Article in the Echo RE Wages

[up and away]

Originally Posted by Teddy Nutkins

If the intension was to discredit Leon Crouch, then i think they have failed. The damage was done by leaving the Exec's to run Wilde, (pun-intended). From what i can gather Leon was adjusting the situation when everything changed again.Time to come to the front Michael Wilde and explain.You owe all the supporters an answer.

You've hit the nail on the head. Wilde appointed the Execs and the players were signed under Wildes Execs. Crouch is the one who loaned Rasiak etc out to reduce the wage bill.

 

What! Crouch was panning the execs for trying to make any savings, you can read it for yourself here. This pikey has been up to his neck in it since the beginning. Surprising he has never commented before the last AGM, had plenty of opportunity, but not a squeak.

 

 

"I am gutted it has come to this. I have spent the last nine months working tirelessly for this club representing the fans, but I have been a thorn in their (the executive board members) side.

"I opposed the mass exodus of staff at the club, we are losing too many good people. I knew it would be a real battle and it has been. I am devastated. I have spent the last 18 months battling these people."

[Gorgiesaint]

Hmm... IMO there are two possible sources for this leak.

 

Firstly, if its come from the Lowe camp, the benefits to him have already been discussed in depth. The downside, which is what puts a question mark over it for me, is why criticise Wilde. Lowe is dependant on Wilde's support to maintain his position as PLC chairman. Without it, Lowe would be back out on his ear. If Wilde's support is irrelevant because the club is going into administration - who is going to put in there? The rumours were that there the 6 month figures due in June were going to show a huge improvement engineered by Lowe, and admin would need NU or HMRC to put us there. No one has yet hinted that we are behind in our payments to either.

 

The other option is that the leak has come from the other side of the fence, either from Crouch, the execs or someone around them at the time. They would have known all of these figures but the question is what would they gain? The execs are now out of the equation as they appear to have just taken the money and run, leaving Crouch & poss Lawrie Mac (was he close enough to the Wilde/Crouch administration to know this info?).

 

Whoever it is, has weakened Lowe's position significantly and left David Jones position untenable IMO.

 

The other point is, given how we treat our playing staff at the moment & manage to get their wages printed in the paper, how are we going to be viewed when trying to bring in loan players or signings? If we do manage to continue playing, we must now be regarded very poorly amongst the players, and this may impact our ability to make future signings.

[John B]

Hmm... IMO there are two possible sources for this leak.

 

Firstly, if its come from the Lowe camp, the benefits to him have already been discussed in depth. The downside, which is what puts a question mark over it for me, is why criticise Wilde. Lowe is dependant on Wilde's support to maintain his position as PLC chairman. Without it, Lowe would be back out on his ear. If Wilde's support is irrelevant because the club is going into administration - who is going to put in there? The rumours were that there the 6 month figures due in June were going to show a huge improvement engineered by Lowe, and admin would need NU or HMRC to put us there. No one has yet hinted that we are behind in our payments to either.

 

The other option is that the leak has come from the other side of the fence, either from Crouch, the execs or someone around them at the time. They would have known all of these figures but the question is what would they gain? The execs are now out of the equation as they appear to have just taken the money and run, leaving Crouch & poss Lawrie Mac (was he close enough to the Wilde/Crouch administration to know this info?).

 

Whoever it is, has weakened Lowe's position significantly and left David Jones position untenable IMO.

 

The other point is, given how we treat our playing staff at the moment & manage to get their wages printed in the paper, how are we going to be viewed when trying to bring in loan players or signings? If we do manage to continue playing, we must now be regarded very poorly amongst the players, and this may impact our ability to make future signings.

 

A club spokesman said: “We won’t comment on individual player contracts.”

 

Well Well Well

[labibs]

Interesting thread, nice to have a bit of a debate without it degenerating into ranting and people stating things as a 'FACT'.

 

Great post by Fitzhugh Fella, I would like to second it being put into the golden post section.

 

It's interesting that the echo article doesn't state the appearance bonuses for each player, that would be quite illuminating with regards to Lowe allegedly banning certain players from playing.

 

I think ultimately Lowe's aim is to have the club on a sound financial footing, regardless of what division this will be in. He would be probably accept being in League 2, should we be capable of staying in business. Whether this is the right approach or not is open to debate. Is it better to have a club in the lower leagues, or risk oblivion gambling on staying up?

[saint1977]

My take on this, Trousers, is this has been leaked by Lowe to prepare for his absolvement of blame when the club goes into administration later this month. Lowe is simply getting his "not my fault guv" excuse in early.

 

Whilst certainly most of the excesses took place while the execs and Wilde were running the show it is also fair to say his previous mistakes laid the not so fertile ground into which Hone and Co wasted what litle crop we had to sow. (A farming analogy rather than a nautical one for a change).

 

Leon Crouch himself told me the circumstances of Euell's arrival. He was at Staplewood and had a meeting with Hone (with Burley present) to discuss whether or not to sanction the signing. Crouch maintains he was against it due to the prohibitive cost but the board was split 50/50%. Hone and Crouch had a blazing row. The impasse only ended when David Jones sweet-talked Keith Wiseman into believing the club could afford the wages etc and Wiseman's vote sealed the deal. This was the start of the Crouch/Hone battle which culminated in Crouch's removal from the PLC board - only to mount a comeback (aided by a payoff) to remove the execs in December 07. Why the execs were so hellbent on supporting Burley (who by then had already been spoken to by Hone over his lifestyle problems), I have no idea except perhaps they had no long term interest and were happy to gamble. (I can confirm Hone had spoken to Burley - in case anyone accuses me of spreading rumours -because Oldknow told me in person on one of the many times I was summoned to SMS to discuss my anti execs postings on the previous forums).

 

David Jones is the man Lowe (and us) should be blaming the most - he has been there more than 10 years and was the person most responsible for the finances. At the recent AGM he tried to weasel out of the "81% accusations" by rather ingeniously saying that Euell and Co would be gone in a couple of years and the percentage would then drastically lower. It was a pretty tame and limp explanation and one Lowe did not invite him to expand upon.

 

So as the club lurches into administration the blame game continues to be played and whilst no one is free of culpability some are certainly guiltier than others. For me Lowe, Wilde and Jones are the main villains alongside the execs but as the latter group have already ridden off into the sunset with their saddlebags full of cash is it not time for the former group to take their leave too? It is my honest belief having spoken to him that if Lowe and Wilde resigned, Crouch would put enough cash in to stave of administration but Lowe would rather the club go under than hand back the reigns to the man whio engineered his first forced removal.

 

Great post but there is also a lot of truth in Weston's post as well. Jones comes out badly whichever way you look at it and should be removed ASAP - he's lucky not to be on the equivalent of the DTI's old blacklist banning him from being a Director where he could join Terry Venables for company. Perhaps as fans we should push for this. The whole house of cards is rotten as proved by Wilde's role in everything that has gone wrong at SFC in the last 3-4 years. Lowe and the stupid Dome spending are also not being mentioned - why? It added a significant overhead that we couldn't afford in the CCC and wasted the first parachute season which is why 2006/7 was such a gamble although it doesn't excuse the poor buying. SCW had some good ideas but it should have been shelved for 2 years as promotion should have been the priority and even then should only have been externally funded as part of perhaps a shared sports science research institute where we kept the players but a company or another organisation ran the centre and facilities.

[dubai_phil]

Anyone who has been through the pre-takeover due diligence process recently?

 

Well of course spot on - that narrows it down to hmm what? about zero people then....

 

But interesting - anyone of the types who did that last year (if any) like that Blackburn bloke would have signed an NDA - perfect - we can now sue them for a couple of mil in damages and sign some players!

[saint1977]

Interesting thread, nice to have a bit of a debate without it degenerating into ranting and people stating things as a 'FACT'.

 

Great post by Fitzhugh Fella, I would like to second it being put into the golden post section.

 

It's interesting that the echo article doesn't state the appearance bonuses for each player, that would be quite illuminating with regards to Lowe allegedly banning certain players from playing.

 

I think ultimately Lowe's aim is to have the club on a sound financial footing, regardless of what division this will be in. He would be probably accept being in League 2, should we be capable of staying in business. Whether this is the right approach or not is open to debate. Is it better to have a club in the lower leagues, or risk oblivion gambling on staying up?

 

He can only achieve that by reducing the overheads - selling the stadium or scrapping the academy on a League 1 income. The playing staff has been reduced hugely and with most of the big earners left out of contract soon, you have to ask why the club are STILL leaking money like a sieve. It has to be that we cannot support the overheads. A competent Finance Director might help as well!

[alpine_saint]

The other point is, given how we treat our playing staff at the moment & manage to get their wages printed in the paper, how are we going to be viewed when trying to bring in loan players or signings? If we do manage to continue playing, we must now be regarded very poorly amongst the players, and this may impact our ability to make future signings.

 

Ouch. Now there's a thought.

 

The dragging of the good name of the club through the gutter by the Three Amegos continues apace..

[david in sweden]

Jesus, can't believe the wages of Thomas, BWP and Euell. It's utterly ridiculous these sums were offered. I know people hate Lowe but surely they realise what we were doing when he was gone was suicide?

 

3 crap players costing us over 20k a week together and towards a million in signing fees. what the hell?!

 

It's fine to say we have too many kids in the team etc., but the kids are no worse than those 3 IMO, many of them are better and will become better. All three of those took us very, very close to relegation last season anyway.

 

 

I agree with that adrians..

 

The largest part of our "debt" is obviously the stadium, but if thats anything like my mortgage it's spread out over 10-20 years, and isn't a debt that needs to be paid off this year.

It doesn't seem PC to say anything positive about Rupert Lowe, but it's fairly obvious that a lot of stupid dealing was done when he was " in exile ".

 

I can accept that the Rasiak deal was made in Lowes first term, but GR was

on enormous wages at Spurs having been bought for £10 million, so 12K would seem a good deal -if thats the case. Wright-Phillips transfer fee was part paid by the Coca Cola prize and his wages at Man City must have been

pretty high, too. Most of the other deals seem to have been made after

Lowe was " deposed " and so the second Board had responsibility for deals

made in that time, and I agree with others that we don't seem to have got value for money from those deals ; Thomas and Euell in particular.

 

Whether this a PR spin, or not it's obviously borne out by Echo facts.

I'm not saying that Lowe hasn't made some mistakes, but there are other facts that he has no control over, namely contracts like Thomas, Rasiak and Euells which take valuable money away from the club at a time when we are almost bankrupt.

[Doctoroncall]

So let's not start portioning blame. Let's not give credit to any of the above. Let's all unite in condemming all that has occurred leading up to and since our relegation without exceptions.

 

Bickering over who is to blame is as decisive as those who have put our once great club in this position.

 

A united club would stand a better chance of survival, however, realistically with all these personalities inovled that is not going to happen.

 

It really is a sad situation where the club, the institute that holds them together is the thing that will be destroyed while the tit-for-tat point scoring takes priority.

[John B]

A united club would stand a better chance of survival, however, realistically with all these personalities inovled that is not going to happen.

 

It really is a sad situation where the club, the institute that holds them together is the thing that will be destroyed while the tit-for-tat point scoring takes priority.

 

Yes I was thinking the same but it is not going to happen.

[Whitey Grandad]

The figures seem to me to be deliberately misleading. To talk about 'wages leapt from 45% to 81%' of turnover when they have actually risen by 15% disguises the fact that the turnover (income) has plummeted. If the attendances had been at the same level as the previous year then how would the figures look? There has been too much emphasis on cutting costs and not enough on maximising the income through winning games by having the best quality of players available.

 

And as I understand things, 81% is not high in comparison with other clubs.

 

Why the sudden surprise at 12.5% National Insurance employer's contributions? Every employer has to pay it. If the Great British Public knew what their gross salary was before all these deductions then they would see just how much income tax they were paying and we'd have rioting in the streets, and not before time too! (before somebody locks me up for inciting public unrest)

[saint1977]

I agree with that adrians..

 

The largest part of our "debt" is obviously the stadium, but if thats anything like my mortgage it's spread out over 10-20 years, and isn't a debt that needs to be paid off this year.

It doesn't seem PC to say anything positive about Rupert Lowe, but it's fairly obvious that a lot of stupid dealing was done when he was " in exile ".

 

I can accept that the Rasiak deal was made in Lowes first term, but GR was

on enormous wages at Spurs having been bought for £10 million, so 12K would seem a good deal -if thats the case. Wright-Phillips transfer fee was part paid by the Coca Cola prize and his wages at Man City must have been

pretty high, too. Most of the other deals seem to have been made after

Lowe was " deposed " and so the second Board had responsibility for deals

made in that time, and I agree with others that we don't seem to have got value for money from those deals ; Thomas and Euell in particular.

 

Whether this a PR spin, or not it's obviously borne out by Echo facts.

I'm not saying that Lowe hasn't made some mistakes, but there are other facts that he has no control over, namely contracts like Thomas, Rasiak and Euells which take valuable money away from the club at a time when we are almost bankrupt.

 

The bit that astonished me was Euell automatically getting £200k p.a - I was sickened to read that. The Execs really did let things slump and thought "It doesn't matter if we get a buyer" but if you don't succeed, it leaves a real mess. I agree with Weston that we should look beyond blame but that means Wilde pulling the choke chain on Rupert and many of Rupert's statements WHICH HAVE CONSISTENTLY APPORTIONED blame and very inaccurately too. Trouble is Mike, YOU appointed the Execs so the hypocracy is stunning!

 

I'm not a fan of Crouch's either for the record but many of his attacks this season have come in response to Rupert and Mike gobbing off. Personally, I agree with MLT, ALL the major shareholders are a waste of space and SFC will continue to slip into a coma and die whilst they are involved.

[saint1977]

Yes I was thinking the same but it is not going to happen.

 

Sad but true unless we put Askham, Wilde, Lowe, Crouch and their hangers on in a dinghy out from Calshot in a Force 9. Hone can go in there as well for past crimes.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

No mention of just under £500,000 that Cowans and Lowe received as pay off two years ago, with the club in so much debt perhaps Cowans and Lowe would like to repay this money back into the coffers !!! seeing that they are both back taking a wage out of the club yet again.

 

Do you know what, this pay off really irks me. If my company wanted to replace me with someone, I would expect a pay off. Why shouldn't anyone else? I think most of us in the same position would want and expect one.

[John B]

The figures seem to me to be deliberately misleading. To talk about 'wages leapt from 45% to 81%' of turnover when they have actually risen by 15% disguises the fact that the turnover (income) has plummeted. If the attendances had been at the same level as the previous year then how would the figures look? There has been too much emphasis on cutting costs and not enough on maximising the income through winning games by having the best quality of players available.

 

And as I understand things, 81% is not high in comparison with other clubs.

 

Why the sudden surprise at 12.5% National Insurance employer's contributions? Every employer has to pay it. If the Great British Public knew what their gross salary was before all these deductions then they would see just how much income tax they were paying and we'd have rioting in the streets, and not before time too! (before somebody locks me up for inciting public unrest)

 

 

Whatever your point of view is the wage bill was surely too high

 

 

You are right income was reducing but the wage bill was going up

Edited 8 January, 2009 by John B

[Flyer]

You are joking

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/2009/01/03/bolton-fulham-and-west-brom-chase-qpr-striker-dexter-blackstock-115875-21012463/

 

We turned down £2m for him last season and its looking like were turning down £4m with an offer of a new contract to him.

[WealdSaint]

The figures seem to me to be deliberately misleading. To talk about 'wages leapt from 45% to 81%' of turnover when they have actually risen by 15% disguises the fact that the turnover (income) has plummeted. If the attendances had been at the same level as the previous year then how would the figures look? There has been too much emphasis on cutting costs and not enough on maximising the income through winning games by having the best quality of players available.

 

And as I understand things, 81% is not high in comparison with other clubs.

 

Why the sudden surprise at 12.5% National Insurance employer's contributions? Every employer has to pay it. If the Great British Public knew what their gross salary was before all these deductions then they would see just how much income tax they were paying and we'd have rioting in the streets, and not before time too! (before somebody locks me up for inciting public unrest)

 

I agree. Basically, they took a risk of hiring expensive players the season after the parachute payments stopped, in the hope of us going up. The gamble failed. Just like the gamble of not investing in the team in our last yr in the prem. Just like the gamble of hiring an inexpieranced Dutch Coach.................

[Village Saint]

Jesus, can't believe the wages of Thomas, BWP and Euell. It's utterly ridiculous these sums were offered. I know people hate Lowe but surely they realise what we were doing when he was gone was suicide?

 

3 crap players costing us over 20k a week together and towards a million in signing fees. what the hell?!

 

It's fine to say we have too many kids in the team etc., but the kids are no worse than those 3 IMO, many of them are better and will become better. All three of those took us very, very close to relegation last season anyway.

 

The problem is that they really do hate Lowe so much (and frankly who can blame them - he is a king tosser) that they are prepared to bury their heads in the sand and argue about who is and isn't to blame. The only salient point here is that these wages are scandalous. The idea that a washed up has been like Jason Ewell is being paid one and a half milllion for two years 'work' is beyond belief. It is an insult to people who are quite good at their jobs, earn a faction of this and no doubt will dig into their pockets to make the journey to Barnsley. At least they will get to see a team that will again try their hearts out and is all we can bloody afford thanks to the last few years of ridiculous excess.

 

Its dull but I have said it before a Chmapionship team is a medium sized business with a very substantial income. It should not be rocket science to make it at least break even. One of the keys here, however, is to not pay people more than you can afford. Jason Ewell one and a half million. It beggars belief.

[alpine_saint]

I agree with that adrians..

 

The largest part of our "debt" is obviously the stadium, but if thats anything like my mortgage it's spread out over 10-20 years, and isn't a debt that needs to be paid off this year.

It doesn't seem PC to say anything positive about Rupert Lowe, but it's fairly obvious that a lot of stupid dealing was done when he was " in exile ".

 

I can accept that the Rasiak deal was made in Lowes first term, but GR was

on enormous wages at Spurs having been bought for £10 million, so 12K would seem a good deal -if thats the case. Wright-Phillips transfer fee was part paid by the Coca Cola prize and his wages at Man City must have been

pretty high, too. Most of the other deals seem to have been made after

Lowe was " deposed " and so the second Board had responsibility for deals

made in that time, and I agree with others that we don't seem to have got value for money from those deals ; Thomas and Euell in particular.

 

Whether this a PR spin, or not it's obviously borne out by Echo facts.

I'm not saying that Lowe hasn't made some mistakes, but there are other facts that he has no control over, namely contracts like Thomas, Rasiak and Euells which take valuable money away from the club at a time when we are almost bankrupt.

 

Who signed Rasiak ?

[up and away]

My take on this, Trousers, is this has been leaked by Lowe to prepare for his absolvement of blame when the club goes into administration later this month. Lowe is simply getting his "not my fault guv" excuse in early.

 

Whilst certainly most of the excesses took place while the execs and Wilde were running the show it is also fair to say his previous mistakes laid the not so fertile ground into which Hone and Co wasted what litle crop we had to sow. (A farming analogy rather than a nautical one for a change).

 

Leon Crouch himself told me the circumstances of Euell's arrival. He was at Staplewood and had a meeting with Hone (with Burley present) to discuss whether or not to sanction the signing. Crouch maintains he was against it due to the prohibitive cost but the board was split 50/50%. Hone and Crouch had a blazing row. The impasse only ended when David Jones sweet-talked Keith Wiseman into believing the club could afford the wages etc and Wiseman's vote sealed the deal. This was the start of the Crouch/Hone battle which culminated in Crouch's removal from the PLC board - only to mount a comeback (aided by a payoff) to remove the execs in December 07. Why the execs were so hellbent on supporting Burley (who by then had already been spoken to by Hone over his lifestyle problems), I have no idea except perhaps they had no long term interest and were happy to gamble. (I can confirm Hone had spoken to Burley - in case anyone accuses me of spreading rumours -because Oldknow told me in person on one of the many times I was summoned to SMS to discuss my anti execs postings on the previous forums).

 

David Jones is the man Lowe (and us) should be blaming the most - he has been there more than 10 years and was the person most responsible for the finances. At the recent AGM he tried to weasel out of the "81% accusations" by rather ingeniously saying that Euell and Co would be gone in a couple of years and the percentage would then drastically lower. It was a pretty tame and limp explanation and one Lowe did not invite him to expand upon.

 

So as the club lurches into administration the blame game continues to be played and whilst no one is free of culpability some are certainly guiltier than others. For me Lowe, Wilde and Jones are the main villains alongside the execs but as the latter group have already ridden off into the sunset with their saddlebags full of cash is it not time for the former group to take their leave too? It is my honest belief having spoken to him that if Lowe and Wilde resigned, Crouch would put enough cash in to stave of administration but Lowe would rather the club go under than hand back the reigns to the man whio engineered his first forced removal.

 

During any of this time, Crouch could have gone to Lowe and expressed his concerns about the finances and the two of them could have forced change to remedy the finances. This never happened and there is more evidence of Crouch adding to the fire than trying to put it out. We keep hearing from sources that Crouch was against the signing of Euell, which I remember hearing at the time. Equally I heard from the same sources about how good various other signings like Davies and Saga would be. To highlight one player then to pretend you were against the whole program is rich indeed. Especially when you further increase that problem when you have total control.

 

The reference to Dave Jones is particularly convenient. Wiseman would have been allowed full access to the accounts, but it was as clear as day that the only way we were being kept afloat was by selling off the family silver for our golden lotto win of the Premier. If any of these idiots are saying they could not see this coming over such a long period, they should not be trusted in any shape or form. If Jones sided with the execs and used his own vote in support then he surely is culpable from that point of view. But even after the exec's left, the madness still continued. Jones is a very convenient scapegoat who could have very easily have been removed at the same time of the exec's. Jones has some explaining over his personal voting, but if the rest of the idiots are saying they did not understand what was happening, they deserve to be shot or set in a time loop running round the south of France for mythical investment. You can say what harm was Mary Corbett doing by chasing after imaginary investment, but then cast your mind back to what was happening at the time. Everyone was so sure investment would come, that extended into the belief that what ever happened financially would all be all right because Paul Allen would sort us out. A legacy Crouch continued until his final days hunkered down in the bunker. This despite all the written and direct verbal denials from the man and his company. Even Richard Chorley would not give it the time of day after seeing the correspondence between the Echo and Allen. You have to wonder when you compare the distance to the Echo office and the south of France, exactly what form of idiocy befalls you just by being a fan?

 

The exec's clearly stated before the AGM that got rid of them, "the cupboard was bare, we've sold off all the family silver and we have to start getting rid of players to survive" Then look back to Crouch's riposte that things were no where near as bad as that and we could continue for a long time to come. Before embarking upon another influx of loans and high salaries just to compound our financial situation. Then when we come to the end of that season, what exactly was Crouch's master plan? Just to sit there, doing nothing and waiting on Fulthorpe? We heard subsequently that Crouch could have taken the cost cutting measures of the stadium etc and had looked at it. But nothing was done with a small exception, best to leave those unpopular decisions to Lowe so he can take that flak. Players that were never going to be sold, now had to go out on loan.

 

And what are we now expected to believe, it was nothing to do with me and I was against it all the time? Irrespective that statements and actions are in direct opposition to this stance.

[mitch01]

I'm sure Lowe was around when BWP was signed...

[Minty]

With respect to up and away, I am encouraged by the amount of people who are now seemingly beyond the point of defending or blaming specific individuals and recognise that all of those involved have played their part in getting us to where we are today. The more fans who can reach this position, IMO, the better, because at least it will unite the fans a little more in finding a way forward, rather than constantly looking back.

 

As always, I read Duncan's input with interest, along with others, hwoever the single most concerning thing for me is that no one seems to actually have any realistic idea of how we are going to come out the other side of this. I'm not saying for one minute that there are any easy solutions, obviously not, but what, realistically, can happen from here on in?!? Does anyone actually have any idea whatsoever? I doubt it, simply because of the variables involved, and it's that unknown that bothers me the most.

[trousers]

You can say what harm was Mary Corbett doing by chasing after imaginary investment, but then cast your mind back to what was happening at the time. Everyone was so sure investment would come, that extended into the belief that what ever happened financially would all be all right because Paul Allen would sort us out. A legacy Crouch continued until his final days hunkered down in the bunker. This despite all the written and direct verbal denials from the man and his company.

 

So it sounds like it was shear coincidence that Paul Allen's private 737 was was in the country a few days after the story broke (end of April 2007)...?

 

Even Richard Chorley would not give it the time of day after seeing the correspondence between the Echo and Allen.

 

What was this correspondence and how did a third party (Richard Chorley) get to see it?

 

cheers

[saint1977]

With respect to up and away, I am encouraged by the amount of people who are now seemingly beyond the point of defending or blaming specific individuals and recognise that all of those involved have played their part in getting us to where we are today. The more fans who can reach this position, IMO, the better, because at least it will unite the fans a little more in finding a way forward, rather than constantly looking back.

 

As always, I read Duncan's input with interest, along with others, hwoever the single most concerning thing for me is that no one seems to actually have any realistic idea of how we are going to come out the other side of this. I'm not saying for one minute that there are any easy solutions, obviously not, but what, realistically, can happen from here on in?!? Does anyone actually have any idea whatsoever? I doubt it, simply because of the variables involved, and it's that unknown that bothers me the most.

 

The thing is Minty, I don't think the major shareholders do either. Administration is what is LIKELY to happen but to call it a solution would be very dangerous and messy and there is no guarantee of a buyer and it would be sickening to see what few semi-decent players we have left going for mere buttons as the bank claw back what little they can. Plus I'm yet to see a club that have prospered after it. The other options could be:

 

Investment - looking highly unlikely in a world downturn and we couldn't even get our act together in boomtime.

Generating other external revenue - again, very difficult as the brand is the first team. Cutting ticket prices might get a few more fans in and spending money but it's a drop in a very big ocean.

Further player sales - we're well below CCC standard already. One or two big earners are left like Euell and Skacel and Davis that will be out of contract - well perhaps not Rudi - in the summer so that might help.

Cutting the academy's size - already happened with natural wasteage and people going. If we cut it any more we won't be allowed to have one and no more Bales or Theos. Not sure if we own Staplewood or not

Selling SMS - but who would want it and we're only going to end up paying rent plus interest so the cash we'd generate wouldn't last long.

 

Not much of a strategy from the information above. Administration is horrible but a VA I reckon it will be.

[Lord Duckhunter]

No mention of Directors Wages I notice

 

Or SCW's

 

What about Pulis?

 

Forecast?

[trousers]

With respect to up and away, I am encouraged by the amount of people who are now seemingly beyond the point of defending or blaming specific individuals and recognise that all of those involved have played their part in getting us to where we are today. The more fans who can reach this position, IMO, the better, because at least it will unite the fans a little more in finding a way forward, rather than constantly looking back.

 

As always, I read Duncan's input with interest, along with others, hwoever the single most concerning thing for me is that no one seems to actually have any realistic idea of how we are going to come out the other side of this. I'm not saying for one minute that there are any easy solutions, obviously not, but what, realistically, can happen from here on in?!? Does anyone actually have any idea whatsoever? I doubt it, simply because of the variables involved, and it's that unknown that bothers me the most.

 

The paradox, IMHO, is that the longer we cling onto survival, or even mild success, the longer Lowe, Wilde and Crouch collectively retain an influence over the club.

 

I know many people refuse to see the 'short term pain, long term gain' route as anything other than people not being 'true supporters' of the club but, for me, it's crystal clear that the only way this club will be able to move forward over the foreseeable future (and beyond) is to take a major step in a rather painful direction.

[Weston Saint]

At least some read my opinions.

 

I have received an email to my orginal post on here to point out that although Davies was signed on 10th January 2008 whilst on Crouch's watch (which started on 17th Decembere 2007) the deal was as good as done long before that.

 

I do recall it was a loan with an option to purchase so I am prepared to accept the deal might have been all but signed before Crouch took control and correct my post.

[John B]

With respect to up and away, I am encouraged by the amount of people who are now seemingly beyond the point of defending or blaming specific individuals and recognise that all of those involved have played their part in getting us to where we are today. The more fans who can reach this position, IMO, the better, because at least it will unite the fans a little more in finding a way forward, rather than constantly looking back.

 

As always, I read Duncan's input with interest, along with others, hwoever the single most concerning thing for me is that no one seems to actually have any realistic idea of how we are going to come out the other side of this. I'm not saying for one minute that there are any easy solutions, obviously not, but what, realistically, can happen from here on in?!? Does anyone actually have any idea whatsoever? I doubt it, simply because of the variables involved, and it's that unknown that bothers me the most.

 

Yes it is like a football match you never know what is going to happen

 

 

Whether the ref gives a dodgy penalty McGoldrick misses a penalty or BWP scores a goal

[trousers]

I have received an email to my orginal post on here

 

I wonder who'll be first to ask: "Who was the email from?"

 

[John B]

Or SCW's

 

What about Pulis?

 

Forecast?

 

Not valid for the year in question unfortunately

[Give it to Ron]

During any of this time, Crouch could have gone to Lowe and expressed his concerns about the finances and the two of them could have forced change to remedy the finances. This never happened and there is more evidence of Crouch adding to the fire than trying to put it out. We keep hearing from sources that Crouch was against the signing of Euell, which I remember hearing at the time.i.

 

Are you serious? Considering it was Crouch that sided with Wilde to oust Lowe in the first place?

How many times has Lowe gone to Crouch in the period he has been here?

I was fuming when Rasiak and Skacel were loaned out but under whose tenureship was that yet you still refuse to see that.

The 3 of them are as bad as each other in my eyes and we will not proceed anywhere until they are gone...starting with the anti-Midas Lowe everything he touches turns to ****e.

[dubai_phil]

The paradox, IMHO, is that the longer we cling onto survival, or even mild success, the longer Lowe, Wilde and Crouch collectively retain an influence over the club.

 

I know many people refuse to see the 'short term pain, long term gain' route as anything other than people not being 'true supporters' of the club but, for me, it's crystal clear that the only way this club will be able to move forward over the foreseeable future (and beyond) is to take a major step in a rather painful direction.

 

And thereby hangs the whole nub of the real argument about survival....

Keith Harris was on talksport this morning about selling football clubs and the recession... The precis I heard was that nothing is likely to happen now and that the closer we get to the end of the recession the more chance there is that buyers COULD start to emerge.

 

Horrid dilemna - do you opt for euthanasia to stop the pain and suffering when there is the chance of a miracle cure in 6 to 9 months?

 

Not easy

[Fitzhugh Fella]

During any of this time, Crouch could have gone to Lowe and expressed his concerns about the finances and the two of them could have forced change to remedy the finances. This never happened and there is more evidence of Crouch adding to the fire than trying to put it out. We keep hearing from sources that Crouch was against the signing of Euell, which I remember hearing at the time. Equally I heard from the same sources about how good various other signings like Davies and Saga would be. To highlight one player then to pretend you were against the whole program is rich indeed. Especially when you further increase that problem when you have total control.

 

The reference to Dave Jones is particularly convenient. Wiseman would have been allowed full access to the accounts, but it was as clear as day that the only way we were being kept afloat was by selling off the family silver for our golden lotto win of the Premier. If any of these idiots are saying they could not see this coming over such a long period, they should not be trusted in any shape or form. If Jones sided with the execs and used his own vote in support then he surely is culpable from that point of view. But even after the exec's left, the madness still continued. Jones is a very convenient scapegoat who could have very easily have been removed at the same time of the exec's. Jones has some explaining over his personal voting, but if the rest of the idiots are saying they did not understand what was happening, they deserve to be shot or set in a time loop running round the south of France for mythical investment. You can say what harm was Mary Corbett doing by chasing after imaginary investment, but then cast your mind back to what was happening at the time. Everyone was so sure investment would come, that extended into the belief that what ever happened financially would all be all right because Paul Allen would sort us out. A legacy Crouch continued until his final days hunkered down in the bunker. This despite all the written and direct verbal denials from the man and his company. Even Richard Chorley would not give it the time of day after seeing the correspondence between the Echo and Allen. You have to wonder when you compare the distance to the Echo office and the south of France, exactly what form of idiocy befalls you just by being a fan?

 

The exec's clearly stated before the AGM that got rid of them, "the cupboard was bare, we've sold off all the family silver and we have to start getting rid of players to survive" Then look back to Crouch's riposte that things were no where near as bad as that and we could continue for a long time to come. Before embarking upon another influx of loans and high salaries just to compound our financial situation. Then when we come to the end of that season, what exactly was Crouch's master plan? Just to sit there, doing nothing and waiting on Fulthorpe? We heard subsequently that Crouch could have taken the cost cutting measures of the stadium etc and had looked at it. But nothing was done with a small exception, best to leave those unpopular decisions to Lowe so he can take that flak. Players that were never going to be sold, now had to go out on loan.

 

And what are we now expected to believe, it was nothing to do with me and I was against it all the time? Irrespective that statements and actions are in direct opposition to this stance.

 

 

There is no doubt (and Mary Corbett has publicly admitted as much) the Crouch camp (Pat Trant, Mary C, Lawrie Mac etc etc) were very naive in not doing due diligence on Michael Wilde and his promises when he arrived on his white charger. I know Mary greatly regrets this and is prepared to shoulder her share of the blame. As for investment I know very well why they were at first taken in re the potential Paul Allen interest. Tom McLaughlin pitched up, using his connections with PA, claiming that Allen was interested and, as it was well known that he did have links with Allen, he was originally believed. Crouch and others even spent their own private money paying McLaughlin a consultancy fee to ensure McLaughlin could deliver the investment he was continually promising. OK Tommac was later proven to be no more than a tyre kicker with an eye to make a few bob, in the final fallout and everything then went boots up but I think the only allegations we can level at Crouch and co is they allowed themselves to be succoured in - first by Wilde and his execs and then by Tom McLaughlin. Naive? Undoubtedly. Yes, but I would not go much further when looking who to blame for this very sad situation.

[warsash saint]

I cant believe the apathy amounst us Saints fans....has Lowe beaten any fight we had out of us, that we are prepared to just sit & scribble a few words down on an internet forum & accept our beloved club go to the wall ?

 

Most important than anything we need points of the board.....we aint doing that with the current Manager in change....the current manager aint going anywhere to the Chairman goes thats for sure !

 

So what can we do ?....I honestly dont know (& I am as guilty just sitting doing nothing), but I know if will need the majority of Saints fans to stand together & shout with one voice. We got Lowe out before, Branfoot previous to that & stopped Hoddle returning (yes, a huge mistake in hindsight!)

 

Trouble is if anyone stands up to the plate & shows some passion, a vast amount of fans on here immediately shout them down (ie. likes of Illingsworth & Chorley). At least these guys love the club, get of their backside, shout for what they believe in & try to do something postive

 

It seems to me that we have accepted our fate & are willing to watch this once great club slide into obscurity.

[John B]

There is no doubt (and Mary Corbett has publicly admitted as much) the Crouch camp (Pat Trant, Mary C, Lawrie Mac etc etc) were very naive in not doing due diligence on Michael Wilde and his promises when he arrived on his white charger. I know Mary greatly regrets this and is prepared to shoulder her share of the blame. As for investment I know very well why they were at first taken in re the potential Paul Allen interest. Tom McLaughlin pitched up, using his connections with PA, claiming that Allen was interested and, as it was well known that he did have links with Allen, he was originally believed. Crouch and others even spent their own private money paying McLaughlin a consultancy fee to ensure McLaughlin could deliver the investment he was continually promising. OK Tommac was later proven to be no more than a tyre kicker with an eye to make a few bob, in the final fallout and everything then went boots up but I think the only allegations we can level at Crouch and co is they allowed themselves to be succoured in - first by Wilde and his execs and then by Tom McLaughlin. Naive? Undoubtedly. Yes, but I would not go much further when looking who to blame for this very sad situation.

 

Blame maybe not but responsibility Yes

 

The board is surely responsible for running the club successfully but the board failed big time.

 

They are all a shower and you are defending them

Edited 8 January, 2009 by John B

[Chez]

is it just me or are these wages incredibly low considering the size of our losses in the last accounts? We were losing £1.2m a month last year. I expected John to be on close to £20k himself.

[woksaintly]

Unless I am mistaken didn't Lowe say at the AGM and elsewhere that it was not the Clubs policy to reveal confidential information about individual player wages?

 

Therefore, the club should have issued a statement condenming the Echo's publication.... Shouldn't they !!!! Of course we all know that it was deliberately leaked and if I was a fellow Director of the PLC I would want to know who was responsible and be demanding their resignation.

[Give it to Ron]

is it just me or are these wages incredibly low considering the size of our losses in the last accounts? We were losing £1.2m a month last year. I expected John to be on close to £20k himself.

 

Good post Chez and what amazes me is the fact that people are surprised that proven experienced players that score goals like Rasiak and Stern John are paid a fair bit of money!

We have gone down the cheap route this year and how many have we scored...that is why they are paid that much FFS!

Euell was a Prem player and needed enticing to us hence the 200k that his agent wangled not Jasons fault at all and fair play to him - its just a shame some of his performances havn't lived up to that salary but towards the end of last season he was earning every penny of that in trying to keep us up.

[trousers]

There is no doubt (and Mary Corbett has publicly admitted as much) the Crouch camp (Pat Trant, Mary C, Lawrie Mac etc etc) were very naive in not doing due diligence on Michael Wilde and his promises when he arrived on his white charger. I know Mary greatly regrets this and is prepared to shoulder her share of the blame. As for investment I know very well why they were at first taken in re the potential Paul Allen interest. Tom McLaughlin pitched up, using his connections with PA, claiming that Allen was interested and, as it was well known that he did have links with Allen, he was originally believed. Crouch and others even spent their own private money paying McLaughlin a consultancy fee to ensure McLaughlin could deliver the investment he was continually promising. OK Tommac was later proven to be no more than a tyre kicker with an eye to make a few bob, in the final fallout and everything then went boots up but I think the only allegations we can level at Crouch and co is they allowed themselves to be succoured in - first by Wilde and his execs and then by Tom McLaughlin. Naive? Undoubtedly. Yes, but I would not go much further when looking who to blame for this very sad situation.

 

Blimey. I think that is what they call a 'bombshell' in these 'ere parts!

 

All we need now is an explanation of the NAMG 'episode' and we've got the full set!

Edited 8 January, 2009 by trousers

[trousers]

Unless I am mistaken didn't Lowe say at the AGM and elsewhere that it was not the Clubs policy to reveal confidential information about individual player wages?

 

Therefore, the club should have issued a statement condenming the Echo's publication.... Shouldn't they !!!!

 

They would probably counter that logic by saying that to issue a denial would grace the accusation with too much credibility, I guess

[Teddy Nutkins]

Unless I am mistaken didn't Lowe say at the AGM and elsewhere that it was not the Clubs policy to reveal confidential information about individual player wages?

 

Therefore, the club should have issued a statement condenming the Echo's publication.... Shouldn't they !!!! Of course we all know that it was deliberately leaked and if I was a fellow Director of the PLC I would want to know who was responsible and be demanding their resignation.

 

Welcome to the mad-house woksaintly, maybe the silence is deafining.

[Give it to Ron]

Unless I am mistaken didn't Lowe say at the AGM and elsewhere that it was not the Clubs policy to reveal confidential information about individual player wages?

 

Therefore, the club should have issued a statement condenming the Echo's publication.... Shouldn't they !!!! Of course we all know that it was deliberately leaked and if I was a fellow Director of the PLC I would want to know who was responsible and be demanding their resignation.

 

Interesting first post can I be the first to say which PR firm do you work for ;-)?

[trousers]

Interesting first post can I be the first to say which PR firm do you work for ;-)?

 

I don't wish to unduly worry you but your brain is starting to work like mine...!

 

p.s. There's been quite a few 'long time registered, no previous posts' newcomers of late....

[dubai_phil]

This thread should be renamed the X-Files thread

 

We always knew the Truth was out there, and a lot of it is coming out today.

 

Would be interesting to know if tommac's fee was for his own work or to pay others to get the proposal up the ladder to PA's desk. It also helps explain why so much store was placed in investment coming in if we had such high powered hitters on the case..

 

Oh

[up and away]

With respect to up and away, I am encouraged by the amount of people who are now seemingly beyond the point of defending or blaming specific individuals and recognise that all of those involved have played their part in getting us to where we are today. The more fans who can reach this position, IMO, the better, because at least it will unite the fans a little more in finding a way forward, rather than constantly looking back.

 

As always, I read Duncan's input with interest, along with others, hwoever the single most concerning thing for me is that no one seems to actually have any realistic idea of how we are going to come out the other side of this. I'm not saying for one minute that there are any easy solutions, obviously not, but what, realistically, can happen from here on in?!? Does anyone actually have any idea whatsoever? I doubt it, simply because of the variables involved, and it's that unknown that bothers me the most.

 

I take your point, but you cannot have missed there is a large percentage of posters tying every sneeze back to Lowe and how he has engineered this current predicament. This in itself is not an issue until you tie it in with your second part, what should we be doing?

 

I have no problem accepting that what we should be doing is exactly what Lowe has done since his return. You can argue the pro’s and con’s regarding Pearson and JP, but given the enormity of the financial problems we faced, no one can categorically say what would have been the best. We have no options left open to us and whether it is Lowe or anyone else implementing these measures, I am fully behind them as it is the only thing that makes sense and just gives us that 1/100 chance of getting out of the mess. Typical is the nasty Lowe trying to do everything to force Skacel out of the club. If our financial survival depends upon getting rid of these high earners, then everything must be done in attempt to bring that about. Look at the actions that require taking and forget about the person implementing those actions. But I feel it will only be once we find ourselves in administration will the penny hit home. Even then I can see the very same posters blaming Lowe for not doing more and personally kicking Skacel’s arse up the road to Ipswich.

 

Over the last few years when I found I had been conned by Michael Wilde, I have had one consistent agenda. Forget about the dreams of investment and just live in the now without ****ing all the family silver against the wall (yeah close to £40M). Someone for Christ’s sake make the right decisions no matter how unpopular they are. The only person who has had the balls to do it is Lowe. I don’t really care which of them would actually do it, just that it was done.

 

We are at the point now where I do not believe it matters anymore and if we were to escape administration and stay in the CCC it would truly be a miracle. I am even wondering if we are not far from the point to accept administration this season so we can go into League 1 without the point’s deduction. Even grateful that these youngsters have gained invaluable experience, to avoid us slipping straight through League 1.

 

 

Originally Posted by Fitzhugh Fella

There is no doubt (and Mary Corbett has publicly admitted as much) the Crouch camp (Pat Trant, Mary C, Lawrie Mac etc etc) were very naive in not doing due diligence on Michael Wilde and his promises when he arrived on his white charger. I know Mary greatly regrets this and is prepared to shoulder her share of the blame. As for investment I know very well why they were at first taken in re the potential Paul Allen interest. Tom McLaughlin pitched up, using his connections with PA, claiming that Allen was interested and, as it was well known that he did have links with Allen, he was originally believed. Crouch and others even spent their own private money paying McLaughlin a consultancy fee to ensure McLaughlin could deliver the investment he was continually promising. OK Tommac was later proven to be no more than a tyre kicker with an eye to make a few bob, in the final fallout and everything then went boots up but I think the only allegations we can level at Crouch and co is they allowed themselves to be succoured in - first by Wilde and his execs and then by Tom McLaughlin. Naive? Undoubtedly. Yes, but I would not go much further when looking who to blame for this very sad situation.

The issue I have with this is not that these people were fooled by that thwat tommac, but what damage was caused by continuing with this belief and sticking all your eggs into this one basket, when alarm bells were ringing at every corner. Even to Crouch's final days this was being extended to Fulthorpe and still blindly going along the same road.

To me this reliance upon the mythical investment explains a lot of the cavalair attitude as to why we ****ed everything against the wall and why we are in our current predicament. Because don't worry, there will always be someone willing to buy the club and get us out of the mess.

 

They are all intelligent people and how could they go so long in continuing with this make believe, even to the extent of Crouch at the recent AGM. If any of them had looked closely at the communications between the Echo and Allen it would have shook them out of their boots. But no one bothered because the ramifications of what that truth meant would have seen everything disappear in an instance. The only reason I can put this down to intelligent people in other fields, because they are fans?

 

 

[SFC1906]

Keep hearing about 'communication between the Echo and the Allen camp'

Can someone pls provide a link/summary etc as I haven't come across this yet and it would appear to be very interesting read?

 

Ta

[Window Cleaner]

Well I haven't had time to read through all 148 replies on this thread yet so someone may have already made the same observations;these figures are far less than those usually bandied about, perhaps they're saving the bonuses for

tomorrow's edition.

[saintstr1]

Having just spent the last couple of Hours digesting all the postings on this thread all I can say is WOW!! , There sure are some skeletons falling out of the cupboards today.

 

Duncan , Your first post on this thread is a real cracker but why have you waited so long to out these facts. IMHO the club is now very close to imploding and the leaks in the press on players wages/contracts are the first "Dont Blame Me" squeals coming out of SMS. Obvious canditates for these leaks are Lowe ,Jones , Wilde etc but I am sorry to say it looks to me as if Administration is very , very close.

 

There were rumours last week of Wilde selling out to Crouch and Crouch entrusting those plus his own shares to Fulthorpe &co to allow a take over and the removal for good of Lowe. Quite honestly I see this as the only hope of avoiding administration but it would need to happen very quickly , like maybe this week.

[alpine_saint]

Having just spent the last couple of Hours digesting all the postings on this thread all I can say is WOW!! , There sure are some skeletons falling out of the cupboards today.

 

Duncan , Your first post on this thread is a real cracker but why have you waited so long to out these facts. IMHO the club is now very close to imploding and the leaks in the press on players wages/contracts are the first "Dont Blame Me" squeals coming out of SMS. Obvious canditates for these leaks are Lowe ,Jones , Wilde etc but I am sorry to say it looks to me as if Administration is very , very close.

 

There were rumours last week of Wilde selling out to Crouch and Crouch entrusting those plus his own shares to Fulthorpe &co to allow a take over and the removal for good of Lowe. Quite honestly I see this as the only hope of avoiding administration but it would need to happen very quickly , like maybe this week.

 

God, please let this be true.....