Jump to content

Article in the Echo RE Wages


Master Bates

Recommended Posts

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.

All parties, and I mean all parties, now see Fulthorpe as another "tyre kicker" without the means to progress any issue relating to our club. Forget him. He is history
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

And the very fact that so much is spilling forth today, starting with that Echo article, suggests the end is very nigh and a huge amount of old scores are going to be settled in a very short space of time.

 

I think Administration is almost going to come as a relief - at last SFC can finally start rebuilding as a football club and not a egoistic fifedom rapidly changing hands like some sort of microcosm of the Battle of Stalingrad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

 

I suspect the trail will go cold on this one as it's got "smoking gun" written all over it.....or so it would seem....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A number of posters have suggested that administration is likely this month. I presume this is opinion rather than fact?

 

Given we could, even in a fire sale, probably get a minimum of £3m by flogging Skacel, Davis, Surman, Schederlin and Lallana do people not think this may be sufficient to keep Barclays happy for a few months? Or is it a planned decision to avoid the points deduction next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A number of posters have suggested that administration is likely this month. I presume this is opinion rather than fact?

 

Given we could, even in a fire sale, probably get a minimum of £3m by flogging Skacel, Davis, Surman, Schederlin and Lallana do people not think this may be sufficient to keep Barclays happy for a few months? Or is it a planned decision to avoid the points deduction next season.

 

More planned by those in current charge so that they can appoint the Administrators of their choice, and therefore Pole Position for the purchase of the remnants...

 

B@stards...have thought this all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Administration is almost going to come as a relief - at last SFC can finally start rebuilding as a football club...

 

Part of me feels like this, but then the other part can't help but wonder if Administration would actually rid us of all those involved thus far? Would some of them still be involved with the club in some way? IF administration meant they were all to depart then MAYBE it would be a relief but I seriously doubt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Total spin by the Lowe P.R.machine. Even if it is all true why do you think it has been leaked now. Lowe is feeling the heat and is looking to deflect the grief. If you fall for all this like the Echo have then you are naive. Come on Lowe we're not the total mugs that you think we are. We are suppose to believe that he is not only squeeky clean but also a shining white knight coming to the rescue. What a load of nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did this info end up in the hands of the Echo? Some one at the club is either a mole or a just wanted to leak. Lowe?

 

(so long as there aren't any real moles at St Mary's. Make a right mess of the pitch)

 

But seriously, If I was paid £10,000 per week, after giving £4,000 to the ****-robbing government I would still have £6,000! Every Fooooking week!!!! For kicking a friggin ball around. And not doing a very good job of kicking it either. Absolute lunacy. Utter madness. The world has gone fruit-loopy. Mental. £6,000 after tax EVERY SEVEN DAYS!?!?!?!? Make me want to puke. Christ, it takes me MONTHS to earn that. How would you spend it? Erm... £200 on rent. £25 on council tax, £30 on bills. £20 on mobile, £2 on TV licence, £30 on food, £100 on clothes, £20 car insurance, £100 on car hire purchase, £100 on booze and you would STILL HAVE £5,373 left to p!ss up against the wall. And then you still get it no matter how crap you are.

 

Un ber f u c k ing lieavable. And we pay them. Get some sanity back into the game, for Christ's sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did this info end up in the hands of the Echo? Some one at the club is either a mole or a just wanted to leak. Lowe?

 

(so long as there aren't any real moles at St Mary's. Make a right mess of the pitch)

 

But seriously, If I was paid £10,000 per week, after giving £4,000 to the ****-robbing government I would still have £6,000! Every Fooooking week!!!! For kicking a friggin ball around. And not doing a very good job of kicking it either. Absolute lunacy. Utter madness. The world has gone fruit-loopy. Mental. £6,000 after tax EVERY SEVEN DAYS!?!?!?!? Make me want to puke. Christ, it takes me MONTHS to earn that. How would you spend it? Erm... £200 on rent. £25 on council tax, £30 on bills. £20 on mobile, £2 on TV licence, £30 on food, £100 on clothes, £20 car insurance, £100 on car hire purchase, £100 on booze and you would STILL HAVE £5,373 left to p!ss up against the wall. And then you still get it no matter how crap you are.

 

Un ber f u c k ing lieavable. And we pay them. Get some sanity back into the game, for Christ's sake.

 

And those figures are just championship wages.....

add a nought for the top PL players and you can afford to crash your Ferrari as often as you like

 

Still, nice to have another convert to the "Football industry is insane" brigade

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And those figures are just championship wages.....

add a nought for the top PL players and you can afford to crash your Ferrari as often as you like

 

Still, nice to have another convert to the "Football industry is insane" brigade

 

I was converted a long time ago. Charlton were paying Luke Varney £23k per week when he hadn't even played at CCC level and hasn't set this level alight either. The Skates would go straight into administration if Adams doesn't keep them up this year - Crouch was good for us but £75k per week anyone? The average Premier League weekly wage is well beyond what the Prime Minister and Governor of the Bank of England earn combined and I know who I want to see succeed more and feel is more important (clue not the footballers!).

 

I even saw a rumour that Scott Parker was going to be offered £100k per week by Man City. He's not even worth a quarter of that, he scored 2 great goals at SMS but his biggest achievement is still playing keepy-uppy on a McDonald's advert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was converted a long time ago. Charlton were paying Luke Varney £23k per week when he hadn't even played at CCC level and hasn't set this level alight either. The Skates would go straight into administration if Adams doesn't keep them up this year - Crouch was good for us but £75k per week anyone? The average Premier League weekly wage is well beyond what the Prime Minister and Governor of the Bank of England earn combined and I know who I want to see succeed more and feel is more important (clue not the footballers!).

 

I even saw a rumour that Scott Parker was going to be offered £100k per week by Man City. He's not even worth a quarter of that, he scored 2 great goals at SMS but his biggest achievement is still playing keepy-uppy on a McDonald's advert.

 

 

That is probably the reason why when we were in the Premiership we could not afford star names

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And those figures are just championship wages.....

add a nought for the top PL players and you can afford to crash your Ferrari as often as you like

 

Still, nice to have another convert to the "Football industry is insane" brigade

 

Its one thing if you are a ronaldo or gerrard. Then it becomes pop-star or holywood-star wages because millions around the world are watching you with your 'AIG' or 'Carlsberg' shirt and gazzillions of pounds of TV money. After all Brad Pitt and Will Smith can both get $20M per movie and they can easily make 2 movies per year.

 

But for players in the fizzy-pop league of English footie with crowds of only 15-20K there is no TV money, no world-wide interest and no feasible credible reason why they should be getting any more than a couple of thousand tops. Some things really make my head sore. How can kicking a football around for a few hours be worth so much more than a doctor or a teacher? Bloody crazy. And completely unsustainable now that the country's economy has gone tits up. Slash the wages, slash the ticket prices and get good old fashioned working-man's football back again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Who hired the Manager (Burley) that recommended all these expensive players? Answer Rupert Lowe.

2. When Lowe left the wage bill (run rate) was already growing again, the Wilde period just added more Burley expense.

3. We have had the same Fin Director through all of this, he even voted for the new players!

4. Lowe is basically slagging off Wilde (his supporter) and Jones (his former employee) whilst trying to smear Crouch.

5. Crouch seems IMHO to have a good grasp of the finances, was willing to make sensible cuts, is able to hire a good Manager and is willing to put in some of his own money to save us. Barclays should take note.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Duncan. Tell you what, I am looking forward to you writing all this down in a book;

 

'Southampton FC 'The plc Years' '

 

No matter what squirming Lowe now does to avoid blame I am sure a historian with as much love and information about the Club as you will be able to produce quite an interesting bestseller in how not to run a football Club that will be read the world over.

 

An historical document nonetheless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take is slightly different but we are in a mess

 

1 Who hired the Manager (Burley) that recommended all these expensive players? Answer Rupert Lowe but did not agree to all the signings at the time Burley was thought to be a good signing with all the relevant experience

 

2. When Lowe left the wage bill (run rate) was already growing again, the Wilde period just added more Burley expense ratio was about 45% when Lowe left

 

3. We have had the same Fin Director through all of this, he even voted for the new players! He only was voting on whether the club could afford him.

 

4. Lowe is basically slagging off Wilde (his supporter) and Jones (his former employee) whilst trying to smear Crouch. We dont know ads yet where the figures came from and whether they are accurate

 

5. Crouch seems IMHO to have a good grasp of the finances, was willing to make sensible cuts, is able to hire a good Manager and is willing to put in some of his own money to save us. Where do you get this from the previous board highlighed the need for careful use of money which Crouch did not appear to take any noticeo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duncan. Tell you what, I am looking forward to you writing all this down in a book;

 

'Southampton FC 'The plc Years' '

 

No matter what squirming Lowe now does to avoid blame I am sure a historian with as much love and information about the Club as you will be able to produce quite an interesting bestseller in how not to run a football Club that will be read the world over.

 

An historical document nonetheless.

 

It would also make a good film but I would like a completely independent author to be involved not Duncan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, so the the Echo is back to it's old tricks of printing Lowe spin.

 

Why has this story come out now?

 

P.S the period the article refers to is the era when Wilde abandoned the club to his Execs.

 

Lowe is obviously getting desperate. During the Saintforever days his PR company even posted on this websites predessor when Lowe was on the ropes. We've seen it all before and no-one is going to fall for it.

 

To me all this says is that they had a punt and bought in expertise to get back into the Prem. And failed miserably.

 

(And don't berate me for the 'bought in expertise' line, it's just a management expression in my blue sky world).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great minds.....no offence...:)

 

Thankyou thankyou thankyou - I have a great mind it's official! Whoopee! Can I keep this and use it as a reference? Wow, I keep this up and I might one day be as clever as Rupert & Michael....

 

Meanwhile I am worried, we have not had any new revelations for at least a couple of hours on this thread. Storm brewing methinks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is probably the reason why when we were in the Premiership we could not afford star names

 

To be fair to the board, I don't think the overseas money which really came in with Chelsea in 2003 helped at all. What I will say is that we should have been going for investment THEN, not trying desperately via Seymour Pearce much later on as the walls and roof were falling in. I think we peaked in 2003 and whilst I'm not of the opinion that the board should not have gambled money in 2003/4 we didn't have, we were a very attractive prospect for proper investment at that time. WGS and the players knew this as well and we ran out of steam badly in the first half of 2004 despite a mini-revival under Sturrock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well people have been asking for ages where did all the Walcott/Bale/Jones money go so I guess we now have the answer - we spent most of it on Jason Mule :mad: . This club has been so horribly mismanaged in recent years if you didn't know any better you'd think Peter Ridsdale was running it .

 

 

if the mule got 200k just for putting pen to paper...i hate to think how much other have had...given that we have had a high turnaround of players...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if the mule got 200k just for putting pen to paper...i hate to think how much other have had...given that we have had a high turnaround of players...

 

Makes you mad until you read that the Defoe transfer to Spuds stalled because he wanted a £700k loyalty bonus from the Skates...for 1 year of ****eness!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's certainly gone eerily quiet after the initial storm....someone at the club "had words" perhaps?

 

I suspect the players who've had personal information leaked won't be very happy with the person they suspect of doing it. This tit for tat point scoring will do wonders for morale.:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know I thought he fell out with Lowe that was why I made my comment.

 

I have to concede the book would have to be written by someone other than me - I long ago succumbed to the temptation to be impartial when it came to Rupert Lowe (one of the reasons I took a sabbatical from this forum). Perhaps my colleague, David Bull (who always manages to sail Nelson like through the political maelstroms) could do a decent job. I am always nagging him to shift his arse off the fence but there again he is much more of a diplomat than me.

 

I am quite happy now to be allowed to say what I think and hopefully I will keep to my New Year's resolution to keep it civil and polite. So may I wish Sundance a belated and sanctimonious Happy New Year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to concede the book would have to be written by someone other than me - I long ago succumbed to the temptation to be impartial when it came to Rupert Lowe (one of the reasons I took a sabbatical from this forum). Perhaps my colleague, David Bull (who always manages to sail Nelson like through the political maelstroms) could do a decent job. I am always nagging him to shift his arse off the fence but there again he is much more of a diplomat than me.

 

I am quite happy now to be allowed to say what I think and hopefully I will keep to my New Year's resolution to keep it civil and polite. So may I wish Sundance a belated and sanctimonious Happy New Year.

 

Yes I agree but how about Colin Farmery who would be completely impartial.

 

 

The story needs to be told without any spin as our supporters are in my opinion owed it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here's what David Jones thought of the numbers:

 

We do forward forecast and the player wage bill was 81 per cent in June 08 but .......... the player wage bill was an artificial blip

 

Would loved to have been a fly on the wall in the office after the AGM with Rupe's leading on the stupidness of the 81% figure and Jones responding that it was a mere blip!!!!!!!

 

The only thing in that report that surprised me was the figure down for Rasiak.

 

When Lowe signed Rasiak he intimated that he was on alot more than that, so just wondering if the Rasiak figure has been massaged down (is it missing loyalty binuses etc).

 

So does that indicate that it was a Lowe leaked story????

 

Certainly when I read the piece, the fact there was the big caveat stating, "this all happened when Lowe was not at the Club" made me think that it probably was.

 

A sort of get my excuses in and divert attention at the same time. If t was him, was he thinking of getting this out to try and say:

 

a) "I'm having to do all this on the cheap because of what I inherited"

 

and/or

 

b) "Administration is inevitable after all these payments"

 

and/or

 

c) "If I put this out it might deflect the spotlight away from the things that aren't going too well at the moment"

 

Not sure what Crouch's camp could achieve by these stories coming out (anyone want to offer up why they might have been behind this?).

 

Also not sure that the old Executive team would have leaked this as parts of it doesn't paint them in a good light (i.e. Euell).

 

Anyway, I'm sure Euell wil now go that extra mile for us having been outed and it's just another day at The Cirque Des Saints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take is slightly different but we are in a mess

2. When Lowe left the wage bill (run rate) was already growing again, the Wilde period just added more Burley expense ratio was about 45% when Lowe left

 

45% of what? The income was £10m higher due to

1) better crowds

2) final Prem payment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I was one of the players in question I would be suing the club/individual for breach of confidentiality. I'd be trying to get the rest of my contract paid up.

 

The leak is either from Lowe's side (unbelievable but somehow believable) or it's from somewhere else being made to look like Lowe's work. Either way it is mind blowing. Remember the fuss when John Arne Riise's wages slip was printed in the paper... well that was nicked out of a bin (I think)... but for 7 or 8 players wages to be thrown out there....

 

I ****ing give up, I really do.

 

As long as when we come out of admin, we still have a club, a ground to play in (owned or rented) and none of the ****ers that have brought us down are involved, I will be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if anyone else would agree but the Echo has been completely different of late with its style of reporting IMO.

Ok,we will always get the usual PR and spin drip fed Via the Echo,but something is recently has changed.

I think we are approaching the "end game" be it admin or "something else"

Even more interesting times ahead?

Fair few new names on this thread raising thier heads above the parapit also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. When Lowe left the wage bill (run rate) was already growing again, the Wilde period just added more Burley expense ratio was about 45% when Lowe left

 

Not true.

 

In Lowe's last season the wage bill was 13.6m (12.5 pro rata) and stood at 53% of turnover.

 

In first season after Lowe wages dropped to 10.5m and stood at 45% of turnover.

 

Last season it went back up to 12.1m and stood at 81% of turnover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[/b]

 

Would Lowe have this information deliberately leaked to discredit his new mate...........................who knows?

 

In all fairness with all the (justified) flack he's taken if i was R.L. i would have released these figures because in all honesty they are beyond comprehension with are revenue stream. L.C. and M.W. rolled the dice and lost.

 

It certainly answers a lot of questions on the reasons why R.L. return. It must have resembled standing by and letting Gary Glitter babesit your favourite niece!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Mate don't get sucked in by the spin, Lowe signed BWP & Rasiak!!!!

 

Also just one other small point, the % of income against players wages were naturaly going up anyway as the turnover went from £23.3m down to £14.9m so even with out the extra signings the existing contracts would of taken a larger %.

 

Please note: That by no means exucesses The Euell deal!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here's what David Jones thought of the numbers:

 

 

 

Would loved to have been a fly on the wall in the office after the AGM with Rupe's leading on the stupidness of the 81% figure and Jones responding that it was a mere blip!!!!!!!

 

The only thing in that report that surprised me was the figure down for Rasiak.

 

When Lowe signed Rasiak he intimated that he was on alot more than that, so just wondering if the Rasiak figure has been massaged down (is it missing loyalty binuses etc).

 

So does that indicate that it was a Lowe leaked story????

 

Certainly when I read the piece, the fact there was the big caveat stating, "this all happened when Lowe was not at the Club" made me think that it probably was.

 

A sort of get my excuses in and divert attention at the same time. If t was him, was he thinking of getting this out to try and say:

 

a) "I'm having to do all this on the cheap because of what I inherited"

 

and/or

 

b) "Administration is inevitable after all these payments"

 

and/or

 

c) "If I put this out it might deflect the spotlight away from the things that aren't going too well at the moment"

 

Not sure what Crouch's camp could achieve by these stories coming out (anyone want to offer up why they might have been behind this?).

 

Also not sure that the old Executive team would have leaked this as parts of it doesn't paint them in a good light (i.e. Euell).

 

 

Or perhaps a consortium struggling to convince the major shareholders to sell their shares leaked information they had gleaned via due diligence in a bid to flush out the inertia and stalemate at the club and shake things up a bit? A wild stab in the dark but plausible perhaps?

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...