Administration inevitable

[Foxy]

Everton, Rooney,

WHU Cole, Ferdinand etc

good young players go to bigger clubs.

we are now a smaller club therefore more will leave

 

simple as that

 

Or to take it further up the food chain (wealth-wise):

 

Spurs: Berbatov, Keane

Arsenal: Henry, Viera

Man Utd: Van Nistelrooy

Juventus: Zidane

Barcelona: Figo

 

and so on

[swannymere]

Or to take it further up the food chain (wealth-wise):

 

Spurs: Berbatov, Keane

Arsenal: Henry, Viera

Man Utd: Van Nistelrooy

Juventus: Zidane

Barcelona: Figo

 

and so on

 

But we're bigger than all of those put together:rolleyes:

[TheSaint75]

but it isnt academy football.

 

academies are under 19's (arent they?), so why should these kids sit in a reserve team?

 

the average age now is similar to that of the busby babes, and more recently the young arsenal side everyone raves about.

 

perhaps maybe just maybe, if everyone got down to the ground and supported these kids there would not be a risk of a load of them being sold???

 

also, would it not be so much more satisfying to see a group of kids come through the ranks together, and get this club back to the prem or even close?

 

I'm not sure if your agreeing with me or not, yes academy's are under 19's, if they are sat in the reserves maybe they aren't good enough for the 1st team?

 

On the rest of your post I agree it would be very satisfying to see the lads progress as home grown talent (mainly)

 

It's a shame soo many 'supporters' will not see this happen as they do not go to games, I know I will enjoy the prem a lot more having seen these lads work their way up (if it happens of course) IMO

[Wes Tender]

John, I'll keep this simple so that you will understand. You have made it clear that for one reason or another, you have chosen not to support Southampton Football Club, the main reason being that Lowe is involved in the company that owns the team. You contend that despite choosing not to support the club, you are still a supporter.

I have no interest in what you do with your life and money. What I fail to see is why you and other posters should take "offense" when I state that you are not a Saints supporter because you do nothing to support the club.

Personally, coming on this site or going down the pub and moaning about the club and it's board, does not, IMHO, count as supporting the club. So, apart from this, please tell me what you do with your life that counts as supporting Southampton Football Club.

My guess is you won't get further than the fact that you p1$$ and complain a lot...

 

I would have thought that seemingly as a reasonably intelligent person, you would be able to juggle with the nuances of the English Language sufficiently to be able to distinguish the subtle differences between the concepts and realities of somebody being a supporter or a fan. John Smith has supplied Dictionary references to cover both terms and if you know better than those who compiled the definitions of those words, perhaps you had better set them right. Be sure to keep it simple though, so that they will understand.

[Alain Perrin]

I would have thought that seemingly as a reasonably intelligent person, you would be able to juggle with the nuances of the English Language sufficiently to be able to distinguish the subtle differences between the concepts and realities of somebody being a supporter or a fan. John Smith has supplied Dictionary references to cover both terms and if you know better than those who compiled the definitions of those words, perhaps you had better set them right. Be sure to keep it simple though, so that they will understand.

 

Jesus, now it is a semantic argument.

 

Everyone has an interest in Saints, and there are people who are (in whatever way they can) stepping up the plate to 'support' the club financially. What is the one thing the club needs to stop it going in to administration? Financial support.

 

So I am a "financial" supporter, I attend home matches, and those that concienciously object are "armchair" supporters. Some are listening to the radio, some (like John Smith) are ****ging his missus.

 

What I object to is "armchair" supporters (those who could go, there are plenty who can't for various valid reason) complaining that we have to sell players and suggesting this is because of Lowe. In part it is because of YOU. Surely you cannot deny this?

 

I also object to people dressing up their perfectly valid reasons as some martyrdom operation against Lowe. Not liking the football on show is a valid reason, and as phrases like "tempted back" suggest are more likely than a professed Lowe hatred.

 

I would suggest that if you are citing the reason for you not going as "Lowe is a shadow over the club" then you are not supporting to the best of your ability. That is your choice but I think it damages your credibility to complain about issues which are made worse by your lack of support.

[cadiz saint]

Agree 100%!!

[Goodfellas Jay]

Please would someone be kind enough to advise into which of the above-mentioned categories I now find myself?

 

I have a season ticket and have had it every since The Dell became all-seater

 

I live overseas and have not returned to the UK or been to a game for over 4 years

 

I regularly ask friends to purchase merchandise on my behalf and I reimburse them accordingly

 

I watch every live TV game featuring Saints

 

I have info and scores sent to me on my UK mobile phone which I still keep (any pay monthly tariff etc) so that I can receive up to date news

 

I still wear my 'Skatebusters' t-shirt

 

Your help would be greatly appreciated

 

Thanks

 

UTS - a confused fan / supporter

[NickG]

have you been wearing the skatebuster t-shirt for 4 years? if so think category is smelly!

[OldNick]

Please would someone be kind enough to advise into which of the above-mentioned categories I now find myself?

 

I have a season ticket and have had it every since The Dell became all-seater

 

I live overseas and have not returned to the UK or been to a game for over 4 years

 

I regularly ask friends to purchase merchandise on my behalf and I reimburse them accordingly

 

I watch every live TV game featuring Saints

 

I have info and scores sent to me on my UK mobile phone which I still keep (any pay monthly tariff etc) so that I can receive up to date news

 

I still wear my 'Skatebusters' t-shirt

 

Your help would be greatly appreciated

 

Thanks

 

UTS - a confused fan / supporter

A timewaster.....only kidding

[Wes Tender]

Jesus, now it is a semantic argument.

 

Everyone has an interest in Saints, and there are people who are (in whatever way they can) stepping up the plate to 'support' the club financially. What is the one thing the club needs to stop it going in to administration? Financial support.

 

So I am a "financial" supporter, I attend home matches, and those that concienciously object are "armchair" supporters. Some are listening to the radio, some (like John Smith) are ****ging his missus.

 

What I object to is "armchair" supporters (those who could go, there are plenty who can't for various valid reason) complaining that we have to sell players and suggesting this is because of Lowe. In part it is because of YOU. Surely you cannot deny this?

 

I also object to people dressing up their perfectly valid reasons as some martyrdom operation against Lowe. Not liking the football on show is a valid reason, and as phrases like "tempted back" suggest are more likely than a professed Lowe hatred.

 

I would suggest that if you are citing the reason for you not going as "Lowe is a shadow over the club" then you are not supporting to the best of your ability. That is your choice but I think it damages your credibility to complain about issues which are made worse by your lack of support.

 

The semantics were addressed to Guided Missile, but I'm sure that he will be happy for you to respond on his behalf. You obviously missed the sarcastic tone which indicated that I was hitting him back in the same tone as he had used towards John Smith. Perhaps I should have used a so that you could understand it more easily.

 

The basis of your entire argument is essentially that the main blame attaches to those who could attend but do not. Of course, this is complete and utter tosh, on a parallel with saying that the restaurant went bust because people stopped patronising it, rather than because the pricey food was crap.

 

As others have said, blame the fans.

 

And what's with all this you, you, you?

 

I've stated enough times that I have attended all home matches this season and indeed for the past numerous years, although it is fair to say that my increasing disillusionment of the team, the manager and indeed the board, could yet see me deciding that I have more important and better things to do than watch us only lose or draw at home.

 

It is incumbent on the people who run the PLC to ensure that the product is attractive to their customer base if they wish to continue to have the support and patronage of those customers. If they are unable to achieve those aims and therefore the revenue falls, then in most industries the directors are sacked. But if you feel the need to berate the customers instead, then those charlatans in charge will have a license to continue to destroy the club and it won't be the stayaways to blame, but blinkered fools like you.

[aintforever]

Facts are some supporters think that the best thing for SFC is for Lowe and co to leave and by boycotting they are making that more likley.

 

It is pointless saying they are not supporters just because you disagree with them, everyone has their own opinions on what's best for the club.

[up and away]

The semantics were addressed to Guided Missile, but I'm sure that he will be happy for you to respond on his behalf. You obviously missed the sarcastic tone which indicated that I was hitting him back in the same tone as he had used towards John Smith. Perhaps I should have used a so that you could understand it more easily.

 

The basis of your entire argument is essentially that the main blame attaches to those who could attend but do not. Of course, this is complete and utter tosh, on a parallel with saying that the restaurant went bust because people stopped patronising it, rather than because the pricey food was crap.

 

As others have said, blame the fans.

 

And what's with all this you, you, you?

 

I've stated enough times that I have attended all home matches this season and indeed for the past numerous years, although it is fair to say that my increasing disillusionment of the team, the manager and indeed the board, could yet see me deciding that I have more important and better things to do than watch us only lose or draw at home.

 

It is incumbent on the people who run the PLC to ensure that the product is attractive to their customer base if they wish to continue to have the support and patronage of those customers. If they are unable to achieve those aims and therefore the revenue falls, then in most industries the directors are sacked. But if you feel the need to berate the customers instead, then those charlatans in charge will have a license to continue to destroy the club and it won't be the stayaways to blame, but blinkered fools like you.

 

 

There is no blame attached to GM's post, just that he finds it very difficult to describe someone who deliberately goes out of their way to give any form of financial aid to the club they imagine they support, with others even wanting the team to lose or the club go into administration.

Any normal person would identify these positions as being those of a skate, not a Saints supporter.

 

If these "supporters" had complained this hard when we were getting into this mess, they may have a toe to stand on. But it has never been about the club for them, that is just a side show in their agenda.

[Verbal Kint]

Jesus, now it is a semantic argument.

 

Everyone has an interest in Saints, and there are people who are (in whatever way they can) stepping up the plate to 'support' the club financially. What is the one thing the club needs to stop it going in to administration? Financial support.

 

So I am a "financial" supporter, I attend home matches, and those that concienciously object are "armchair" supporters. Some are listening to the radio, some (like John Smith) are ****ging his missus.

 

What I object to is "armchair" supporters (those who could go, there are plenty who can't for various valid reason) complaining that we have to sell players and suggesting this is because of Lowe. In part it is because of YOU. Surely you cannot deny this?

 

I also object to people dressing up their perfectly valid reasons as some martyrdom operation against Lowe. Not liking the football on show is a valid reason, and as phrases like "tempted back" suggest are more likely than a professed Lowe hatred.

 

I would suggest that if you are citing the reason for you not going as "Lowe is a shadow over the club" then you are not supporting to the best of your ability. That is your choice but I think it damages your credibility to complain about issues which are made worse by your lack of support.

 

Lowe has always done everything in his power to sell our best players. It is completely irrelevant how many fans turn up. I object to people being conned into believing the only reason we are selling players is because we have no money. He proved in his time when we were an established premiership team that he is very happy selling our best players at every opportunity possible, regardless of our financial position.

 

The reason many fans do not want to go whilst Lowe is here is becasue they know as soon as any youngster shows any sign of becoming a good player he will be sold.

[John B]

Lowe has always done everything in his power to sell our best players. It is completely irrelevant how many fans turn up. I object to people being conned into believing the only reason we are selling players is because we have no money. He proved in his time when we were an established premiership team that he is very happy selling our best players at every opportunity possible, regardless of our financial position.

 

The reason many fans do not want to go whilst Lowe is here is becasue they know as soon as any youngster shows any sign of becoming a good player he will be sold.

 

I think you must be deluded in some way

 

All Chairmen sell players to balance the books and players want to move for a variety of reasons

 

 

Best Cranie Bale Jones Baird Mills Blackstock have been sold recently I dont know which of these Lowe was involved with

Edited 26 November, 2008 by John B

[NickG]

yes, the same as every other club outside of the top 4 -get used to it, its the way of the world not Lowe!

[Wes Tender]

There is no blame attached to GM's post, just that he finds it very difficult to describe someone who deliberately goes out of their way to give any form of financial aid to the club they imagine they support, with others even wanting the team to lose or the club go into administration.

Any normal person would identify these positions as being those of a skate, not a Saints supporter.

 

If these "supporters" had complained this hard when we were getting into this mess, they may have a toe to stand on. But it has never been about the club for them, that is just a side show in their agenda.

 

I disagree. If people hold the opinion that by constantly losing to the extent of relegation or administration, there might be a regime change as a result, it might be a fairly extreme position to hold, but does not mean that they are closer to being Skate fans rather than Saints fans.

 

I have been advocating a mass boycott for the purpose of ridding us of the parasites on the board. If properly supported, it would achieve the desired result very quickly, as pressure would come from the bank and loan note holder. Undoubtedly many anticipate that our current path is taking us inevitably towards relegation or administration anyway, so they are inclined to think along those lines sooner rather than later.

 

I'm always amused to hear people who adopt a certain position as being "normal" whereas the implication is that any who adopt a contrary opinion are somehow abnormal. Just to show the effect, I'll counter by saying that no intelligent person would hold that sort of opinion.

[John B]

I disagree. If people hold the opinion that by constantly losing to the extent of relegation or administration, there might be a regime change as a result, it might be a fairly extreme position to hold, but does not mean that they are closer to being Skate fans rather than Saints fans.

 

I have been advocating a mass boycott for the purpose of ridding us of the parasites on the board. If properly supported, it would achieve the desired result very quickly, as pressure would come from the bank and loan note holder. Undoubtedly many anticipate that our current path is taking us inevitably towards relegation or administration anyway, so they are inclined to think along those lines sooner rather than later.

 

I'm always amused to hear people who adopt a certain position as being "normal" whereas the implication is that any who adopt a contrary opinion are somehow abnormal. Just to show the effect, I'll counter by saying that no intelligent person would hold that sort of opinion.

 

Obviously you have a valid plan which however I do not agree with.

 

I do not think that boycotting will achieve your objectives and will upset an equal number of fans to those that you please.

 

The bank I would have thought is only interested in the club paying off the overdraft not how many people attend or who is in the board room.

 

Whoever is there will probably have the same aspirations - make some money and that can only achieved by having a successful team.

 

If we have a successful team and a large number of people attending games we are also more likely to be taken over.

[Roman]

yes, the same as every other club outside of the top 4 -get used to it, its the way of the world not Lowe!

 

I think you have to look not just at the fact that other clubs do it - which clearly they do - but the extent to which we do it, compared to them.

 

There's a hard, quantitative difference between sales made by, say, Cardiff or Crystal Palace, and us. We have tended to use the academy as a production line for 'asset sales'. They have not, even though they've had to part with the most talented of their young players.

 

The question for many fans (and even, quite explicitly, from JP) is: when are we ever going to have a team settled enough to start looking upwards towards one of the top-six places, rather than bumping along with yet another batch of new faces that have to be integrated - a process that Wotte perceptively said 'takes months'.

 

Come January, I fear you'll see all too clearly what I mean, given dark the mutterings associated with the release of the financials the other day.

[John B]

I think you have to look not just at the fact that other clubs do it - which clearly they do - but the extent to which we do it, compared to them.

 

There's a hard, quantitative difference between sales made by, say, Cardiff or Crystal Palace, and us. We have tended to use the academy as a production line for 'asset sales'. They have not, even though they've had to part with the most talented of their young players.

 

The question for many fans (and even, quite explicitly, from JP) is: when are we ever going to have a team settled enough to start looking upwards towards one of the top-six places, rather than bumping along with yet another batch of new faces that have to be integrated - a process that Wotte perceptively said 'takes months'.

 

Come January, I fear you'll see all too clearly what I mean, given dark the mutterings associated with the release of the financials the other day.

 

We may have a better Academy than other clubs.

 

I dont think your other point maybe correct all teams are playing the new system so youngsters moving from the reserves to the first team do not have a three month learning curve

[NickG]

I think you have to look not just at the fact that other clubs do it - which clearly they do - but the extent to which we do it, compared to them.

 

There's a hard, quantitative difference between sales made by, say, Cardiff or Crystal Palace, and us. We have tended to use the academy as a production line for 'asset sales'. They have not, even though they've had to part with the most talented of their young players.

 

The question for many fans (and even, quite explicitly, from JP) is: when are we ever going to have a team settled enough to start looking upwards towards one of the top-six places, rather than bumping along with yet another batch of new faces that have to be integrated - a process that Wotte perceptively said 'takes months'.

 

Come January, I fear you'll see all too clearly what I mean, given dark the mutterings associated with the release of the financials the other day.QUOTE]]

not disputing the situation and hope rather than expect to hang onto players. I just don't think Lowe does it out of spite to the fans just that it is an unfortunate effect of our place in the football pecking order and our financial plight.

[Roman]

We may have a better Academy than other clubs.

 

I dont think your other point maybe correct all teams are playing the new system so youngsters moving from the reserves to the first team do not have a three month learning curve

 

Well unfortunately I suspect we're going to be able to test whether you're right or wrong in a very practical way, if Lallana, Surman and Schneiderlin are sold in the January transfer window. My hunch, based on the fairly uncontroversial theory that they are three very talented young players, is that we will suffer badly, possibly terminally as far as the CCC is concerned.

 

Personally, I'd rather we didn't get into this little chemistry experiment because I can hear the 'kaboom' from here.

[Roman]

not disputing the situation and hope rather than expect to hang onto players. I just don't think Lowe does it out of spite to the fans just that it is an unfortunate effect of our place in the football pecking order and our financial plight.

 

No, I don't think he does it out of spite either, Nick. I think he does it out of short-term business necessity, but is seemingly unprepared to look at the longer term (which could be just the end of this season) damage. Nor is he prepared, evidently, to heed the warning from his own coach.

 

He could also be selling them as their values are still rising - in other words, we'll miss out on something like their real worth once they've had a half-decent run in the team (well at least with Lallana and Schneiderlin, anyway)

 

It is, in other words, a junkie mentality. Get the relief from the quick fix, and the rest can be put off until tomorrow.

[John B]

No, I don't think he does it out of spite either, Nick. I think he does it out of short-term business necessity, but is seemingly unprepared to look at the longer term (which could be just the end of this season) damage. Nor is he prepared, evidently, to heed the warning from his own coach.

 

He could also be selling them as their values are still rising - in other words, we'll miss out on something like their real worth once they've had a half-decent run in the team (well at least with Lallana and Schneiderlin, anyway)

 

It is, in other words, a junkie mentality. Get the relief from the quick fix, and the rest can be put off until tomorrow.

 

 

That would be true if we did not need the money now

[Wes Tender]

Obviously you have a valid plan which however I do not agree with.

 

I do not think that boycotting will achieve your objectives and will upset an equal number of fans to those that you please.

 

The bank I would have thought is only interested in the club paying off the overdraft not how many people attend or who is in the board room.

 

Whoever is there will probably have the same aspirations - make some money and that can only achieved by having a successful team.

 

If we have a successful team and a large number of people attending games we are also more likely to be taken over.

 

You are obviously not fully attuned as to how big business and banks work.

 

A mass boycott if really well observed would have the board resign within days, especially if there was the will to hold another the following home game if the board thought they could hold firm.

 

A boycott would upset some fans, who would attend regardless. The others, whom it would please, would be the ones boycotting, of course.

 

The bank are only interested in the club paying off the overdraught, all things being equal. But when the scene changes to one where the club's customer base is prepared to act in this manner as a mass protest with the added result that the revenue stream takes a massive hit too, you can bet that they would soon sit up and take notice. As I say, they would then put pressure on the board to resign unless they can pacify the protesters and restore the attendances to a level that makes the finances more viable.

 

I agree that anybody in charge would want to make money and they will only achieve that end through success on the pitch. But the plan instigated by Lowe in his appointment of JP and playing the kids was hardly the normal solution that would have been put in place by others and as such the blame for it going tits up rests firmly on the shoulders of the current board. Because any quality players will have to be sold too in January, we will never reach that situation whereby we are a successful, well supported club that somebody will want to take over. But then again, it has not been proven to my satisfaction that Lowe even wants to sell, as he seems to like playing the chairman too much.

[NickG]

boycott has few problems;

 

Most would not support it so would not have any effect

 

what exactly are people protesting about

 

if people resigned who would replace them, surely not another merry-go-round?

 

if there was a mass boycott would that cause less sympathy from the bank and more financial problems?

[John Smith]

I do find this all very amusing. It just goes to show how some people like 'control' and can't cope when they are unable to control the situation, other people, the dictionary, people's right to choose. I won't even bother replying to GM's mail, think it speaks for itself, first by him suggesting that he can 'state' that I am not a supporter, and then goes onto confess that this is in 'IMHO'. These two are contradictory, when you take into consideration that I was stating that I have every right to call myself a Saints Supporter, because that's what the English Language determines that I can call myself. If GM wants to write and publish his own dictionary, then by all means, we can all have a good laugh.

 

Apart from GM's obvious floundering so as not to provide an apology, the other bit that amuses me is the stance of those that think I'm not going because I want to hurt the club. Well no, and I have stated this umpteen times, especially to the two Nicks, but for some reason they don't understand. So, here we go for the 20,000th time, maybe Nick(s), you could read and digest this once, so that when you comment on my posts, you are actually talking about me, rather than your perception of a rabid anti-Lowe supporter:

 

I have no issue with people still attending. I have no preconceived idea that we are a Prem team, I had filled out my ST application and believed that that would entail supporting Saints in the 3rd tier, before we secured safety. I have no problem with the team, and I don't comment on who we should or shouldn't buy or anything like that, because I'm not in the position to say so. I don't criticise JP and I don't criticise the youngsters, nor the older ones, maybe, at a push, I have suggested that a better mix is required, but I don't know if I've actually stated that on here.

 

I lost my passion to attend when Lowe announced his return. I don't want him running this club (badly IMO - see how I use those 3 little letters), and I felt so strongly about that, I decided not to hand in my application form and decided it was just best if I didn't go. I had often wondered, in the past,what would fill that 'gap' but, Lowe coming back timed nicely with my new family, getting married and having a baby, my time, and money, could easily be well used up by supporting my family more. This, I have no problem with, my wife loves it that she doesn't lose me to football anymore and my baby gets to go to more places with her mummy and daddy rather than just mummy. Time and money well spent I believe.

 

Now, it's not that I'm 'witholding' the money, and I'm saving it in a big pot somewhere or an Icelandic bank, but actually putting it to good use elsewhere. So, if Lowe does go, will I rush out and buy a ST? Probably not. Will I start attending odd games again, probably yes. If I get the 'bug' again, will I buy a new ST? Don't know. IF Lowe stays, will I rush out and buy a ticket if we are on the verge of promotion? No. Will I buy a ticket because 'fans' on here tell me to? No. Will I feel bad if someone calls me a non-supporter or anti-Saint? No. I think those people are a little sad and must have really lonely, unfulfilled lives. I, on the other hand, am very very happy. My family are lovely, my job is great, my career is coming on leaps and bounds and in fact, right now, am negotiating a massive contract (in regards to advancing my career, rather than the money side of it, although still very favourable in this economic climate) with a massive European client, having already secured and delivered on some great work and created opportunities with a UK based International company.

 

I am, so to speak, doing very well thank you, and like I've tried to show, for me, it's not 'all' about the money, it's about quality of life, getting the balance right, supporting your family and loved ones, because they are the people that support you. This club does not support me when times are hard, and I bare it no ill feelings or loss because of that, but I will not throw my money away and go against my principals, just because a few outraged 'fans' can't believe I have a life outside and away from football!

 

Look guys, you all need to chill out a tad and stop asking me to justify my decisions, I have done and really, it is getting tiresome. I will not return whilst Lowe is in charge, end of. I have no regrets, no ill feeling, nothing but love and happiness in my heart. If you can't understand that, fine, I'm not asking you to, I'm not even asking you to agree BUT, please refrain from trying to stamp on me as if I was some sort of idiot who is out of his mind because he choses not to give (what is it now being called? Used to be a ticket when I went) 'financial aid'. Come on guys, are you really serious? You want me to 'donate' 'financial aid' to a PLC? No, Saints will live or die as determined by the law, the rules and it's ability to attract customers, just like any other business. For me, life will continue whether Lowe is there or not, even if we go into administration, I will still hold my family, friends and career above 'donating' to SLH PLC. This doesn't make me not a supporter, maybe in some people's eyes, opinions and own dictionaries, but I don't care about that, why, because when someone asks me which team I support, I don't ask them if they mean, financially? Morally? Vocally? Aid benefit functions? Charity Functions or Armchair, but then I guess some do. I just reply "Southampton mate", then I get that usual pitiful look that I've experienced for donkeys years and then I tell them how many times we've beat their team, which great players have played for us, how many England captains we had on the pitch at one time, great goals, great wins, etc, etc. That will never be removed from my memory, and I will never stop supporting Saints.

 

So a big two fingers up in the air to all those that think I'm not a Saints supporter, I don't care!

[Weston Saint]

Let's get this thread back on track, well onto a different track really

 

Most of us would have seen the recent suggestion in the press that Pompey are up for sale for £1. That part needs no further comment.

 

BUT I am hearing whispers from people close to the action that for that £1 you get £92m worth of debt!! And we thought we were in a mess!!!!

 

It is understood that they have only paid a small part of Defoe's and Crouch's transfer fee and the next big installment is up in January and they don't have the money. The Sky money has already been spent on other projects

 

Unless Gaydamak senior and junior put their hands in their pocket they will not be able to pay off the football debts let alone the others. So what will they do? Well the obvious way to extract themselves with the minumum of loss is to put the club into Administration.

 

Will they beat us to it?

[NickG]

I can't argue with much (maybe any) of that.

 

I don't seek to label you, or anyone else -didn't bother reading posts where fan/supporter was being debated.

 

I fully understand your life balance comments, I no longer go to pub before games or travel to away games as I wanted to spend more time with my family.

 

I do post on here a lot, not out of obsession but due to spending some days working from home on laptop and poor concentration levels!

 

The bit I don't get, and you don't have to justify it to me, was why Lowe changed your mind about sending the form in? Who sits there balancing the books isn't important enough to change my mind either way.

[NickG]

Let's get this thread back on track, well onto a different track really

 

Most of us would have seen the recent suggestion in the press that Pompey are up for sale for £1. That part needs no further comment.

 

BUT I am hearing whispers from people close to the action that for that £1 you get £92m worth of debt!! And we thought we were in a mess!!!!

 

It is understood that they have only paid a small part of Defoe's and Crouch's transfer fee and the next big installment is up in January and they don't have the money. The Sky money has already been spent on other projects

 

Unless Gaydamak senior and junior put their hands in their pocket they will not be able to pay off the football debts let alone the others. So what will they do? Well the obvious way to extract themselves with the minumum of loss is to put the club into Administration.

 

Will they beat us to it?

 

 

I nearly started another thread the other day about the current economic climate and how it maybe to our advantage (but decided I would be insulted again for looking for positives!)

 

What I was thinking is that we have no money so thats not going to change -but at least if other clubs suddenly find it tight it might even it out, and there would be less throwing money around.

[Tom28]

I've just joined this forum and I can't believe the negativity amongst our supporters. I want to address two things:

 

1) Finances - When Rupert Lowe was driven out by a section of Saints supporters I said at the time that they should be careful what they wish for. It was frustrating under Lowe that our best players kept getting sold off, but ultimately, he kept our finances in order and he got us a great new stadium. The annual report that came out recently doesn't look good, but, if Leon Crouch was still in charge, we'd be in a far worse position. Look at the facts. Two years ago our revenue was £23m and last year it dropped to £14m. There are a number of reasons for this, and this is not the fault of Crouch, Lowe or anyone else in charge of the money. However, during the same period, our player wages went UP from £10m (45% of total revenue) to £12m (81% of revenue). This is something that Crouch could and should have controlled. We always knew our revenue would drop the longer we spent in the Championship. Our player costs should have dropped in line with that, but they didn't and that has put us on the brink of Administration. The best thing that could have happened for this club is for Rupert Lowe to come back in and sort this mess out. He has made the unpopular decisions needed to keep this club going. With Lowe in charge I believe we will stave off Administration and get the club closer towards the black. It won't happen over night and it may require one or two of our best players to be sold off, but I would take that over Administration.

 

2) Football - watching Saints play this season has been great. My complaints in recent years have been over poor football quality and players lacking passion. I would far rather pay money to watch entertaining football played by guys who want to play for the club, that pay to watch the rubbish I saw last year. The results haven't been good this year, especially at home, and on the face of it, that is hard to take. But for those that still go to the games, you will see a much more entertaining brand of football. We have outplayed almost everyone this season, and our defeats are a result of naive defending more than anything else. The players are young though and will improve. I think we'll continue to improve and learn and finish around 16th this season. I don't even think we'll be playoff contenders next season, but the season after, assuming most of the players stay, I think we'll be in a great position to get promotion. We may lose one or two along the way such as Lallana (who lets face it belongs in the Premiership), but I think we have every reason to be positive about what is now going on at the club. For the first time in a long time, I see a long term sustainable plan in place to get us back in the Premiership. And that is a vast improvement over the short termist strategies employed in recent seasons.

 

Get behind the team and the club.

[John B]

boycott has few problems;

 

Most would not support it so would not have any effect

 

what exactly are people protesting about

 

if people resigned who would replace them, surely not another merry-go-round?

 

if there was a mass boycott would that cause less sympathy from the bank and more financial problems?

 

Yes I agree not everybody wants a boycott and as you say who would run the club

[up and away]

No, I don't think he does it out of spite either, Nick. I think he does it out of short-term business necessity, but is seemingly unprepared to look at the longer term (which could be just the end of this season) damage. Nor is he prepared, evidently, to heed the warning from his own coach.

 

He could also be selling them as their values are still rising - in other words, we'll miss out on something like their real worth once they've had a half-decent run in the team (well at least with Lallana and Schneiderlin, anyway)

 

It is, in other words, a junkie mentality. Get the relief from the quick fix, and the rest can be put off until tomorrow.

 

We all know that our best playing chance of staying in this league is to try and hang onto our promising youth players. But the bank has removed that option and we just have to hope that others coming through will be able to take their place. We had that option for a long period when Lowe was interfering and trying to get the youth players in the team. That option is no longer available to us after ****ing everything against the wall.

 

Everyone can clearly see that now is not the optimum time to be selling these players, but if we do not, the administrator will. And if you think we would be selling them off cheap, wait until you see those clearance prices. All these niceties were available to us over the last few years, but not any longer. That was squandered awaiting for the take over fairy to come and make everything better.

[Verbal Kint]

yes, the same as every other club outside of the top 4 -get used to it, its the way of the world not Lowe!

 

How's Gareth Barry getting on at Liverpool? And Ronaldo at Madrid? They were desperate to leave so i'm sure they are enjoying life at their new clubs

[John B]

How's Gareth Barry getting on at Liverpool? And Ronaldo at Madrid? They were desperate to leave so i'm sure they are enjoying life at their new clubs

 

 

Dear Verbal Kint

 

Cant you read

 

He said apart from the top 4

 

1 Chelsea

2 Liverpool

3 Man Utd

4 Aston Villa

Edited 26 November, 2008 by John B

[miserableoldgit]

Facts are some supporters think that the best thing for SFC is for Lowe and co to leave and by boycotting they are making that more likley.

 

It is pointless saying they are not supporters just because you disagree with them, everyone has their own opinions on what's best for the club.

But surely by not going these fans are making sure that R and W stay. All the while that we are losing money, due mainly to falling gates at home, Rupert will be there selling assets to balance the books to protect what investment he has. We are more likely to have a take-over/investment if we are a viable "going concern" turning in even a modest profit. I can see Lowe being here even longer if we go into admin and he picks the club up for a couple of bob.

[Roman]

Let's get this thread back on track, well onto a different track really

 

Most of us would have seen the recent suggestion in the press that Pompey are up for sale for £1. That part needs no further comment.

 

BUT I am hearing whispers from people close to the action that for that £1 you get £92m worth of debt!! And we thought we were in a mess!!!!

 

It is understood that they have only paid a small part of Defoe's and Crouch's transfer fee and the next big installment is up in January and they don't have the money. The Sky money has already been spent on other projects

 

Unless Gaydamak senior and junior put their hands in their pocket they will not be able to pay off the football debts let alone the others. So what will they do? Well the obvious way to extract themselves with the minumum of loss is to put the club into Administration.

 

Will they beat us to it?

 

I hate to bring this up, but Pompey's richly deserved misfortune could effectively rebound on us. They won't be the only ones in the prem struggling to cope with the pressure of debts. And this will mean a depressed transfer market in January. If it's Lowe's ambition to sell off Lallana, Schneiderlin and/or Surman at top dollar to stay one step ahead of Barclays, he may be sorely disappointed.

 

If we lose them, it could be very cheaply.

[John Smith]

But surely by not going these fans are making sure that R and W stay. All the while that we are losing money, due mainly to falling gates at home, Rupert will be there selling assets to balance the books to protect what investment he has. We are more likely to have a take-over/investment if we are a viable "going concern" turning in even a modest profit. I can see Lowe being here even longer if we go into admin and he picks the club up for a couple of bob.

 

OK, taking that rationale, and presuming that those 25 people that are boycotting because of Lowe, start to turn up regularly, how long will it take before we then became a 'viable concern', turning in a 'modest profit'? Are we talking months, years or decades?

 

OK, for ease, and a good one for the accountants and mathematicians out there:

 

Q. With an assumed average attendance currently at 15K per home game;

i. How many additional fans will it take to turn our fortunes around and return a profit?

ii. Seeing as this can be a tiered/cascading response, please show the terms implied

eg. extra 10,000 fans for 1 season

extra 20,000 fans for 1/2 a season

NB. The key here is amount of extra fans over how long a period (time) will return a profit for SLH (no matter how small that profit)

 

IMO, this will take a lot of fans over a pretty long time, but I may be wrong and am happy to accept that. And, I think this is relevant to the 'Administration inevitable' thread title.

[aintforever]

But surely by not going these fans are making sure that R and W stay. All the while that we are losing money, due mainly to falling gates at home, Rupert will be there selling assets to balance the books to protect what investment he has. We are more likely to have a take-over/investment if we are a viable "going concern" turning in even a modest profit. I can see Lowe being here even longer if we go into admin and he picks the club up for a couple of bob.

 

I think the rationalle is that if enough people boycott then Lowe n co will have to sell up because the club will have no future without fans through the turnstiles.

 

Even if Lowe does somehow turn us into a successful Championship club making a profit then he would demand such a high price for the shares that we probably wouldn't be a decent investment anyway. Loads of clubs in a ****ty state financially have been bought, pompey were bought for a quid, QPR were up to their necks, Coventry & Leicester were debt ridden.

 

I think Admin, or a Coventry situation where we are minutes away, is inevitable. It's the only way for Lowe, Wilde n co to realise that their shares are not worth a penny. And I think that though admin would be bad, the one good thing that COULD come from it is the removal of the PLC and Lowe.

[Wes Tender]

I've just joined this forum and I can't believe the negativity amongst our supporters. I want to address two things:

 

1) Finances - When Rupert Lowe was driven out by a section of Saints supporters I said at the time that they should be careful what they wish for. It was frustrating under Lowe that our best players kept getting sold off, but ultimately, he kept our finances in order and he got us a great new stadium. The annual report that came out recently doesn't look good, but, if Leon Crouch was still in charge, we'd be in a far worse position. Look at the facts. Two years ago our revenue was £23m and last year it dropped to £14m. There are a number of reasons for this, and this is not the fault of Crouch, Lowe or anyone else in charge of the money. However, during the same period, our player wages went UP from £10m (45% of total revenue) to £12m (81% of revenue). This is something that Crouch could and should have controlled. We always knew our revenue would drop the longer we spent in the Championship. Our player costs should have dropped in line with that, but they didn't and that has put us on the brink of Administration. The best thing that could have happened for this club is for Rupert Lowe to come back in and sort this mess out. He has made the unpopular decisions needed to keep this club going. With Lowe in charge I believe we will stave off Administration and get the club closer towards the black. It won't happen over night and it may require one or two of our best players to be sold off, but I would take that over Administration.

 

2) Football - watching Saints play this season has been great. My complaints in recent years have been over poor football quality and players lacking passion. I would far rather pay money to watch entertaining football played by guys who want to play for the club, that pay to watch the rubbish I saw last year. The results haven't been good this year, especially at home, and on the face of it, that is hard to take. But for those that still go to the games, you will see a much more entertaining brand of football. We have outplayed almost everyone this season, and our defeats are a result of naive defending more than anything else. The players are young though and will improve. I think we'll continue to improve and learn and finish around 16th this season. I don't even think we'll be playoff contenders next season, but the season after, assuming most of the players stay, I think we'll be in a great position to get promotion. We may lose one or two along the way such as Lallana (who lets face it belongs in the Premiership), but I think we have every reason to be positive about what is now going on at the club. For the first time in a long time, I see a long term sustainable plan in place to get us back in the Premiership. And that is a vast improvement over the short termist strategies employed in recent seasons.

 

Get behind the team and the club.

 

Thanks for your contribution Rupert and welcome to the forum.

[Big Bad Bob]

Even if Lowe does somehow turn us into a successful Championship club making a profit then he would demand such a high price for the shares that we probably wouldn't be a decent investment anyway. Loads of clubs in a ****ty state financially have been bought, pompey were bought for a quid, QPR were up to their necks, Coventry & Leicester were debt ridden.

 

OK, I'm going to step into the breech once more my firends...

 

Would you rather

 

a) Spend £1 on a club and inherit lots of debt that you have to finance or

b) Spend £30m on a club with no debt and turning a nice profit every year

 

Currently SLH shares are worth, and I stand to be corrected, ~£10M. Someone has to pay to buy all the shares. However there is the debt on top of that that has to be serviced too. So you're looking at ~£50m

 

However if RL wants £0.50 per share and the club was running a profit with no debt (excl Stadium) that would cost someone ~£20M.

 

I know what I'd do

 

P.S. Please correct my guesstimates as you feel fit

[OldNick]

Thanks for your contribution Rupert and welcome to the forum.

Behave Wes, its good to have new members and so keep your charm offensive back for a while.

I of course accept his views and am glad to have another sensible poster on the site.

[Wes Tender]

I've just joined this forum and I can't believe the negativity amongst our supporters. I want to address two things:

 

1) Finances - When Rupert Lowe was driven out by a section of Saints supporters

 

He was actually driven out by the possibility that a majority of shareholders would have outvoted him at the EGM called by his current poodle, Michael Wilde. If the supporters had the power to rid us of him, do you not think that they would have exercised that power to prevent his return?

 

I said at the time that they should be careful what they wish for. It was frustrating under Lowe that our best players kept getting sold off, but ultimately, he kept our finances in order and he got us a great new stadium.

 

Having ****ed up the original Stoneham project and having then been rescued by Southampton City Council providing the St. Mary's site.

 

The annual report that came out recently doesn't look good, but, if Leon Crouch was still in charge, we'd be in a far worse position.

 

How do you know this? Crouch is a far better businessman than Lowe and Wilde combined, proven by the turnover of the companies he runs. Do you have a crystal ball?

 

 

Look at the facts. Two years ago our revenue was £23m and last year it dropped to £14m. There are a number of reasons for this, and this is not the fault of Crouch, Lowe or anyone else in charge of the money. However, during the same period, our player wages went UP from £10m (45% of total revenue) to £12m (81% of revenue). This is something that Crouch could and should have controlled. We always knew our revenue would drop the longer we spent in the Championship. Our player costs should have dropped in line with that, but they didn't and that has put us on the brink of Administration. The best thing that could have happened for this club is for Rupert Lowe to come back in and sort this mess out.

 

So in your opinion, the best people to be running the club are the two former failed Chairmen, who are despised by most of the fanbase. And then you wonder why gate revenue is falling.

 

He has made the unpopular decisions needed to keep this club going.

 

But he didn't need to dismiss a popular manager who seemed to have turned around a team of disinterested journeyman, steadied a leaky defence with great loan signings and saved us from relegation. He didn't need then to appoint a pair of Dutchmen virtually unknown in this country and totally inexperienced in British football and fill the team with the youth, playing a style of football they are not used to playing, did he?

 

With Lowe in charge I believe we will stave off Administration and get the club closer towards the black. It won't happen over night and it may require one or two of our best players to be sold off, but I would take that over Administration.

 

Those players will be gone in January, the resultant loss of quality will weaken the team sufficiently that we will probably be relegated and administration will follow.

 

2) Football - watching Saints play this season has been great. My complaints in recent years have been over poor football quality and players lacking passion. I would far rather pay money to watch entertaining football played by guys who want to play for the club, that pay to watch the rubbish I saw last year. The results haven't been good this year, especially at home, and on the face of it, that is hard to take. But for those that still go to the games, you will see a much more entertaining brand of football. We have outplayed almost everyone this season, and our defeats are a result of naive defending more than anything else.

 

Well, if you're happy to pay the same as you did when we were in the Premiership to watch youngsters that you could have seen for free last season, then fair enough. A bit of a bummer that their home record has been so poor and thus accounts for the lower attendances. Everybody can see that the defence needed strengthening, but Poortvliet has done little about it until we signed Pearce on loan. NP had sussed out the problem within a short space of time and fixed it. Why did it take JP, a former Dutch national defender so long?

 

 

The players are young though and will improve. I think we'll continue to improve and learn and finish around 16th this season. I don't even think we'll be playoff contenders next season, but the season after, assuming most of the players stay, I think we'll be in a great position to get promotion. We may lose one or two along the way such as Lallana (who lets face it belongs in the Premiership), but I think we have every reason to be positive about what is now going on at the club. For the first time in a long time, I see a long term sustainable plan in place to get us back in the Premiership. And that is a vast improvement over the short termist strategies employed in recent seasons.

 

You mean the short termist strategies employed by Lowe presumably, who had a manager a year throughout his decade in charge? Regrettably we seem stuck with his current manager as he will be given far more time than any of the others, as he is part of Lowe's bizarre masterplan.

 

Get behind the team and the club.

 

I get behind the team at all home matches so far. But I regret that I will not get behind the club when the two most divisive elements in its history are running it.

[JohnnyFartPants]

Thanks for your contribution Rupert and welcome to the forum.

 

What Tom28 says is pretty hard to disagree with. Rupert is here until such time as he sinks us or makes us swim better. Get used to it. Nobody can wave a magic wand and make all the nasty stuff go away so if that means we have had to rearrange the deck chairs and shuffle who is to be at the helm, then I for one think that out of the current names possible, he is the best one to be doing it.

[OldNick]

]

Well, if you're happy to pay the same as you did when we were in the Premiership to watch youngsters that you could have seen for free last season, then fair enough. [end quote] So when Channon or MLT or all the other youngsters came through you said the same.

Come on Wes surely you appreciate the quality of their football, it is just the failure to shoot is the problem.This team should have had another 10 points if they had been clinical and so with a bit of time we will get there.

I didnt think the cost of going to games was the same as when we were in the PL. It is a lot cheaper for me nowadays.

[JohnnyFartPants]

Not having a go Wes, but how did Pearson manage to sell the idea that he "seemed to have turned around a team" to an old cynic like you? Is this based on the last few minutes of a match that nearly saw us go down, relying on Stoke to score against Leicester? Great theatre, as was his Stuart Pearce like three lions passion movements from the subs bench, but great manager he really wasn't.

[Wes Tender]

What Tom28 says is pretty hard to disagree with. Rupert is here until such time as he sinks us or makes us swim better. Get used to it. Nobody can wave a magic wand and make all the nasty stuff go away so if that means we have had to rearrange the deck chairs and shuffle who is to be at the helm, then I for one think that out of the current names possible, he is the best one to be doing it.

 

Well, I just have disagreed with it and it was pretty easy IMO.

 

And all of this "he is the best of the current bunch of possible people" is also a load of bunk too. It's been debated often enough, so I can't really be bothered to go over it again.

[JohnnyFartPants]

Well, I just have disagreed with it and it was pretty easy IMO.

 

And all of this "he is the best of the current bunch of possible people" is also a load of bunk too. It's been debated often enough, so I can't really be bothered to go over it again.

 

The alternative is that you believe we were on a good footing with the "fingers crossed Paul Allen will be here next Friday, honest" approach. There was no plan or forward thinking being done at all.

[John B]

Well, I just have disagreed with it and it was pretty easy IMO.

 

And all of this "he is the best of the current bunch of possible people" is also a load of bunk too. It's been debated often enough, so I can't really be bothered to go over it again.

 

You may have disagreed with him but nothing you said is very believable it is your opinions not facts.

[Wes Tender]

The alternative is that you believe we were on a good footing with the "fingers crossed Paul Allen will be here next Friday, honest" approach. There was no plan or forward thinking being done at all.

 

You obviously don't read many of the other threads that have covered the alternatives to Lowe. Do a little research before you come up with the wrong angle about it.

[Wes Tender]

You may have disagreed with him but nothing you said is very believable it is your opinions not facts.

 

Just as nothing that he said was very believable and was also his opinion not facts....