Mark Fry (Begbies Traynor) given award

[EastleighSoulBoy]

Agree - he was brought in to do a job and did it. I'm sure he always acted in our best interests. It's MLT we should be asking questions of, especially as he's gone so quiet.

 

2009 Insolvency Awards eh? Woo hoo, sounds like a wild night.

 

MLT is no more of a financial expert than the vast majority of us on here. Again, like the majority of us on here, he was led by his love of the club.

 

Yes, in retrospect, it does seem that he was a little blinded by things as I was.

[aintforever]

I find it hard to fault Fry.

 

He came in when we were facing oblivion, from what I understand all the creditors got paid, and we ended up with a Billionaire in charge.

 

Those are the facts.

[Wes Tender]

Agree - he was brought in to do a job and did it. I'm sure he always acted in our best interests. It's MLT we should be asking questions of, especially as he's gone so quiet.

 

2009 Insolvency Awards eh? Woo hoo, sounds like a wild night.

 

But he wasn't appointed to act in our best interests; he was there to act in the best interests of the creditors. When he almost lost us ML and Cortese, that would not have been acting in the best interests of the fans. For precisely that reason, we as fans are perfectly entitled not to feel any great enthusiasm for Fry getting this award. One almost gets the feeling in retrospect that the end result was despite his involvement rather than because of it.

 

But in the words of the immortal Bard and via some Macchiavellian machinations, "all's well that ends well.

[benjii]

I think it's most people's natural instinct to 'protect' the industry they are in. Doesn't mean they're not right of course. I'm happy to be proved wrong, as ever. As I said, just a subjective view based on anecdotal evidence. That's all. Guilty as charged m'lud.

 

I still hold the opinion that the 'Administration Industry' is one of the most 'vested-interest' industries in the world. There seems no incentive to get the job done quickly and efficiently. As I understand it (which, again, could be totally wrong of course) the longer the administration process goes on the more the administrator gets paid. No?

 

No. Maybe sometimes but not in this case. This was all about career building and profile. Not money. If it had gone wrong, they wouldn't have been paid much at all.

[JackFrost]

MLT is no more of a financial expert than the vast majority of us on here. Again, like the majority of us on here, he was led by his love of the club.

 

Yes, in retrospect, it does seem that he was a little blinded by things as I was.

 

To me MLT just put his full weight behind the first serious buyer of the club just to try and unite the fans behind one party. We'd gone through years of takeover/investment approaches going tits up. The Paul Allen debacle, SISU, Wilde etc etc. He came out publicly he'd support anyone who was seriously interested. IMO he was let down by Pinnacle as much as everyone else.

[trousers]

I find it hard to fault Fry.

 

He came in when we were facing oblivion, from what I understand all the creditors got paid, and we ended up with a Billionaire in charge.

 

Those are the facts.

 

I don't think anyone is unhappy with the outcome. If Fry/Begbies are to be judged on outcome alone then, yes, he/they deserve a gong.

 

However, I believe this thread is covering how we got to that outcome.

 

Some are saying that it was Fry's expertise that got us to the favourable outcome. Others are suggesting there was a fair amount of luck and 'interesting' decisions along the way.

 

That's all.

[aintforever]

I don't think anyone is unhappy with the outcome. I believe this thread is covering how we got to that outcome.

 

Some are saying that it was Fry's expertise that got us to the favourable outcom. Others are suggesting there was a fair amount of luck and 'interesting' decisions along the way.

 

That's all.

 

I think as no one on here knows what went on between Fry, Pinnacle and Leibherr the only possible way we can judge Fry is on the results - and those were quite obviously very good.

[trousers]

Caption Competition

 

[trousers]

I think as no one on here knows what went on between Fry, Pinnacle and Leibherr the only possible way we can judge Fry is on the results - and those were quite obviously very good.

 

I think 'some' on here know 'something' about what went on but fair point for the majority on here.

[trousers]

Enjoy:

 

[Wes Tender]

Caption Competition

 

 

Yes, you're right; I was a lot slimmer in the summer. But since then, on the proceeds I've been able to dine on foie gras, caviar and truffles washed down with Vintage Krug .

[Whitey Grandad]

Yes, you're right; I was a lot slimmer in the summer. But since then, on the proceeds I've been able to dine on foie gras, caviar and truffles washed down with Vintage Krug .

Is that you on the left in the dress Wes?

[Bucks Saint]

No. Maybe sometimes but not in this case. This was all about career building and profile. Not money. If it had gone wrong, they wouldn't have been paid much at all.

 

Spot on. Most of the bigger firms do not take on football clubs because (1) they do not tend to have many assets (apart from players) and have very weird income and expenditure patterns - e.g. close season - and this all limits the options severly; and (2) the potential for "grief" is huge.

 

Fry will be judged by the creditors. So if he had made a mess of it, or took too long, or charged too much, or all three of these, then Barclays, Aviva and whoever else would be unlikely to use him again, which is ultimately the most important success measure for him.

[trousers]

Caption Competition

 

 

"Man behind Fry's mystery Irish consortium revealed at last...."

[Master Bates]

Caption Competition

 

 

Mark Fry's getting his arse pinched :shock:

[JackFrost]

Caption Competition

 

 

Ed Byrne in sudden change of career shocker

[Weston Saint]

Let's make one thing clear. Barclays did not put us in Administration. They would need to apply to the court for that (Clapham Saint please confirm the court bit)

 

Barclays refused to honour a couple of cheques. Lowe, acting correctly, decided that, because of that, we were no longer a going concern and put us into Voluntary Administration.

 

I understand from someone close to the action on the inside that initially no one insolvency practitioner wants to get involved. It was thought in the market that Southampton Leisure incorporating SFC was incapable of finding funds for a buy out.

 

Lowe, and I assume his legal/financial advisors, finally was able to persuade Begbies Taylor to take it on. I do not know the terms but I suspect they included a high success premium.

 

Here, I am making a big assumption based on sensible thinking - Lowe wanted to continue to advise Begbies Taylor on the football front. Fry stated that Lowe would have to step aside completely if he was to act. As there were no other takers it was that or liquidation and SFC would be no more.

 

The fact Begbies Taylor and particularly Fry succeeding was the reason the award was given.

[krissyboy31]

Ed Byrne to agent: Bloody hell! 10 years working with a plastic mobile phone, now you've got me playing second fiddle to a cardboard cut-out!

[alpine_saint]

I read this thread and think that the accusation of not having something proper to moan about shouldnt just be levelled at me.

 

Who gives a shiny one if Fry got lucky ? How often have we suffered bad luck ? Michael Svensson's injury had the biggest impact of any injury on this club probably in its entire history. We should be grateful that he recovered from one possible flawed judgment. Multi-national companies go down on the basis of single decisions, you know.

 

He seems to have done his job by the numbers apart from that, and a successful conclusion (that we ALL, except a pig farmer in the Cotswolds, are happy with) was reached.

[Clifford Nelson]

I "didnt leave the thread alone" and "barged in" because I have every right to express the opinion that the nit-picking is counter-productive. Where did I say I am not interested ? I just dont think this is the time or place for it.

 

Got it ?

 

You can now start the fight you seem to be itching to start if you want.

 

I would suggest calling me a tw*t.

 

No, I won't start a fight. There are enough people around here who seems to be fighting with you all the time. I will just ignore you in future.

[Wes Tender]

Let's make one thing clear. Barclays did not put us in Administration. They would need to apply to the court for that (Clapham Saint please confirm the court bit)

 

Barclays refused to honour a couple of cheques. Lowe, acting correctly, decided that, because of that, we were no longer a going concern and put us into Voluntary Administration.

 

 

Did anybody say that Barclays put us into administration? Not as far as I'm aware. Although by their actions in withdrawing their continuing support to our overdraft, they made it virtually inevitable.

 

To be fair to them, it was becoming ever clearer that dwindling attendances because of our poor results under bad management would only be exacerbated by the sale of our best players and that we would be in a downward spiral of falling revenues from then on. In retrospect we have to thank Barclays' Fry for running out of patience with us and pulling the plug.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

To me MLT just put his full weight behind the first serious buyer of the club just to try and unite the fans behind one party. We'd gone through years of takeover/investment approaches going tits up. The Paul Allen debacle, SISU, Wilde etc etc. He came out publicly he'd support anyone who was seriously interested. IMO he was let down by Pinnacle as much as everyone else.

 

I reckon you're very close to the truth with that. Not that I know anything of course!

[RedAndWhite91]

Caption Competition

 

 

"F*ck off Ed, I'm trying to pull"

[Bucks Saint]

Let's make one thing clear. Barclays did not put us in Administration. They would need to apply to the court for that (Clapham Saint please confirm the court bit)

 

I did not say that Barclays put us into Administration. (You are right about the court bit). But as a major work provider to the insolvency industry, doing a decent job in their eyes would have been a wise career move by Fry

[trousers]

I did not say that Barclays put us into Administration. (You are right about the court bit). But as a major work provider to the insolvency industry, doing a decent job in their eyes would have been a wise career move by Fry

 

Richard or Mark?

[Clifford Nelson]

Let's make one thing clear. Barclays did not put us in Administration. They would need to apply to the court for that (Clapham Saint please confirm the court bit)

 

Barclays refused to honour a couple of cheques. Lowe, acting correctly, decided that, because of that, we were no longer a going concern and put us into Voluntary Administration.

 

I understand from someone close to the action on the inside that initially no one insolvency practitioner wants to get involved. It was thought in the market that Southampton Leisure incorporating SFC was incapable of finding funds for a buy out.

 

Lowe, and I assume his legal/financial advisors, finally was able to persuade Begbies Taylor to take it on. I do not know the terms but I suspect they included a high success premium.

 

Here, I am making a big assumption based on sensible thinking - Lowe wanted to continue to advise Begbies Taylor on the football front. Fry stated that Lowe would have to step aside completely if he was to act. As there were no other takers it was that or liquidation and SFC would be no more.

 

The fact Begbies Taylor and particularly Fry succeeding was the reason the award was given.

 

On all the available facts I think you're right. and I believe that Fry himself made it known that RL had "offered" to stay behind and "advice", although Begbies Traynor believed that to be an obstacle rather than a help.

 

There is still this question about why Fry gave Pinnacle exclusivity rights. As the appointed Administrator he had an obligation of assuring himself that the prospective buyer actually had the money. That would at the very least be through information from the buyer's bank. We all know that they didn't have the money, and I discount the possibility that the bank lied to Fry.

 

So what are then the alternatives? Was there money available at one point which was withdrawn later? Or didn't Fry pursue his professional obligations?

 

And why did he discount the overtures from Cortese? He would, or at least should, have known him as a european banker, and he would have been told that he acted on behalf of Markus Liebherr. Didn't "Liebherr" mean anything to him? Whatever else he knew he ought to have realised that this was a very serious buyer with very serious money.

 

Those are, I think, the outstanding questions which it looks unlikely that we'll ever get answers to, but it rather looks like large mistakes to me, and as I have said previously I doubt that I would have gotten an award for the outcome alone in my line of business.

[dune]

Caption Competition

 

 

And tonight Matthew i'm going to be the gay off Bargain Hunt.

 

[RonManager]

Caption Competition

 

 

Dr Who introduces Mark Fry as his latest companion before leaving in the Tardis, having received word that the Dalek Empire has gone into administration.

Edited 9 November, 2009 by RonManager

[alpine_saint]

No, I won't start a fight. There are enough people around here who seems to be fighting with you all the time. I will just ignore you in future.

 

Splendid.

[Gorgiesaint]

There is still this question about why Fry gave Pinnacle exclusivity rights. As the appointed Administrator he had an obligation of assuring himself that the prospective buyer actually had the money. That would at the very least be through information from the buyer's bank. We all know that they didn't have the money, and I discount the possibility that the bank lied to Fry.

 

So what are then the alternatives? Was there money available at one point which was withdrawn later? Or didn't Fry pursue his professional obligations?

 

From what I can recall from the statements made at the time, the Pinnacle bid was originally a consortium (which potentially provided Fry with the necessary proof of funding) which they whittled down to Micky Fialka on his own. If Fry had already seen proof of funds but was being assured that everything was still on track (which Tony Lynam was doing at that point), then he may hav opted to still prefer the Pinnacle bid if they had made the largest offer at that point. Whether Fry should have re-requested funds in that case is open to debate.

 

Ironically it is similar to whats happened down the road, although for the blue few, their man with no money actually managed to take over!!

[trousers]

From what I can recall from the statements made at the time, the Pinnacle bid was originally a consortium (which potentially provided Fry with the necessary proof of funding) which they whittled down to Micky Fialka on his own. If Fry had already seen proof of funds but was being assured that everything was still on track (which Tony Lynam was doing at that point), then he may hav opted to still prefer the Pinnacle bid if they had made the largest offer at that point.

 

So, the best 'tactic' for any prospective head of a consortium (e.g. Tony Lynham, Marc Jackson, etc) is to get a name in the frame who satisfies the Administrator's "proof of funding" criteria just so you can get your foot in the 'exclusivity door', thus buying yourself time to find an actual buyer whilst the 'name' who bought you the exclusivity in the first place slips quietly away never to be heard of again.....?

 

Trojan Horse anyone?

Edited 9 November, 2009 by trousers

[Lets B Avenue]

Caption Competition

 

 

Hey Mark. Is that the fat Russian bird that Draino had to kick out of his flat?

[Nineteen Canteen]

Me too. If people are interested in the goings on from an historical perspective, I still have not been convinced as to the propriety of the other Fry from Barclays, the one responsible for pulling the plug on us, then being appointed by Begbies Traynor. As far as I'm aware, in all probability somebody at his level of executive seniority in an organisation like Barclays would have to serve at least 3 months notice, thus putting him in the time frame for having applied to work for the very administrators who were awarded the contract for dealing with the club as a result of his actions whilst at Barclays.

 

On the other hand, I must say that I'll be forever grateful that he did pull the plug on the board, as I loathed and detested Lowe and Askham and their cronies.

 

All that rankles is the timing that prevented us avoiding the ten point deduction. Otherwise, the deduction is a small price to pay to rid us of all that dross, even if it means that we have to spend an extra season in this division. But even that scenario becomes less likely with each week that passes.

 

In hindsight Wes you are right but at the time facing administration was a bit like making the decision of jumping into a deep crevasse without any equipment (administration) or get buried by the mother of all avalanches (slim chance of survival). The outcome is better than we could have hoped but a process you wouldn't wish on your worse enemy (even Pompey).

 

I'm pleased Duncan and others are asking questions because I think it is wrong that Fry x 2, the board of SLHplc, Crouch and MLT have to date provided very little justifcation for their action or post administration report, if such a thing is a requirement. As I've said before MLT did answer some questions from Simon Mayo that frankly wouldn't have tested Noddy.

[Scudamore]

And tonight Matthew i'm going to be the gay off Bargain Hunt.

 

 

The gay?

[INFLUENCED.COM]

As Tony Lynam is still a member of this forum would it be OK to ask him if he felt Fry did a decent job ? he is probably the only poster that had direct contact with him throughout the process so would be able to offer an informed opinion, Tony ?

[Nineteen Canteen]

MLT is no more of a financial expert than the vast majority of us on here. Again, like the majority of us on here, he was led by his love of the club.

 

Yes, in retrospect, it does seem that he was a little blinded by things as I was.

 

ESB you don't know categorically that he was led by his love of the club and if he was then he should have taken a little more care about it IMO. Reading MLT's book you get the picture of a very casual personality and he was at best casual supporting Pinnacle at the start but still supporting them towards the end? I think that beggars belief and it would be good to hear his side of the story other than some very carefully crafted answers which anyone with the slightest knowledge of the transcation could have drawn up to deflect critcism. Lets face it i only ever heard Simon Mayo question him and he didn't sound at all interested in the first place and wasn't exactly the Spanish Inquistion that afternoon, especially not nailing MLT when he made an audible groan when Mayo mentioned Pinnacle. Surely, a good interviewer would be saying to himself - hello, we may be one to something here - but Mayo asked if it was ok to proceed! Not exactly Paxman.

 

IMO I don't think he was blinded I just think he was complacent and under estimated the gravity of what he was taking on. He's a big lad and it was his reponsibility to check - no one else's. What came to light in his book has only exacerbated the situation if you ask me - which I appreciate you didn't.

[Tamesaint]

Reading MLT's book you get the picture of a very casual personality

 

 

 

So despite saying that he wouldn't buy it, Numpty has read MLT's book!!

[Nineteen Canteen]

To me MLT just put his full weight behind the first serious buyer of the club just to try and unite the fans behind one party. We'd gone through years of takeover/investment approaches going tits up. The Paul Allen debacle, SISU, Wilde etc etc. He came out publicly he'd support anyone who was seriously interested. IMO he was let down by Pinnacle as much as everyone else.

 

Ridiculous, MLT is culpable as Pinnacle IMO and if your theory is correct we can only be very grateful indeed that they didn't succeed. If to win an contract or player or manager etc under MLT's leadership you just need to be first through the door then it has failure written across the entrance. Lets face it, MLT had already admitted he was only considering managers with an ex-Saints background - why? Was it because they were already in his contacts on his mobile and to save him doing some extra work with agents? He suggested it was for 'box office appeal' - good grief, why narrow the field by about 99%? Let's stop making excuses for le Tissier until he has provided some answers as we want answers from everyone else.

 

Sorry but your defence of MLT on this basis is indefensibe IMO.

[Wes Tender]

The outcome is better than we could have hoped but a process you wouldn't wish on your worse enemy (even Pompey).

 

Oh, I don't know. I think that I might get quite a lot of amusement seeing them going through what we had too, but wishing that their outcome would not be as fortuitous as ours.

 

Although as you say, nobody could forecast the outcome for us, I still had faith that with a bright new stadium, a decent fanbase and good ancillary facilities, we did represent a decent investment proposition in the fire sale of administration.

 

You couldn't really say the same with Pompey, as their stadium is crap and doesn't hold enough capacity to generate much income. Even starting with the debt wiped out, their facilities and infrastructure don't amount to much. All they have is their Premiership status and it doesn't seem that they will have that for much longer.

 

After all the fun that Fahim brought, things are a little dull over there, apart from Storrie's tax problems and the relief that a couple of wins might turn out to be a blip rather than a trend. I grow increasingly hopeful that we might yet be playing them next season, us having been promoted and they having either gone down through relegation caused by poor results, or by a points deduction like ours.

[Nineteen Canteen]

So despite saying that he wouldn't buy it, Numpty has read MLT's book!!

 

A few trips to Waterstones or Borders whilst the wife was shoe shopping - ample time, Tame. If you're married you'll know what I mean. Convieniently some stores stupidly put coffee shops in their stores making them even more like a library. A Library, you know the place where you can go and borrow books for a couple of weeks once you've read them. No risk of a fine with MLT's tome.

[Nineteen Canteen]

Oh, I don't know. I think that I might get quite a lot of amusement seeing them going through what we had too, but wishing that their outcome would not be as fortuitous as ours.

 

Although as you say, nobody could forecast the outcome for us, I still had faith that with a bright new stadium, a decent fanbase and good ancillary facilities, we did represent a decent investment proposition in the fire sale of administration.

 

You couldn't really say the same with Pompey, as their stadium is crap and doesn't hold enough capacity to generate much income. Even starting with the debt wiped out, their facilities and infrastructure don't amount to much. All they have is their Premiership status and it doesn't seem that they will have that for much longer.

 

After all the fun that Fahim brought, things are a little dull over there, apart from Storrie's tax problems and the relief that a couple of wins might turn out to be a blip rather than a trend. I grow increasingly hopeful that we might yet be playing them next season, us having been promoted and they having either gone down through relegation caused by poor results, or by a points deduction like ours.

 

I agree with your second paragraph but it was the economic climate at the time that was the most worrying and I have to say I didn't share your confidence at all. Couple of years earlier then perhaps things would have been different but nobody was interested seriously with the level of debt we had. SISU would have been just musical chairs in the boardroom IMO.

 

As for Pompey I enjoy watching the farce play out on the news but I absolutely would not want to see them fold. I appreciate you're not saying that but whilst I enjoy it (if that's the right phrase - not sure it is), it's also with the hope they will be ok in the long run. They are not a Premier League club and if they get relegated lets hope they go down with the like of Hull and Wigan.

 

Football on the South Coast would be poorer without them and we would miss those derbies especially if they remain rare events because we are in a league above them!

[Bucks Saint]

Richard or Mark?

Mark (the intended subject of this thread at least)

[Wes Tender]

I agree with your second paragraph but it was the economic climate at the time that was the most worrying and I have to say I didn't share your confidence at all. Couple of years earlier then perhaps things would have been different but nobody was interested seriously with the level of debt we had. SISU would have been just musical chairs in the boardroom IMO.

 

As for Pompey I enjoy watching the farce play out on the news but I absolutely would not want to see them fold. I appreciate you're not saying that but whilst I enjoy it (if that's the right phrase - not sure it is), it's also with the hope they will be ok in the long run. They are not a Premier League club and if they get relegated lets hope they go down with the like of Hull and Wigan.

 

Football on the South Coast would be poorer without them and we would miss those derbies especially if they remain rare events because we are in a league above them!

 

Sometimes the economic climate makes some business propositions even more attractive. A couple of years earlier and we weren't as attractive a proposition as we were this year in administration, partly because the various factions of shareholders made it all very complicated. We can all be very thankful that SISU didn't get their sticky fingers on us. There were some who expressed wishes during our administration that we had gone with them and rued the fact that Coventry had them whereas we seemed to be heading towards oblivion. Now I doubt whether there is one single Saints fan who would swap their position with ours, even allowing that they are in a division above us.

 

As you say, I wouldn't want the Skates to go out of existence, but would be very happy if the natural order were re-established, so that we were either in the same division or above them, beating them whenever we played them. I have hated seeing the increase of plastics wearing Pompey shirts in our natural territory and can't wait for them to disappear back under their stones again.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Caption Competition

 

 

Who invited Jarvis ****er

[dune]

Why is it that every 19C contribution involves either slagging off MLT, Lawrie or Leaon Crouch?

 

We already know your views 19C, we've heard them over and over and over again.

 

I apologise for this post as i've comitted the cardinal sin of replying to the attention seeker, but i'm just sick to death of his nasty and vile trolling.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

I'm glad there has been some serious debate on this thread. Some questions still niggle away at me -

 

I would still like to know why Fry gave Pinnacle exclusivity 3 days after Liebherr made his initial offer and just how did Lynam and Co manage to convince Fry they were genuine buyers with funds when the best they could do when it was time to put up or shut up was to push Fialka into the spotlight.

 

I would also like to know just how far MLT investigated Pinnacle and who was behind them before he allowed his name to be put forward as their public face and also why Lynam was given permission to address the players at Staplewood.

 

I think we are all delighted at what eventually happened with the purchase by Liebherr but I think there is a massive case of "there by the grace of God" about the whole debacle and Fry now picking up an award does seem a little bit fraudelent.

 

I heard from an excellent source that Cortese and Liebherr were far from happy at the way the whole thing was handled, which fits in with Coretese's interview in the Echo and speaks volumes when compared to an award.

[aintforever]

Didn't Pinnacle pay for exclusivity, hence they got exclusivity?

 

If Leibherr had paid for it, he would have got it.

 

Fry's job was not to get Saints a Billionaire, it was to get money for the creditors - which he did. If he knew Leibherr was still interested he had nothing to lose by giving Pinnacle the opportunity to pay more.

[trousers]

I'm glad there has been some serious debate on this thread. Some questions still niggle away at me -

 

I would still like to know why Fry gave Pinnacle exclusivity 3 days after Liebherr made his initial offer and just how did Lynam and Co manage to convince Fry they were genuine buyers with funds when the best they could do when it was time to put up or shut up was to push Fialka into the spotlight.

 

I would also like to know just how far MLT investigated Pinnacle and who was behind them before he allowed his name to be put forward as their public face and also why Lynam was given permission to address the players at Staplewood.

 

I think we are all delighted at what eventually happened with the purchase by Liebherr but I think there is a massive case of "there by the grace of God" about the whole debacle and Fry now picking up an award does seem a little bit fraudelent.

 

I heard from an excellent source that Cortese and Liebherr were far from happy at the way the whole thing was handled, which fits in with Coretese's interview in the Echo and speaks volumes when compared to an award.

 

Did you see fry's interview at the awards ceremony FF? He didn'thave much competition!

[dune]

I'm glad there has been some serious debate on this thread. Some questions still niggle away at me -

 

I would still like to know why Fry gave Pinnacle exclusivity 3 days after Liebherr made his initial offer and just how did Lynam and Co manage to convince Fry they were genuine buyers with funds when the best they could do when it was time to put up or shut up was to push Fialka into the spotlight.

 

I would also like to know just how far MLT investigated Pinnacle and who was behind them before he allowed his name to be put forward as their public face and also why Lynam was given permission to address the players at Staplewood.

 

I think we are all delighted at what eventually happened with the purchase by Liebherr but I think there is a massive case of "there by the grace of God" about the whole debacle and Fry now picking up an award does seem a little bit fraudelent.

 

I heard from an excellent source that Cortese and Liebherr were far from happy at the way the whole thing was handled, which fits in with Coretese's interview in the Echo and speaks volumes when compared to an award.

 

The whole Pinnacle/Micky Fialka thing is very suspect. It makes no sense because Fialka makes that Pompey arab look like J D Rockefeller. I doubt we'll never know the truth. I know it's a bit far fetched but the only explanation i can think of for Frys behaviour was to milk the situation and drag things out.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Didn't Pinnacle pay for exclusivity, hence they got exclusivity?

 

If Leibherr had paid for it, he would have got it.

 

Fry's job was not to get Saints a Billionaire, it was to get money for the creditors - which he did. If he knew Leibherr was still interested he had nothing to lose by giving Pinnacle the opportunity to pay more.

 

Fair point but, it "begbies" the question was Liebherr even invited to pay for exclusivity?