What Wilde really thinks of Lowe

[Guided Missile]

Wilde criticising the way the club is run is like my bank manager complaining about my level of borrowing and the value of my assets. I am reminded of this old post of mine about the biggest bullsh!tter ever to be chairman of a football club, since Michael Knighton.

 

I haven't a clue what Wilde is personally worth, but it seems to have come mainly from bleeding the company he runs. What we are left with is a company, in my opinion, with high gearing, large debts and interest payments of over £500K a year. With the low level of net assets, due, for instance, to the withdrawal of £1.8M in dividends against £1.5M in net profits over the two years, 2003-2004, Merlion seems to be very susceptible to any increase in interest rates and downturn in the property market.

How does this affect Saints you may wonder? Well let's imagine Wilde has bled £5M from Merlion over 5 years. He punts a couple of million in Saints shares to satisfy his ego and very poor investment judgement. Interest rates go up a couple of percent, property sales dip and all of a sudden, Merlion can't service the £500K a year in interest to service their debt. The banks look to the shareholders or they will call in the loans and he either has to sell his Saints shares or let Merlion go to the wall. With potential personal guarantees, things are looking grim and the last thing him and people like Patrick Trant, also involved in building, want to do is invest further money in a Championship football club that is going nowhere. I'm not saying this will happen and I am sure Wilde understands the risks of running a company like Merlion plc. I am also sure that I would not like him running Southampton Leisure plc in the way he seems to be running Merlion plc.

For that reason, if he wins the EGM, I will be selling my shares PDQ and will certainly not be providing any more money in the form of a rights issue.

 

If I was any of the people that he is throwing stones at, I'd ask him why Merlion Group have failed to submit accounts for 2006, that were due on the 31st October, 2007 and have yet to be filed. It is probably not because the financial performance of the company that forms the basis of his wealth are doing well, is it?

[Mole]

How can Merlion simply not submit accounts?

 

Is this legal?

[Guided Missile]

How can Merlion simply not submit accounts?

 

Is this legal?

Companies incur late filing penalties under civil law. Failure to pay a late filing penalty can result in a County Court judgment (or Sheriff Court decree) against the company.

 

Failure to file accounts is a separate, criminal offence which can result in directors themselves being fined on conviction in the criminal courts.

[Long Shot]

Shuffling the deckchairs once more it seems,we just go round in circles,Lowe,Wilde ,Crouch,Wilde,Crouch,Lowe.

 

FFS this bunch appear determined to kill off anything that is SFC.

IT IS NOTHING MORE THAN A BUNCH OF TINPOT WANNABES WITH NO THOUGHTS OR GOOD INTENTIONS FOR THE CLUB.

Massaging egos along the way and playing games of one up manship over each other.

Sfc is just a plaything it seems,something to give each other some kudos in the presence of their peers.

**** off the lot of you.

 

I apologies for the lack of well thought out and considered response.

I'm just at my wits end with it all.

Never in my 35 years of watching and supporting the club have i ever felt so sodding low.

 

 

Appreciate how you feel I really do.

 

I think the choice we face as a club is damage or damage limitation.

 

I think with Lowe/Wilde running the club that damage is administration.

I think with Crouch/and friends running the club we would be able to fend off administration and also be able to hang onto players we want to come January. Option B is not wonderful but obviously better than Option A.

 

Influenced.com asked when - fair enough, I accept it is a bit like waiting for Godot (especially after Fulthorpe) at present. There is activity in the background but there is a lot of bad feeling out there and the e mail shows just how treacherous some of those involved can be.

[Long Shot]

Companies incur late filing penalties under civil law. Failure to pay a late filing penalty can result in a County Court judgment (or Sheriff Court decree) against the company.

 

Failure to file accounts is a separate, criminal offence which can result in directors themselves being fined on conviction in the criminal courts.

 

Which begs the question why Wilde hasn't been taken to task by the law?

[Mole]

Which begs the question why Wilde hasn't been taken to task by the law?

 

Companies House website opens tomorrow. I've not looked on it for a long time so perhaps Merlions accounts will be up to date on there now.

[up and away]

No not Crouch. He has supporters out there.

 

As for Admin, Crouch was aware of our position and the need to cut back. From what I am told he firmly believes he would have kept us out of Admin with a Manager who was making a difference. That opportunity has gone now. He firmly feels the way Lowe is running things is adding to the Admin risk. A manager without the right experience of CCC football, interference from Lowe in team selection and paying supporters who are turning their back on the club.

 

Lowe considers that Crouch would have put us in Admin by now or soon and that he was the best option to sort it out. Lowe will only step down if someone comes in with enough money and a three year plan. Without it is just a shuffle of the pack.

 

The two sides are in conflict.

 

You can argue either way on the manager and I can accept the rationale for either, but it becomes marginal when administration comes along. As soon as we failed to gain fees for our senior pro's and the ability to move on those high salaries our goose was cooked. Based upon last season and the gates we were then getting, there is nothing I can see that gates would be in sufficient numbers to get us out of the mire. A lot of fans are so fed up and have turned their back on the club, but Lowe going tomorrow would not solve that problem, although some improvement would occur. There is no interference from Lowe in team affairs with the exception of the financial aspects of running the club. This was desperately needed beforehand and is the main reason we are in this current mess. So for Crouch to highlight his failings in this manner, just empathises how little he has learnt and where the main problem has laid.

 

Would Crouch have put us into administration already? Not so sure but there is nothing in his record to believe he would improve matters, in fact just the opposite. He knew all the problems that would be coming along and did very little. His one strategy was to plough on regardless and hope the takeover fairy would get him out of the sheite. Nothing wrong with hoping for the takeover, but why should that stop you implementing safeguards to avoid administration? I look back at the statements made by Crouch and they are truly cringeworthy and so indicative of why we are in this mess today.

 

As it is I cannot see a way of avoiding administration, with the possible exception of what Crouch can add to the pot delaying matters. The amount that Crouch brings to the table would just be wasted without implementing all the cuts we have, so what would have been better in the first instance is a difficult call. An idiot with shed loads can afford to make mistakes and still do a job, but an idiot with that small a wedge is hardly an advantage, unless others do the ground work.

 

If Crouch does eventually throw in to help once again it will show what could have been. We could have had all 3 coming together before the end of last season and our chances would have been so much better. Throughout all of this, because no one has had sufficient cash the only sensible way forward was working together. But all we have seen is a continual ****ing contest where the misguided concept of saving the club just continually placed it in greater peril.

[Long Shot]

You can argue either way on the manager and I can accept the rationale for either, but it becomes marginal when administration comes along. As soon as we failed to gain fees for our senior pro's and the ability to move on those high salaries our goose was cooked. Based upon last season and the gates we were then getting, there is nothing I can see that gates would be in sufficient numbers to get us out of the mire. A lot of fans are so fed up and have turned their back on the club, but Lowe going tomorrow would not solve that problem, although some improvement would occur. There is no interference from Lowe in team affairs with the exception of the financial aspects of running the club. This was desperately needed beforehand and is the main reason we are in this current mess. So for Crouch to highlight his failings in this manner, just empathises how little he has learnt and where the main problem has laid.

 

Would Crouch have put us into administration already? Not so sure but there is nothing in his record to believe he would improve matters, in fact just the opposite. He knew all the problems that would be coming along and did very little. His one strategy was to plough on regardless and hope the takeover fairy would get him out of the sheite. Nothing wrong with hoping for the takeover, but why should that stop you implementing safeguards to avoid administration? I look back at the statements made by Crouch and they are truly cringeworthy and so indicative of why we are in this mess today.

 

As it is I cannot see a way of avoiding administration, with the possible exception of what Crouch can add to the pot delaying matters. The amount that Crouch brings to the table would just be wasted without implementing all the cuts we have, so what would have been better in the first instance is a difficult call. An idiot with shed loads can afford to make mistakes and still do a job, but an idiot with that small a wedge is hardly an advantage, unless others do the ground work.

 

If Crouch does eventually throw in to help once again it will show what could have been. We could have had all 3 coming together before the end of last season and our chances would have been so much better. Throughout all of this, because no one has had sufficient cash the only sensible way forward was working together. But all we have seen is a continual ****ing contest where the misguided concept of saving the club just continually placed it in greater peril.

 

 

You know that for sure do you?

[OldNick]

You know that for sure do you?

well if we are to accept the email chapter and verse perhaps Wildes comment about LC's excesses should be taken very seriously.So far many have said Lc was not responsible for gross overspending and made excuses but if MW is correct then LC must have been causing concern, and so administration under him must have been very likely

[Long Shot]

well if we are to accept the email chapter and verse perhaps Wildes comment about LC's excesses should be taken very seriously.So far many have said Lc was not responsible for gross overspending and made excuses but if MW is correct then LC must have been causing concern, and so administration under him must have been very likely

 

 

Nick go find a sunshade quick - we are getting worried here in Blighty. Love Liz

[Mole]

Nick go find a sunshade quick - we are getting worried here in Blighty. Love Liz

 

Are you sure you're a woman?

[Amesbury Saint]

This is what Wilde said about Lowe in February 2008 in an e mail - I think it sums up how the duo are unfit to be in the position they are.

Basically Wilde is accusing Lowe of deliberatly sabotaging the Boardroom with the insistence that a destructive and divisive person be appointed. Thanks Rupert.

 

"Unfortunately Leon Crouch was the 'poison pill' that Rupert Lowe forced upon the new management team at the point of his resignation - I did not want him appointed as a director at that time as I knew how divisive and destructive he could be - Rupert Lowe also knew this and insisted on his appointment as a condition of his stand down".

 

how did you get hold of the email?

[Long Shot]

how did you get hold of the email?

 

 

million dollar question Amesbury and one I would want to know but - do you seriously expect me to answer it?

Under normal conditions I would not have disclosed it, but my reckoning is that Wilde never kept his side of the bargain with the fans therefore all bets are off. All is fair in love and war and all that.

[fos1]

million dollar question Amesbury and one I would want to know but - do you seriously expect me to answer it?

Under normal conditions I would not have disclosed it, but my reckoning is that Wilde never kept his side of the bargain with the fans therefore all bets are off. All is fair in love and war and all that.

 

Good point Wilde has never kept his side of the bargain on anything

So will he do the right thing for our club and not himself now !!!!!

[Mole]

million dollar question Amesbury and one I would want to know but - do you seriously expect me to answer it?

Under normal conditions I would not have disclosed it, but my reckoning is that Wilde never kept his side of the bargain with the fans therefore all bets are off. All is fair in love and war and all that.

 

Are the club secretary that got sacked?

[fos1]

Are the club secretary that got sacked?

 

Stanley she was not sacked she resigned, think your find she couldnt work for Lowe !!

[Mole]

Stanley she was not sacked she resigned, think your find she couldnt work for Lowe !!

 

OK sorry Liz. I was just taking a wild stab with that question by the way and now i feel a bit guilty. If you're the lady who worked on reception you're very nice.

[Weston Saint]

I think Nickh should be banned for outing someone

[Saint 76er]

Appreciate how you feel I really do.

 

I think the choice we face as a club is damage or damage limitation.

 

I think with Lowe/Wilde running the club that damage is administration.

I think with Crouch/and friends running the club we would be able to fend off administration and also be able to hang onto players we want to come January. Option B is not wonderful but obviously better than Option A.

 

Influenced.com asked when - fair enough, I accept it is a bit like waiting for Godot (especially after Fulthorpe) at present. There is activity in the background but there is a lot of bad feeling out there and the e mail shows just how treacherous some of those involved can be.

 

LS, what would actually facilitate a coming together of these disparate parties do you think?

 

It seems that L+W have joined forces to prop up their investments presumably until someone comes along who would buy them out for an acceptable amount. But with the club edging ever closer to the big A (if not hurtling), then it appears they have a problem as who would buy a lowly CCC club in such depressed economic times?

 

But, gee whiz there is one person in the whole world who might just be prepared to do the deal and you would think L+W would bite that hand off. However, due to past bad blood a Mexican standoff appears to have ensued.

 

What I wonder would be required to work around this impasse (answers on a postcard to...)? Perhaps if all parties appointed an independent negotiator to act on their behalf some agreement could be reached without the necessity for them all to sit down and be nice to each other....

[aintforever]

The whole bunch of them need the bullet.

[Junior Mullet]

The only thing this really proves is how a plc structure for a football club does not work.

[OldNick]

I think Nickh should be banned for outing someone

how have i outed someone? I dont know who LS is I was pm'd who it was and that turned out to be wrong.

Personally i dont care who LS is, but this site i would have thought should be very wary as the person is putting up sensitive private information, that i would have thought could be deemed as slander at best (ie re Wilde)

It is trying to play games, slipping in little so called in the know stuff but then nothing happens.

Sooner or later the truth will come out Im sure.

[OldNick]

Stanley she was not sacked she resigned, think your find she couldnt work for Lowe !!

I heard a slightly different version

[John B]

The only thing this really proves is how a plc structure for a football club does not work.

 

I think you will find that most clubs are PLCs

 

I was quite surprised when I checked

[um pahars]

I think you will find that most clubs are PLCs

 

I was quite surprised when I checked

 

I think you will find they're not.

 

About a handful in the English Leagues are PLC's

[Viking Warrior]

............................

Edited 7 December, 2008 by Viking Warrior

[Long Shot]

Somebody is acting as agent Orange on here. I see a fair bit of misinformation being spouted

 

Long shot you state the following

 

This e mail proves both Wilde and Lowe not to be rational or worthy.

 

But you do not appear to chastise leon crouch in any format. yet the email you reveal is clearly directed at Crouch.

 

Are you being used by crouch or one of his cohorts by any chance?

 

Mike

 

I will say Leon Crouch to the best of my knowledge has never seen this e mail - in fact he probably doesn't know it exists, unless he reads this forum so me making it public has nothing to do with him.

 

As I have often said elsewhere I would summarise thus IMO

 

Wilde/Lowe in charge = severe damage=administration

Crouch and friends in control = damage limitation = non administration and not losing Surman/Lallana, but still needing proper investment before too long.

 

A bit simplistic maybe but knowing all 3 incumbents, as I do, Crouch is who I am putting my faith in. Would have appreciated a "wider" choice and bigger investment but beggars can't be chosers and all that. Hope this helps and you also have a pm.

[benjii]

Rule 1.

[buctootim]

Somebody is acting as agent Orange on here. I see a fair bit of misinformation being spouted

 

Long shot........are you being used by crouch or one of his cohorts by any chance?

 

Bingo!

[Viking Warrior]

................

Edited 7 December, 2008 by Viking Warrior

[Mole]

we have some excellent posters on this site a we should respect their comments sadold git weston manji red bag proffessor longshot. oh and that sun worshiper dubai phil amongst others.

 

I could comment, but it wouldn't be worth the infraction.

[Viking Warrior]

.....................

Edited 7 December, 2008 by Viking Warrior

[INFLUENCED.COM]

i have a far better understanding on what some key posters are saying.

so instead of slagging off peope who have genuine concerns about the club show a bit more restraint and try to understand where they are coming from.

 

It would be far easier for us regular posters to understand what 'key posters' are saying if they just came out and said it, they offer cryptic clues and when pushed state they are not at liberty to say, it is alleged there is activity behind the scenes by parties who will be able to 'save us from administration' I think it is fair that we question the time line and the position of the ITK poster.

[Weston Saint]

how have i outed someone? I dont know who LS is I was pm'd who it was and that turned out to be wrong.

Personally i dont care who LS is, but this site i would have thought should be very wary as the person is putting up sensitive private information, that i would have thought could be deemed as slander at best (ie re Wilde)

It is trying to play games, slipping in little so called in the know stuff but then nothing happens.

Sooner or later the truth will come out Im sure.

 

It was a joke!!

[jonah]

I think you will find they're not.

 

About a handful in the English Leagues are PLC's

 

Yeah, it's a real struggle to think of more than a couple...

 

SLH

Aberdeen

Reading

Sheff Utd

Sheff Weds

Rangers

Celtic

Birmingham

Arsenal

Norwich

Blackburn

Charlton

Spurs

West Brom

Gillingham

Leeds Utd

Preston

Sunderland

West Ham

Leicester

Millwall

Chelsea

Shrewsbury

Nottm Forest

AFC Wimbledon

Ipswich

Bolton

Grimsby

Wycombe

Watford

St Johnstone

Bristol Rovers

Hearts

Chesterfield

Torquay United

 

Or maybe you just have very large hands.

[Big Bad Bob]

whats rule 1 Benji....

 

This I'm guessing??

 

As for LS, why she is backing Crouch when the email intimates that Lowe wanted him in place because of his 'divisive personality' is beyond me.

 

Why swap one devisive personality for another, methinks personal vendetta is coming to the fore!!

[Roman]

Yeah, it's a real struggle to think of more than a couple...

 

SLH

Aberdeen

Reading

Sheff Utd

Sheff Weds

Rangers

Celtic

Birmingham

Arsenal

Norwich

Blackburn

Charlton

Spurs

West Brom

Gillingham

Leeds Utd

Preston

Sunderland

West Ham

Leicester

Millwall

Chelsea

Shrewsbury

Nottm Forest

AFC Wimbledon

Ipswich

Bolton

Grimsby

Wycombe

Watford

St Johnstone

Bristol Rovers

Hearts

Chesterfield

Torquay United

 

Or maybe you just have very large hands.

 

And you must have a lot of time on yours.

 

Anyway, you missed one.

[up and away]

Wilde criticising the way the club is run is like my bank manager complaining about my level of borrowing and the value of my assets. I am reminded of this old post of mine about the biggest bullsh!tter ever to be chairman of a football club, since Michael Knighton.

 

I haven't a clue what Wilde is personally worth, but it seems to have come mainly from bleeding the company he runs. What we are left with is a company, in my opinion, with high gearing, large debts and interest payments of over £500K a year. With the low level of net assets, due, for instance, to the withdrawal of £1.8M in dividends against £1.5M in net profits over the two years, 2003-2004, Merlion seems to be very susceptible to any increase in interest rates and downturn in the property market.

How does this affect Saints you may wonder? Well let's imagine Wilde has bled £5M from Merlion over 5 years. He punts a couple of million in Saints shares to satisfy his ego and very poor investment judgement. Interest rates go up a couple of percent, property sales dip and all of a sudden, Merlion can't service the £500K a year in interest to service their debt. The banks look to the shareholders or they will call in the loans and he either has to sell his Saints shares or let Merlion go to the wall. With potential personal guarantees, things are looking grim and the last thing him and people like Patrick Trant, also involved in building, want to do is invest further money in a Championship football club that is going nowhere. I'm not saying this will happen and I am sure Wilde understands the risks of running a company like Merlion plc. I am also sure that I would not like him running Southampton Leisure plc in the way he seems to be running Merlion plc.

For that reason, if he wins the EGM, I will be selling my shares PDQ and will certainly not be providing any more money in the form of a rights issue.

 

If I was any of the people that he is throwing stones at, I'd ask him why Merlion Group have failed to submit accounts for 2006, that were due on the 31st October, 2007 and have yet to be filed. It is probably not because the financial performance of the company that forms the basis of his wealth are doing well, is it?

 

I really cannot understand the fascination with Merlion, but for the fact it is not going to be increasing his bank balance at any time soon.

Once you have made money via a plc, your objective is to have direct control over that capital, without it subsequently being subject to risk or taxation. Anyone with any sense will have designed this strategy in the beginning. Ask your self what is better, having all that capital under your own personal control at minimal taxation and leaving the shell of the plc behind, or have that capital sitting within the plc? All perfectly legal and you have the option of giving secured loans to the plc from your own holding.

[cambsaint]

Jonah:

Try to buy an Arsenal share.

I think being a company limited by shares, and therefore having limited liability; and being a listed plc with shares being freely traded on one of the stock exchanges are very different.

I freelyadmit to not being an expert in company law, but I think some of the clubs you listed my be "closed", or if not all the issued shares are in a very few hands.

[jonah]

I think being a company limited by shares, and therefore having limited liability; and being a listed plc with shares being freely traded on one of the stock exchanges are very different.

I freelyadmit to not being an expert in company law, but I think some of the clubs you listed my be "closed", or if not all the issued shares are in a very few hands.

 

cambsaint, being a PLC has nothing to do with being listed.

 

For a related example, Wilde's Merlion was originally a PLC yet he was the only shareholder. Being a PLC rather than a private limited company means there are certain differences such as in terms of paying dividends and in terms of what you have to present in terms of profit and loss.

[Tamesaint]

Yeah, it's a real struggle to think of more than a couple...

 

SLH

Aberdeen

Reading

Sheff Utd

Sheff Weds

Rangers

Celtic

Birmingham

Arsenal

Norwich

Blackburn

Charlton

Spurs

West Brom

Gillingham

Leeds Utd

Preston

Sunderland

West Ham

Leicester

Millwall

Chelsea

Shrewsbury

Nottm Forest

AFC Wimbledon

Ipswich

Bolton

Grimsby

Wycombe

Watford

St Johnstone

Bristol Rovers

Hearts

Chesterfield

Torquay United

 

Or maybe you just have very large hands.

 

 

Thats 35.

 

There are 92 clubs in the Football league. There are 42 in Scotland. There are thousands in non league fooball (you have listed Torquay who play in the conference). There are many who play in wales.

 

So really 35 is just a handful. I do not see your point.

:-)

[um pahars]

Yeah, it's a real struggle to think of more than a couple...

 

SLH

Aberdeen

Reading

Sheff Utd

Sheff Weds

Rangers

Celtic

Birmingham

Arsenal

Norwich

Blackburn

Charlton

Spurs

West Brom

Gillingham

Leeds Utd

Preston

Sunderland

West Ham

Leicester

Millwall

Chelsea

Shrewsbury

Nottm Forest

AFC Wimbledon

Ipswich

Bolton

Grimsby

Wycombe

Watford

St Johnstone

Bristol Rovers

Hearts

Chesterfield

Torquay United

 

Or maybe you just have very large hands.

 

There's a few Scottish teams in there!!!!!!

 

But my mistake with the technical vocabulary, I meant listed PLC's of which there are a handful.

 

This is a good article and I like the bit that says :

 

From Arsenal to Millwall, all of the remaining quoted football clubs are private companies in all but name, as they are controlled by a single owner or group of investors.

 

Could certainly apply to us, with a cabal in control of 42%, which whilst not representing an overall majority, it means that this group is able to run the Club as they see fit.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/marketreport/2787675/Listed-football-clubs-score-own-goals.html

[Long Shot]

There's a few Scottish teams in there!!!!!!

 

But my mistake with the technical vocabulary, I meant listed PLC's of which there are a handful.

 

This is a good article and I like the bit that says :

 

From Arsenal to Millwall, all of the remaining quoted football clubs are private companies in all but name, as they are controlled by a single owner or group of investors.

 

Could certainly apply to us, with a cabal in control of 42%, which whilst not representing an overall majority, it means that this group is able to run the Club as they see fit.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/marketreport/2787675/Listed-football-clubs-score-own-goals.html

 

 

So were there any real benefits of Lowe and Askham masterminding the swindle that saw us become a PLC?

[John B]

So were there any real benefits of Lowe and Askham masterminding the swindle that saw us become a PLC?

 

I thought one of the main reasons becoming a PLC was to be able to get a loan for the Stadium.

 

If that is not the case there cannot be any benefits that I can see.

[Long Shot]

I thought one of the main reasons becoming a PLC was to be able to get a loan for the Stadium.

 

If that is not the case there cannot be any benefits that I can see.

 

wish we had stayed at the Dell.

Edited 19 November, 2008 by Long Shot

[Wes Tender]

I thought one of the main reasons becoming a PLC was to be able to get a loan for the Stadium.

 

If that is not the case there cannot be any benefits that I can see.

 

The original shares were for a nominal value of £1 since the very early days of the club. The biggest shareholder I think was Askham if I'm not mistaken and I believe he held 2500 shares costing him just £2500. Now, I don't know about you, but I could easily write a cheque for £2500 and not bat an eyelid. And I would gladly have done that if I knew that when the club became a PLC, the value of those shares would rocket to something like £1.5 million. I hope that I have recalled those figures accurately. Askham called it an unfortunate side effect of the reverse takeover and of course, it had no influence at all on the board's decision to become a PLC

[stanthemanfairoak]

The original shares were for a nominal value of £1 since the very early days of the club. The biggest shareholder I think was Askham if I'm not mistaken and I believe he held 2500 shares costing him just £2500. Now, I don't know about you, but I could easily write a cheque for £2500 and not bat an eyelid. And I would gladly have done that if I knew that when the club became a PLC, the value of those shares would rocket to something like £1.5 million. I hope that I have recalled those figures accurately. Askham called it an unfortunate side effect of the reverse takeover and of course, it had no influence at all on the board's decision to become a PLC

if you remember the tw#t went round at the time to as many as he could findin ex saints players,or there widows,buyin up there shares for next to nothing.

[jonah]

But my mistake with the technical vocabulary, I meant listed PLC's of which there are a handful.

 

"Technical vocubulary" my arse, nothing like moving the goalposts after the event to make yourself look a bit less dumb is there... ;-) Anyone would think you didn't actually understand the difference between being a PLC and being listed... or an open offer and a rights issue... or a real proxy and a pretend one sprinkled with fairy dust... or competent businessmen and egotistical fantasists.

 

Anyway, glad we cleared that one up!

[INFLUENCED.COM]

The biggest shareholder I think was Askham if I'm not mistaken and I believe he held 2500 shares costing him just £2500.

value of those shares would rocket to something like £1.5 million.

 

From memory it was about £3500 invested 1.5m being the unfortunate side affect as pointed out, oh to be so unfortunate, lets not forget others were as unfortunate, in relative terms, to experience great increases in wealth so we should not be selective when looking back at events, however, agree Askham was the main protagonist.

[trousers]

"Technical vocubulary" my arse, nothing like moving the goalposts after the event to make yourself look a bit less dumb is there... ;-) Anyone would think you didn't actually understand the difference between being a PLC and being listed... or an open offer and a rights issue... or a real proxy and a pretend one sprinkled with fairy dust... or competent businessmen and egotistical fantasists.

 

Anyway, glad we cleared that one up!

 

I assumed UP was referring to 'listed' PLCs in his original post. But there again, I am one of the dumb ones on here so no surprises there....