Administration is the ONLY way to break this downward spiral

[Chez]

just a question;

if we go into administration, do the players contracts have to be honoured?

 

Presumably they do, otherwise they would become free agents.

 

My (limited) understanding was that the administrators are only bound to honour debts accrued after a business goes into admin.

 

if you don't pay them at any point (in admin or not) that is breech of conyract so they could walk. We'd win in terms of losing Thomas, John etc off the wage bill but we'd lose in terms of Surman and Lallana walking on frees.

 

The adminstrators need to get all creditors to agree (actually its 75% of them) to terms of a settlement (pennies in pounds etc). That includes creditors prior to going ito admin.

[solentstars]

And there, in bold, is the point where your argument falls apart. You're basing your wish for administration on one big 'if'. And you're ignoring, or at the very best glossing over, the other effects of administration. What happens to the stadium? The training ground (or the part of it we own)? Other assets such as Jackson's Farm? The players, for god's sake? If we go into administration, none of these will belong to us any more (unless I understand it wrongly).

 

To top it all, it's by no means impossible that Lowe and his mates (almost certainly not Wilde though) will emerge as the owners of whatever's left. As the old saying goes, be careful of what you wish for...

i agree and that explains why admin would be a disaster for the club,if it was so easy don,t you think saints would have gone into admin ages ago.

[Big Poppa]

Surely if there is a suspicion that the board have deliberately brought this about to clear debts and pick up the club for a song, there are serious legal ramifications ?

 

There definitely needs to be a closer look at this. You would have thought having a manager in Big Nige last season, who was well liked & had the unity & backing of players & fans alike, who sensed positive times for the club ahead could simply be discarded. The simple truth is no matter what was said, done by Big Nige last summer, his face just simply didn't fit in with the current board.

 

As a rule of thumb, "if it's not broke, don't fix it" but the board decided to go ahead anyway in letting go of Big Nige. As businessmen you would have thought in are plight & financial situation that the gamble of replacing a manager with a foreign one with no experience of the CCC let alone British football, would be too big a gamble to take, especially if it goes pear shaped.

 

Now I like Jan a lot a kind decent bloke, straight down the line, pulls no punches etc etc, but the sad fact is that Jan was given a false dream that is now crumbling around him, as well as the rest of us. Now the board must have realized this last summer that there was a chance that if Saints didn't get off to a good start, with the young up and coming players coming through due to the fact we had to let certain older players go, that there confidence would be a lot more fragile than most.

 

The only way now, without any chance of certain members of the board still staying/trying to stay in some form or another by if any future takeover is if their is a hostile takeover, a complete clean slate.

[Chez]

It's one thing going into administration, takinging the ten point slap on the wrist and then with a clean slate being able to compete, but it's not as simple as that.

 

Creditors are subject to a CVA (Creditors Voluntary Agreement). For the CVA to succeed, 75% of the creditors +£1, must agree to the proposed CVA. If they don't agree by a set time then the League imposes a further points deduction (as it did with Leeds). If they don't ever agree then the club can go into liquidation.

[Fowllyd]

Fine. You carry on accepting the status quo, the complete boolllocks being served up, then.

 

And that is where your method of argument always disintegrates. Did I say I was accepting the status quo, or the football that's being served up? No, I did not. I merely pointed out that administration is not the panacea you think it to be.

 

It seems to me that your preferred method of debate is to put words into others' mouths, refute the points which they didn't make in the first place, then congratulate yourself on winning the argument. It's exactly what you've done here. There's a term for this form of argument - it's known as building a straw man.

 

Perhaps you'd like to address the points I actually did raise, rather than ones you raised on my behalf?

[Alain Perrin]

MTV generation solution to debt, declare bankruptcy / administration.

 

We've spent the money, built up the debt and now need to suck it up and take the pain. Administration is an immoral step.

[Block 5]

Well it is, whether some of you like it or not.

 

SFC is facing years of painful decline to non-league or non-existence status with the current management and mentality.

 

We need Barclays to force administration now, flog the club, clear the debts, take the points deduction on the chin in what is already a lost (and highly likely relegation) season, and start with a clean slate next year and rebuild the club and the trust and faith of the fan-base without the emotional baggage of Lowe and Wilde.

 

There is NO other way. Anything else is a death by a thousand cuts.

 

What a ridiculous post.

Sorry Alpine mate. I quite often agree with things you say, but not in this instance.

[TopGun]

What a ridiculous post.

Sorry Alpine mate. I quite often agree with things you say, but not in this instance.

 

I think Alpine needs to bone up a bit on insolvency law before he recommends administration as a course of action.

[alpine_saint]

I think Alpine needs to bone up a bit on insolvency law before he recommends administration as a course of action.

 

You keep writing the same patronising dismissal of my opinion.

 

Why cant you accept that it is my (and that of others) preferred course of action to breaking the ridiculous and infuriating cycle of events that is destroying this club, to get back to the sort of club we want to have, rather than saying "we're too stupid to understand" ?

 

Take a look around you, FFS. A decent gate turned up for the first time since the Crouch/Pearson days, and they were subjected to the worst f**king performance from the team in many a days. A lot of those fans are probably lost now for the WHOLE season, and the club cannot survive on 14-15,000 gates. So Lowe will get shot of more decent players, the football will get worse, so the gates will get worse. If not now, when the STs are renewed.

 

Unless a buyer is found for the club it is going into administration somewhen. I reckon its about 90% certain. We are arguing that we take the hit NOW rather than see another season damaged by it.

 

The sooner we address the almost certainty of it, the sooner the remnants of SFC start their recovery.

[NickG]

Lowe and Wilde must be removed, that is obvious. The effects of administration is just not understood by those who advocate it.

 

totally agree with all of that - administration is not something to aim for unless you don't understand all of its implications.

 

We could be even worse off.

[trousers]

Well it is, whether some of you like it or not.

 

SFC is facing years of painful decline to non-league or non-existence status with the current management and mentality.

 

We need Barclays to force administration now, flog the club, clear the debts, take the points deduction on the chin in what is already a lost (and highly likely relegation) season, and start with a clean slate next year and rebuild the club and the trust and faith of the fan-base without the emotional baggage of Lowe and Wilde.

 

There is NO other way. Anything else is a death by a thousand cuts.

 

Good to see people starting to repeat what I was saying this time last year....

[Windmill Arm 2]

Only if we let it - which is the sad thing - some people have.

 

Show some fight, show some belief. We've been in many worse positions than this (in terms of league position/points) before and people weren't throwing the towel then. F*cking cowards.[/QUOTE]

 

Are you able to seperate fiction from real life? Who exactly are you calling a coward???

 

Weirdo.

[Daren W]

I understand that if we go into administration before March, the points are taken from THIS season.

 

Even if we dont go into administration this season, I reckon we are down because of the way we play.

 

You dont think it is worth taking the (inveitable, imo) bad medicine now before next season starts ?

 

You are right there is no guarantee that Lowe and Wilde will be gone post-administration. BUT- my feeling is that there is a greater possibility of coming out from the shadow of Lowe and Wilde by this route than by preserving the status quo.

 

Do you not also concede that the club and fan base being Lowe- and Wilde-free is more likely to have a positive and united atmosphere surrounding it ????

 

Absolutely. I want them gone. More than you could ever possibly know. With those two at the helm of this club I feel physically isck...

 

However...

 

Unti you can deliver the following for me I do not want adminsitraion under any circumstance...

 

1) Lowe and Wilde will go and never darken our doorstep ever again.

2) We will keep the brightest talent we have

3) We will not struggle to make up those 15 points

4) We will bounce back in four years or so...

 

Until you can tell me, with some degree of certainty, that adminstration will not devastate this club then I will continue to disagree with you on the subject...

 

Just far, far too many if's for my liking..

[Legod Third Coming]

I find it despicable that people who haven't put a bean into this club want it wound up and plummeted a division by guarantee.

 

I use this word rarely, but what a bunch of c u n t s.

 

Right now we have a chance of survival and riding out a few years before the economy turns and someone buys us.

 

Or we can go bust now, allow anyone (Lowe, Wilde) to buy us for nothing. Or simply go out of existence.

 

I'll settle for an ugly sh4g rather than having my balls ripped off thanks.

[Weston Saint]

Jobs may be lost in and out of the club, businesses may fail because of the lack of payment of their bills, and all because some selfish "supporters" want us cheat and go into Administration to get a person out of the club.

[Weston Super Saint]

Again though, doesn't this come down to shareholder power? As it has for the last 10+ years?

 

Yes, yes it does.

 

So therefore we need to get rid of these idiot shareholders whose 'master plan' has been to keep Lowe in power so that he can fail at every opportunity he's given. If that means administration is the ONLY way to get rid of them, then that's the price we'll have to pay....

 

It'a all well and good throwing these names about (Salz, Fulthorpe, Gavyn Davies...) but is there any sign of their money?

 

But that's just it, we don't actually NEED their money to change the leadership of the club, we do need the shareholders to agree to it though

[Matt SFC]

Well it is, whether some of you like it or not.

 

SFC is facing years of painful decline to non-league or non-existence status with the current management and mentality.

 

We need Barclays to force administration now, flog the club, clear the debts, take the points deduction on the chin in what is already a lost (and highly likely relegation) season, and start with a clean slate next year and rebuild the club and the trust and faith of the fan-base without the emotional baggage of Lowe and Wilde.

 

There is NO other way. Anything else is a death by a thousand cuts.

 

looks like all your christmas' have come at once alpine saint

 

merry christmas you miserable ****

[OldNick]

which bits do you disagree with Nick. ?

I think the major thing I dont agree with on DW's post was that the board got us relegated.

They were a part not the whole. We had so many reasons, and we were relegatred by the fact we didnt score 1 more goal home or away at WBA. The margin was so small.

Everton and Arsenal (Wigan and Hull in recent history) are the only teams never to be relegated, it happens. It was probably the worst period in football history to be relegated when we did, but there are many factors for have been so.

[um pahars]

I think the major thing I dont agree with on DW's post was that the board got us relegated.

They were a part not the whole. We had so many reasons, and we were relegatred by the fact we didnt score 1 more goal home or away at WBA. The margin was so small.

Everton and Arsenal (Wigan and Hull in recent history) are the only teams never to be relegated, it happens. It was probably the worst period in football history to be relegated when we did, but there are many factors for have been so.

 

And if we get relegated this season, then I presume it will be the fault of Lallana for that missed penalty or White for giving away a penalty against Blackpool.

 

It will have nothing to do with Lowe employing a manager so out of his depth it's unbelievable????

[OldNick]

And if we get relegated this season, then I presume it will be the fault of Lallana for that missed penalty or White for giving away a penalty against Blackpool.

 

It will have nothing to do with Lowe employing a manager so out of his depth it's unbelievable????

I agree Jan is not the man for the job. If RL acts decisivily in the next week or so, any new man has more than enough time to get us out of the mire.If he appoints a backroom replacement then that is foolish. Again i dont know what the club can afford at the present.

[um pahars]

I agree Jan is not the man for the job. If RL acts decisivily in the next week or so, any new man has more than enough time to get us out of the mire.If he appoints a backroom replacement then that is foolish. Again i dont know what the club can afford at the present.

 

In Jan I see Wigley, and we all know how that season ended!!!!!!!!

 

And if Jan goes, then IMHO Lowe must walk as well.

[OldNick]

In Jan I see Wigley, and we all know how that season ended!!!!!!!!

 

And if Jan goes, then IMHO Lowe must walk as well.

If it was LC or any other chairman I doubt you would think the same. Has the Charlton chairman left yet?

I would love the club to be rid of the lot, lock stock and barrel.Do you wish the same?

Who in the board do you trust? I see a lot of chaff there.

[bridge too far]

If it was LC or any other chairman I doubt you would think the same. Has the Charlton chairman left yet?

I would love the club to be rid of the lot, lock stock and barrel.Do you wish the same?

Who in the board do you trust? I see a lot of chaff there.

 

Watford have 'lost' their chairman and manager in the past month.

[OldNick]

Watford have 'lost' their chairman and manager in the past month.

they bought to call air sea rescue then

[um pahars]

If it was LC or any other chairman I doubt you would think the same.

 

I think you'll find I would think exactly the same irrespective of who was Chairman.

 

The one thing I have a strong opinion on is the need to accept responsibility. If you're happy to take the money and the plaudits when things are going well, then you should have the balls to accept responsibility when things go pear shaped.

 

Mistakes of the magnitude of Wigley (along with how the appointment came about) and the cost of it to the Club were big enough to consider asking those involved to step down, and IMHO so is this decision.

 

Lowe is intrinsically linked with this "Revolutionary Coaching Set Up" and so if Jan goes, then IMHO Lowe's position is untenable.

[alpine_saint]

Jobs may be lost in and out of the club, businesses may fail because of the lack of payment of their bills, and all because some selfish "supporters" want us cheat and go into Administration to get a person out of the club.

 

R, its going to happen somewhen if we continue on this course, and there is zero chance of the course changing because we are talking about one R. Lowe.

 

If suppliers are really stupid enough to be continuing to provide SFC with lines of credit considering the known state of the club, that's their fault.

 

Its not selfish to want the inevitable to come at the best time for the club, which is clearly before another season becomes impacted by it, and I resent your accusation.

 

Once more - dont you get it ? Administration WILL happen on the course Lowe has plotted. He is doing NOTHING to increase revenue (look how the team supported yesterdays initiative...), and the cost cutting he is undertaking is also reducing revenue, so he is solving NOTHING.

[solentstars]

Jobs may be lost in and out of the club, businesses may fail because of the lack of payment of their bills, and all because some selfish "supporters" want us cheat and go into Administration to get a person out of the club.

yes it somes those simple simons up. me i rather we fight and stay in division,we got 22 games to go and are still fouth from bottom.

Edited 21 December, 2008 by solentstars

[NickG]

its been said many times on here but the positives Alpine seeks from administration are not guaranteed.

 

His rationale that relegation and administration are guaranteed is also flawed.

 

Can't see any reasoned arguement at all.

[Snowballs2]

I think you'll find I would think exactly the same irrespective of who was Chairman.

 

The one thing I have a strong opinion on is the need to accept responsibility. If you're happy to take the money and the plaudits when things are going well, then you should have the balls to accept responsibility when things go pear shaped.

 

Mistakes of the magnitude of Wigley (along with how the appointment came about) and the cost of it to the Club were big enough to consider asking those involved to step down, and IMHO so is this decision.

 

Lowe is intrinsically linked with this "Revolutionary Coaching Set Up" and so if Jan goes, then IMHO Lowe's position is untenable.

 

 

Yes but Um the first thing that Lowe would have to do is admit that he made a mistake AGAIN in employing the latest Coach...Hell will freeze over first, it aint going to happen.

[NickG]

more likely moving coaches around with Hockaday or Wotte taking the lead

[CB Fry]

R, its going to happen somewhen if we continue on this course, and there is zero chance of the course changing because we are talking about one R. Lowe.

 

If suppliers are really stupid enough to be continuing to provide SFC with lines of credit considering the known state of the club, that's their fault.

 

Its not selfish to want the inevitable to come at the best time for the club, which is clearly before another season becomes impacted by it, and I resent your accusation.

 

Once more - dont you get it ? Administration WILL happen on the course Lowe has plotted. He is doing NOTHING to increase revenue (look how the team supported yesterdays initiative...), and the cost cutting he is undertaking is also reducing revenue, so he is solving NOTHING.

 

 

 

I personally think the one think Lowe can near-as guarantee is us avoiding administration. Down to his very core he is a cautious cost cutting book balancer. That's why the squad has been cut back to the bone and the team is stuff with a load of never-will-be hyped up reserve teamers.

 

As revenues drop, we'll just cost cut and cost cut and cost cut and sell players and sell players and sell players. And remortgage the stadium. Or flog the farm. Anything, anything to stave off admin.

 

 

Anyway Alpine, I know a lot of people have ripped apart your pie in the sky notion already, but I do wonder if you can point to a real life example of a team that have gone into administration and are now rocketing back up the divisions powered by the unbelievable self belief that administration brings about?

 

Leeds maybe, energised, super powered and....ninth in their second season in the third tier and sacking their manager.

 

Or Luton, who club was so engerised and super powered by administration a couple of years back rocketed ummm down a division and then, well, went into adminstration again. And now are staring non league football in the face.

 

Or Rotherham, a text book example of the healing power of administration who drew so much strength from their admin they are no riding high....in the bottom three of the bottom division. Look out Chelsea!

 

Bradford? How's their European mission going?

 

 

Now you mention it, Alpine, administration is going to be just brilliant.

 

 

 

 

 

[LostBoys]

Lowe will forestall it by selling players in January to preserve his share value in the hope of a takeover. We will almost certainly be relegated even if our currently underperforming best players are sold. To that degree Lowe is merely postponing the inevitable.

[NickG]

doesn't normally take us over 130 posts to point out Alpine is talking without knowledge or reasoned arguement!

[alpine_saint]

doesn't normally take us over 130 posts to point out Alpine is talking without knowledge or reasoned arguement!

 

Yet not one of the supposed "put downs" I have received has made ANY sort of coherent argument that SFC has a safe long-term, mid-term or even short-term future with the current board and strategy (because I actually think deep-down none of you believe it either). That is why your put downs have zero substance...

 

As LostBoys has already indicated, Lowe is just postponing the inveitable for a couple of months. The result will be EXACTLY the same.

 

Short of a non-existent buyer coming forward, administration WILL happen. I do not share CBs confidence that Lowe will avoid it with his current strategy.

 

A business without customers will go under, whatever it is.

[ottery st mary]

Yet not one of the supposed "put downs" I have received has made ANY sort of coherent argument that SFC has a safe long-term, mid-term or even short-term future with the current board and strategy (because I actually think deep-down none of you believe it either). That is why your put downs have zero substance...

 

As LostBoys has already indicated, Lowe is just postponing the inveitable for a couple of months. The result will be EXACTLY the same.

 

Short of a non-existent buyer coming forward, administration WILL happen. I do not share CBs confidence that Lowe will avoid it with his current strategy.

 

A business without customers will go under, whatever it is.

 

I knew after your first post you were right. It is so obvious where we are and where we are about to fall over the cliff.

[alpine_saint]

I knew after your first post you were right. It is so obvious where we are and where we are about to fall over the cliff.

 

You'll have to forgive me. In the current TSW climate of slapping on the sarcasm thickly with a trowel, I cannot tell if you are taking the **** or not...

[ottery st mary]

You'll have to forgive me. In the current TSW climate of slapping on the sarcasm thickly with a trowel, I cannot tell if you are taking the **** or not...

 

No, I think you are right and I really am saddened to see the decline of the club.

I believe we are certainly at rock bottom and I am stiill very concerned about Lowey and his little mob and what they are up to.

I do not trust him one little bit and have always had my doubts about his leadership of this Askham mob and what they want for themselves.

I understand that administration, would not be good in a lot of supporters eyes

but that is where we are about to arrive.

We have one last chance now, but I believe Lowe has to go with the Askham mob out the door and funnily enough the only man who can do that is Wildey.

Will he be man enough for the club.

 

Most of what you say makes sense but you invariably come up against the Lowey nutters who have one aim and that is to defend him at all costs, for whatever reason.

Your entitled to your opinion and you should keep giving it to them.

The place would not be the same without posters like you. Sod the Lowey Luvvies.

[saintwarwick]

Yet not one of the supposed "put downs" I have received has made ANY sort of coherent argument that SFC has a safe long-term, mid-term or even short-term future with the current board and strategy (because I actually think deep-down none of you believe it either). That is why your put downs have zero substance...

 

As LostBoys has already indicated, Lowe is just postponing the inveitable for a couple of months. The result will be EXACTLY the same.

 

Short of a non-existent buyer coming forward, administration WILL happen. I do not share CBs confidence that Lowe will avoid it with his current strategy.

 

A business without customers will go under, whatever it is.

 

And how many football clubs have gone out of business over the last 40 years?

[brightspark]

Ive pretty much lost faith and seem to feel whichever way we turn its a bad turn. So just take administration IMO. We'd get a bit of media and some fans from other clubs feeling sorry for us. Might help a potential future chairmen want to try and help us and end the reign of Lord Lowe.

 

If Lowe went on to Dragons Den and went looking for an investment, he'd be told to give it up. If by some miracle he recieved an offer, he'd never accept as he wouldnt give away more than 0.2% of the company.

[NickG]

Yet not one of the supposed "put downs" I have received has made ANY sort of coherent argument that SFC has a safe long-term, mid-term or even short-term future with the current board and strategy (because I actually think deep-down none of you believe it either). That is why your put downs have zero substance...

 

As LostBoys has already indicated, Lowe is just postponing the inveitable for a couple of months. The result will be EXACTLY the same.

 

Short of a non-existent buyer coming forward, administration WILL happen. I do not share CBs confidence that Lowe will avoid it with his current strategy.

 

A business without customers will go under, whatever it is.

 

the arguements are not that we are safe but that administration is a child-like simplistic solution which is wrong

[saint1977]

Ive pretty much lost faith and seem to feel whichever way we turn its a bad turn. So just take administration IMO. We'd get a bit of media and some fans from other clubs feeling sorry for us. Might help a potential future chairmen want to try and help us and end the reign of Lord Lowe.

 

If Lowe went on to Dragons Den and went looking for an investment, he'd be told to give it up. If by some miracle he recieved an offer, he'd never accept as he wouldnt give away more than 0.2% of the company.

 

Considering he owns only 6%, it's not really his to give away. I'm inclined to agree with the above posters though, whilst most people on here are well aware I'm not a Lowe fan, administration is SERIOUSLY not funny and we could lose the assets that we have left. Sadly, I'm not so sure that Rupert can keep us out of it judging by what I heard earlier in the season. Trust me on this though, administration IS NOT an easy answer and it would push a whole host of already struggling local companies under as well and the waves caused on the supply chains could put people on this board out of work.

 

What I won't stand for though is anyone on here blaming us, the fans. Lowe did not have to take this wacky, stupid gamble in the summer and if we do go down, he has to take 100% of the blame. No PR or spin can disguise the stupidity of appointing JP, nice bloke or not.

[Dicko]

Administration is a very serious situation - it's not the best or easiest option

 

They will totally rape the club.

Vulchers will gather & take our youngsters for ridiculously low amounts.

 

We have to do everything we can to avoid going into administration, this is why I'm very annoyed at the stay away fans

[Wopper]

Personally I want to see Lowe fall flat on his face and lose shed loads of money.

[alpine_saint]

Administration is a very serious situation - it's not the best or easiest option

 

They will totally rape the club.

Vulchers will gather & take our youngsters for ridiculously low amounts.

 

We have to do everything we can to avoid going into administration, this is why I'm very annoyed at the stay away fans

 

Yep, it's all the fans fault. What complete waankers :rolleyes:

[NickG]

Personally I want to see Lowe fall flat on his face and lose shed loads of money.

 

the club is more important than any of that crowd. I would rather have a club underachieving under Crouch / Lowe / Wilde and cronies than see us in admin, going down divisions and selling everyone/everything.

 

Of course I would rather the club achieving with a new board able to take us forward.

[saint1977]

Administration is a very serious situation - it's not the best or easiest option

 

They will totally rape the club.

Vulchers will gather & take our youngsters for ridiculously low amounts.

 

We have to do everything we can to avoid going into administration, this is why I'm very annoyed at the stay away fans

 

I'm not that fussed about the players any more, all the Southampton calibre players were sold long ago. What would be devastating is for SMS to be sold off and the club have to find extra interest payments in a world economic slump. Add to that the end of Staplewood as well and it would be a disasterous option, albeit one that may happen.

Edited 22 December, 2008 by saint1977

[NickG]

explanation cut and pasted from another thread;

 

Administration and administrative receivership

When a company or partnership gets into financial trouble an administrator or administrative receiver may be appointed.

 

Administration

The role of an administrator is to get the company out of trouble and trading again if possible.

 

Administrators can be appointed to a company that is unable, or is likely to become unable, to pay its debts. They can be appointed by any of the following:

 

the courts - on application from a creditor, directors or partners

the holder of a qualifying floating charge over the assets of the business

the company or its directors

An administrator's primary goal is to rescue the company as a going concern. If this isn't possible, the administrator will try to get a better result for the creditors than would be possible if the company was wound up.

 

If neither of these is possible, the administrator will sell the company's property to make at least a partial payment to one or more secured or preferential creditors, such as employees or the bank.

 

Administration can also apply to partnerships.

 

Administrative receivership

When a company borrows money, the lender is usually given some security over the company's assets to guarantee payment. If the company fails to keep the terms of the loan or encounters financial difficulties, the lender may be entitled to appoint an administrative receiver. An administrative receiver is an insolvency practitioner who has control of the whole, or a substantial part, of the company's property and wide powers over the business.

 

The administrative receiver is mainly concerned with getting back the money owed to the secured creditor. The administrative receiver may sell the assets piecemeal, or sell the whole business as a going concern to pay off the secured creditor, and the costs of the receivership.

[NickG]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/7305998.stm

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/find_out/guides/2004/money_problems_at_leeds/newsid_3446000/3446021.stm

 

(2nd one probably better for alpine)

[alpine_saint]

the club is more important than any of that crowd. I would rather have a club underachieving under Crouch / Lowe / Wilde and cronies than see us in admin, going down divisions and selling everyone/everything.

 

Of course I would rather the club achieving with a new board able to take us forward.

 

Of course, the two are mutually exclusive, arent they ???

 

Utterly ridiculous post. Amazing that 7 months on, certain idiots think that having Lowe in charge means automatically avoiding administration :rolleyes:

[alpine_saint]

explanation cut and pasted from another thread;

 

Administration and administrative receivership

When a company or partnership gets into financial trouble an administrator or administrative receiver may be appointed.

 

Administration

The role of an administrator is to get the company out of trouble and trading again if possible.

 

Administrators can be appointed to a company that is unable, or is likely to become unable, to pay its debts. They can be appointed by any of the following:

 

the courts - on application from a creditor, directors or partners

the holder of a qualifying floating charge over the assets of the business

the company or its directors

An administrator's primary goal is to rescue the company as a going concern. If this isn't possible, the administrator will try to get a better result for the creditors than would be possible if the company was wound up.

 

If neither of these is possible, the administrator will sell the company's property to make at least a partial payment to one or more secured or preferential creditors, such as employees or the bank.

 

Administration can also apply to partnerships.

 

Administrative receivership

When a company borrows money, the lender is usually given some security over the company's assets to guarantee payment. If the company fails to keep the terms of the loan or encounters financial difficulties, the lender may be entitled to appoint an administrative receiver. An administrative receiver is an insolvency practitioner who has control of the whole, or a substantial part, of the company's property and wide powers over the business.

 

The administrative receiver is mainly concerned with getting back the money owed to the secured creditor. The administrative receiver may sell the assets piecemeal, or sell the whole business as a going concern to pay off the secured creditor, and the costs of the receivership.

 

Here we go....A Lowe Luvvie using the classic fear tactic to con and mislead the stupid amongst our fan base. However, he conviently stops the bold font before this bit...

 

"or sell the whole business as a going concern to pay off the secured creditor, and the costs of the receivership."

 

Why is the piecemeal approach more likely than the going concern scenario, Mr. Einstein ?