Saint Without a Halo Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 If someone was spending large amounts of your money without actually telling you, would you be happy to let it continue ? What was the price of the club that ML paid and what was its price and the price of the players when NC left. If the Delta was greater than the money he spent (and their is no reason to think it wasn't) then NC actually created wealth for KL and did not squander it! As I said before the only difference between them was when to cash in the chips! NC felt the value could increase further with more spend KL wasn't convinced! That led to disappointment and broken promises to the manager and players and that is the principal reason we are now where we are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 What was the price of the club that ML paid and what was its price and the price of the players when NC left. If the Delta was greater than the money he spent (and their is no reason to think it wasn't) then NC actually created wealth for KL and did not squander it! As I said before the only difference between them was when to cash in the chips! NC felt the value could increase further with more spend KL wasn't convinced! That led to disappointment and broken promises to the manager and players and that is the principal reason we are now where we are! We are where we are now because we are Provincial PL Club with a very good Academy The previous CEO/Chairman had ideas which were totally unrealistic We will sell Morgan Adam and Luke who have been at the club since the days of Lowe and have every right to move on to earn more money and get more success Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 What was the price of the club that ML paid and what was its price and the price of the players when NC left. If the Delta was greater than the money he spent (and their is no reason to think it wasn't) then NC actually created wealth for KL and did not squander it! As I said before the only difference between them was when to cash in the chips! NC felt the value could increase further with more spend KL wasn't convinced! That led to disappointment and broken promises to the manager and players and that is the principal reason we are now where we are! I'm not sure what your point is. KL obviously didn't want to spend what it took to fulfil Cortese's Champions League dream (£100-200mill min), you can't blame her for that. Cortese jumped ship because he didn't fancy the alternative and left us where we are now. It's pointless moaning unless we have another billionaire lined up willing to lose a few hundred million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 how do you know that was the case? what if she sanctioned every penny? then there is the question that the club was in probate and she had no control and it was not her money at the time No need to disclose how I know this is the case, but I do not think any of us would be happy if our own personal money was being spent without full disclosure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 No need to disclose how I know this is the case, but I do not think any of us would be happy if our own personal money was being spent without full disclosure. there is, if you want to be believed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 (edited) What was the price of the club that ML paid and what was its price and the price of the players when NC left. If the Delta was greater than the money he spent (and their is no reason to think it wasn't) then NC actually created wealth for KL and did not squander it! As I said before the only difference between them was when to cash in the chips! NC felt the value could increase further with more spend KL wasn't convinced! That led to disappointment and broken promises to the manager and players and that is the principal reason we are now where we are! Irrelevant, we all know ML got for a bargain. But the fact remains if we gave our cash cards to friends and they said they needed a tenner, but you find out they actually took 50 quid, you wouldn't be impressed. We are talking millions rather than tens or twenties. Edited 28 June, 2014 by Ed Rooney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 there is, if you want to be believed Do not care if I am believed or not, as people will make up there own minds on what happened and I will happily let them do so. I would certainly not disclose a source of information on this forum, but it has not come via a rumour mill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 Irrelevant, we all know ML got for a bargain. But the fact remains if we gave our cash cards to friends and they said they needed a tender but you find out they actually took 50 quid, you wouldn't be impressed. We are talking millions rather than tens or twenties. And you know he took more than she sanctioned for a fact? I would bet as a banker all spend was fully sanctioned once the estate was out of probate however it was the fact that demands for future (unspent) funds were not sanctioned that led to him departing as he could see the consequences we are all now seeing! Otherwise there would be a legal case for him to answer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 And you know he took more than she sanctioned for a fact? I would bet as a banker all spend was fully sanctioned once the estate was out of probate however it was the fact that demands for future (unspent) funds was not sanctioned that led to him departing as he could see the consequences we are all now seeing! Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 Yes So I look forward to the fraud case in court as if anyone spent my millions I had not sanctioned I would sue the ass of them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dellman Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 If NC spent more than he was meant to KL should be happy because she is now creaming tens of millions but NCs work is falling apart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 As a person holding authority to sign cheques on behalf of the club a fraud case would not stand up, as he wasn't committing fraud, he did what his job allowed him to. However it is not his club, his money and no doubt the owner of the club and the money would like to be kept informed of spending and not kept in the dark on spending. I will say no more, everyone will make there own mind up on NC and what happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 We are where we are now because we are Provincial PL Club with a very good Academy The previous CEO/Chairman had ideas which were totally unrealistic We will sell Morgan Adam and Luke who have been at the club since the days of Lowe and have every right to move on to earn more money and get more success Where did I disagree with anything you say? I have supported Saints since 1968 and am well aware of who and what we are and as I said before NC and KL only disagreed on when to cash in it was timing only. However for the new board to continue to claim what is happening is progress assumes we are naïve! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 As a person holding authority to sign cheques on behalf of the club a fraud case would not stand up, as he wasn't committing fraud, he did what his job allowed him to. However it is not his club, his money and no doubt the owner of the club and the money would like to be kept informed of spending and not kept in the dark on spending. I will say no more, everyone will make there own mind up on NC and what happened. Sorry this is crap! if you have an authority to sign cheques that authority is approved and limited by the company owners or shareholders i.e sanctioned ! if you go outside your authorised limits (and are unsanctioned) you will be sued! Ask any lawyer, accountant or indeed banker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 Sorry this is crap! if you have an authority to sign cheques that authority is approved and limited by the company owners or shareholders i.e sanctioned ! if you go outside your authorised limits (and are unsanctioned) you will be sued! Ask any lawyer, accountant or indeed banker No it isn't crap, but hey hi you know it all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 I'm not sure what your point is. KL obviously didn't want to spend what it took to fulfil Cortese's Champions League dream (£100-200mill min), you can't blame her for that. Cortese jumped ship because he didn't fancy the alternative and left us where we are now. It's pointless moaning unless we have another billionaire lined up willing to lose a few hundred million. That is exactly my point! NC thought we could go further in increasing the value of the club KL didn't when the manager and players saw the investment dry up they jumped ship as they are entitled to My objection is to the current board trying to pass off what is happening as some sort of plan for progress and making statements they cant possibly comply with when indeed it is nothing more than the need to go back to being a small provincial self financing club all be it with a current good academy . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 No it isn't crap, but hey hi you know it all No I don't know it all but in this particular case I almost certainly do as I am authorised to sign large cheques on behalf of my company! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpturner Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 No I don't know it all but in this particular case I almost certainly do as I am authorised to sign large cheques on behalf of my company! It depends on your remit. If there is a clear and defined limit to the amount you can write then clearly you'll be in trouble if you exceed it. If, however, there is no limit cast in stone, or it is ambiguously worded, or you yourself wrote your own terms of employment, then you could do what you like with impunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 (edited) It depends on your remit. If there is a clear and defined limit to the amount you can write then clearly you'll be in trouble if you exceed it. If, however, there is no limit cast in stone, or it is ambiguously worded, or you yourself wrote your own terms of employment, then you could do what you like with impunity. Correct but in this case your shareholders owners have given you unlimited sanctions and therefore you cannot spend unsanctioned funds. KL can always add the sanctions at any point which is probably what happened. However I said I doubted NC had spent any money that was not within his powers to do so otherwise he would have been sued and as a banker he would not have been that stupid. Edited 28 June, 2014 by Saint Without a Halo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 No I don't know it all but in this particular case I almost certainly do as I am authorised to sign large cheques on behalf of my company! As am I in my own company, but that doesn't make me an expert in legal proceedings, as I am sure you being able to sign cheques on behalf of a company doesn't make you a legal expert. There are steps to follow in a case of being able to sue and avenues to take to avoid the need for this course of action. As the other poster states if it is in your remit to sign cheques for an unlimited amount then you can do so. BUT if you do this without providing feedback to your employer of how much you ar spending then I would not think you will be in that job for much longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintSteve Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 That is exactly my point! NC thought we could go further in increasing the value of the club KL didn't when the manager and players saw the investment dry up they jumped ship as they are entitled to My objection is to the current board trying to pass off what is happening as some sort of plan for progress and making statements they cant possibly comply with when indeed it is nothing more than the need to go back to being a small provincial self financing club all be it with a current good academy . That's exactly how I see it.. but lets wait and see what July brings.. I'm sure there are more surprises to follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 (edited) As am I in my own company, but that doesn't make me an expert in legal proceedings, as I am sure you being able to sign cheques on behalf of a company doesn't make you a legal expert. There are steps to follow in a case of being able to sue and avenues to take to avoid the need for this course of action. As the other poster states if it is in your remit to sign cheques for an unlimited amount then you can do so. BUT if you do this without providing feedback to your employer of how much you ar spending then I would not think you will be in that job for much longer. Sorry you said you know for a fact he spent unsanctioned funds (see post 109) your opinion with no evidence. I said if he did he can be sued and wasn't. So I doubted a banker would be so silly to do this. My view is he wanted additional funds which were not forthcoming which I believe to be far more likely. If she indeed gave him unlimited powers then she is not in a position to complain if he uses them. Anyway my opinion versus yours End of Edited 28 June, 2014 by Saint Without a Halo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 Sorry you said you know for a fact he spent unsanctioned funds (see post 109) your opinion with no evidence. I said if he did he can be sued and wasn't. So I doubted a banker would be so silly to do this. My view is he wanted additional funds which were not forthcoming which I believe to be far more likely. My opinion versus yours End of I have said from first involvement in this topic, that money was being spent without the knowledge of the person who provides the money. When it was discovered that money was being spent which went against plans, agreements and feedback to the owner, this unfortunately resulted in serious trust issues. You decided to use words like unsanctioned, whether you believe or not that this has come via people that would be privy to information on this is up to you, and as you say it's your opinion against my opinion. Cortese thought this was his club and it wasn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpturner Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 As the other poster states........ Oi! I've got a name you know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 Oi! I've got a name you know! Sorry, that was very rude of me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dellman Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 What ever way anyone looks at it and what ever anyone's feelings about NC or KL the fact is the Liebherrs have a colossal return for their investment and we have had five breathtakingly successful fun years, good all round up to now. NC deserves praise all round, don't see him getting it, sadly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 I have said from first involvement in this topic, that money was being spent without the knowledge of the person who provides the money. When it was discovered that money was being spent which went against plans, agreements and feedback to the owner, this unfortunately resulted in serious trust issues. You decided to use words like unsanctioned, whether you believe or not that this has come via people that would be privy to information on this is up to you, and as you say it's your opinion against my opinion. Cortese thought this was his club and it wasn't He may well have thought it was his club that is not the issue I suggest you re read post 108 and 109 where you clearly said "yes" to the question "do you know for a fact he spent unsanctioned funds?". If she allowed him extensive powers to legally spend her money she cannot complain when he does it. I suspect he had extensive powers under the probate as an executor of the will as left to him by ML which she then wanted to curb after inheriting and that caused the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 He may well have thought it was his club that is not the issue I suggest you re read post 108 and 109 where you clearly said "yes" to the question "do you know for a fact he spent unsanctioned funds?". If she allowed him extensive powers to legally spend her money she cannot complain when he does it. I suspect he had extensive powers under the probate as an executor of the will as left to him by ML which she then wanted to curb after inheriting and that caused the difference. Sorry I was unaware you were using the wording Unsanctioned in the legal term and that would lead you to talk about suing. I read your Unsanctioned as mr c you have told me this will cost x so therefore you can spend x on that, that is what I will sanction for spending on that. Surely you are not suggesting she can't complain when she feels money is being spent in a way that is not in accordance with plans and proposals, if course she will complain as any boss would. Last on this conversation, we shall see how the season pans out and how much we miss the messiah and how much we suffer with this useless board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 If someone was spending large amounts of your money without actually telling you, would you be happy to let it continue ? The assumption that Saint Richmond would be in possession of large sums of money is worthy of derision, I'm afraid. Nothing in any of his posts suggests that he would be capable of accumulating such sums, so the hypothetical situation would never arise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Block34 Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 I suspect he had extensive powers under the probate as an executor of the will as left to him by ML which she then wanted to curb after inheriting and that caused the difference. This, and NC did not appreciate 'interference' as NC saw it, or 'proper governance' as KL saw it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 What is happening is not the boards fault. It is because every time a Saints player gets into the England squad they get tapped up to move to so called big club. This goes back many years back to when the prem league started and all those meaningless fifa friendlys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waggy Posted 28 June, 2014 Share Posted 28 June, 2014 The acid test will obviously be the coming season. If we have sold the family silver and not invested wisely with the proceeds there will be a lot of told ya so's crowing. If RoKo pulls the proverbial rabbits out of the hat and we secure another top 10 finish then a fair few moist mattress munters with have egg on their mush when this post is dug up next May. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junior Mullet Posted 28 July, 2014 Author Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Careful Crab Lungs, I was called names for posting this a month ago. There are some absolute rotters on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Correct but in this case your shareholders owners have given you unlimited sanctions and therefore you cannot spend unsanctioned funds. KL can always add the sanctions at any point which is probably what happened. However I said I doubted NC had spent any money that was not within his powers to do so otherwise he would have been sued and as a banker he would not have been that stupid. Markus Leibherr put in place a Five Year Plan The person he appointed to run his Five Year Plan was Nicola Cortese Cortese saw out those Five years (most of which was overseen by Katharina, after Markus passed away) If Cortese had abused his position within Markus's Five Year remit, then he would have been brought to account (legally) But he hasn't been Makes me laugh when people accuse Cortese of "mismanagement" He was working to Markus's instructions as laid down in the Five Year Plan Katharina changed the emphasis re "ambition" when her Father's Five years finished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Got to be careful what I say here, but About time she sold up and took Krueger. Reed and the other2 with her. That OK Mods Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junior Mullet Posted 29 July, 2014 Author Share Posted 29 July, 2014 I worry about just how much damage is being done in the meantime. Don't get me wrong, the club is so much stronger now that when Markus took over but we are going backwards at a serious rate. It's not long until the new season kicks off - we will do well to stay up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whoateallthepies Posted 29 July, 2014 Share Posted 29 July, 2014 yeah this. We, the fans, should buy KL out and have the fans run the club then we could see real ambition we could keep all our best players, sell our crap ones for loads of money, while putting massive bids in for the top teams best players all while pushing on to win the Champions league running a mid size provincial football club is easy why can't the owners and board do it right morons........... .......mean while back in the real world of modern football Do you have a colour TV yet? Or is your entire view of the world still black and white? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 So, thought this would be an interesting one now. Do people still think that KL should sell the club? She has mentioned that she no longer has any interest investing money into the club, and from now on we need to self-sustainable. Is it better that we are like this, have to sell a player or so a season much in the same way Everton have or do people want KL to sell up to a potential overseas consortium or the like? Personally, I am happy with the self-sustainable model under KL, with FFP coming in I think the days of mega-spending oligarchs is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrensup Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 So, thought this would be an interesting one now. Do people still think that KL should sell the club? She has mentioned that she no longer has any interest investing money into the club, and from now on we need to self-sustainable. Is it better that we are like this, have to sell a player or so a season much in the same way Everton have or do people want KL to sell up to a potential overseas consortium or the like? Personally, I am happy with the self-sustainable model under KL, with FFP coming in I think the days of mega-spending oligarchs is over. Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattio Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 So, thought this would be an interesting one now. Do people still think that KL should sell the club? She has mentioned that she no longer has any interest investing money into the club, and from now on we need to self-sustainable. Is it better that we are like this, have to sell a player or so a season much in the same way Everton have or do people want KL to sell up to a potential overseas consortium or the like? Personally, I am happy with the self-sustainable model under KL, with FFP coming in I think the days of mega-spending oligarchs is over. 100% self sustaning, money is killing the sport of football, it's now a business and I will lose all interest in Saints if we turn into a Man City/ Chelsea. I'd honestly rather play in the Championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goatboy Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 Whatever happened to saint richmond? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 Yes. To anyone? Be nice if you expanded on your answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 Whatever happened to saint richmond? I think he got so embarrassed (and rightly so) after arguing with himself that he thought it best to quit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowgli Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 The thread was started by the same poster who thought Pelle would struggle... ...just saying like.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dellman Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 I would like us to be self-sustainable, who wouldn't, but is it possible in today's top flight? Wenger has tried at Arsenal and was helped by being able to pick up our young stars but even he has had to buy big now (Ozil for example). We will only be self sustained by constantly selling our star players, we've got away with it this time (brilliantly) but it's high risk and I wouldn't want to bet on such success a second time. Neither would I want another summer like we've just had. Bad for dicky tickers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 Having read back over this thread, there were some real gems. Thank God that Katharina hasn't given up on us, as we are arguably in as good a position under her ownership as we've ever been. Whilst listening to the chanting for Markus on Saturday, I wondered when there will be a chant showing our appreciation of her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint86 Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 What you missed, was lallana, shaw and Lambert all wanting to leave. Possibly a few others. Your crying over players who left you. Why can you get behind Southampton and the squad that have stayed loyal. You criticise Katrina but I am fully convinced she loves the club.I was looking through old photos and she is in the directors box in many, Bournemouth 2010 being one example, and she was with her nephew/son. It is her money, the liebhers saved us, and they continue to try their best for us. In contrast your post summarises a stance from the fans that is at best ungrateful, and at worst pathetic, selfish and ignorant. Look at me look at me!!! Vindication!!! HaHa beatches! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 I would like us to be self-sustainable, who wouldn't, but is it possible in today's top flight? Wenger has tried at Arsenal and was helped by being able to pick up our young stars but even he has had to buy big now (Ozil for example). We will only be self sustained by constantly selling our star players, we've got away with it this time (brilliantly) but it's high risk and I wouldn't want to bet on such success a second time. Neither would I want another summer like we've just had. Bad for dicky tickers! FFP means we will have to sell at least 1 player for big ££ every season or so. Everyone bar the biggest will have to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 Look at me look at me!!! Vindication!!! HaHa beatches! Fairplay man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloridaMarlin Posted 22 October, 2014 Share Posted 22 October, 2014 I think the vast majority of sensible Saints fans would prefer us to be self-sustaining, even at the risk of not breaking into the top four and competing in the Champs League. Like everybody else, I would like to believe that the FFP rules will eventually even things out so that clubs like us can compete. However, I am not naieve enough to think that the FFP rules will ever really hit the biggest clubs, who will continue to drive a coach and horses through them to maintain the differential between themselves and the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now