Clifford Nelson Posted 24 July, 2011 Share Posted 24 July, 2011 Saints are wholly owned by the Liebherr family. There are no shareholders apart from the shareholding left after Markus. Markus decided as he pleased what salary he wanted to pay to the Chief Executive, and that appears, not surprisingly, to have been endorsed by the surviving family. To be absolutely truthful that is all there is to know about it. We can have whatever opinions we like about it, but there is no board (in any useful meaning other than sounding board for NC) and no shareholding democracy. Complaining about it is of little value. The club seems well run and well invested in and with the ambition to be a force in the PL. The squad is good and well motivated and the manager clearly has got a plan for recruitment. Oh, I forgot, the only debt we've got is limited and to the owner. I would have given a kiss to anybody offering this scenario in the dark days, even if it included an inflated salary to the boss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughieslastminutegoal Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 I'm not arguing against a free market, I'm suggesting that the additional costs and failure to engage fans as customers whose opinions are valued are short termist and will result in disenchantment. With the current economic climate customer service is one of the things people should be expecting as the competition for the limited money fans have available. I'm more than aware that the demand for people attending their specific football club is inelastic, but as I've said, once people stop, they generally stop forever. The rising average age of football fans has been of note to the football money men for some time, and it's because fewer young people are starting, and those who are fans have generally been fans for a long time. It's a lot easier to keep people who want to keep coming happy than it is to entice new people to come along. Saints, when surveyed in the Prem had one of the very oldest fanbases, so the problem is even more relevant to us. Of course, Cortese seems has his own approach to reducing the average age regarding the 60-64s. Thats a very good point. The most significant baby boom that contributed to the growth of support means that 55+ supporters are a large % of the fan base. P*ss them off enough and you can alienate a lot of fans. There's far too much competition for young peoples' dosh, and their favourite time to be entertained just aint late afternoon/early evening at £25 a time. What with the cost of Uni, no EMA, lack of jobs for young people, big cuts in benefits on the way this aint the time for any business to annoy its older fans. You can afford to hack off your existing customers only if you can replace them with new ones, and that can only happen at Saints if the club is successful. That will continue to cost more and more. And if success doesn't come and a reversal of fortune sets in, no doubt the club will try to (re)play the loyalty card: you know, the one where fans somehow get assigned a "duty" to keep supporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 Are the Cortese bashers ever going to give it a rest. The problem I dont think you have grasped is that Cortese can do whatever he likes at the club and as long as the team is relatively successful he will not have any real problems I am not bashing him just posting some thoughts. Of course he needs to be kept in check otherwise more fans will become disenchanted as are the 60-64s and those having to pay parking fees to renew season ticket holders. Cortese earns in a year what it probably takes a significant number fans over twenty years to earn based on the current average weekly wage of less than £500 So he cannot really expect to continually raise money from the average fan especially during the austerity regime of the Tory Led Coalition. We need to think that the club is being run for the fans and the City and Region of Southampton and not to line Cortese's Pocket but as most people want guaranteed success this appears to be the only way possible. NC and ML are well respected because they are percieved as having saved the club after the desperate days of 2009 but a club like Southampton was always likely to survive and prosper after administration no matter who were the owners were because of the loyal fans and the infrastructure of the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenridge Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 (edited) NC and ML are well respected because they are percieved as having saved the club after the desperate days of 2009 but a club like Southampton was always likely to survive and prosper after administration no matter who were the owners were because of the loyal fans and the infrastructure of the club. Nothing to do with 'perception' it is fact that they saved The Club. There was hardly a queue of willing suitors lined up as you seem to suggest - other than Micky Falka or whatever his name was. The Club may well have survived but in what capacity no one can say but you'd put your money on the likelihood of it being much further down the football tier than it finds itself now. Yes the fans (at least some) would have stayed loyal but as for 'infrastructure' it could well have been decimated in another owners hands (assuming it was able to find a buyer). As has been pointed out elsewhere recently The Club is in a far greater position than I think the vast majority would have ever envisged just two short years ago so it seems in this football-quiet close season period a little pedantic moaning is an endorsement of how far we have come. Edited 25 July, 2011 by Greenridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokingFun Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 I'm more than aware that Saints can pay Cortese what he wants, it just seems like a massive piece of hypocrisy for him to be taking such a wad from the club whilst exploiting all these nice new ways to extort cash from fans in a recession. The long and short of it to me is if he can earn that as a banker, then he should be earning it as a banker. He's certainly not earning it in customer service or by nurturing the longer-term goodwill of the people who pay to see the club. It probably did first come out with the accounts, but it's the first time I've seen it in print. How on earth can he "extort" money from fans. This comment suggests that he is forcing people to part with their cash which is clearly not true. Everyone has a choice as to whether they wish to pay the money to watch what is on offer. Watching Saints simply isn't one of life's necessities so your comments seem very much OTT and actually a little disrespectful to fans as it suggests you do not think fans can think for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokingFun Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 People don't like people who get paid lots. Tommy Forecast probably earns the annual salary of 4 doctors. It's a sad world. You have a real axe to grind with Forecast don't you. I'm not sure what he has done wrong other than sign a long term deal with Saints. To my knowledge he turns up, trains, is willing to play etc. The people who signed him are the ones we should question, not the player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 You have a real axe to grind with Forecast don't you. I'm not sure what he has done wrong other than sign a long term deal with Saints. To my knowledge he turns up, trains, is willing to play etc. The people who signed him are the ones we should question, not the player. And he is perfectly adequate for a third choice keeper. Probably a bit over-paid for a squad player, but he's not unique on the footballing world in that respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 25 July, 2011 Author Share Posted 25 July, 2011 (edited) How on earth can he "extort" money from fans. This comment suggests that he is forcing people to part with their cash which is clearly not true. Everyone has a choice as to whether they wish to pay the money to watch what is on offer. Watching Saints simply isn't one of life's necessities so your comments seem very much OTT and actually a little disrespectful to fans as it suggests you do not think fans can think for themselves. Having moved here (twice) with the intention of making it easier for myself to watch Saints on a regular basis we clearly have a very different perspective on necessities. For as long as I'm in employment, and am permitted to attend by the club, I'll be watching Saints and worrying about how to pay for the other stuff after that. It would take a quite significant shift in my situation to not attend Saints, although I accept that as someone currently with an income but without a mortgage or kids I've got a bit more leeway than some. What I object to is the sly implementation of unavoidable charges for doing things that have been free for some time - and before anyone trots out the "but we went into administration" line, that was caused by the withdrawal of an overdraft and the overheads of paying for a stadium which now does not need to be repaid. Edited 25 July, 2011 by The9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docker-p Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 I know this site is traditionally very defensive of old Nick, but £650K is an extraordinarily large amount to pay a CEO for a company the size of Saints. If there is a fixed operating budget, which there almost certainly is, paying NC such a vast amount means less to spend on players, which ultimately means less potential for success. I think this was a problem caused when NC took operating control of the company and was allowed to do what he liked within the budget, hence he paid himself a ridiculously large amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 I know this site is traditionally very defensive of old Nick, but £650K is an extraordinarily large amount to pay a CEO for a company the size of Saints. If there is a fixed operating budget, which there almost certainly is, paying NC such a vast amount means less to spend on players, which ultimately means less potential for success. I think this was a problem caused when NC took operating control of the company and was allowed to do what he liked within the budget, hence he paid himself a ridiculously large amount. Until it actually impacts the club, and until it looks like we're struggling to buy players, I'll remain disinterested by talk of how much Cortese earns. £650K per year is peanuts compared to some players' salaries in this division. Even if he halved his salary, what is £300K going to get us in the transfer market? We've had a £3M+ bid accepted this summer, so I don't think money is a problem. Also, it's a good idea to check the facts before making an accusation that Cortese did this after Markus died, and without his consent. The accounts in question are up to the end of June 2010. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaucho Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 Why, oh why, aren't people complaining about the amount players (and their agents) are taking out of the game. Makes what NC is getting small fry. How much is Puncheon earning for doing F-All? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 I don't see why anyone would have a problem with Cortese's salary, if you want success you have to pay for it. 600K is a good salary so if Cortese doesn't get results there are plenty of other top CEOs the Leibherrs could replace him with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 Why, oh why, aren't people complaining about the amount players (and their agents) are taking out of the game. Makes what NC is getting small fry. How much is Puncheon earning for doing F-All? Cortese's annual salary is roughly the same as 3 weeks wages for Yaya Toure ! TBF, I think we are getting better value !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redondo Saint Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 Having moved here (twice) with the intention of making it easier for myself to watch Saints on a regular basis we clearly have a very different perspective on necessities. For as long as I'm in employment, and am permitted to attend by the club, I'll be watching Saints and worrying about how to pay for the other stuff after that. It would take a quite significant shift in my situation to not attend Saints, although I accept that as someone currently with an income but without a mortgage or kids I've got a bit more leeway than some. What I object to is the sly implementation of unavoidable charges for doing things that have been free for some time - and before anyone trots out the "but we went into administration" line, that was caused by the withdrawal of an overdraft and the overheads of paying for a stadium which now does not need to be repaid. Are you old enough for a full time job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilippineSaint Posted 25 July, 2011 Share Posted 25 July, 2011 Are you old enough for a full time job? He has a Paper round but only on Sundays when its not a school day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 26 July, 2011 Author Share Posted 26 July, 2011 Some people just aren't funny, are they? Saints' turnover, £14m, Chairman's salary, approx £1m (that £600k IS a part year figure btw, I've been told by someone who gets paid to find this sort of stuff out and I'll cede to their knowledge on it). That seems like a not-insignificant amount. Of course player wages are sky-high too, but that's the value of their trade - there are lots more players on lots more money than our second-tier superstars and player wages reach a natural level across the divisions in a way that exec remuneration doesn't, necessarily. I guess part of Cortese's salary is down to his trusted friendship with Markus, and part what he gets paid not to be banking in Switzerland where I'm sure he's very good at his area of expertise. When we're a profit-making global brand in the Champions League turning over 100 times the figure we had in 2009/10, he'll have earned it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 performance and crowds good so the owners will be happy with him. No players leaving due to lack of wages and attracting good players. Therefore not a problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windmill Arm 2 Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/district/southampton/9100617.Saints_director_paid_600k/?ref=fbrec Does exactly what it says on the tin. Probably worth noting that the article indicates that at the time there were two directors, Liebherr and Cortese, and Markus wasn't thought to be taking a salary. I look forward to seeing the discussion of why it was wrong for Lowe to take money out of the club via share dividends, but it's ok that we're paying through the nose for every visit to the club whilst a director is getting that kind of sum for doing the job he's doing - the crux presumably being that he could earn it somewhere else in banking...People like you are a cancer to this club. Take your negative nit picking shyte over to the ugly inside, nobody wants you here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 Nothing to do with 'perception' it is fact that they saved The Club. There was hardly a queue of willing suitors lined up as you seem to suggest - other than Micky Falka or whatever his name was. The Club may well have survived but in what capacity no one can say but you'd put your money on the likelihood of it being much further down the football tier than it finds itself now. Yes the fans (at least some) would have stayed loyal but as for 'infrastructure' it could well have been decimated in another owners hands (assuming it was able to find a buyer). As has been pointed out elsewhere recently The Club is in a far greater position than I think the vast majority would have ever envisged just two short years ago so it seems in this football-quiet close season period a little pedantic moaning is an endorsement of how far we have come. So do really think Cortese decided to get involved with SFC to save it for the fans. More likely he thought it was a good investment where he could earn an extremely good salary and bonuses whilst having a bit of fun ****ing Dune off with a ticket tax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 The problem I dont think you have grasped is that Cortese can do whatever he likes at the club and as long as the team is relatively successful he will not have any real problems I am not bashing him just posting some thoughts. Quite Of course he needs to be kept in check otherwise more fans will become disenchanted as are the 60-64s and those having to pay parking fees to renew season ticket holders. Kept in check by who? The Liebherr family will either allow him to just get on with things, or say if they are not happy with how NC is running things. It is certainly nothing at all for ordinary fans to concern themselves with. We are not a PLC any longer, neither do any ordinary fans hold shares. I queued three hours for my son's ST and didn't pay a penny to park. There are places to park for free you know. Total red herring. Cortese earns in a year what it probably takes a significant number fans over twenty years to earn based on the current average weekly wage of less than £500 So what? There is a tendency in life for people to earn what they are worth, based on the job they do, the responsibility that goes with it, the expertise needed to do that job, etc. Live with it. So he cannot really expect to continually raise money from the average fan especially during the austerity regime of the Tory Led Coalition. Why can't he? If they want to watch football at St Mary's they will just have to pay what it costs. Provided that what it costs is not out of line with the cost of watching other similar teams, then that will not be unreasonable. The austerity of the Tory led regime was a direct result of Labour's grand cock-up of the nation's finances. Why not mention that too? We need to think that the club is being run for the fans and the City and Region of Southampton and not to line Cortese's Pocket but as most people want guaranteed success this appears to be the only way possible. Kindly explain why all of these things are not mutually conducive? NC and ML are well respected because they are percieved as having saved the club after the desperate days of 2009 but a club like Southampton was always likely to survive and prosper after administration no matter who were the owners were because of the loyal fans and the infrastructure of the club. We didn't survive and prosper under the previous couple of regimes. But presumably now that they are gone, had we not got ML and NC, you are absolutely certain that anybody else would have been capable of making us prosper. Just as Coventry are prospering under that shower that wanted to take us over, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 We didn't survive and prosper under the previous couple of regimes. But presumably now that they are gone, had we not got ML and NC, you are absolutely certain that anybody else would have been capable of making us prosper. Just as Coventry are prospering under that shower that wanted to take us over, eh? At least this regime has dared to tax the fans for everything and doesn't pander to "fan power".Perhaps the 2 previous regimes were running the place like a charity shop. I think many supporters,particularly the older ones, have learnt a valuable lesson, if you want success in football it comes with a price tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenridge Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 (edited) So do really think Cortese decided to get involved with SFC to save it for the fans. More likely he thought it was a good investment where he could earn an extremely good salary and bonuses whilst having a bit of fun ****ing Dune off with a ticket tax Don't believe I have made any comments relating to 'saving SFC for the fans' so not sure where you're coming from on that one? As for your second point, which I've attempted to decipher, I believe he was brought on board by ML who obviously felt confident in his ability to run the SFC 'business' which is exactly what it is whether we like it or not. He's being rewarded at equal or lower than comparable positions in the industry so really not sure what your gripe is. I'm fairly sure he's not a registered charity. Surely you can find something more meaty to moan about? Edited 26 July, 2011 by Greenridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 People like you are a cancer to this club. Take your negative nit picking shyte over to the ugly inside, nobody wants you here. you are mistaken. There are far too many sheep on this forum only too willing to accept everything thrown at them by NC just because he spotted a good business opportunity for Marcus to invest in. Questioning things is exactly what the fanbase should be doing. Take a trip over to the Pompey takeover thread and see how many times Saints fans accuse the skates of negligence over questioning the large salaries they paid out. Asking about huge salaries, £7m losses last year orthe loans/debts we have is not nit picking. If the answers are there fair enough, but describing these people as a cancer to this club just because you are happy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 think some are too used to all the negative infighting that they go looking for problems forgetting what this is all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 you are mistaken. There are far too many sheep on this forum only too willing to accept everything thrown at them by NC just because he spotted a good business opportunity for Marcus to invest in. Questioning things is exactly what the fanbase should be doing. Take a trip over to the Pompey takeover thread and see how many times Saints fans accuse the skates of negligence over questioning the large salaries they paid out. Asking about huge salaries, £7m losses last year orthe loans/debts we have is not nit picking. If the answers are there fair enough, but describing these people as a cancer to this club just because you are happy? I'm not going to comment on Windmill Arms 2 comments, the last time I objected to people using the word cancer so freely I got heavily criticised. All I'll say is after losing my mother to cancer I doubt I'd use the word cancerous to describe a Saints fan who asks questions of his club rather than being a Stepford fan who blindly accepts everything... Bit over the top.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 I have a problem with NC wages....Its not NC or Southampton though it's just football in general. I just find the way football has become all about obscence amounts of money dis-heartning. I doubt NC is earning anything special in terms of football chairmen these days and who can blame him for wanting the going rate. The amount of money that gets thrown around in modern football is ridiculous though when you consider it's just a game and other more important things in this country go without due to lack of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dellman Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 I'm happy for NC to take twice as much, he'd still be cheap at the price compared with most players and he is bringing about the miracle of rising from the dead, thanks NC and keep it up inspite of the hostility of some 'supporters' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 I'm not going to comment on Windmill Arms 2 comments, the last time I objected to people using the word cancer so freely I got heavily criticised. All I'll say is after losing my mother to cancer I doubt I'd use the word cancerous to describe a Saints fan who asks questions of his club rather than being a Stepford fan who blindly accepts everything... Bit over the top.... Sadly some people on here are only to happy to throw about words as insults with thinking about their meaning....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 I'm not going to comment on Windmill Arms 2 comments, the last time I objected to people using the word cancer so freely I got heavily criticised. All I'll say is after losing my mother to cancer I doubt I'd use the word cancerous to describe a Saints fan who asks questions of his club rather than being a Stepford fan who blindly accepts everything... Bit over the top.... I appreciate that you, like others of us have pain associated with the word cancer but it also has non-medical definition, "an evil influence that spreads dangerously" - and think its this context the poster meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 I appreciate that you, like others of us have pain associated with the word cancer but it also has non-medical definition, "an evil influence that spreads dangerously" - and think its this context the poster meant. Nick I'm not going to get into an argument about the context of the word, I'm not objecting to the use of the word... I've never objected to the use of the word just how people use it. It was a ****ing chairman of a football club, a former manager and now a poster who dares to question how much a chairman gets paid? Seriously, going by your definition of cancer is The9 "an evil influence that spreads dangerously"? Was Lowe? Was McMenemy? I'm not going to tell people not to use the word on a messageboard but ffs people... I saw cancer eat my mother from the inside out, and then read people comparing Rupert Lowe, Lawrie McMenemy and now The9 to a cancer. Trust me, when you've seen cancer at work first hand you don't stop using the word, you change when and where you use it and describing a bloke on a messageboard who challenges how much his chairman is paid as a cancer is just... well, kind of disturbing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 Nick I'm not going to get into an argument about the context of the word, I'm not objecting to the use of the word... I've never objected to the use of the word just how people use it. It was a ****ing chairman of a football club, a former manager and now a poster who dares to question how much a chairman gets paid? Seriously, going by your definition of cancer is The9 "an evil influence that spreads dangerously"? Was Lowe? Was McMenemy? I'm not going to tell people not to use the word on a messageboard but ffs people... I saw cancer eat my mother from the inside out, and then read people comparing Rupert Lowe, Lawrie McMenemy and now The9 to a cancer. Trust me, when you've seen cancer at work first hand you don't stop using the word, you change when and where you use it and describing a bloke on a messageboard who challenges how much his chairman is paid as a cancer is just... well, kind of disturbing.... Get off your high horse Darren. We've all lost relatives to cancer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoobysaint Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 Get off your high horse Darren. We've all lost relatives to cancer. Dune, you really are a nasty piece of work aren't you. Totally unneccessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 Get off your high horse Darren. We've all lost relatives to cancer. FFS, did you ****ing read that post or just react to it? Is The9 "an evil influence that spreads dangerously" or are people getting a but hysterical over a poster who just questioned how much Cortese gets paid? Or am I just not getting my point across well enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoobysaint Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 With respect to Cortese's wage. . . if he gets paid what he wants for AOC instead of what people want to pay then he has made his money for the next few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 FFS, did you ****ing read that post or just react to it? Is The9 "an evil influence that spreads dangerously" or are people getting a but hysterical over a poster who just questioned how much Cortese gets paid? Or am I just not getting my point across well enough? You've made this point several times and it's a cheap shot IMO. Like I say we've all lost relatives to cancer, but that doesn't mean we can't take a comment using the word in the context it's meant. You are making a mountain out of a molehill and I happen to think it's a rather crass way of trying to win an argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 You've made this point several times and it's a cheap shot IMO. Like I say we've all lost relatives to cancer, but that doesn't mean we can't take a comment using the word in the context it's meant. You are making a mountain out of a molehill and I happen to think it's a rather crass way of trying to win an argument. And what part of... "Nick I'm not going to get into an argument about the context of the word, I'm not objecting to the use of the word" Did you not understand Einstein? A bloke posts on here questioning whether or not Cortese merits £600k and he get gets called a cancer amongst Saints fans and I'm the one making a mountain out of molehill? ****ing grow up.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locksheathsaint101 Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 And what part of... "Nick I'm not going to get into an argument about the context of the word, I'm not objecting to the use of the word" Did you not understand Einstein? A bloke posts on here questioning whether or not Cortese merits £600k and he get gets called a cancer amongst Saints fans and I'm the one making a mountain out of molehill? ****ing grow up.... Have to disagree with you here daren and I think you are letting your personal experience cloud your judgment. I think it is entirely possible for cancer to be an accurate description in this context even if I totally disagree with the view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 And what part of... "Nick I'm not going to get into an argument about the context of the word, I'm not objecting to the use of the word" Did you not understand Einstein? A bloke posts on here questioning whether or not Cortese merits £600k and he get gets called a cancer amongst Saints fans and I'm the one making a mountain out of molehill? ****ing grow up.... This is not the first time you have made a big deal about the use of the word to win an argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alain Perrin Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 £600K is not a lot of money for a banker; trust me, I work in Zurich a lot. And, as people have mentioned, getting irate about a football chairman's salary when players are paid a multiple of that is akin to worrying about global warming when your house is on fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 Have to disagree with you here daren and I think you are letting your personal experience cloud your judgment. I think it is entirely possible for cancer to be an accurate description in this context even if I totally disagree with the view. I give up, I'm obviously not getting my point across well enough or people are choosing to mis-interrept it (I'm not referring to you locksheathsaint) I'll say this one last time. I'm not objecting to the use of the word, I'm not some ****ing word nazi. For me it's an emotive word admittedly but people on here get so ****ing hett about what is essentially sh1t. Rupert Lowe, Lawrie McMenemy, Nicola Cortese, Ticket taxes... Seriously I don't care but come on... I just think it's over the top... For the final time I'm not, never have done, never will do, objecting to people using emotive words but in the right context? Is that so difficult to understand? What argument am I winning here ffs? I'm just standing up for a poster who quite rightly dares to question his club. It's his right as a paying fan. I think Cortese wages are a bargain but I'll stand up for The9's right to question it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 26 July, 2011 Author Share Posted 26 July, 2011 (edited) people like you are a cancer to this club. Take your negative nit picking shyte over to the ugly inside, nobody wants you here. LOL. I do wish people would try to back up their arguments by debating the issues sometimes. Daren, I have every sympathy with your reaction to the terminology given your recent bereavement, but I'm not going to worry about criticism from people who take on the moral high ground and pass themselves off as representative of others ("nobody wants you here") even in the face of numerous messages supporting the right to discussion and a few who even support my none-too-popular point(s) despite the obvious hassle of being seen to not be blissfully happy with everything. What's also a shame is the constant playing of the man not the ball. I'm not a great supporter of the angle that this forum isn't what it was, but if it isn't, it's down to the failure of certain people to discuss the point, not the person making the point. As I've recently made a few of these people's lists, I'm fully expecting every single discussion to turn into some kind of personal attack from now on. FWIW I still think Cortese is good for the club on balance, but I don't like some of his methods of fundraising, the arbitrary nature of when it suits the club to be run as a business compared to when it's altruistic, or the ignorance of competent marketing and communication that underpins being run as a business. Edited 26 July, 2011 by The9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 I give up, I'm obviously not getting my point across well enough or people are choosing to mis-interrept it (I'm not referring to you locksheathsaint) I'll say this one last time. I'm not objecting to the use of the word, I'm not some ****ing word nazi. For me it's an emotive word admittedly but people on here get so ****ing hett about what is essentially sh1t. Rupert Lowe, Lawrie McMenemy, Nicola Cortese, Ticket taxes... Seriously I don't care but come on... I just think it's over the top... For the final time I'm not, never have done, never will do, objecting to people using emotive words but in the right context? Is that so difficult to understand? What argument am I winning here ffs? I'm just standing up for a poster who quite rightly dares to question his club. It's his right as a paying fan. I think Cortese wages are a bargain but I'll stand up for The9's right to question it... So what exactly are you trying to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 £600K is not a lot of money for a banker; trust me, I work in Zurich a lot. He's not banking though, he running a football club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat from Poole Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 People like you are a cancer to this club. Take your negative nit picking shyte over to the ugly inside, nobody wants you here. Absolute horse dung for three reasons:- 1. not going to repeat Daren's points re use of the "c" word, but entirely agree with him. 2. The9 is a sound guy, very knowledgeable. I think he'd be missed a lot more than you. 3. Nothing wrong with The Ugly Inside board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenridge Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 He's not banking though, he running a business. Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 Agreed I like what you did there. First time I've written football club for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 I'm not some ****ing word nazi. My grandad died in that war you coc.k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 My grandad died in that war you coc.k I'm assuming that would only offend you if he happened to be a Nazi.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 I'm assuming that would only offend you if he happened to be a Nazi.......... You couldn't be more wrong. Hitler quite liked being called a Nazi, but it used to **** Churchill off something rotten! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 26 July, 2011 Share Posted 26 July, 2011 So what exactly are you trying to say? That that comment was a bit over the top... That's all For me the word cancer refers to something evil, destructive, malignant. I have never been able to see how people can refer to people like Lawrie McMenemy as a cancer because he gets a few free tickets or, unbelievably, The9 because he dares question the wage a chairman gets… For me it's just over the top. Cancerous was another word and I can understand people using it to describe someone's influence but for me, personally, to refer to an indivual as cancerous is, again, over the top… Nothing more, nothing less. Is that so hard to understand? Or am I just not getting the point across well enough? If they'd said evil or malignant I'd still be saying the same thing… It's just over the top… Maybe my experiences with it have clouded my judgement here but I don't think so.... Do I find the word cancer offensive on here? No, not really Do I find the word cancer really applicable to Rupert Lowe, Lawrie McMenemy or The9? No, not really Do I find it offensive that someone intimates that i'm somehow using my mother's death through cancer to score cheap points on a ****ing internet messageboard over a nothing argument on a nothing point? Yes I do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now