Sisu

[spyinthesky]

Can anyone pl remind me details of the failed SISU bid a few years ago

 

Talking to some Coventry based mates

 

Apparently SISU are despised up there as the club is reportedly losing £500k a month.

 

Ken Dulieu (who was here for a while) apparently has turned up at training with a momogrammed training top (and labradors in tow) to provide 'advice'

 

Unless ownership/finances this can be sorted quickly the spectre of admin and 10 points deduction is a possibility

[Verbal]

Can anyone pl remind me details of the failed SISU bid a few years ago

 

Talking to some Coventry based mates

 

Apparently SISU are despised up there as the club is reportedly losing £500k a month.

 

Ken Dulieu (who was here for a while) apparently has turned up at training with a momogrammed training top (and labradors in tow) to provide 'advice'

 

Unless ownership/finances this can be sorted quickly the spectre of admin and 10 points deduction is a possibility

 

Their speciality was a 'take it or leave it' ultimatum to Roops (or was it the other lot?) to pick up the club for pennies. Had a LOT of support on here I recall.

[Colinjb]

Oh they are boned. Living in Coventry the atmosphere here can only be described as 'appathetic.' The locals have totally lost faith in their club, a decade of essentially nothing happening to them can't be helping (at least we had relegations and survival days/play-offs to keep us going, Cov have literally had a decade of mid-table nothing.)

 

As stated in the rumours thread the only offer to take the club on is a £1 admin fee and agreement to take on the debts from a consortium led by an ex chairman.

 

Yes, this could have been us. I believe they made an offer to buy us but couldn't agree a share price with Rupert Lowe and Co.... Either that or one of Rupert's final big decisions in refusing them could well turn out to have been one of his best, he may not have been in charge them but he was a large shareholder. Let us remember that the only reason SISU took over Coventry was because they got them at a rock bottom price in the first place. They saved them from administration at the last minute back in December 2007.... now it's coming full circle.

[Crab Lungs]

Didn't Leon Crouch, Michael Wilde and Rupert all tell them to bugger off in a rare show of unity?

[Pancake]

Didn't Leon Crouch, Michael Wilde and Rupert all tell them to bugger off in a rare show of unity?

 

This, IIRC.

[trousers]

Can anyone remember which month and year SISU made their bid?

 

I've got a vague memory that it was around the same time that the share price was being "artificially inflated" (due to the reported Paul Allen interest)....i.e. April/May 2007

 

If it was the inflated share price that out-priced SISU then we could have 'Tommac' to thank (allegedly) for inadvertantly saving our club afterall.....?! ;-)

[Verbal]

Can anyone remember which month and year SISU made their bid?

 

I've got a vague memory that it was around the same time that the share price was being "artificially inflated" (due to the reported Paul Allen interest)....i.e. April/May 2007

 

If it was the inflated share price that out-priced SISU then we could have Tommac to thank (allegedly) for saving our club afterall.....?! ;-)

 

We have nothing to thank tommac for.

[trousers]

We have nothing to thank tommac for.

 

;-)

[trousers]

Hmmm....SISU bid was defo in 2007, albeit later than April/May.....

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-494402/SISU-running-patience-Saints-share-offer.html

[Fowllyd]

We have nothing to thank tommac for.

 

Well, he gave me a lot of laughs...

[Verbal]

Well, he gave me a lot of laughs...

 

Oh that, certainly. I had to deal with him a couple of times. Fantasist doesn't begin to cover it.

 

Some persist in disbelieving it on here, but he was the sole source of the Paul Allen rubbish that ramped the share price to such unaffordable levels that a take-over was all but impossible. All's well that ends well, I suppose, but it's also easy to forget how close we came to extinction.

[Fowllyd]

Didn't Leon Crouch, Michael Wilde and Rupert all tell them to bugger off in a rare show of unity?

 

They did indeed. As I recall it, SISU's offer would have meant a large share issue, which would in turn have diluted the shareholdings of Crouch, Lowe and Wilde. It prompted a meeting involving all three parties; they decided to reject the offer, leaving it dead in the water. A few months after that, the execs running the club (except Hoos) were booted out along with Dulieu.

 

After that we had Crouch in charge, then the Lowe/Wilde combo, then administration, then rebirth. Phew.

[Verbal]

They did indeed. As I recall it, SISU's offer would have meant a large share issue, which would in turn have diluted the shareholdings of Crouch, Lowe and Wilde. It prompted a meeting involving all three parties; they decided to reject the offer, leaving it dead in the water. A few months after that, the execs running the club (except Hoos) were booted out along with Dulieu.

 

After that we had Crouch in charge, then the Lowe/Wilde combo, then administration, then rebirth. Phew.

 

Oh, that's how it started - during the putsch by the execs, who then tried to bounce the shareholders into the deal while (I think) securing decent bonuses/pay-ffs for themselves.

 

I must have blanked this from my memory. Horrible.

[Fowllyd]

Oh that, certainly. I had to deal with him a couple of times. Fantasist doesn't begin to cover it.

 

Really? Was that to do with the Paul Allen/Saints stuff, or something else entirely? Just curious...

[Verbal]

Really? Was that to do with the Paul Allen/Saints stuff, or something else entirely? Just curious...

 

The former.

[trousers]

Oh that, certainly. I had to deal with him a couple of times. Fantasist doesn't begin to cover it.

 

Some persist in disbelieving it on here, but he was the sole source of the Paul Allen rubbish that ramped the share price to such unaffordable levels that a take-over was all but impossible. All's well that ends well, I suppose, but it's also easy to forget how close we came to extinction.

 

So, he did (albeit inadvertantly) out-price the likes of SISU....?

[Verbal]

So, he did (albeit inadvertantly) out-price the likes of SISU....?

 

Yes, but he made it impossible, in a buyer's market, to sell the club to more credible buyers than SISU. His actions made the collapse of the club (or the public company controlling it) nigh on inevitable.

[JackFrost]

Yeah SISU was around the time that Chorley was posting his OPEN LETTERS on here, I seem to remember it was the only thing that ever unified Lowe, Wilde & Crouch.

 

I seem to remember there were rumours that a lot of money was heading Hone & Dulieu's way if the SISU deal had gone through. The forum was split in two one side was people wanting to snatch it because it was money and we were broke at the time, and the other half wanted to reject it and thought we could do a lot better.

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but thank god we turned SISU down

[Fowllyd]

The former.

 

Well that must have been fun! I'll ask no more. But I'm more than prepared to believe that the whole thing was essentially the invention of Tommac, as you said earlier. Madness, utter madness.

[JackFrost]

I always thought Tommac was a Derby fan on a very lengthy and clever windup who took a lot of people in, including bods from the Echo.

 

Henrik Larsson never did sign did he

 

Anyone remember sequoia? He was the real deal. .

[Verbal]

I always thought Tommac was a Derby fan on a very lengthy and clever windup who took a lot of people in, including bods from the Echo.

 

Henrik Larsson never did sign did he

 

The club he supported wasn't relevant, and it wasn't, in the sense you mean it, a wind up. I've gone over this before in the dim distant past (and under another user-name), so here's a potted summary.

 

tommac (real name Tom McLoughlin) claimed that he was the managing director of an airline leasing company and he worked out of a luxury office in Mayfair. Actually, he was a local manager of an American leasing company, and he worked in an industrial estate in Fulham. In the course of his job, booking executive jets for the hobnobs, he met two lawyers from Paul Allen's umbrella company in Seattle. They have (or had) a number of American sports interests, including a basketball franchise I think. Now, tommac being tommac thought he could make a killing out of this opportunity, and knew that Saints were up for sale. He pitched the idea of Allen taking over Saints to the lawyers, who by all ccounts gave a non-committal 'yeah, yeah, that's interesting' response. tommac then reported this 'interest from Allen' to the Southampton board, and presented himself as a go-between. The news was gushingly leaked (by Leon, I think?), and the share price went into orbit. When Mary Corbett, among others, tried to follow up this supposed 'interest', there was absolutely nothing there. Allen had, it seems, never been told of the lawyers' conversation with tommac. Indeed, I imagine the lawyers completely forgot about it.

[benjii]

Oh that, certainly. I had to deal with him a couple of times. Fantasist doesn't begin to cover it.

 

Some persist in disbelieving it on here, but he was the sole source of the Paul Allen rubbish that ramped the share price to such unaffordable levels that a take-over was all but impossible. All's well that ends well, I suppose, but it's also easy to forget how close we came to extinction.

 

Shows how easy it is to get the media to publicise a load of bull**** for you!

 

Also shows how desperation plays a large part in credulity (Leon!).

[trousers]

I always thought Tommac was a Derby fan on a very lengthy and clever windup who took a lot of people in, including bods from the Echo.

 

You thinking of HelpMeRhonda - aka American Dan Williams - who was supposedly interested in Blackburn too?

[benjii]

On the topic of SISU:

 

It is easy to be dismissive now but had we not got promoted last year you would've seen:

 

Lallana

Chamberlain

Fonte

Schneiderlin

 

and quite possibly some other players leaving over the summer. You would've been looking at another season of Hartlepool, Walsall, MK Dons etc.

 

SISU may not have proven to be great owners but if we had been picked up by Lynam and Fialka or had not got promoted last season.... well, if SISU had just kept us in the Champ in the first place, avoided admin and then sold us on I think we would have all taken that.

[aintforever]

It turned out to be a good move in the end but turning down SISU did lead to administration, relegation and -10.

 

Saying turning it down was the right thing to do is the same as saying hiring Poortvleit as manager was the right thing.

[JackFrost]

The club he supported wasn't relevant, and it wasn't, in the sense you mean it, a wind up. I've gone over this before in the dim distant past (and under another user-name), so here's a potted summary.

 

tommac (real name Tom McLoughlin) claimed that he was the managing director of an airline leasing company and he worked out of a luxury office in Mayfair. Actually, he was a local manager of an American leasing company, and he worked in an industrial estate in Fulham. In the course of his job, booking executive jets for the hobnobs, he met two lawyers from Paul Allen's umbrella company in Seattle. They have (or had) a number of American sports interests, including a basketball franchise I think. Now, tommac being tommac thought he could make a killing out of this opportunity, and knew that Saints were up for sale. He pitched the idea of Allen taking over Saints to the lawyers, who by all ccounts gave a non-committal 'yeah, yeah, that's interesting' response. tommac then reported this 'interest from Allen' to the Southampton board, and presented himself as a go-between. The news was gushingly leaked (by Leon, I think?), and the share price went into orbit. When Mary Corbett, among others, tried to follow up this supposed 'interest', there was absolutely nothing there. Allen had, it seems, never been told of the lawyers' conversation with tommac. Indeed, I imagine the lawyers completely forgot about it.

 

Ah interesting.

 

The days of the takeover threads and updates of where Paul Allen's yacht was moored on any given day. It was only 3-4 years ago and it almost seems to be in a different century

[benjii]

It turned out to be a good move in the end but turning down SISU did lead to administration, relegation and -10.

 

Saying turning it down was the right thing to do is the same as saying hiring Poortvleit as manager was the right thing.

 

Exactly.

 

SISU better than Markus and Nic - no.

SISU better than Rupes and Mikey and the boysh - yes.

SISU better than Mickey and Des - yes.

[September Saint]

Hmmm....SISU bid was defo in 2007, albeit later than April/May.....

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-494402/SISU-running-patience-Saints-share-offer.html

 

Look at the story just below. Off topic but it made me smile

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-494197/Tottenham-Pompey-battle-sign-wonderkid.html

[Colinjb]

It turned out to be a good move in the end but turning down SISU did lead to administration, relegation and -10.

 

Saying turning it down was the right thing to do is the same as saying hiring Poortvleit as manager was the right thing.

 

Having seen what has happened to Cov over the last few years I personally think that we did better sticking with Rupes and Co. Yes, administration came quicker but so did our rebirth.

 

I would in no way want to have had the ongoing drain that is happening at the Ricoh happening to us. Yes, Cov have stayed in the Championship and up until now avoided oblivion, but the club has become a souless shell with dwindling fanbase. Nothing to give them hope, nothing to rally their supporters, just a zombie stuttering towards the inevitable.

Edited 13 July, 2011 by Colinjb

[JackFrost]

It turned out to be a good move in the end but turning down SISU did lead to administration, relegation and -10.

 

Saying turning it down was the right thing to do is the same as saying hiring Poortvleit as manager was the right thing.

 

I said back then that the only way the club was ever going to move forward was when Lowe, Wilde and Crouch were all gone and I saw administration as almost a necessary evil and a calculated risk if we weren't completely bought out beforehand. After the Fialka Fiasco we really did land on our feet with Liebherr just at the right time, and we were very fortunate how it all turned out.

 

Turning down SISU may well have led to administration relegation and -10 but going on how the Coventry situation is currently looking, accepting SISU may well have led to administration relegation and -10, just delayed for a few years.

 

I thought turning down SISU was the right decision then and I still stand by it now. But there again, hindsight is a wonderful thing.

[dubai_phil]

A key point that was missed by many at the time and which has yet to be posted on here.

 

SISU were a HEDGE FUND.

 

They were not in any way shape or form an INVESTMENT COMPANY.

 

Hedge Funds make money from things going down in price (in simple terms).

 

In the economic climate of the time, it was boom boom boom, a Hedge Fund could see that buying Saints for peanuts trimming to the bone and then "flipping" the club could make them a very large sum of money.

 

They were shown the door, rightly, they had no money to offer (as Coventry have found out)

 

They went to Coventry and many fans went into manic depression.

 

Of course they got Coventry for a peanut, unfortunately the world went bust and they got stuck with them. They will be very lucky t o get a peanut back.

 

Some of TSF posted stuff like this at the time but got beaten up by Chorley's buddies for being Lowe luvvies

 

Anyway - hahahahaha at Coventry, good luck getting rid of them

[benjii]

Having seen what has happened to Cov over the last few years I personally think that we did better sticking with Rupes and Co. Yes, administration came quicker but so did our rebirth.

.

 

But we were very, very lucky to end up in Markus' lap.

 

There is a reasonable chance we would never have gone into admin at all if SISU had taken over. We are a much better prospect than Coventry.

[Colinjb]

In the economic climate of the time, it was boom boom boom, a Hedge Fund could see that buying Saints for peanuts trimming to the bone and then "flipping" the club could make them a very large sum of money.

 

They were shown the door, rightly, they had no money to offer (as Coventry have found out)

 

They went to Coventry and many fans went into manic depression.

 

Of course they got Coventry for a peanut, unfortunately the world went bust and they got stuck with them. They will be very lucky t o get a peanut back.

 

Some of TSF posted stuff like this at the time but got beaten up by Chorley's buddies for being Lowe luvvies

 

Anyway - hahahahaha at Coventry, good luck getting rid of them

 

Quite, SISU would have taken on a stadium, training ground and club here. With the facilities being a key factor, they could have controlled the destiny of the club.

 

Coventry rent the Ricoh Arena from the local council. They need to get in a crowd of circa 18,000 a game just to break even on the agreed rental terms.

 

All SISU have is the Allard Way training grounds and a league registration. It was never going to work.

Edited 13 July, 2011 by Colinjb

[JackFrost]

A key point that was missed by many at the time and which has yet to be posted on here.

 

SISU were a HEDGE FUND.

 

They were not in any way shape or form an INVESTMENT COMPANY.

 

Hedge Funds make money from things going down in price (in simple terms).

 

In the economic climate of the time, it was boom boom boom, a Hedge Fund could see that buying Saints for peanuts trimming to the bone and then "flipping" the club could make them a very large sum of money.

 

They were shown the door, rightly, they had no money to offer (as Coventry have found out)

 

They went to Coventry and many fans went into manic depression.

 

Of course they got Coventry for a peanut, unfortunately the world went bust and they got stuck with them. They will be very lucky t o get a peanut back.

 

Some of TSF posted stuff like this at the time but got beaten up by Chorley's buddies for being Lowe luvvies

 

Anyway - hahahahaha at Coventry, good luck getting rid of them

 

even when Wilde & Crouch supported the decision as well

[Colinjb]

But we were very, very lucky to end up in Markus' lap.

 

There is a reasonable chance we would never have gone into admin at all if SISU had taken over. We are a much better prospect than Coventry.

 

No argument there, but SISU never had any money to put in anyway. They would have had a better chance running us as a business but as we all know from experience it is almost impossible to run a football club currently unless you have money to throw at them.

 

The only way to make a small fortune in football is to start with a large one.

[benjii]

A key point that was missed by many at the time and which has yet to be posted on here.

 

SISU were a HEDGE FUND.

 

They were not in any way shape or form an INVESTMENT COMPANY.

 

Hedge Funds make money from things going down in price (in simple terms).

 

In the economic climate of the time, it was boom boom boom, a Hedge Fund could see that buying Saints for peanuts trimming to the bone and then "flipping" the club could make them a very large sum of money.

 

They were shown the door, rightly, they had no money to offer (as Coventry have found out)

 

They went to Coventry and many fans went into manic depression.

 

Of course they got Coventry for a peanut, unfortunately the world went bust and they got stuck with them. They will be very lucky t o get a peanut back.

 

Some of TSF posted stuff like this at the time but got beaten up by Chorley's buddies for being Lowe luvvies

 

Anyway - hahahahaha at Coventry, good luck getting rid of them

 

I don't think their proposal was to buy 100% of the equity though was it? It was a smaller amount. So they couldn't just "flip on" the whole company to some dodgy geezers. I don't think they were offering peanuts either were they? I doubt they viewed us and Coventry as simialr propositions as we were at different stages in the "heading towards insolvency" cycle at the time.

 

To say, "hedge funds do [this]", is far too simplistic.

 

Obviously their ultimate motive was profit but they seemed to be looking to establish some market credentials in English football; not conduct an extremely rapid turnaround.

 

I think you may be wrong.

 

Anyway, I am happy with what we currently have!

[spyinthesky]

Is Ray Ranson still involved with SISU?

[Colinjb]

Is Ray Ranson still involved with SISU?

 

No, he was turfed out of Coventry last season after the club nearly went into administration. There was an 8 million pound investment into the club to bail it out and SISU then put Ken Dulieu into the hotseat.

[dubai_phil]

I don't think their proposal was to buy 100% of the equity though was it? It was a smaller amount. So they couldn't just "flip on" the whole company to some dodgy geezers. I don't think they were offering peanuts either were they? I doubt they viewed us and Coventry as simialr propositions as we were at different stages in the "heading towards insolvency" cycle at the time.

 

To say, "hedge funds do [this]", is far too simplistic.

 

Obviously their ultimate motive was profit but they seemed to be looking to establish some market credentials in English football; not conduct an extremely rapid turnaround.

 

I think you may be wrong.

 

Anyway, I am happy with what we currently have!

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-489594/Southampton-mystery-bidder.html

 

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23417910-saints-are-the-goal-for-secretive-hedge-fund.do

 

The mystery bidder for Southampton Football Club can be named today as Mayfair hedge fund Sisu Capital.,,,,,

 

.....The Evening Standard can reveal that Sisu Capital, a firm that has been criticised in the High Court and which is said to be one of London's most aggressive traders in debt-laden businesses, is the unnamed "investment company" which has made an on-the-cheap bid for Saints' quoted parent Southampton Leisure.....

 

....

Sisu aims to take at least 55% control of Southampton through the placing of 30 million new shares.

But the placing is priced at 40p a share, a discount of more than 20% to last Friday's closing price, raising just £12 million for a loss-making club that is £24 million in debt.

The offer has been agreed by Saints' chairman Ken Dulieu and chief executive Jim Hone with the backing of 29% shareholder and former chairman Rupert Lowe, who is likely to sell some of his stake to Sisu.

[aintforever]

Having seen what has happened to Cov over the last few years I personally think that we did better sticking with Rupes and Co. Yes, administration came quicker but so did our rebirth.

 

I would in no way want to have had the ongoing drain that is happening at the Ricoh happening to us. Yes, Cov have stayed in the Championship and up until now avoided oblivion, but the club has become a souless shell with dwindling fanbase. Nothing to give them hope, nothing to rally their supporters, just a zombie stuttering towards the inevitable.

 

That's all hindsight

 

The fact is the worst possible fate of Coventry is administration, -10 and relegation, if SISU sell them to a billionare tomorrow it would become "obvious" that turning them down was the wrong move because they will have avoided what we went through.

[benjii]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-489594/Southampton-mystery-bidder.html

 

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23417910-saints-are-the-goal-for-secretive-hedge-fund.do

 

Yeah?

 

So they were going to inject £12m for 55% of the club. That fits with what I said.

 

EDIT - funny how that last quote seemed to think Lowe backed the bid?!

[South Londoner]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. I remember being in favour of the SISU bid at the time; anything rather then what was happening at the club with Rupes and co.

 

Very happy to say that I was wrong.

[benjii]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. I remember being in favour of the SISU bid at the time; anything rather then what was happening at the club with Rupes and co.

 

Very happy to say that I was wrong.

 

You were only wrong because we got lucky with Markus and have since been promoted. At the time, you were right.

[Matthew Le God]

Always a bad sign when your chairman starts turning up to training camps in Portugal wearing initialed training gear...

 

 

Ken Dulieu, remember him? Far left of the picture.

Edited 13 July, 2011 by Matthew Le God

[Crab Lungs]

always a bad sign when you chairman starts turning up to training camps in portugal wearing initialed training gear...

 

 

ken dulieu, remember him? Far left of the picture.

 

lol.

[Graffito]

Hedge funds don't muck about and are interested only in the bottom line. They have no place football. I'm so relieved Sisu were not allowed anywhere near our club.

[Crab Lungs]

It did. Many people said 'anyone but rupert'. The pantomine Lowe stuff was just as bad as Lowe himself.

 

Lol again. Plenty of advocates for SISU deal. Still, doesn't matter now... but surely you could just tell Dulieu, Hone et al were useless opportunists?

[Red]

But we were very, very lucky to end up in Markus' lap.

 

There is a reasonable chance we would never have gone into admin at all if SISU had taken over. We are a much better prospect than Coventry.

 

It's not luck my friend - it's fate :-) We have fate on our side to provide enjoyment for the good folk of Southampton and surrouding areas! Which is why we missed a big trick in not rehiring Glenda - who would have brought true krama to the haloed saints :-)

[benjii]

In hindsight, "anyone but Rupert" was pretty prudent.

 

Let's just have a brief history recap...

 

At the time of the SISU offer, Lowe was not involved with the club in any way other than as a shareholder. He only held about 6% but due to the fragmented nature of our shareholdings he was still one of the most influential shareholders. SISU made an offer that would have seen them inject £12m new money into the club whilst the existing shareholders would have retained their holdings, although their control would have been diluted due to the new rights placement.

 

The board at the time supported the SISU offer. The major shareholders all decided they would vote against the offer.

 

Subsequently, Crouch ended up in control of the business. He appointed a good young manager and we stayed up. He appeared to have the support of our bankers.

 

Meanwhile, Lowe and Wilde had been lining up their return. Why did Lowe return? He obviously believed he could do a better job than Crouch. He obviously thought we were still heading for insolvency.

 

And what did Lowe achieve: insolvency and relegation. He did the worst possible job.

 

So, "anyone but Lowe": it certainly couldn't have been worse.

Edited 13 July, 2011 by benjii
spellings

[benjii]

Lol again. Plenty of advocates for SISU deal. Still, doesn't matter now... but surely you could just tell Dulieu, Hone et al were useless opportunists?

 

Quite possibly, but they did bring an offer of actual hard cash to the table; which is more than Lowe and Wilde ever managed.