More Echo Poo Stirring

[Turkish]

You got to love some of the mugs on here. They demand evidence otherwise it's all bullsh*t from people with agendas, then why they get their evidence by way of a court order, they then claim that it doesn't matter, it's only a one off, we dont know both sides of the story, conviniently ignoring that Saints had their chance to give their side of the story in court and didn't even bother turning up, then when all else fails remember it doesn't matter because 85% of the time we dont mug local businesses off!

[Saint Without a Halo]

You got to love some of the mugs on here. They demand evidence otherwise it's all bullsh*t from people with agendas, then why they get their evidence by way of a court order, they then claim that it doesn't matter, it's only a one off, we dont know both sides of the story, conviniently ignoring that Saints had their chance to give their side of the story in court and didn't even bother turning up, then when all else fails remember it doesn't matter because 85% of the time we dont mug local businesses off![/quote

 

If by refusing to accept an isolated case of non payment amongst thousands of normal monthly payments is a sure fire sign of a clubs hidden agenda to not pay for work done and to hold back monies makes me a mug i am happy to be one! thanks Turkish

[The Kraken]

We've hit the big time now. Heating & Ventilation News have picked up on the story.

 

http://www.hvnplus.co.uk/news/southampton-fc-ordered-to-pay-60k-to-solent/8638937.article?blocktitle=LATEST-NEWS&contentID=2339

[stevegrant]

If by refusing to accept an isolated case of non payment amongst thousands of normal monthly payments is a sure fire sign of a clubs hidden agenda to not pay for work done and to hold back monies makes me a mug i am happy to be one! thanks Turkish

If it was a simple case of it being a payment lost among "thousands" of other monthly payments, surely they would have paid up when they realised their mistake, rather than allow it to go to independent arbitration, and then when the independent arbitration ruled against the club, surely they would have paid up then, rather than take it to court and then wait until the day before the case was due to be heard before emailing the court to tell them they wouldn't be attending to defend themselves?

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Yeah definitely a skate, i mean only a skate would have a season ticket, go to away games, drink in well known saints pubs and absolutely love the club. You really are a proper dic.k if you think he is, the lad gives a massive sh.it about the club and is sticking his neck out on many things (with a risk of losing out as a result) so people like us are informed.

 

This place really is depressing reading at times, how you can get so many head in the sand fuc.kwits in one place truly baffles me.

 

Sorry, what if, but and hypothetials is it based on? Wasn't It a FACT SFC were given a court order to pay an unpaid bill, that no defence was given as to why not and we didn't even bother to attend court. Anyone in their right mind without a blind cult like loyalty to the club would think that it has been out of order on this occasion and as he says, you can forgive some things like crap beer and ticket tax but not shafting local companies.

 

As for Dan Kerins, I know him personally and I know he is a big saints fan, just one that's not so blind they can't dare to critise th club when it's needed. I just hope he doesn't get 'Illingsworthed' as we know our wonder chairman doesn't like people saying nasty things about his toy.

 

Sorry lads have I upset you? Offended one of your pals? I wonder why you are both so quick to jump down the throat of anyone that criticises a fellow cortese bashed eh?

 

If you could point me to where I have criticised him personally? Or said anything to suggest he is not indeed a 'top lad'? I couldn't possibly comment on this, having never met the chap.

 

But clearly it's fine for you to start slagging off and name calling anyone that questions someone that takes every story to come of SMS as the worst thing ever, and we are the worst club ever in everyway. It's as if Cortese and Saints are the only company (which lets face it, every single professional club in the country, if not the world are now). That ever do something that upsets other people or its customers.

 

If you write off a ruling from a judge in court as an "imagined hypothetical" I'd like to see what you'd do if you got a fixed penalty notice.

 

Probably write it off as a being from a "skate on a wind up", eh?

 

This board is not getting any less mongy is it.

 

That wasn't the bit I was referring to. But congrats in proving your own point. Top effort.

 

Extrapolating one half of a story, to make statements such as "If you couldn’t put food on your table because Saints hadn’t paid their bill", is there any evidence of this? Nah course not. But hey, as always, why let evidence get in the way of a food whine?

 

It's Daily Mail-esque predictive misery - oh Everyone at the club is so mean? What next? Viewing tax to be able to see the pitch during the game?! Oh my god, everyone out!

 

As for head in the sand, I would argue you lot the perpetually p!ss-drenched pampers are equally guilty. Any negative story is absolute proof of how awful the club and those in the club are - which are often, not always, based on hear say, rumour and speculation.

 

Yet when an actual good news story comes out from the club, or those involved, it's all just smoke and mirrors, what else are they going to say blah blah?

 

Pip pip!

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

This thread is rapidly becoming yet another example of what you might call a growing 'My Club Right or Wrong' attitude among some on here. It doesn't matter what the club do because as fans it is our duty to support it come-what-may. Well no actually, I don't agree with that.

 

When a individual, or as in this case, an organization is clearly in the wrong, then instead of desperately hunting around for (unconvincing) reasons to excuse that errant behavior, I say we should instead stand up and condemn that wrongdoing - even if it is our family, our friends, or even our football club doing it.

 

The court has ruled - pay the bloody bill Mr Cortese.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

You got to love some of the mugs on here. They demand evidence otherwise it's all bullsh*t from people with agendas, then why they get their evidence by way of a court order, they then claim that it doesn't matter, it's only a one off, we dont know both sides of the story, conviniently ignoring that Saints had their chance to give their side of the story in court and didn't even bother turning up, then when all else fails remember it doesn't matter because 85% of the time we dont mug local businesses off![/quote

 

If by refusing to accept an isolated case of non payment amongst thousands of normal monthly payments is a sure fire sign of a clubs hidden agenda to not pay for work done and to hold back monies makes me a mug i am happy to be one! thanks Turkish

 

Questionable Maths if you ask me. One non payment out of what is probably what, thousand every year = 85%?

 

I hope he isn't a maths teacher?

[Turkish]

 

Questionable Maths if you ask me. One non payment out of what is probably what, thousand every year = 85%?

 

I hope he isn't a maths teacher?

 

See Franks Cousins post.

[CB Fry]

Sorry lads have I upset you? Offended one of your pals? I wonder why you are both so quick to jump down the throat of anyone that criticises a fellow cortese bashed eh?

 

If you could point me to where I have criticised him personally? Or said anything to suggest he is not indeed a 'top lad'? I couldn't possibly comment on this, having never met the chap.

 

But clearly it's fine for you to start slagging off and name calling anyone that questions someone that takes every story to come of SMS as the worst thing ever, and we are the worst club ever in everyway. It's as if Cortese and Saints are the only company (which lets face it, every single professional club in the country, if not the world are now). That ever do something that upsets other people or its customers.

 

 

 

That wasn't the bit I was referring to. But congrats in proving your own point. Top effort.

 

Extrapolating one half of a story, to make statements such as "If you couldn’t put food on your table because Saints hadn’t paid their bill", is there any evidence of this? Nah course not. But hey, as always, why let evidence get in the way of a food whine?

 

It's Daily Mail-esque predictive misery - oh Everyone at the club is so mean? What next? Viewing tax to be able to see the pitch during the game?! Oh my god, everyone out!

 

As for head in the sand, I would argue you lot the perpetually p!ss-drenched pampers are equally guilty. Any negative story is absolute proof of how awful the club and those in the club are - which are often, not always, based on hear say, rumour and speculation.

 

Yet when an actual good news story comes out from the club, or those involved, it's all just smoke and mirrors, what else are they going to say blah blah?

 

Pip pip!

 

 

 

If you plan to squinny about others extrapolating wildly, my advise would be to not then pepper your own rant with your own wild extrapolation.

 

Jolly nice try though.

[Saint Without a Halo]

If it was a simple case of it being a payment lost among "thousands" of other monthly payments, surely they would have paid up when they realised their mistake, rather than allow it to go to independent arbitration, and then when the independent arbitration ruled against the club, surely they would have paid up then, rather than take it to court and then wait until the day before the case was due to be heard before emailing the court to tell them they wouldn't be attending to defend themselves?

 

That wasnt the point i was making was it? I said previously this is an isolated case out of many payments made every month in which the club may be mistaken or wrong but even here we dont have the full facts. My point was that it is a far leap from one case where payments have been withheld to the inference by the journo that this is a declared club policy to delay payments to local businesses.

[Saint Without a Halo]

This thread is rapidly becoming yet another example of what you might call a growing 'My Club Right or Wrong' attitude among some on here. It doesn't matter what the club do because as fans it is our duty to support it come-what-may. Well no actually, I don't agree with that.

 

When a individual, or as in this case, an organization is clearly in the wrong, then instead of desperately hunting around for (unconvincing) reasons to excuse that errant behavior, I say we should instead stand up and condemn that wrongdoing - even if it is our family, our friends, or even our football club doing it.

 

The court has ruled - pay the bloody bill Mr Cortese.

I am not disagreeing with paying once the court has ruled I am saying

 

1) We dont have all the facts on this case

2) There are likely to be thousands of normal payments being made by the club to local businesses every month

3) you cannot conclude purely on the evidence from (1) that this means the club has a hidden policy to avoid and delay paying local businesses ina pompey like manner!

[Special K]

I dont disagree with your logic - I just struggle how you can extrapolate such a negative conclusion from this case considering how many suppliers and firms are paid each month in comparison - of which we dont see or hear any stories. This is what I mean about balance. Of course 'local firm pays local company for quality service' is not a story of any interest, but some perspective is needed.

 

I dont like the idea of my club being crap in these things - but i also dont believe this is some sort of policy or strategy to screw over local businesses - even Cortese is unlikely to see any commercial benefit in alienating local companies that advertise and support the club. If there was an issue with thsi foirm, or not, I would love to know, but I dont have access to that information, So we can assume one of two things, which is the point - the worst, or that its an issue between the two firms, that does unfortunatey happen.

 

Cortese, may indeed be all the things some think he is. I dont know, never met him, never seen how he operates, never seen him dealing with employees or suppliers on a day to day basis, and until we see accounts in 2014 for this season, we wont know how well he managed the transition and expenditure - It may well be full of holes, but I am not going to ASSUME it is, simply because of rumours and speculation, which has only ever come from sources with obvious grievences.

 

Markus trusted NC - for some reason they were close friends. I dont believe Markus would have placed that trust in someone who has been characterised as a complete vindictive type some are insinuating. If I am wrong, I will be the first to admit to it - but I simply dont believe in teh conclusions some are drawing from what is still only one side of the story.

 

It's not though is it? Judgment at court. Please don't dig that hole any bigger.

 

Irrespective of that, there is no balance to discuss. You pay your bills on time. If you don't, you get a bad reputation, or worse, statutory judgments against your company. It is a very simple tenet of business administration. Corporate image is primarily about confidence in your brand and losing court cases that should never have gone to court in the first place is either plain bloody stupid or smacks of overbearing arrogance. I suspect the latter. I suspect the contractor was "tested" to see if a) he had the stomach for the fight and b) had the capital to fund the fight to the court steps. Good on him for seeing it through. Let's hope the club have paid that particular bill.

 

And when NC tries to get an offer accepted in January on a much needed defensive duo, i can imagine his stance for negotiation will be very much weakened by tales of financial mismanagement with, relatively speaking, small sums of money owed to local builders. FFS, you can't go wading into a boardroom wanting a 5m defender with a 1m downpayment when you can't even pay your suppliers what that defender would want in his weekly wage and yes, the other clubs representatives will do their homework.

 

If it was my CEO acting like this, i'd sack the ***t. Inexcusable actions by the club. Really, really poor.

[aintforever]

I don't know why people are getting in a flap over a blog like this. It's just a nothing article written by someone obviously struggling for news. The Echo can write what they like, it doesn't have to be positive.

 

I couldn't give a monkeys if the club are bad payers or not. What annoys me is the fact that the Echo have to resort to writing sh!te like this. if the club had a decent relationship with the one local paper we have then we could be reading an interview with a player, or the club's plans for a 50,000 seater megadome.

 

Instead all we get is boring negative stories and all the club gets is bad PR just because one person has thrown his toys out the pram.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

If you plan to squinny about others extrapolating wildly, my advise would be to not then pepper your own rant with your own wild extrapolation.

 

Jolly nice try though.

 

If you plan to be so condescending, my advice would be to learn the difference between advice and advise.

 

But yes, clearly I am the ****w!t here, right.

 

The difference in that I am using hyperbole to make a point. You lot take one guys leap from A to Z as absolute proof to justify your constant complaining about the people overseeing an extremely successful period in the clubs history.

 

Better luck next time.

Edited 21 November, 2012 by KelvinsRightGlove

[shurlock]

If you plan to be so condescending, my advice would be to learn the difference between advice and advise.

 

But yes, clearly I am the ****w!t here, right.

 

The difference in that I am using hyperbole to make a point. You lot take one guys leap from A to Z as absolute proof to justify your constant complaining about the people overseeing an extremely successful period in the clubs history.

 

Better luck next time.

 

[Frank's cousin]

 

See Franks Cousins post.

 

Another Gem. Illustrates once again that you read much and comprehend little. That was clearly refering to the 15% outstanding to the 85% paid for thsi particular contract - NOT all bills....

[Frank's cousin]

This thread is rapidly becoming yet another example of what you might call a growing 'My Club Right or Wrong' attitude among some on here. It doesn't matter what the club do because as fans it is our duty to support it come-what-may. Well no actually, I don't agree with that.

 

When a individual, or as in this case, an organization is clearly in the wrong, then instead of desperately hunting around for (unconvincing) reasons to excuse that errant behavior, I say we should instead stand up and condemn that wrongdoing - even if it is our family, our friends, or even our football club doing it.

 

The court has ruled - pay the bloody bill Mr Cortese.

 

I dont think anyone would NOT condemn any wrong doing - its NOt a case of my club right or wrong, but one of 'benefit of the doubt' which given the lack available and only one side of the story is IMHO fair enough. I would hope that there is a genuine reason for what has happened, if not, then like others have said its well out of order.

 

Two questions:

 

1. Is it right to judge the club and NC on this without any knowledge of why this occured? Sure the club have had an opportunity to make its case, they chose not to, but I for one would still prefer to hear their side of this issue before taking sides - afterall it IS my club and I get no joy out of seeing it exposed in this way, so want to be 100% sure before condemning its actions - as a 'supporter', I struggle to see what is wrong with that attitude. Seems some are quick/happy to condemn.

 

2. Is it right what some media and fans on here seem to be insinuating, that because of this one example, the club is somehow crap in all its transactions?

 

 

The problem on here seems to be that this is and always has been about more than this story - NO ONE who cares about the club would defend it if its fecked up on this and there is no justification for withholding teh FINAL payment. The ajudication and court decision make it clear that from a legal standpoint the club must pay up. BUt I want to know why they held this back before condemning what is afterall MY club... I am not a lawyer, or a contractor, just a fan/supporter so I have that luxury.

 

The club is never always right - it has made and will always make mistakes - there will be personalities involved at teh cub that I may not like if I ever got to know them - who knows. I also believe its right to ask questions of the club when as fans we feel it has done wrong - its a duty of care. BUt I also find it stange how some are so quick to condemn, without having the answers to those questions. Yes its frustrating that the club remains silent on most issues - but that is not always an admission of guilt.

 

Yes in this case, it appears like the club has indeed behaved wrongly. No excuses, just as it is indeed MY club, I still do not feel comfortable condemning without hearing their side of the story.

[CB Fry]

I dont think anyone would NOT condemn any wrong doing - its NOt a case of my club right or wrong, but one of 'benefit of the doubt' which given the lack available and only one side of the story is IMHO fair enough. I would hope that there is a genuine reason for what has happened, if not, then like others have said its well out of order.

 

Two questions:

 

1. Is it right to judge the club and NC on this without any knowledge of why this occured? Sure the club have had an opportunity to make its case, they chose not to, but I for one would still prefer to hear their side of this issue before taking sides - afterall it IS my club and I get no joy out of seeing it exposed in this way, so want to be 100% sure before condemning its actions - as a 'supporter', I struggle to see what is wrong with that attitude. Seems some are quick/happy to condemn.

 

2. Is it right what some media and fans on here seem to be insinuating, that because of this one example, the club is somehow crap in all its transactions?

 

 

The problem on here seems to be that this is and always has been about more than this story - NO ONE who cares about the club would defend it if its fecked up on this and there is no justification for withholding teh FINAL payment. The ajudication and court decision make it clear that from a legal standpoint the club must pay up. BUt I want to know why they held this back before condemning what is afterall MY club... I am not a lawyer, or a contractor, just a fan/supporter so I have that luxury.

 

The club is never always right - it has made and will always make mistakes - there will be personalities involved at teh cub that I may not like if I ever got to know them - who knows. I also believe its right to ask questions of the club when as fans we feel it has done wrong - its a duty of care. BUt I also find it stange how some are so quick to condemn, without having the answers to those questions. Yes its frustrating that the club remains silent on most issues - but that is not always an admission of guilt.

 

Yes in this case, it appears like the club has indeed behaved wrongly. No excuses, just as it is indeed MY club, I still do not feel comfortable condemning without hearing their side of the story.

 

Well they held the judicary in enough contempt to make no attempt to give a side of the story to them. It's highly unlikely they are going to bother to tell the rest of us. And if they do, it will be agenda-driven hearsay they didn't have the guts to say to a judge. Won't stop you lapping it up of course.

 

But in your world this is enough to prove the club is actually probably in the right after all.

 

Next time there are rumours kicking about, don't bother with your usual pompous demands for evidence. You've proved here you have no interest in any at all, just wanting to hear what you want to hear.

 

All the FC snoreathon lectures in the world can't change that now.

[dronskisaint]

1) Junior reporter told by his bosses to write story - probably he is a good lad and a Saints supporter and probably wasn't going to risk losing his job by refusing

 

2) Club has commercial dispute with supplier and witholds part payment - commercial argument ensues ending in court action which the club (customer) decide they won't defend because it's good money after bad.

 

3) The end

[Dr Who?]

Talking of poo stirring, I always find it quieter on here when Saints win. Are there any stats that show people on here like to moan about the team more than praise them, by number of threads, posts.....

 

God I need to get out more!

[John B]

1) Junior reporter told by his bosses to write story - probably he is a good lad and a Saints supporter and probably wasn't going to risk losing his job by refusing

 

2) Club has commercial dispute with supplier and witholds part payment - commercial argument ensues ending in court action which the club (customer) decide they won't defend because it's good money after bad.

 

3) The end

 

I dont really understand how people like you make excuses for a pretty disgraceful decision by SFC

 

Or do you think it is acceptable to withold money on a whim and not pay when a court tells you do so.

[CB Fry]

1) Junior reporter told by his bosses to write story - probably he is a good lad and a Saints supporter and probably wasn't going to risk losing his job by refusing

 

 

 

Laughable nonsense. It's a blog the editor will barely know exists.

[Turkish]

That wasnt the point i was making was it? I said previously this is an isolated case out of many payments made every month in which the club may be mistaken or wrong but even here we dont have the full facts. My point was that it is a far leap from one case where payments have been withheld to the inference by the journo that this is a declared club policy to delay payments to local businesses.

 

Good point though, I think rapists should use this arguement in their defence in court. Don't have a go at at them about it it and don't listen to journalists reporting on it, afterall what about all the times they managed to go out without raping anyone?

[Dig Dig]

Good point though, I think rapists should use this arguement in their defence in court. Don't have a go at at them about it it and don't listen to journalists reporting on it, afterall what about all the times they managed to go out without raping anyone?

 

What if it was just one rape but journalists were insinualting that you're a serial rapist? I'd definitely sue if it were me.

[dronskisaint]

I dont really understand how people like you make excuses for a pretty disgraceful decision by SFC

 

Or do you think it is acceptable to withold money on a whim and not pay when a court tells you do so.

 

Not an excuse at all, just what happens in business when you strip away the agendas.

 

No I don't think it's acceptable to withold money on a whim - can you point out for me where it says that is the case? I have run and owned a number of businesses over the years and have been on both sides of commercial disputes, sometimes you or the other party has to walk away and that can happen at any stage. Sometimes the court adjudicates - I don't know what the issue was in this case but it was not presumably worth adding legal costs to go to court - it's a commercial decision that was probably made by a project manager - if it cost the club money then that manager has probably paid the price.

 

It's not a big story...unless you add agendas as the Echo and numerous posters on here seem happy to do.

[CB Fry]

What if it was just one rape but journalists were insinualting that you're a serial rapist? I'd definitely sue if it were me.

 

 

 

Have the Echo accused Saints of being serial anythings? This blog doesn't.

 

What the spanners on here seem to want is round the clock coverage of Saints paying their invoices complete with tearful tributes from grateful sanitary product suppliers.

[dronskisaint]

Laughable nonsense. It's a blog the editor will barely know exists.

 

Thank you for your valuable insight

[Greenridge]

Talking of poo stirring, I always find it quieter on here when Saints win. Are there any stats that show people on here like to moan about the team more than praise them, by number of threads, posts.....

 

God I need to get out more!

 

A fair and accurate observation.

[CB Fry]

Thank you for your valuable insight

 

 

 

Better than the conspiracy fairy story you came out with.

[CB Fry]

Not an excuse at all, just what happens in business when you strip away the agendas.

 

It's not a big story...unless you add agendas as the Echo and numerous posters on here seem happy to do.

 

 

 

Like you adding an agenda to the Echo's pretty anodyne blog you mean?

[Wes Tender]

I dont really understand how people like you make excuses for a pretty disgraceful decision by SFC

 

Or do you think it is acceptable to withold money on a whim and not pay when a court tells you do so.

 

I don't really understand how people like you can make snap judgements about the decision making of some and the subsequent comments about it by others, without any real grasp of all of the facts.

 

And if you're going to harangue others for having an opinion you disagree with, at least make some effort to engage your brain first. Two things that can be challenged in one short sentence. Well done.

 

Firstly you state that the club didn't pay on a whim. They obviously got out of bed that morning and thought shall I pay that company for the work they did? Nah, I don't feel like it.

 

Secondly, I don't recall the club refusing to pay the bill now that the court has instructed them to do so. Perhaps you know something that none of the rest do. Could you enlighten us how you know this?

[Turkish]

I don't really understand how people like you can make snap judgements about the decision making of some and the subsequent comments about it by others, without any real grasp of all of the facts.

 

And if you're going to harangue others for having an opinion you disagree with, at least make some effort to engage your brain first. Two things that can be challenged in one short sentence. Well done.

 

Firstly you state that the club didn't pay on a whim. They obviously got out of bed that morning and thought shall I pay that company for the work they did? Nah, I don't feel like it.

 

Secondly, I don't recall the club refusing to pay the bill now that the court has instructed them to do so. Perhaps you know something that none of the rest do. Could you enlighten us how you know this?

 

Snap judgements?! That's a good one even by your usual pious standards. What's a court orders then?unless of course the club where in the right all along and the court ruled against us because of the judicial systems anti saints agenda.

[Greenridge]

Snap judgements?! That's a good one even by your usual pious standards. What's a court orders then?unless of course the club where in the right all along and the court ruled against us because of the judicial systems anti saints agenda.

 

What shall we do now that we are armed with this information?

[Turkish]

What shall we do now that we are armed with this information?

 

Ah Barry appears for his morning fix. Morning Barry, do the 'when are we marching' gag again, it's sooooo funny.

[dubai_phil]

 

Eric? FFS in future just STFU and stick to drinking OSH washed down with Margheritas

 

This thread has become like trying to explain to a Dubai Taxi Driver where Jumeirah Golf Estates is....

[John B]

I don't really understand how people like you can make snap judgements about the decision making of some and the subsequent comments about it by others, without any real grasp of all of the facts.

 

And if you're going to harangue others for having an opinion you disagree with, at least make some effort to engage your brain first. Two things that can be challenged in one short sentence. Well done.

 

Firstly you state that the club didn't pay on a whim. They obviously got out of bed that morning and thought shall I pay that company for the work they did? Nah, I don't feel like it.

 

Secondly, I don't recall the club refusing to pay the bill now that the court has instructed them to do so. Perhaps you know something that none of the rest do. Could you enlighten us how you know this?

 

A very strange comment from a very strange poster

 

If you read the original article it says that in August a court told SFC to pay but did not

 

The court heard that an adjudicator had found on 21 August that Southampton FC owed £55,000 after missing the final payment, due in July, but that Solent had received no explanation as to why payment had not been made.

 

Amy Amieson, of legal firm P J English, working for Solent, told H&V News after the hearing that the incident had affected Solent’s cash flow “quite significantly”.

 

Mr Justice Robert Akenhead said that the club “did not hint or suggest that there is any defence to the claim” and that he “cannot see any conceivable defence” in the evidence heard.

 

The court ordered the football club, in the absence of counsel, to pay £55,000 in contracted fees, VAT and £1,370.63 of interest, as well as legal costs at £3,309.

 

Mr Akenhead said “I simply don’t understand” why Southampton had left it to a day before the hearing to say they weren’t attending.

[Wes Tender]

And when NC tries to get an offer accepted in January on a much needed defensive duo, i can imagine his stance for negotiation will be very much weakened by tales of financial mismanagement with, relatively speaking, small sums of money owed to local builders. FFS, you can't go wading into a boardroom wanting a 5m defender with a 1m downpayment when you can't even pay your suppliers what that defender would want in his weekly wage and yes, the other clubs representatives will do their homework.

 

:lol:

 

Who says satire is dead?

[dronskisaint]

Like you adding an agenda to the Echo's pretty anodyne blog you mean?

 

Indeed - the Echo invite comment and I respond, it's my anodyne response

[Greenridge]

Ah Barry appears for his morning fix. Morning Barry, do the 'when are we marching' gag again, it's sooooo funny.

 

It's a genuine question, what are we going to do?

 

It's been discussed ad infinitum on several threads, in large by the same few posters with two schools of thought:

 

- the Club is the devil incarnate or

- there are unknown business reasons why they chose to withhold payment

 

You have posted the same key points of your view time and time again. You have been asked time and time again what the end goal is from your side and yet you don't seem able to provide an answer to such a simple question. We could, of course keep discussing the topic but where will that get us as it can be summarised as above.

[Big Bad Bob]

Have the Echo accused Saints of being serial anythings? This blog doesn't.

 

What the spanners on here seem to want is round the clock coverage of Saints paying their invoices complete with tearful tributes from grateful sanitary product suppliers.

 

I wasn't going to respond on this thread anymore because of the circular arguments going on but

 

The reason this leaves a sour taste is that many supporters quite rightly have chastised Portsmouth for leaving so many small local firms high and dry when that club went into administration.

 

Now Saints are doing exactly the same – whilst supposedly having huge amounts of money behind them, either from the Liebherr estate, the Premier League or this mystery loan the club have.

 

Now read into that what you will but to me it seems clear he is, at the least, insinuating that Saints are becoming serial defaulters a la Pompey!!

[brmbrm]

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/view_from_the_chapel/10056594.Together_As_One__That_doesn_t_always_seem_the_case/?ref=twt

 

Why on earth lead with this article when there is at last something to be posiitive about.

 

Tal about (not so hidden) agendas.

 

FFS this is bizarre. It seems the link is 100% accurtae. The OP says it is "poo stirring". Nobody says anything ever anywhere at all nothing nix zilch to contradict any of the actual facts, yet people say its poo stirring rathar than actually fact? Blinkered, biased, thick, stupid, prejudiced? whikch sort of """fan""" do you think you are?

 

In what possible sense did the club "do the right thing" here? Apart, of course, from not being an echo journaliost. Jeeeeez

[Big Bad Bob]

FFS this is bizarre. It seems the link is 100% accurtae. The OP says it is "poo stirring". Nobody says anything ever anywhere at all nothing nix zilch to contradict any of the actual facts, yet people say its poo stirring rathar than actually fact? Blinkered, biased, thick, stupid, prejudiced? whikch sort of """fan""" do you think you are?

 

In what possible sense did the club "do the right thing" here? Apart, of course, from not being an echo journaliost. Jeeeeez

 

I refer you to post 142

 

See, the trouble is, ALL of the people that have responded have said that *IT IS WRONG WHAT HAS OCCURRED*

 

What the sensible fringe have a problem with is the blog insinuating that this is the MO for Saints' (and likening it to the shenanigans that have occurred down the road!!)

 

FFS it might have nothing to do with NC, it might be entirely down to the CFO (whoever that is)

 

At worst we've had 1 person saying that he won't judge until he's had more info as to why the club did it (citing legal v ethical reasons)

[Wes Tender]

A very strange comment from a very strange poster

 

If you read the original article it says that in August a court told SFC to pay but did not

 

The court heard that an adjudicator had found on 21 August that Southampton FC owed £55,000 after missing the final payment, due in July, but that Solent had received no explanation as to why payment had not been made.

 

Amy Amieson, of legal firm P J English, working for Solent, told H&V News after the hearing that the incident had affected Solent’s cash flow “quite significantly”.

 

Mr Justice Robert Akenhead said that the club “did not hint or suggest that there is any defence to the claim” and that he “cannot see any conceivable defence” in the evidence heard.

 

The court ordered the football club, in the absence of counsel, to pay £55,000 in contracted fees, VAT and £1,370.63 of interest, as well as legal costs at £3,309.

 

Mr Akenhead said “I simply don’t understand” why Southampton had left it to a day before the hearing to say they weren’t attending.

 

So no defence to your claim that the club acted soley on a whim then?

 

And no evidence that the club will not pay the money now that the court has instructed them to do so.

 

The earlier case was an adjudication, not as I understand it, a court case.

[John B]

So no defence to your claim that the club acted soley on a whim then?

 

And no evidence that the club will not pay the money now that the court has instructed them to do so.

 

The earlier case was an adjudication, not as I understand it, a court case.

 

You dont seem to be a very realistic person as usual Mr Tender just an internet troll arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

SFC have been found wanting in their dealings with the Solent which you cannot accept it for some unknown reason Mr Justice Robert Akenhead said that the club “did not hint or suggest that there is any defence to the claim” which can be called a whim.

 

If you are happy that SFC only pay up when a court tells them then that speaks highly of your morals but for me and most other reasonable people we pay up when we get a bill otherwise the whole economy of the country would come to a grinding halt.

 

The whole episode is a sad reflection how some businesses are gives the impression that the club is to be run in fair and equitable manner as no conceivable evidence was put forward by the club.

 

Thats my three for the day until we meet again Wes when you post some more drivel best wishes John B

 

PS Think things are getting better on the pitch as the team begins to gel shame we did not get in some more experienced defensive players but I doubt it is as easy to get them as posters suggest as you dont go to Argos and AMAZON and find them there

[Saint Without a Halo]

Good point though, I think rapists should use this arguement in their defence in court. Don't have a go at at them about it it and don't listen to journalists reporting on it, afterall what about all the times they managed to go out without raping anyone?

 

 

This point is far to silly even for a mug like me to respond to Turkish! you must try harder!

[Saint Without a Halo]

Not an excuse at all, just what happens in business when you strip away the agendas.

 

No I don't think it's acceptable to withold money on a whim - can you point out for me where it says that is the case? I have run and owned a number of businesses over the years and have been on both sides of commercial disputes, sometimes you or the other party has to walk away and that can happen at any stage. Sometimes the court adjudicates - I don't know what the issue was in this case but it was not presumably worth adding legal costs to go to court - it's a commercial decision that was probably made by a project manager - if it cost the club money then that manager has probably paid the price.

 

It's not a big story...unless you add agendas as the Echo and numerous posters on here seem happy to do.

 

 

This

[ericofarabia]

FFS this is bizarre. It seems the link is 100% accurtae. The OP says it is "poo stirring". Nobody says anything ever anywhere at all nothing nix zilch to contradict any of the actual facts, yet people say its poo stirring rathar than actually fact? Blinkered, biased, thick, stupid, prejudiced? whikch sort of """fan""" do you think you are?

In what possible sense did the club "do the right thing" here? Apart, of course, from not being an echo journaliost. Jeeeeez

 

Please have a quick re read of Posts 9, 39 & 73.

 

My initial reason for the OP was that I hadn't reaslised it was A blog. Reading it on-line made it appear as The Lead Story of the day, as it was at the Top of Page.

Seeing as it had already featured as a Headline Story a few days earlier, I assumed that they were running it again kust for the hell of it.

 

What sort of fan am I? 48 years man and boy following The Saints, old enough to remember when The Echo was the only way of keeping up to date on all things SFC, and am now saddened at the way both party's are behaving with petty point scoring.

[Wes Tender]

You dont seem to be a very realistic person as usual Mr Tender just an internet troll arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

SFC have been found wanting in their dealings with the Solent which you cannot accept it for some unknown reason Mr Justice Robert Akenhead said that the club “did not hint or suggest that there is any defence to the claim” which can be called a whim.

 

If you are happy that SFC only pay up when a court tells them then that speaks highly of your morals but for me and most other reasonable people we pay up when we get a bill otherwise the whole economy of the country would come to a grinding halt.

 

The whole episode is a sad reflection how some businesses are gives the impression that the club is to be run in fair and equitable manner as no conceivable evidence was put forward by the club.

 

Thats my three for the day until we meet again Wes when you post some more drivel best wishes John B

 

PS Think things are getting better on the pitch as the team begins to gel shame we did not get in some more experienced defensive players but I doubt it is as easy to get them as posters suggest as you dont go to Argos and AMAZON and find them there

 

So who is the realistic one? The person who doesn't accept everything he reads without knowing both sides of it, or the one who is prepared to blindly accept what he reads without question or analysis?

 

And in case it had not occurred to you, this is an internet forum where by definition people come and express their opinions. You can conclude that I am arguing for the sake of it and call it trolling if you wish. But isn't it easy to dismiss anybody who disagrees with you as being a troll?

 

Regarding payment of bills, I would imagine that there was some reason the club had for withholding that last installment. Nobody on here knows the ins and outs of it, but some are quite happy to draw their own conclusions that the club must have acted on a whim.

 

I'm happy for you that your morality dictates that you settle all of your bills promptly, regardless of whether you have any qualms about whether the service/product received was in any way unsatisfactory or did not measure up to expectation. My experience in business tells me that astute and reasonable businessmen do often quibble over invoices if the product or service was not as contracted/advertised/sampled.

 

I am indebted to you for your remarkable insight that players are not available through Argos and Amazon.

[ericb]

Regarding payment of bills, I would imagine that there was some reason the club had for withholding that last installment. Nobody on here knows the ins and outs of it

 

Probably the same reason other things haven't been paid that have been charged to the club... of course no one knows the reason, and i'm sure in a couple of years or less it won't all be clear.

 

Yup all is fine and dandy behind the doors at SFC

[dubai_phil]

Thank goodness there have been no other unattributable rumours or comments about random law firms seeing random legal cases relating to contractual issues, that did not include the name Solent.

 

Phew