ****ing bunch of dirty skate bastards we are

 

 

Get in there!

 

 

Nice bit of fresh this, less teeth = less worry about chaffing... mark my words my fellow blu phew

 

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8FYqrWyIp20/TiFNczRUlXI/AAAAAAAAAw8/TeSPdEpFzbw/s1600/BigSkate_ROW1638011410_20110716.jpg

 

Sometimes, i do four at a time

 

 

This is work I learnt whilst on gardening leave

 

 

Flat fish make me feel big and strong

 

[Chez]

 

 

Err, yes, it has. Our last year in the PL was distinguished by us bringing in about 3 players for a total of around £2m (a massive outlay) and last year I'm not sure we spent anything at all. And before you bleat on about Lawrence and Kitson, they were PX deals,

really, there's me thinking you spent £1.8m on Tommy Smith, £4m on Boatang, and £3m on Mike Williamson, as well as loan fees (on top of wages) for Dinande Awusa-Abeiye, Vanden Borre, Jamie O'Hara and Hassan Yebda, not to mention the probable signing on fees for the likes of Ben Heim, Steve Finnan and Michael Brown. The fact you gave Ben Heim £38k a week suggests you weren't exactly looking to reign in the spending.

 

As for the part exchange deals, they still would have a value. If you had not taken them off Stoke's hands when you sold Begavic you would have had £3m in the coffers but instead you chose to effectively spend £3m on them.

[JackFrost]

really, there's me thinking you spent £1.8m on Tommy Smith, £4m on Boatang, and £3m on Mike Williamson, as well as loan fees (on top of wages) for Dinande Awusa-Abeiye, Vanden Borre, Jamie O'Hara and Hassan Yebda, not to mention the probable signing on fees for the likes of Ben Heim, Steve Finnan and Michael Brown. The fact you gave Ben Heim £38k a week suggests you weren't exactly looking to reign in the spending.

 

As for the part exchange deals, they still would have a value. If you had not taken them off Stoke's hands when you sold Begavic you would have had £3m in the coffers but instead you chose to effectively spend £3m on them.

 

(Cue the "Pompey didn't buy them, the owners did" response)

[holepuncture]

 

Clotters lineup for saturday...

[rallyboy]

nice lineup!

Just enough room left on the pitch for a photocall of club officials mugging a charity worker.

 

And what of the down to the bare bones plucky bestest bench?.....

[Corporate Ho]

really, there's me thinking you spent £1.8m on Tommy Smith, £4m on Boatang, and £3m on Mike Williamson, as well as loan fees (on top of wages) for Dinande Awusa-Abeiye, Vanden Borre, Jamie O'Hara and Hassan Yebda, not to mention the probable signing on fees for the likes of Ben Heim, Steve Finnan and Michael Brown. The fact you gave Ben Heim £38k a week suggests you weren't exactly looking to reign in the spending.

 

As for the part exchange deals, they still would have a value. If you had not taken them off Stoke's hands when you sold Begavic you would have had £3m in the coffers but instead you chose to effectively spend £3m on them.

 

Agreed, I forgot about Boateng for £4m and looking at your post in isolation it looks like you’re making a good point. But that means we spent a total £8m (Williamson was £2m not £3m) plus the loans and freebies we signed. That sounds like a lot – until you look at the players we sold and released.

Glen Johnson £18M, Distin £5m, Kaboul £5m, Crouch £9m, Kranjcar £2.5m and Begovic for £3.5m (Kitson and Lawrence came in last season, not the one you’re talking about here in exchange for Marc Wilson, not Begovic). So, that’s £43m we pulled in from transfers and spent 18% of it. Plus, if you think we brought in too many players based on the ones we sold, let’s not forget we also lost or released Sol Campbell, Sean Davis, Pamarot, Lauren and quite a few other squad players. Doesn’t sound like we were exactly going for broke to me.

Anyway, now we've disproved another accusation, what about the boycott. Are we all agreed now that it was all about Lowe trying to run you within budget and that you weren't happy about it? I can't see any other explanation.

[Weston Super Saint]

 

Clotters lineup for saturday...

 

I notice you / clotts haven't named any subs, so I can only assume that that there is the legit team. Excellent work

[holepuncture]

Insolvent XI

 

''the most crooked bunch of football club executives in the history of the beautiful game...''

 

 

Manager: Harry Redknapp

Assistant: Avram Grant

Head Coach: Tony Adam

 

Subs:

Levi Kusnir

Terry Venables

Paul Hart

Deepak Chanrai

Corporate Ho

Stevie Clotteril

David Lampitt

[saintjay77]

Agreed, I forgot about Boateng for £4m and looking at your post in isolation it looks like you’re making a good point. But that means we spent a total £8m (Williamson was £2m not £3m) plus the loans and freebies we signed. That sounds like a lot – until you look at the players we sold and released.

Glen Johnson £18M, Distin £5m, Kaboul £5m, Crouch £9m, Kranjcar £2.5m and Begovic for £3.5m (Kitson and Lawrence came in last season, not the one you’re talking about here in exchange for Marc Wilson, not Begovic). So, that’s £43m we pulled in from transfers and spent 18% of it. Plus, if you think we brought in too many players based on the ones we sold, let’s not forget we also lost or released Sol Campbell, Sean Davis, Pamarot, Lauren and quite a few other squad players. Doesn’t sound like we were exactly going for broke to me.

Anyway, now we've disproved another accusation, what about the boycott. Are we all agreed now that it was all about Lowe trying to run you within budget and that you weren't happy about it? I can't see any other explanation.

 

The fans wanted Lowe out because he had continually run the club downwards and failed to bring in investment during the whole time he was there. It was believed by the fans that the longer he stayed the worse it would get until we had no club left to support. he had a slight reprieve when we had our cup final run but even then there were mutterings amongst the fans because the smug tw*t was still at the club. Even then he couldnt attract a buyer or investor. Years of taking a wage and dividends meant the fans had enough and were boycotting to get rid of him.

 

As it turned out he wasnt the only person that should be getting the fans abuse as the board was filled with chancers and the boycotts eventually laid the path to the administration and in turn Markus. When the fans were happy to push the club to Admin the choices were hope someone buy's us or we fold. The boycott was serious, it was aimed eventually at the board and those running the club into the ground with a figure head of Lowe and it was at risk of some very serious conciquences.

 

In hindsight we actually had something to thank Lowe for! Him trying to run the club within its means made us more attractive to proper business men in the long run as we could be bought with less baggage. That is not so easy to see at the time though with so many numpty's at the top trying to take control and run it "their way" until the seems ripped apart and there was nothing left.

[Depressed of Shirley]

Agreed, I forgot about Boateng for £4m and looking at your post in isolation it looks like you’re making a good point. But that means we spent a total £8m (Williamson was £2m not £3m) plus the loans and freebies we signed. That sounds like a lot – until you look at the players we sold and released.

Glen Johnson £18M, Distin £5m, Kaboul £5m, Crouch £9m, Kranjcar £2.5m and Begovic for £3.5m (Kitson and Lawrence came in last season, not the one you’re talking about here in exchange for Marc Wilson, not Begovic). So, that’s £43m we pulled in from transfers and spent 18% of it. Plus, if you think we brought in too many players based on the ones we sold, let’s not forget we also lost or released Sol Campbell, Sean Davis, Pamarot, Lauren and quite a few other squad players. Doesn’t sound like we were exactly going for broke to me.

Anyway, now we've disproved another accusation, what about the boycott. Are we all agreed now that it was all about Lowe trying to run you within budget and that you weren't happy about it? I can't see any other explanation.

 

Look I know you're trolling but, here it is in English.

 

If Lowe had said we need to balance the books, so we will reduce the squad, but try and stay in the league, I think people would have accepted it. He didn't, because he had a hair brained scheme to bring in two Dutch coaches with no experience, and a belief that the players in the Academy were better than any established pro's we had. Therefore, he got rid of the experienced players, and replaced them with the youth team, not just because they were cheaper, but because he believed himself that it would work. No English manager would have put up with it, so he went to Holland and pulled up some bloke who would agree with him.

 

People boycotted because if we hadn't gone into Admin, Lowe would have continued in this mad plan. He thought he knew more about football coaching than anyone else in the club, and probably in the league. Even if he had attracted new investment, people would still of wanted him out, because the natural progression was to have Rupert Lowe as first team manager, fitness coach etc.

 

You may have had some chancers and crooks in charge, but you haven't had a maniac like Lowe in charge of your first team.

[Danish Saint]

Agreed, I forgot about Boateng for £4m and looking at your post in isolation it looks like you’re making a good point. But that means we spent a total £8m (Williamson was £2m not £3m) plus the loans and freebies we signed. That sounds like a lot – until you look at the players we sold and released.

Glen Johnson £18M, Distin £5m, Kaboul £5m, Crouch £9m, Kranjcar £2.5m and Begovic for £3.5m (Kitson and Lawrence came in last season, not the one you’re talking about here in exchange for Marc Wilson, not Begovic). So, that’s £43m we pulled in from transfers and spent 18% of it. Plus, if you think we brought in too many players based on the ones we sold, let’s not forget we also lost or released Sol Campbell, Sean Davis, Pamarot, Lauren and quite a few other squad players. Doesn’t sound like we were exactly going for broke to me.

 

Why was it, you had to sell these players?! Oh yeah! The banks wanted their money back!! You couldn't afford them in the first place!

[Frank's cousin]

You were lucky enough to attract Liebherr as a new owner. If you’d been bought by Pinnacle or SISU are you really telling me your crowds wouldn't have dwindled?

 

That is indeed a reasonable point - short answer... we don’t know... like anything customer based and I apart from the hard core that includes football, crowds can fall rapidly when things go wrong... but take a lot longer to build even when things go right again... I suspect that even if pinnacle were able to stabilize... the feel good factor would not have been as impressive as there were many who were concerned about their bid despite MLT as a figurehead (perhaps more so because of it as it smacked of more 'fan friendly' propaganda than letting the real value of the bid come through.

 

 

Err, yes, it has. Our last year in the PL was distinguished by us bringing in about 3 players for a total of around £2m (a massive outlay) and last year I'm not sure we spent anything at all. And before you bleat on about Lawrence and Kitson, they were PX deals, we didn't pay for them and although their wages were higher than the £10K a week wage cap that was initially proposed the fact that we went with a smaller squad meant that our total wage bill was still approved by the FL under the terms of the CVA. That seems to be a difficult concept for you lot to grasp but every deal and all wages we pay have to be approved by the FL. Again, any transfers we pay for now have to be approved by the FL. So how are we cheating?

 

Because although as you say you last PL campaign saw restrictions - these were only imposed because you were already looking at Administration - they key to this is that you did not STOP spending two years previously when you were already 30mil+ in debt... as was reported at the time - this was not debt as in mortgage or infrastructure investment that was planned and budgeted through official and regulated channels, but a complex and confusing mix of overspend/loans and other strange goings on... all to satisfy 'arry's hunt for glory by proving how effective he could be as a manger if able to buy who he wanted - and you lapped it up.... and so now it’s the FAs fault for letting you get away with it.... when was the last time the FA had any balls to do anything about the business end of Prem League clubs who look after their own? Are you saying that as long as the FA did not challenge something it must make it right? Jeez and you think some on here are naive...

 

Let's put this one to bed. Despite God knows how many times people have banged on to me about "we did the right thing, we played the kids" that's exactly why you were protesting/ boycotting/ staying away. Lowe was trying to balance the books and stop you drifting into administration and you didn't like it. You weren't "competitive" as one of your posters has said on here, you weren't buying better players. You wanted more "investment". Despite your high and mighty moral stance the simple truth of the matter is you didn't want your club to be run within its means.

 

Yes that is TRUE but only to a point - the fan base was split on this. Most hated Lowe and wanted him out, but even amongst those who wanted him out regardless, there were plenty who at least acknowledged that 'living within ones means' was a better approach - but there were also plenty of us who defended the clubs position when not spending stupidly in the prem and were glad we operated as we did... it’s what caused such a schism in the fan base - our old forum at the time was littered with quite vicious threads as the fans when on and on about this - I know because I took part in it.

 

Yes, I will concede that we had many fans who on seeing how much other were spending in the prem and also when we became so uncompetitive playing the kids were even more ****ed off with Lowe, but also many you hated him but understood why he was doing it (even if from his perspective it was perhaps driven by maintaining some share value). The thing is this as well... all clubs have many fans who just want to go and watch their side and don’t get involved in all the political crap, but that’s why a club needs ethical and appropriate leadership to ensure its financial decisions is not driven by fan passion. I go back to the point that has been made 1000s of times on here - There has been no real evidence of any kind of shame felt about this - indeed the club has ensured its played to the media in need of sympathy rather than punishment as the majority of fans happy to accept this patronizing 'pluck pompey' crap.

 

I know several very passionate and lifelong pompey fans who stopped going and gave up their STs, because they were not prepared to support the club whilst run in that way and they also take minimal pride in the FA Cup success - it’s sad to see as for them I feel sorry that they have lost their love and passion in this way, but given that the vast majority won’t even acknowledge that anything that was done was wrong, let alone feel that the success is tarnished in anyway... my sympathy stops there.

 

 

What a complete and utter ****ing bunch of hypocrites you are

 

Yes there has been some hypocrisy applied... after all as you say there were many who were unhappy precisely because Lowe did not invest loads and keep us competitive... but even though I clashed horns with many of those who said exactly that, I used to always ask them a simple question : where would the money come from for such investment and you what was interesting about the answers? Not once did anyone advocate borrowing heavily from either banks or credit notes to individuals - They were looking for new shares to be issued, personal investment from shareholders and more importantly trying to get Lowe to stop spending money we did have on non 1st team issues such as radio stations and insurance services - maybe naive in some expectations, but never did I see our fans advocating we just spend what we don’t have - they wanted LOWE to SEEK investment, not get the club into debt . You may have fans who felt exactly the same, but were they protesting when the cup was paraded through the streets?

[/ QUOTE]

 

.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

Why was it, you had to sell these players?! Oh yeah! The banks wanted their money back!! You couldn't afford them in the first place!

 

So that's what this thread is all about!

[eurosaint]

Agreed, I forgot about Boateng for £4m and looking at your post in isolation it looks like you’re making a good point. But that means we spent a total £8m (Williamson was £2m not £3m) plus the loans and freebies we signed. That sounds like a lot – until you look at the players we sold and released.

Glen Johnson £18M, Distin £5m, Kaboul £5m, Crouch £9m, Kranjcar £2.5m and Begovic for £3.5m (Kitson and Lawrence came in last season, not the one you’re talking about here in exchange for Marc Wilson, not Begovic). So, that’s £43m we pulled in from transfers and spent 18% of it. Plus, if you think we brought in too many players based on the ones we sold, let’s not forget we also lost or released Sol Campbell, Sean Davis, Pamarot, Lauren and quite a few other squad players. Doesn’t sound like we were exactly going for broke to me.

Anyway, now we've disproved another accusation, what about the boycott. Are we all agreed now that it was all about Lowe trying to run you within budget and that you weren't happy about it? I can't see any other explanation.

 

FFS, you crease me up Ho Ho Ho, you really do !

So you sold £43 mil worth of players that you couldn't afford in the first place and then spent a further £8 mil that you still couldn't afford and then went under with unpaid debts of over £100 mil !

As I pointed out to you earlier, you do not understand the concept of cheating !

Ps. I am prepared to accept your apology for disputing the fact that you had stopped spending now that it has been proven otherwise !

[View From The Top]

Poor Ho, so thick.

 

He fails to understand that the boycott was because we believed Lowe was destroying the club and the only way to be rid of him was to push the club to the brink financially. Finance never entered it, just his bizarre vision that started with Woodford and ended with the Dutch experiment.

 

I refused to attend a home game when he returned and like 1000s of others was back at SMS when he was hoofed out. I went to nearly every away game as I still supported SFC and the nippers deserved all the support we could give.

[Danish Saint]

So that's what this thread is all about!

 

Crazy, innit!

[eastleighhalo]

FFS, you crease me up Ho Ho Ho, you really do !

So you sold £43 mil worth of players that you couldn't afford in the first place and then spent a further £8 mil that you still couldn't afford and then went under with unpaid debts of over £100 mil !

As I pointed out to you earlier, you do not understand the concept of cheating !

Ps. I am prepared to accept your apology for disputing the fact that you had stopped spending now that it has been proven otherwise !

 

A wasted post euro..the feckin thick skate knut still wont get it