So, why DID Mark Fry prefer Pinnacle over Liebherr?

[trousers]

There isn't really anything interesting going on is there. Hense this crap all being rehashed again and again.

 

I started one this week when i heard some news... This is OLD news...

 

I respectfully disagree. Yes, the epicentre and initial eruption is "old news" but the aftershocks and ash storm blown up in the air by the erupting volcano is still affecting us today and into the future.

 

It was, afterall, cortese's somewhat agitated response on Monday this week that resurrected the 'what really happened?' question again. If coretese still has nagging concerns that he's prepared to air in public then that's 'current news' in my book

[Wes Tender]

Or NC/ML pulled the club out of the flames despite the administrator?

 

I agree. The impression that I got was that Fry had pretty well run out of options and that had NC (Nicola Cortese, not Nineteen Canteen)/ML not stuck around, Fry would have been hard pressed to complete the deal. NC/ML saved his bacon as far as I'm concerned, although we did hear rumours of some overseas financial consortium sniffing around. Thank God that ML remained interested.

[up and away]

Originally Posted by up and away

Why do you have to keep repeating such ******. There was no failure to secure Stoneham. It was not financially viable without modifications which were unacceptable to the council. So you keep trying to advocate we should have gone ahead with it, even though we could not afford it?

As long as there are posters trying to rewrite history as you have attempted, I will repeat my response.

 

It was eminently viable financially, with all sorts of add-ons to help make it so, but just not with the two things that Rupert wanted, which were the only two things that the EBC couldn't realistically allow.

 

When Stoneham collapsed, we went ahead with a new stadium with no external additional revenue streams, so yes, I am entirely happy to advocate that we should have proceeded with Stoneham with a 4* Star hotel, a sports and leisure complex, training grounds, fast food outlets, a night club, bowling alley, ice skating rink, sports shop, any or all of those things included.

 

You can quote whatever add-ons you like, but unless they are going to impact the bottom line a sufficient amount, it’s meaningless. The add-ons that would have made that difference were not acceptable to Eastliegh, simples.

We declined Stoneham because we could not make it financially viable, we had no where to go and St Mary’s was not even in the offing then. We could easily have gone back to Stoneham and agreed Eastliegh’s terms, but we did not.

Do you think we just did not like the location or what? It was a deliberate act in not accepting Stoneham with those conditions because it was not financially viable. The add-ons we required to make it financially viable were not acceptable to Eastliegh and we then could not afford to proceed without them. There is no great conspiracy theory here, just cost.

[dubai_phil]

There is a lot to "cast blame" around wih the whole process of our admin, and there are some comments in TL's post that really did cause me to "raise my eyebrows", but there was something that happened during the admin process which leads to one REALLY important point that we should consider while making our arguments.

 

In the early stages, Fry "magically" produced a "confidential" bid from IRELAND. That came out of the blue for fans and other bidders alike. Just think back, what happened? Day One Irish zillionaires will "do the deal tomorrow". Next day - zilch, nada nothing.....

 

At NO time did anybody know that there was any "firm" interest from any parties other than MJ or Pinnacle.

 

Now I think Pinnalce have a huge amount to answer for, but to accuse them of KNOWINGLY obstructing ML's bid is wide of the mark. Sure they should never have got to exclusivity, and there are many MANY questions about how that happened which should be answered, but as far as we the fans, and hence the people bidding, there was no other BID.

 

Fry's "strong negotiating stance" and the Irish issue meant that anything he "implied" about "people waiting in the wings" was taken as being simply a "ruse" to get a better outcome from the deal for the creditors. The moment he felt that a bid had kept back some funds for the business of running the club, it was his JOB to "screw, squeeze, bash and bully" every last penny of that money out of the bidders for the creditors.

 

Which is a very careful way of saying "IMHO" the two parties at the table in the days before Pinnacle gained exclusivity probably had good cause not to believe anything Fry was telling them.

 

So Pinnacle should NEVER have got to exclusivity, it was THAT decision and act that ruined our pre-season, and the consequence was that we VERY nearly lost ML, but they would not have KNOWN that he was out there, nobody did until about 24 hours before the deal was done

[Wes Tender]

You can quote whatever add-ons you like, but unless they are going to impact the bottom line a sufficient amount, it’s meaningless. The add-ons that would have made that difference were not acceptable to Eastliegh, simples.

We declined Stoneham because we could not make it financially viable, we had no where to go and St Mary’s was not even in the offing then. We could easily have gone back to Stoneham and agreed Eastliegh’s terms, but we did not.

Do you think we just did not like the location or what? It was a deliberate act in not accepting Stoneham with those conditions because it was not financially viable. The add-ons we required to make it financially viable were not acceptable to Eastliegh and we then could not afford to proceed without them. There is no great conspiracy theory here, just cost.

 

With respect, I took the trouble with certain others to actually go to see the guy responsible for all this on Eastleigh Borough Council. I therefore can say with certainty what they would have found acceptable and what not. The list of acceptable things is as I have stated it and the two things that were not acceptable were the massive out of town shopping one mile away from the town centre and the multiplex cinema complex, as that was already earmarked for the Swan Centre.

 

Why would we not have liked the position? It was perfectly placed with motorway, rail and air links adjacent to it. As you say, as it stood at the time anyway, it was the only option until SCC bailed Lowe out with land that was originally designated for social housing at St Mary's.

 

As I say, we eventually proceeded with the stadium at St Mary's without any external revenue producers, so to have proceeded with Stoneham with those items I listed would of course have been preferable. Lowe was too bloody-minded to have gone back to EBC and change his mind, or otherwise he had already upset too many on the Council anyway.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

There isn't really anything interesting going on is there. Hense this crap all being rehashed again and again.

 

I started one this week when i heard some news... This is OLD news...

 

How can it be old news when only this week we heard NC's opinion on the whole affair - hence Trousers starting up this thread. No one is asking you to read it.

The fact that Lynam is till posting on here makes it relevant too.

[Window Cleaner]

The fact that Lynam is till posting on here makes it relevant too.

 

 

He paid his fiver like everybody else, probably just getting his money's worth whipping up support for his golf day...whatever golf may be;);)

[Fitzhugh Fella]

With respect, I took the trouble with certain others to actually go to see the guy responsible for all this on Eastleigh Borough Council. I therefore can say with certainty what they would have found acceptable and what not. The list of acceptable things is as I have stated it and the two things that were not acceptable were the massive out of town shopping one mile away from the town centre and the multiplex cinema complex, as that was already earmarked for the Swan Centre.

 

Why would we not have liked the position? It was perfectly placed with motorway, rail and air links adjacent to it. As you say, as it stood at the time anyway, it was the only option until SCC bailed Lowe out with land that was originally designated for social housing at St Mary's.

 

As I say, we eventually proceeded with the stadium at St Mary's without any external revenue producers, so to have proceeded with Stoneham with those items I listed would of course have been preferable. Lowe was too bloody-minded to have gone back to EBC and change his mind, or otherwise he had already upset too many on the Council anyway.

 

Reading your factual account of the reasons we never built at Stoneham set me wondering what it would have been like if we had. Not many pubs nearby i know that much.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

He paid his fiver like everybody else, probably just getting his money's worth whipping up support for his golf day...whatever golf may be;);)

 

I heard Crouch paid it for him!

[Window Cleaner]

Reading your factual account of the reasons we never built at Stoneham set me wondering what it would have been like if we had. Not many pubs nearby i know that much.

 

Concorde would probably have opened saturday lunchtimes and before week-night games. Can't be very far away.

[John B]

Reading your factual account of the reasons we never built at Stoneham set me wondering what it would have been like if we had. Not many pubs nearby i know that much.

 

I also wonder where the Lowe out Marches would have started from

[trousers]

In the early stages, Fry "magically" produced a "confidential" bid from IRELAND. That came out of the blue for fans and other bidders alike. Just think back, what happened? Day One Irish zillionaires will "do the deal tomorrow". Next day - zilch, nada nothing.....

 

Hmmm....I always did have my doubts about a certain poster going by the name of 'channon8', who broke the news that the Irish were coming....

 

26-05-2009, 08:16 PM

Channon8

Full Member

Join Date: Nov 2006

Posts: 9

 

When Irish eyes are smiling

I know i dont post often,but i thought i would share my news.Their is an Irish consortium that have today paid the £500,000 required to enter a period of exclusivity,and a deal is done at £15,000,000,subject to nothing untoward being found.As we were a PLC,working under strict guidlines hopefully none will be found.

 

The Pinnacle bid is still very much in the hunt and this new interest from the 2 Irish guys might force there hand one way or the other.Hopefully within a matter of days we will have a club to be proud of once again.

27-05-2009, 12:45 AM

Channon8

Full Member

Join Date: Nov 2006

Posts: 9

 

No i am not,just grew up watching his windmill celebration from the chocolate boxes at the milton road end,and he was my boyhood idol.

The info was told to me on friday,but was confirmed by Mark Fry this afternoon.I dont know who the 2 Irishmen are,but they now lead by a short neck,followed by Pinnacle.

27-05-2009, 11:26 PM

Channon8

Full Member

Join Date: Nov 2006

Posts: 9

 

Delmary,all i can add is that Pinnacle are still very keen and their one really wealthy guy,has to put up or lose out to the Irish bid.It still appears Fry wanted the Pinnacle bid to happen,and the Irish interest has got them moving again.I have no knowledge of who the Irish guys are,but i do know a deal is imminent.The fact is Tony Lynam is purely acting as a broker on comission,but definately believes in his client.

So, the news of the Irish was posted on here on 26th May.....wasn't that the very same week that Mr Liebherr and/or his reps first registered their interest?

 

At least Channon8's other prophecy came true....

 

25-08-2009, 04:11 PM

Channon8

Full Member

Join Date: Nov 2006

Posts: 9

 

Max Cradle

Quick winger from leicester City,coming on loan.

 

Doh.....

[Tamesaint]

Is this some compulsive obsessive disorder? MLT, Crouch and now the Daily Mail. You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that I might subscribe to the rag.

 

If you really want to see NC's compulsive disorder, tell him that you drive an Audi. That really gets him going!!

[Legod Third Coming]

If you really want to see NC's compulsive disorder, tell him that you drive an Audi. That really gets him going!!

 

How does he feel about BMWs??

[Wes Tender]

Mercedes?

[Legod Third Coming]

Mercedes?

 

Don't tell me you drive a Nazi staff car??

[Clifford Nelson]

Fry did whatever he could to drive up the price. That was his job. Was he successful? Probably not since when Pinnacle crashed there was only one option left which had any money, but he did what his employers wanted from him.

 

Thank God it is all over and I can have interesting, and sometimes infuriating discussiona about football. Should we play with more wingers? Harding is a great signing, so there! I think Lallana will make it or break it this season. I can't understand why AP doesn't play our left wingers.

 

Look at those poor buggers down the road. Six losses, no hope, total confusion. What did we get in the end? - No debts and an owner who doesn't want to be a celeb and considers himself a custodian of the club. This must surely be happiness of sorts.

 

Could Fry have done better? For outcome, no, but for the road travelled, yes.

[dune]

If you really want to see NC's compulsive disorder, tell him that you drive an Audi. That really gets him going!!

 

I wonder what 19C drives?

 

[Tamesaint]

How does he feel about BMWs??

 

BMW's are the worst of the worst. I am not sure about Mercedes.

 

If you want a good laugh go into the motoring forum and follow the thread about someone "doing an Agnew" & putting unleaded petrol into their diesel car. At the moment that thread is halfway down the second page. Within about 15 posts, NC had turned into an attack on large sections of humanity - especially BMW and Audi drivers. Its a classic.

 

I just guess that the pharmacy had run out of his medication that week.

Edited 25 September, 2009 by Tamesaint
Originally possted that it was in the lounge

[Scudamore]

Reading your factual account of the reasons we never built at Stoneham set me wondering what it would have been like if we had. Not many pubs nearby i know that much.

 

Wouldn't have been a great location eh? All these out of town football grounds set in retail parks and industrial estates do leave me feeling a little cold i must say. And as you point out decent boozers are a no no. St Mary's is a spot on location really. As well as taking us back to our roots.

[hypochondriac]

Any update on these questions? It would be interesting to hear both sides.

[trousers]

Any update on these questions? It would be interesting to hear both sides.

 

The one about whether Max Cradle is joining us or not? :-)

[Professor]

With respect, I took the trouble with certain others to actually go to see the guy responsible for all this on Eastleigh Borough Council. I therefore can say with certainty what they would have found acceptable and what not. The list of acceptable things is as I have stated it and the two things that were not acceptable were the massive out of town shopping one mile away from the town centre and the multiplex cinema complex, as that was already earmarked for the Swan Centre.

 

Why would we not have liked the position? It was perfectly placed with motorway, rail and air links adjacent to it. As you say, as it stood at the time anyway, it was the only option until SCC bailed Lowe out with land that was originally designated for social housing at St Mary's.

 

As I say, we eventually proceeded with the stadium at St Mary's without any external revenue producers, so to have proceeded with Stoneham with those items I listed would of course have been preferable. Lowe was too bloody-minded to have gone back to EBC and change his mind, or otherwise he had already upset too many on the Council anyway.

I also had contacts at Eastleigh Borough Council at the time, and there was simply too much opposition to Stoneham amongst elected councillors for the plan to be approved. To suggest thet the club, the board, or the chairman had 'upset' anyone is entirely wrong, the opposition of councillors was based on what those individuals perceived as public opposition in the borough. In other words, rightly or wrongly, they thought they were doing what their electors wanted in opposing the move.

[John B]

Wouldn't have been a great location eh? All these out of town football grounds set in retail parks and industrial estates do leave me feeling a little cold i must say. And as you point out decent boozers are a no no. St Mary's is a spot on location really. As well as taking us back to our roots.

 

Yes I agree wait until you go to Wycombe

 

No pubs for miles way out of town in the middle of an industrial site

[Wes Tender]

I also had contacts at Eastleigh Borough Council at the time, and there was simply too much opposition to Stoneham amongst elected councillors for the plan to be approved. To suggest thet the club, the board, or the chairman had 'upset' anyone is entirely wrong, the opposition of councillors was based on what those individuals perceived as public opposition in the borough. In other words, rightly or wrongly, they thought they were doing what their electors wanted in opposing the move.

 

Well, our meeting was with Roberto Tambini, who was the officer appointed by the Council to oversee the project. From speaking to him, we were left in no doubt that it was the way that Lowe approached matters and his complete intransigence towards accepting that the shopping complex and the multiplex cinema could never be permitted, that alienated the EBC. Why would the Council have appointed an officer to oversee the project if if didn't have the support of the Councillors? You might be right that at the point that things were falling through because of Lowe's arrogance and crass lack of diplomacy, the Councillors were then against the project, but that could equally be an excuse to save face when the project was all but doomed.

 

Why should there have been mass opposition to the stadium? Most of the electorate of the Borough were not affected by proximity to it and as it was not just a stand alone stadium, but part of a large sporting complex with the possibility of a bowling alley, ice rink, night club, themed restaurants, hotel, etc, there were great benefits that the project would have brought to the town, including extra business to the area, extra jobs and increased prestige for the Borough. The only residential area in close proximity was Stoneham itself, a small village with a small electorate, so not many votes lost from the NIMBYs there.

 

Your statement regarding the suggestion "that the club had "upset" anybody is entirely wrong" is the incorrect one. The Council were upset enough by their treatment from the club that as a result I was told that they would not look favourably on a planning application for housing on Jackson's Farm while Lowe was in charge of the club.

 

Of course it is all history and irrevelant now, but having taken the trouble to find out these things first hand, I'm bound to try and stand my corner if somebody tries to portray events in a different light. In particular, it is totally incorrect to state that Lowe and the board did not upset anybody on EBC.

[SaintRichmond]

I would presume it was a judgement call. The administrator was getting desperate and pumped for the one who was hanging out with MLT in the hope that it would happen. He chose the wrong one clearly.

 

Judgement call ????

 

Not exactly a PROFFESSIONAL call that you would expect from someone "Earning" Mega Bucks as an Administrator

 

Fry was "PITS" ... so was Lienam ....it is Liemans part in all this that should be closely examined

 

In retrospect Lyingman could not have brought our Club closer to "The Brink"

 

To all those that say he's a nice chap, I say KRAP.... he was a dangerous IDIOT ... one that paraded a nobody with a £7.50 Bamk Account as one of the Moneymen

 

Lynam cost us a lot of time.... and he very nearly cost us our CLUB:cool:

[charliemiller]

The one about whether Max Cradle is joining us or not? :-)

 

Think it is Max Gradle ......

[Whitey Grandad]

One major concern amongst the people at EBC was that the 'strategic gap' between Eastleigh and Southampton would be filled in once one corner of the motorway junction had been built over. Like the Prof and Wes, I was also close to the discussions at the time.

[JibMcdo]

Think it is Max Gradle ......

 

Gradel.

[Wopper]

I also wonder where the Lowe out Marches would have started from

 

They did us all a favour Barclays must have taken notice.

[John B]

Well, our meeting was with Roberto Tambini, who was the officer appointed by the Council to oversee the project. From speaking to him, we were left in no doubt that it was the way that Lowe approached matters and his complete intransigence towards accepting that the shopping complex and the multiplex cinema could never be permitted, that alienated the EBC. Why would the Council have appointed an officer to oversee the project if if didn't have the support of the Councillors? You might be right that at the point that things were falling through because of Lowe's arrogance and crass lack of diplomacy, the Councillors were then against the project, but that could equally be an excuse to save face when the project was all but doomed.

 

Why should there have been mass opposition to the stadium? Most of the electorate of the Borough were not affected by proximity to it and as it was not just a stand alone stadium, but part of a large sporting complex with the possibility of a bowling alley, ice rink, night club, themed restaurants, hotel, etc, there were great benefits that the project would have brought to the town, including extra business to the area, extra jobs and increased prestige for the Borough. The only residential area in close proximity was Stoneham itself, a small village with a small electorate, so not many votes lost from the NIMBYs there.

 

Your statement regarding the suggestion "that the club had "upset" anybody is entirely wrong" is the incorrect one. The Council were upset enough by their treatment from the club that as a result I was told that they would not look favourably on a planning application for housing on Jackson's Farm while Lowe was in charge of the club.

 

Of course it is all history and irrevelant now, but having taken the trouble to find out these things first hand, I'm bound to try and stand my corner if somebody tries to portray events in a different light. In particular, it is totally incorrect to state that Lowe and the board did not upset anybody on EBC.

 

Is in intransigence a bad thing then?

 

 

Lots on here seem to be intransigent

 

 

 

Just a discussion point