Jump to content

AGM is getting lairy!!!


exit2

Recommended Posts

Crouch would buy Lowe's and/or Wilde's shares in an instant.

 

The problem is they will not sale.

 

I also understand he is willing to put new money into the Club (2million has been mentioned in various circles), but this has been turned down.

 

Just heard from a friend that it has been the most vociferous and ugly AGM he has ever attended (I wonder if anyone from Barclays is there). With Lowe at the helm, I struggle to see how the Club will escape from it's current circle of decline.

 

But Lowe and Wilde's share are not unique, they total about 22% of the total issue.Even taking it as a block of 42% that still leaves another 48% hanging around somewhere.Why is he so obsessed with buying the Lowe/Wilde block when he could achieve control by focussing on the rest of the issue?

It's a weak argument to say you'll buy from someone you know won't sell. There are other shares, if he means business I'm sure that he could go after them.Unless of course Lowe and Wilde have a bigger stranglehold than can be referenced.I'm sure that Crouch can get his hands on a list of shareholders, if he's serious he'd know what to do with it. So Mr Crouch, action or words???i

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i say again...who had a problem with lowe prior to 2004..?

 

hardly many..

 

nick illingsworth is about the only person who could, that went public before 2003 about his dislike for lowe..ask him in the UI..he will tell you that he was verbally abused at the start of the cup final by many many fans asking him "do you still dislike lowe now you f-ing c**t"...

I remember we found it great that so many modeled themselves on how we did it...the right way, with no sugar daddy etc...no one had a real problem then..and that was 5 years ago...not 12..

 

Yes because he was doing a good job and most fans acknowledged that TDD. Remember, he is CEO, NOT an owner and his track-record since 2004 is going to read 2 relegations by May 2009. Therefore, his style is totally inappropriate and he is the one that should buy more shares and put up or shut up if he wants to "rule" in such in an arbitary way. Therefore, as Chairman, if he is doing a poor job which one home win all season tells you is and no-one bar a few brainwashed zealots - I know that's not you TDD and I'm not having a pop at you mate - can tell us otherwise and he has to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes because he was doing a good job and most fans acknowledged that TDD. Remember, he is CEO, NOT an owner and his track-record since 2004 is going to read 2 relegations by May 2009. Therefore, his style is totally inappropriate and he is the one that should buy more shares and put up or shut up if he wants to "rule" in such in an arbitary way. Therefore, as Chairman, if he is doing a poor job which one home win all season tells you is and no-one bar a few brainwashed zealots - I know that's not you TDD and I'm not having a pop at you mate - can tell us otherwise and he has to go.

 

oh..i agree with what you say...lowe is no good for us and some of his manager choices have been insane..from grey, wigley, sturrock and jan..have been utterly insane..

 

BUT, to say it all went wrong with askham is a rather silly point as we achieved a huge amount upto 2004..then the rest, is of course history..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Lowe and Wilde's share are not unique, they total about 22% of the total issue.Even taking it as a block of 42% that still leaves another 48% hanging around somewhere.Why is he so obsessed with buying the Lowe/Wilde block when he could achieve control by focussing on the rest of the issue?

It's a weak argument to say you'll buy from someone you know won't sell. There are other shares, if he means business I'm sure that he could go after them.Unless of course Lowe and Wilde have a bigger stranglehold than can be referenced.I'm sure that Crouch can get his hands on a list of shareholders, if he's serious he'd know what to do with it. So Mr Crouch, action or words???i

 

Why should he pay 40p a share or indeed anything more than a minimal amount when the organisation is insolvent though? Lowe and Wilde haven't a hope in hell of turning this situation around. I'm not particularly a fan of Crouch but I could just smell Lowe's old "£25m and it's theirs argument". Erm Rupert, it isn't yours to sell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i say again...who had a problem with lowe prior to 2004..?

 

hardly many..

 

..

 

 

There was a guy used to post on Saintslist, he constantly said that Lowe would eventually ruin the club with his miserly attitude. Can't remember his name though. My did he get slagged off on a continual basis. Probably why he stopped posting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if only crouch and co had appointed pearson/billy davies the minute burley left, and set about on preparing a plan for the summer then I very much doubt lowe and wilde would be here now...

 

the dod/gorman fiasco put so many off IMO

 

and stopped the weekly "the takeover is just around the corner" comments...also

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this the same Crouch that got us into this mess?

 

Is this the same Crouch who while he was in charge let Burley spend money we didnt have on wages and transfer fees in an attempt to get promoted and ultimately when that failed gave us no option but to cut costs dramatically including playing youngsters?

 

No. It's the Leon Crouch who wanted to cut costs but was continually outvoted by Hone, Dulieu, Oldknow, etc - the executives that Wilde brought to the club. Crouch only properly got his feet under the table this time last year, by which time contracts had been signed and deals done. He was fire-fighting pretty well from day one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Lowe and Wilde's share are not unique, they total about 22% of the total issue.Even taking it as a block of 42% that still leaves another 48% hanging around somewhere.Why is he so obsessed with buying the Lowe/Wilde block when he could achieve control by focussing on the rest of the issue?

It's a weak argument to say you'll buy from someone you know won't sell. There are other shares, if he means business I'm sure that he could go after them.Unless of course Lowe and Wilde have a bigger stranglehold than can be referenced.I'm sure that Crouch can get his hands on a list of shareholders, if he's serious he'd know what to do with it. So Mr Crouch, action or words???i

I would guess that there are quite a few dormant shares, say 20-30%. About 35 per cent of Sheffield Wednesday's shares are classed as dormant.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. It's the Leon Crouch who wanted to cut costs but was continually outvoted by Hone, Dulieu, Oldknow, etc - the executives that Wilde brought to the club. Crouch only properly got his feet under the table this time last year, by which time contracts had been signed and deals done. He was fire-fighting pretty well from day one.

 

Indeederooni!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh..i agree with what you say...lowe is no good for us and some of his manager choices have been insane..from grey, wigley, sturrock and jan..have been utterly insane..

 

BUT, to say it all went wrong with askham is a rather silly point as we achieved a huge amount upto 2004..then the rest, is of course history..

 

Cheers mate, I know my post could have been taken the wrong way. I just feel that the reverse takeover has always left the club between pillar and post. Lowe did well 1997-2003 and we had some skillfull managers that really helped us through, plus exceptional talents like MLT. Trouble is, Abramovich blew everyone out of the water a bit - not Lowe's fault but that should probably have been the time to have bought out the old guard and brough an investor in to fuel new growth. I don't think he had the cash to do it and it would have been difficult to persaude people to sell at that time as well. The fact that it would have been so difficult stems back to Askham IMO who put pure personal gain ahead of any interest in SFC going forward.

 

I also suspect - but have no evidence - that Secure Retirement wasn't the best deal for SFC ob the table but was the best for Guy Askham and that will be his legacy and that of Wiseman and Richards as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this the same Crouch that got us into this mess?

 

Is this the same Crouch who while he was in charge let Burley spend money we didnt have on wages and transfer fees in an attempt to get promoted and ultimately when that failed gave us no option but to cut costs dramatically including playing youngsters?

 

At best that is re-writing history - I think you need to look closer at Wilde. By the time Crouch came in the damage had been done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Lowe and Wilde's share are not unique, they total about 22% of the total issue.Even taking it as a block of 42% that still leaves another 48% hanging around somewhere.Why is he so obsessed with buying the Lowe/Wilde block when he could achieve control by focussing on the rest of the issue?

It's a weak argument to say you'll buy from someone you know won't sell. There are other shares, if he means business I'm sure that he could go after them.Unless of course Lowe and Wilde have a bigger stranglehold than can be referenced.I'm sure that Crouch can get his hands on a list of shareholders, if he's serious he'd know what to do with it. So Mr Crouch, action or words???i

 

I think you'll the market for our shares is rather illiquid and you can't buy the volumes required on the open market. At the time of the last EGM, I had a friend willing to buy #40,000 worth of shares, but he found it impossible to acquire even that amount.

 

As proved last time, the only realy way to acquire enough shares to change things is in buying the lagre tranches (as was the case with the ones owned by Invesco & Thompson).

 

Additionally, removing Lowe from the picture would be seen by many as finally ridding a divisive influence within the Club. He was the catalyst for the Revolution on and off the pitch this summer, something which is proving disastrous for the Club.

 

In order to effect change, in our case there has to be a willing seller just as much as a willing buyer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should he pay 40p a share or indeed anything more than a minimal amount when the organisation is insolvent though? Lowe and Wilde haven't a hope in hell of turning this situation around. I'm not particularly a fan of Crouch but I could just smell Lowe's old "£25m and it's theirs argument". Erm Rupert, it isn't yours to sell?

 

 

But it's nothing to do with a price fixed by Rupert Lowe. There are 28,000,000

shares, a controlling interest can be obtained completely independently of Lowe,his cronies or Wilde.I'm sure a goodly number of people would accept 30p.

Unless of course he's snookered himself by paying 65p for his shares and he'd have to offer that for the remaining 70% if he eventually got to 30%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Window Cleaner viewpost.gif

Turning up the heat will do nothing whatsoever, turning up the CASH is the only solution.Screaming and howling at the AGM will produce absolutely f**k all;

If Crouch doesn't like it he only has to put his hand in his pocket, obtain another 20.05 % of the shares and then he can do whatever it is he wants.

I mean a man of means like he should surely be able to stump up another 4 million or so instead of wasting time running his mouth off. He had his chance,

didn't step up to the plate,wallet in hand. He tried the "petit jouer'' approach (see Runnymede Minutes) and got his arse kicked.

Crouch would buy Lowe's and/or Wilde's shares in an instant.

 

The problem is they will not sale.

 

I also understand he is willing to put new money into the Club (2million has been mentioned in various circles), but this has been turned down.

 

Just heard from a friend that it has been the most vociferous and ugly AGM he has ever attended (I wonder if anyone from Barclays is there). With Lowe at the helm, I struggle to see how the Club will escape from it's current circle of decline.

 

What a load of ******. When Crouch was giving it the Michael and Rupert routine he was spouting they agreed a fair price for their shares? All of a sudden that no longer exists. As for mentioning £2M under your breath at the back of the stands, what's happened to all those 10's of millions to blow your socks off? Going by the previous ratio, it's just enough for a pie and a pint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if only crouch and co had appointed pearson/billy davies the minute burley left, and set about on preparing a plan for the summer then I very much doubt lowe and wilde would be here now...

 

the dod/gorman fiasco put so many off IMO

 

and stopped the weekly "the takeover is just around the corner" comments...also

 

This is very true and didn't help either. No wonder the fans think the major shareholders are utter clowns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crouch would buy Lowe's and/or Wilde's shares in an instant.

 

The problem is they will not sale.

 

I also understand he is willing to put new money into the Club (2million has been mentioned in various circles), but this has been turned down.

 

Just heard from a friend that it has been the most vociferous and ugly AGM he has ever attended (I wonder if anyone from Barclays is there). With Lowe at the helm, I struggle to see how the Club will escape from it's current circle of decline.

Its about bloody time that Lowe was faced with someone with passion and shares giving him a verbal bashing. I am not a great admirer of Crouch, but without him quite honestly there would be no-one prepared to say boo to the goose (or duck). Its quite clear now why Wilde did not attend, because he knew that Crouch would run riot with him in the room. For all those that say this is childish, you are just so completely wrong. This is the whole point of having an AGM, it is the one legitimate opportunity for the shareholders to let the Board know exactly how they feel. I accept it will make little difference, but these things need to be said and Lowe needs to understand the depth of feeling against him. I wish I had gone now, instead of simply proxying my vote, I guess my 56 votes aginst Lowe and Wilde being elected will not tip the balance, but I have at least registered my protest legitimately and in a way that Lowe may understand.

 

Well done Leon :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it's nothing to do with a price fixed by Rupert Lowe. There are 28,000,000

shares, a controlling interest can be obtained completely independently of Lowe,his cronies or Wilde.I'm sure a goodly number of people would accept 30p.

Unless of course he's snookered himself by paying 65p for his shares and he'd have to offer that for the remaining 70% if he eventually got to 30%.

 

I suspect your analysis might not be too far off sadly, Lowe's bluster was exactly that. Trouble is WC, the club's staff and the fans lose either way. Despite all the arguing at SMS today, we're still insolvent and no further forward. Doesn't inspire confidence at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i still think the residents of southampton circa a quater of a million people..should campaign to get the city council to buy sms and donate it back to the club...

 

would be better than some of the crap schemes they come up with for the city..

 

As great as that would be, SCC aren't in great shape financially themselves! They might be able to buy one of the advertising hoardings and that would be about it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Hopkins viewpost.gif

Is this the same Crouch that got us into this mess?

 

Is this the same Crouch who while he was in charge let Burley spend money we didnt have on wages and transfer fees in an attempt to get promoted and ultimately when that failed gave us no option but to cut costs dramatically including playing youngsters?

At best that is re-writing history - I think you need to look closer at Wilde. By the time Crouch came in the damage had been done.

 

Your point is valid. But equally Crouch is in there up to his pikey arse. The sheer stupidity and divisiveness of the idiot is one of the main reasons where we are now. All that hedgehog muncher had to do was use his head and keep people onside. But all we saw was a bull in a china shop with the one brain cell flickering on and off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your point is valid. But equally Crouch is in there up to his pikey arse. The sheer stupidity and divisiveness of the idiot is one of the main reasons where we are now. All that hedgehog muncher had to do was use his head and keep people onside. But all we saw was a bull in a china shop with the one brain cell flickering on and off.

 

I take it your office did not get a xmas card or bottle from Crouchey then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thanks Danny. Chorley is an idiot - I mean throwing coins at someone, come on, that's stupid and he's lucky not to have been arrested. Makes it easy for Rupert's PR representatives to dismiss dissent as rabble though. Still Rupert, you know you are in a tough time now, not least with the transfer window looming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Danny. Chorley is an idiot - I mean throwing coins at someone, come on, that's stupid and he's lucky not to have been arrested. Makes it easy for Rupert's PR representatives to dismiss dissent as rabble though. Still Rupert, you know you are in a tough time now, not least with the transfer window looming.

yep....the lunatic fringe strike again

 

chorley the nob..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know that we're technically insolvent, actually.

 

If we were, we'd be breaking the law by continuing to trade.

 

This is very true - however, football clubs do get a bit more breathing space as not for profit organisations. Trust me, the bank would have put us into admin a long time ago if it wasn't for being a football club. The good news is I'm told - by a source on here I trust - that we don't owe HMRC which is good news as they have really been gunning for clubs post-Leeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep....the lunatic fringe strike again

 

chorley the nob..

 

I don't what's wrong with the bloke, he always has to take it too far. Didn't he have a huge kick off with Dave Jones and Jones (allegedly) said something like "Richard, if my kids behaved like you are, I'd send them to bed"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this the same Crouch that got us into this mess?

 

Is this the same Crouch who while he was in charge let Burley spend money we didnt have on wages and transfer fees in an attempt to get promoted and ultimately when that failed gave us no option but to cut costs dramatically including playing youngsters?

 

To be fair mate that is absolute rubbish. Crouch had no control at all until last december and then he appointed pearson who looks a brilliant manager. He also had the bank onside end of last season and was working 6 days a week for no money as opposed to lowes 2 for a lot of money

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i still think the residents of southampton circa a quater of a million people..should campaign to get the city council to buy sms and donate it back to the club...

 

would be better than some of the crap schemes they come up with for the city..

 

good shout put a spitfire on top of one stands hey presto a wow factor! i just hope something gets sorted like everyone else ive had a gutfull of all the goings on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is very true - however, football clubs do get a bit more breathing space as not for profit organisations. Trust me, the bank would have put us into admin a long time ago if it wasn't for being a football club. The good news is I'm told - by a source on here I trust - that we don't owe HMRC which is good news as they have really been gunning for clubs post-Leeds.

 

That really made me lol - the irony :D

 

However, I think we're supposed to be a 'for profit' organisation as we're a PLC and have shareholders - surely :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richard Chorley, from the Southampton Independent Supporters Association, was thrown out of the meeting by security guards for lobbing some coins in Lowe's direction. .

 

Throwing coins at Lowe, well done Richard, that will help. Great idea for a rep of the supporters association.

*Rollyeyestuttingthingy*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That really made me lol - the irony :D

 

However, I think we're supposed to be a 'for profit' organisation as we're a PLC and have shareholders - surely :confused:

 

Football clubs are treated as community organisations you see (but not as charities), even as a PLC. They get an extra bit of room as the Civil Service doesn't like the bad PR of winding up a club. They tend to get painted as the nasties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richard is a tight bu.ger, they were not even one pound coins, just a couple of 1d pieces. As if that would help the overdraft.

 

Also I believe he was aiming at Askham.

 

Askham would have picked them up and put them in his pocket. Seriously though, Chorley is a plank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...