Takeover? No Chance

[Katalinic]

Strong leader? eh? Are you talking about the man who, last season, practically bankrupted the club? 81% of revenue being spent on a lacklustre, journey-man squad who only JUST - in the 83rd minute of the last game of the season - managed to keep us in the CCC.

 

In wasting time after Burley went Leon Crouch dithered in a way which makes Gordon Brown look pro-active. That is not strong leadership.

 

Leon Crouch is not a strong leader. He is the reason we are in this mess. RL , Wilde and Crouch are all as bad as each other.

 

You are re-writing history again - Crouch was not responsible for 81% of revenue being spent on the squad - he was only Chairman for a few months FFS - remind me, who signed Rasiak on a long contract and massive wages???

[lordswoodsaints]

Journalists independent? My God, you're naive. They report what their editor wants to convey, with a slant in their favoured direction.

 

Of course the transcript wasn't verbatim. Read it back again and tell me where they mentioned Lowe's crass exercise of attempting to big up his ego by reading that letter singing his praises. I can't be arsed to read it all again, but if memory serves, I don't think that they covered what Anne McMenemy said about the replacement of her husband's picture with the FA Cup either. Verbatim means quoting everything that was said, not a precis of what they thought were the salient points. I heard the words of all speakers verbatim, especially as I was sat close to Crouch, whereas in the melee, unless the reporter was also sat close to him, he might well not have caught what was said through the noise.

 

The thing about the photo illustrates the pettiness of the people running the club. The significance of that obviously escaped you.

 

true,i know people at the echo and they have told me that they have to be careful when reporting on saints because if they upset certain people they will not be allowed preferential treatment so they have to tread carefully.

a classic example is what is happening to wotton at the moment,the story is there but it has to be kept under wraps for fear of upsetting the club,it will be reported but it will be very watered down.

[Wes Tender]

No it is not going to happen because most people still put their team before boardroom politics....

 

 

thank goodness.

 

All, fans get disgruntled when their team is not winning matches but fans do not have any idea how to run a football club and nail their colours to anyone who tells them what they want to hear.

Remember the Wilde fiasco and off the the cyber warriors on here who swallowed his bullsh*t hook line and sinker?

 

Despite our league position, Lowe and Cowen have a job to do re the finances in order to tey and keep this club afloat. Sometimes people need to look at the bigger picture and put their personal issues aside. If Lowe and Cowen weren't doing it someone esle who have to keep a tight hold on the purse strings.

 

I don't think thjat either Wilde and his mates or Crouch showed they could do that did they?

 

So all fans are a bit thick when it comes to running a football club? Logically it follows that the best people to run a football club are not fans, by your argument. Many fans of this club are also business people in their own right and know perfectly well how to run their businesses. The difference here, is that the club is a different type of business to most, being as it is in the entertainment sector. The trouble with the current people running the club, is that they might have a decent appreciation of how to run the finances except with one deficiency; they alienate their customer base at their peril. It doesn't matter a jot how good they are at balancing the books if their policies alienate the very people they need on board to keep the business afloat. This is the achievement of the current lot, who are the most divisve board in the history of this club. You might wish that these issues are put to one side, but others consider them the crux of the whole matter and refuse to ignore them, knowing that ultimately they will destroy the club.

[Delmary]

Strong leader? eh? Are you talking about the man who, last season, practically bankrupted the club? 81% of revenue being spent on a lacklustre, journey-man squad who only JUST - in the 83rd minute of the last game of the season - managed to keep us in the CCC.

 

In wasting time after Burley went Leon Crouch dithered in a way which makes Gordon Brown look pro-active. That is not strong leadership.

 

Leon Crouch is not a strong leader. He is the reason we are in this mess. RL , Wilde and Crouch are all as bad as each other.

Wrong! He opposed all the big wage signings but unfortunately he was out voted by the executives that Wilde had brought in. He was eventually kicked off the plc board (June 07). He did not get back into a position of power until Dec 07, by which time most of the financial damaged had already been done. Please do the research and you will find that your post is factually incorrect.

[Wes Tender]

Wrong! He opposed all the big wage signings but unfortunately he was out voted by the executives that Wilde had brought in. He was eventually kicked off the plc board (June 07). He did not get back into a position of power until Dec 07, by which time most of the financial damaged had already been done. Please do the research and you will find that your post is factually incorrect.

 

Crouch also said this at the AGM. Again, I can't be arsed to read the transcript that the Echo reported to see whether it was covered, but he certainly said it.

[INFLUENCED.COM]

Crouch also said this at the AGM..

 

The ratio was just a blip, confirmed by our(STILL)Financial Director........

[stevegrant]

I heard the words of all speakers verbatim, especially as I was sat close to Crouch, whereas in the melee, unless the reporter was also sat close to him, he might well not have caught what was said through the noise.

Adam Leitch was the reporter in question and he was sat a row or two in front of Crouch.

 

The thing about the photo illustrates the pettiness of the people running the club.

Agreed. I was surprised Lowe wasn't a bit cleverer with the photo issue - if he wanted to get rid of the photo of McMenemy (which he clearly did), he could have replaced it with one of the TEAM from 76 with the cup and therefore would have had a ready-made response along the lines of "the TEAM won the cup, Lawrie, not just you".

 

That said, I would have expected pettiness on a similar level from all of the three protagonists. They're all as bad as each other, IMO.

[1976_Child]

You are re-writing history again - Crouch was not responsible for 81% of revenue being spent on the squad - he was only Chairman for a few months FFS - remind me, who signed Rasiak on a long contract and massive wages???

 

totally irrelevant. He could and should have seen the writing on the wall and done something about it when he was in charge. He didn't. That is not strong leadership. That is business ineptitude. And the ratio of turnover to player wages did increase under his tenure as attendance dropped.

 

Nothing will ever convince me that Crouch is the way forward for this club. None of the amigos should have anything to do with the club.

[1976_Child]

As far as a takeover bid goes, there are a lot of clubs up for sale at the minute including Pompey and West Ham. Ashley has just announced that he has taken Newcastle Utd off the market. He has failed to find a buyer even after being prepared to take a loss on his investment. If a premiership club of the sort of pedigree and fan-base as Newcastle can not be sold in the current financial environment there is little hope for a soon-to-be div one club which is only getting gates of 14K or so and an almost worthless (in transfer fee terms) squad like SFC.

 

The original poster is absolutely correct. If we go bankrupt then the likely hood of the administrators being able to find a quick buyer are not good even if the club is sold for £1 plus debt. The club could be kept open and run in administration but only if it was deemed to be a going concern (ie profitable), and that would mean that there would have to be serious cutbacks first - serious as in it would make Lowe look like the fairy godmother on a shopping spree. However, the loudest voices around the liquidation table would be Barclays and the Loan Note holder (Norwich Union?). Employees are also first to be paid off under insolvency law, all though there might be something in the players' contracts negating that.

 

All in all, bankruptcy is not a good option. Five years ago may be there would be a white knight waiting in the wings to snap up a bargain but i doubt it could be found quickly these days. That said, I wouldn't expect SFC to simply vanish. After all, SFC is a brand owned by SLH plc, and therefore an asset of the plc. The administrators could always sell the brand 'SFC' to someone for a nominal amount, ay £100,000 who could then find a barren piece of land for the club to regroup around and play football on.

 

Anyway, enough doom and gloom. Up the Saints. Let's get a win today eh?

[NickG]

think the picture was probably not thought as off an issue

 

given a picture by another team

 

boardroom has picture of the face of outspoken opponent

 

that will do as a place for the pic

 

offer pic to LMc and it all blows up.

 

I would agree it would be out of order to replace a picture of Mt Stokes celebrating, hanging a main reception with a pic of lowe, but come on this is a picture of Lawrie in the semi private boardroom!

 

Fact that they are all talking about it sohws that they ALL need to go from this club as soon as we can get a new mature owner willing to buy us

[Window Cleaner]

you seem to know about this.....:confused:

 

I am a veritable fountain of obscure knowledge.

[miserableoldgit]

Strong leader? eh? Are you talking about the man who, last season, practically bankrupted the club? 81% of revenue being spent on a lacklustre, journey-man squad who only JUST - in the 83rd minute of the last game of the season - managed to keep us in the CCC.

 

In wasting time after Burley went Leon Crouch dithered in a way which makes Gordon Brown look pro-active. That is not strong leadership.

 

Leon Crouch is not a strong leader. He is the reason we are in this mess. RL , Wilde and Crouch are all as bad as each other.

 

Whilst I would agree with most of the sentiments of this post I disagree that Crouch is the reason that we are in this mess. He certainly is PART of the reason. We are where we are because of a series of BAD DECISIONS, starting with (IMHO) a failure to support WGS after the Cup Final. Before that because Saints were (comparitively) successful there was no real anti-Lowe campaign, although because of the plc thing and Lowes percieved "toffee - nosed" lack of football knowledge, it was always a firework waiting to go off! Since then the whole thing has been a tragedy of soap-opera proportions in which Lowe, Wilde and Crouch are all villains to some degree or another.

[hypochondriac]

Strong leader? eh? Are you talking about the man who, last season, practically bankrupted the club? 81% of revenue being spent on a lacklustre, journey-man squad who only JUST - in the 83rd minute of the last game of the season - managed to keep us in the CCC.

 

In wasting time after Burley went Leon Crouch dithered in a way which makes Gordon Brown look pro-active. That is not strong leadership.

 

Leon Crouch is not a strong leader. He is the reason we are in this mess. RL , Wilde and Crouch are all as bad as each other.

Erm. I think you'll find that was Hone and Hoos' doing.

[1976_Child]

To tie up a few replies saying that Crouch was out voted or that last season's decisions were not his, all I can say is that Crouch was the Chairman FFS. The chairman is the BIG BOSS. It is his ship, and he is the captain. If there is one thing I can not abide, in any area of life, it is when the people who are ultimately responsible for poor performance and/or mistakes are not prepared to take the responsibility: to stand up and say "the buck stops with me".

 

Crouch was the ultimate man in charge of our football club when the finances went off the edge of a cliff. Sure, RL is to blame for other crap decisions in earlier years but Crouch was the one wearing the captain's hat last season and it was on his watch that the **** hit the fan.

 

Please stop this nonsense about him not agreeing to the players' wages. He was the chairman aka Big Honcho. If he WAS such a great leader he would have slammed his fist down on the board room table and said NO! He didn't and the rest is history.

[bridge too far]

To tie up a few replies saying that Crouch was out voted or that last season's decisions were not his, all I can say is that Crouch was the Chairman FFS. The chairman is the BIG BOSS. It is his ship, and he is the captain. If there is one thing I can not abide, in any area of life, it is when the people who are ultimately responsible for poor performance and/or mistakes are not prepared to take the responsibility: to stand up and say "the buck stops with me".

 

Crouch was the ultimate man in charge of our football club when the finances went off the edge of a cliff. Sure, RL is to blame for other crap decisions in earlier years but Crouch was the one wearing the captain's hat last season and it was on his watch that the **** hit the fan.

 

Please stop this nonsense about him not agreeing to the players' wages. He was the chairman aka Big Honcho. If he WAS such a great leader he would have slammed his fist down on the board room table and said NO! He didn't and the rest is history.

 

Voting and majority are obviously concepts you don't understand, I think

[1976_Child]

Voting and majority are obviously concepts you don't understand, I think

 

Not sure you understand them actually. Crouch was voted to the Chairmanship by the shareholders. At which point, the shareholders then do not get to vote on how the football club/plc is run. That is then down to the Chairman.

 

Sorry, mate. You are wrong.

[Weston Saint]

Unless I have misunderstood, it is not the Shareholders who elect a Chairman! Shareholders elect a board. It is the board who appoint the Chairman.

 

Crouch had been on the plc from the time Lowe stood down the first time as a non exec director. He was briefly Chairman of the toothless football board. He was also toothless on the plc board whilst the execs were there. He was continually outvoted.

 

When the Executives resigned he took control of the football board as Chairman with Wiseman chairing the AGM. That was the time Crouch had the power to make and be supported on decisions. Euell and many others had been purchased before then. He had to start trying to sort out the financial mess.

[benjii]

totally irrelevant. He could and should have seen the writing on the wall and done something about it when he was in charge. He didn't. That is not strong leadership. That is business ineptitude. And the ratio of turnover to player wages did increase under his tenure as attendance dropped.

 

Nothing will ever convince me that Crouch is the way forward for this club. None of the amigos should have anything to do with the club.

 

You plonker!

 

He did see the writing but by the time he was acting chairman of the football club (a position he had no choice but to accept after the power vacuum of the old board's departure) the damage had been done. People have explained this to you before - what don't you understand?

 

What was he supposed to do? "Un do" contractual commitments? How?

 

All he could do was loan out high earners (which he did) whilst prioritising our champinoship survival (achieved) and appointing a popular, crowd-uniting manager in the process.

 

What more could he have done or could anyone have realistically done in the middle of the season? Unless you're advocating refusing to pay wages?

[benjii]

Not sure you understand them actually. Crouch was voted to the Chairmanship by the shareholders. At which point, the shareholders then do not get to vote on how the football club/plc is run. That is then down to the Chairman.

 

Sorry, mate. You are wrong.

 

Utterly clueless.