Sport Republic

[Avenue_Saint]

Rumoured US party has to be RedBall I reckon.

[Daft Kerplunk]

12 hours ago, Wade Garrett said:

Don’t think it’s Reed.  Simon Jordan said serious people.  I don’t think he was referring to Charlton’s worst ever manager.

Don’t be surprised about Reed though, I have heard through the football grapevine that he has been involved in discussions about an SFC takeover. At what level, not sure, but football consultancy and the higher level discussions is his gig now. 
 

If Simon Jordan is involved, I wouldn’t expect some of the current board to last very long as he’d surely be able to see right through them. He’d probably challenge Matt Crocker to get on with restructuring the academy and not be too focussed on first team and the pavilion. 

[SKD]

Is anyone close enough to know how long these things usually take? For example, is it realistic that we could have a new owner by the summer transfer window? Assuming there are currently ongoing discussions in the background. 
 

Its clear that we’ll be taken over at some Point, I guess it’s just a matter of time and who. Noise from the club is that we won’t rush into a sale and we’ll wait for a suitable buyer, which sounds positive, but easier said than done when the money is waved in front of you. 
 

If the new owner isn’t in place by the summer, next season is going to be a long one. 

[Turkish]

5 minutes ago, SKD said:

Is anyone close enough to know how long these things usually take? For example, is it realistic that we could have a new owner by the summer transfer window? Assuming there are currently ongoing discussions in the background. 
 

Its clear that we’ll be taken over at some Point, I guess it’s just a matter of time and who. Noise from the club is that we won’t rush into a sale and we’ll wait for a suitable buyer, which sounds positive, but easier said than done when the money is waved in front of you. 
 

If the new owner isn’t in place by the summer, next season is going to be a long one. 

Considering rumours Kat was looking to sell 3 years before she did and we ended up with Goa, plus the fact Goa is desperate to sell then I wouldn’t believe the waiting for the right buyer line, it’ll be the first one to stump up enough cash. 

[Smirking_Saint]

1 hour ago, SKD said:

Is anyone close enough to know how long these things usually take? For example, is it realistic that we could have a new owner by the summer transfer window? Assuming there are currently ongoing discussions in the background. 
 

Its clear that we’ll be taken over at some Point, I guess it’s just a matter of time and who. Noise from the club is that we won’t rush into a sale and we’ll wait for a suitable buyer, which sounds positive, but easier said than done when the money is waved in front of you. 
 

If the new owner isn’t in place by the summer, next season is going to be a long one. 

Considering our current predicament I imagine that a lot of the waiting was to see where we ended up at the end of this season. This probably affects the negotiations on both ends to be honest.

Relegation obviously affects the price and the overall saleability of the club in general, would the parties still be interested in a large club, with large outlay no longer receiving Prem payments and under the cloud of a restrictive loan agreement ?

An FA Cup win will probably flip the favour to that of Gao/Kat, European entry will of course increase the potential price etc

So for me its not beyond the realms of possibility that potential consortiums are waiting for our position to become a bit more clear, plus the overall impact of Covid on football in general probably becomes more clear this summer. A release to clubs to allow spectators back is massive for balance sheets etc

Hopefully, all being well, we can be under new ownership come the summer, or at least headed into that direction... a lot depends on how desperate Gao is to release control and regain funds.

As per Jordan/Reed etc, I'm not sure I really care much.... Reed gets a terrible terrible time on here but it seems to me he was pretty integral at building the clubs background footballing facilities such as the medical science/training ground/academy structure. It obviously all went wrong when he gained more power and involved himself more with recruitment.

[JustinSFC]

3 hours ago, SKD said:

Is anyone close enough to know how long these things usually take? For example, is it realistic that we could have a new owner by the summer transfer window? Assuming there are currently ongoing discussions in the background. 
 

I'm not anyone with any 'inside knowledge' but I do follow takeovers.

A great person to follow is Alan Nixon on Twitter, the Bolton Takeover was an absolute farce and Wigan are a mess.

Both of those were administration takeovers.

Usually it depends who the buyer is and satisfying the EFL / PL.

If I just throw a name out there as a pure example, say someone like Michael Dell was interested it would just be a case of

"oh yes, he's the guy who owns Dell".

The PL don't need to dig that far into it, he's a known commodity.

Right, have you got funds? Yes.

Could you fund the club under your own steam for 2 years? Yes

Prove it.. Ok here you go.

In that scenario as long as we're straight and upfront about any debt, debtors and liabilities it should be straight forward.

Newcastle was a circus because the Saudis buying them had a network of companies buried underneath other companies and the EFL / PL couldn't see where the money was coming from.

Or the Gao's of this world where nobody has the first fucking clue who the guy was and Liebherr had to basically underwrite the whole thing and leave 20% in just so he could satisfy the PL he could buy the club.

Once we know exactly who is behind the takeover and there is real INTENT, if it took longer than 6 weeks then things could start getting messy.

People will say what they will about Alan Nixon but he's a superb person to follow on Twitter where takeovers are concerned.

 

 

 

Edited 17 March, 2021 by JustinSFC

[SuperSAINT]

Just now, JustinSFC said:

I'm not anyone with any 'inside knowledge' but I do follow takeovers.

A great person to follow is Alan Nixon on Twitter, the Bolton Takeover was an absolute farce and Wigan are a mess.

Both of those were administration takeovers.

Usually it depends who the buyer is and satisfying the EFL / PL.

If I just throw a name out there as a pure example, say someone like Michael Dell was interested it would just be a case of

"oh yes, he's the guy who owns Dell".

Right, have you got funds? Yes.

Could you fund the club under your own steam for 2 years? Yes

Prove it.. Ok here you go.

In that scenario as long as we're straight and upfront about any debt, debtors and liabilities it should be straight forward.

Newcastle was a circus because the Saudis buying them had a network of companies buried underneath other companies and the EFL / PL couldn't see where the money was coming from.

Or the Gao's of this world where nobody has the first fucking clue who the guy was and Liebherr had to basically underwrite the whole thing and leave 20% in just so he could satisfy the PL he could buy the club.

Once we know exactly who is behind the takeover and there is real INTENT, if it took longer than 6 weeks then things could start getting messy.

People will say what they will about Alan Nixon but he's a superb person to follow on Twitter where takeovers are concerned.

 

 

 

He seemed to literally know everything on those 2 takeovers.

[JustinSFC]

1 minute ago, SuperSAINT said:

He seemed to literally know everything on those 2 takeovers.

Like I say, he's fascinating to follow on Twitter for takeovers and usually dead on the money.

[Dusic]

Those that talk in public are probably not the serious contenders.

If indeed there are any serious contenders.

[East Kent Saint]

Derby takeover cancelled by current owner .....

[JustinSFC]

2 hours ago, East Kent Saint said:

Derby takeover cancelled by current owner .....

I like Morris, he's no mug.

He's a proper businessman.

But he should have done what Mike Ashley did and charged a non-refundable fee to get access to the books whether they proceed or not.

It was supposedly £2M quid.

What that does is pretty much guarantees whoever pays that is serious and has enough wealth that £2m isn't a problem.

The issue with the Newcastle sale wasn't money, as in lack of it, the EFL just couldn't see in a satisfactory manner where the money came from.

Charging a fee to see the books guarantees quality candidates and avoids being fucked around by fantasists or similar.

We should implement similar.

I know clubs implement 'exclusivity periods' where criteria has to met in order to enter into exclusive negotiations, but even then no actual tangible money is on the line, when people's actual money is on the line (regardless of wealth) the dynamics change completely.

[danjosaint]

Wasn't a main issue with the Newcastle take over was that the potential owners owned a pirate sports TV channel and the Premier league were worried about what there intentions were

[JustinSFC]

It was one thing after another from the outside looking in.

But they obviously had the money.

Gao wouldn't have got through if he tried to buy us tomorrow. He wouldn't get anywhere near.

It would get blocked outright.

It looked to me the only way Gao got through was basically Liebherr leaving her foot in and vouching for him.

 

[redkeith]

11 hours ago, danjosaint said:

Wasn't a main issue with the Newcastle take over was that the potential owners owned a pirate sports TV channel and the Premier league were worried about what there intentions were

That and a dead journalist in bin bags in one of their embassies.

[Raging Bull]

34 minutes ago, redkeith said:

That and a dead journalist in bin bags in one of their embassies.

Well, we’ve all got that 1 friend who constantly takes it too far. 
 

I mean you can’t tell me that you’ve not been in a fight and someone whips out a bone saw? We’ve all been there! 

[EBS1980]

15 hours ago, JustinSFC said:

I like Morris, he's no mug.

He's a proper businessman.

But he should have done what Mike Ashley did and charged a non-refundable fee to get access to the books whether they proceed or not.

It was supposedly £2M quid.

What that does is pretty much guarantees whoever pays that is serious and has enough wealth that £2m isn't a problem.

The issue with the Newcastle sale wasn't money, as in lack of it, the EFL just couldn't see in a satisfactory manner where the money came from.

Charging a fee to see the books guarantees quality candidates and avoids being fucked around by fantasists or similar.

We should implement similar.

I know clubs implement 'exclusivity periods' where criteria has to met in order to enter into exclusive negotiations, but even then no actual tangible money is on the line, when people's actual money is on the line (regardless of wealth) the dynamics change completely.

Mel Moris - hmm, a bit shady when it comes to trying to bend the rules though: https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/finance-strategy/derby-charged-under-financial-fair-play-rules

[JustinSFC]

1 hour ago, EBS1980 said:

Mel Moris - hmm, a bit shady when it comes to trying to bend the rules though: https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/business/finance-strategy/derby-charged-under-financial-fair-play-rules

Nothing shocking really.

It's up to him as an owner to assess affordability of the penalty.

It's one thing to do it knowing you couldn't afford the penalty and another thing doing it knowing you can.

[EBS1980]

17 minutes ago, JustinSFC said:

Nothing shocking really.

It's up to him as an owner to assess affordability of the penalty.

It's one thing to do it knowing you couldn't afford the penalty and another thing doing it knowing you can.

It was more the sale and lease back of stadium and the high value they put on the stadium. A tactic clubs are using to try and get in line with FFP

[JustinSFC]

11 minutes ago, EBS1980 said:

It was more the sale and lease back of stadium and the high value they put on the stadium. A tactic clubs are using to try and get in line with FFP

I find that creative more than shocking.

I'd do it aswell if I could afford the penalty.

[MarkSFC]

Its obvious we need a new owner/consortium, I'm curious to know though (particularly from those who are critical of Gao's total lack of investment in the business other than purchasing it) how much each season or up front you think any new owner(s) should / need to put in?

Do you want them to invest in order to up the wage limit (which potentially takes the club beyond breakeven, should investment cease) or can better players be acquired without doing this?

Can we even if they invest say 50m a year attract the type of players we need to progress ?

Should their investment include/focus on the stadium in terms of capacity and facilities and therefore income?

[Fan The Flames]

Oh no, Mark has started the stadium expansion debate 😱

[alehouseboys]

1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

Oh no, Mark has started the stadium expansion debate 😱

Funnily enough, I was looking at this the other day and some were suggesting a WC 2030 south coast venue would be needed and championed St Mary's with a grant-supported capacity increase 🙂 lights touch paper and moves away.......

https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/world-cup-2030-great-britain-ireland.2303336/page-2

[Fan The Flames]

4 hours ago, alehouseboys said:

Funnily enough, I was looking at this the other day and some were suggesting a WC 2030 south coast venue would be needed and championed St Mary's with a grant-supported capacity increase 🙂 lights touch paper and moves away.......

https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/world-cup-2030-great-britain-ireland.2303336/page-2

Imteresting. Fashionable Brighton would fancy their chances of that, they are putting in more seats to make it eligible for international games. Although they would struggle to expand any further and accessibility is a bit rubbish.

[woodsaint1]

On 16/03/2021 at 18:14, Katalinic said:

I assumed it was Richard Scudamore. I think it has been reported he joined the Moneyball lot last year.

Theres a brief mention in the following article about Scudamore being a member of the Redball board. Also says that RedBall remain interested in 'soccer' teams and have another 18 months to identify an acquisition target. If a purchase is not completed within that time, its raised funds will be returned to investors. There is a significant amount of sports team ownership experience and funding behind them.

https://www.sportspromedia.com/news/redball-spac-fenway-sports-group-equity-stake

[Verbal]

On 19/03/2021 at 19:18, woodsaint1 said:

Theres a brief mention in the following article about Scudamore being a member of the Redball board. Also says that RedBall remain interested in 'soccer' teams and have another 18 months to identify an acquisition target. If a purchase is not completed within that time, its raised funds will be returned to investors. There is a significant amount of sports team ownership experience and funding behind them.

https://www.sportspromedia.com/news/redball-spac-fenway-sports-group-equity-stake

Be extremely worried if this lot turn their attention on Saints.  The whole point of a SPAC, generally, is it's a shell company designed solely to take over an asset - any asset - and drive it hard towards a low-cost, lower regulated public offering.  Once a hyped-up IPO is done, the investors are paid off and the acquired asset is left to sink or swim.  Think of Lowe, only bigger and far worse. 

It would be a disaster for Saints.  

[sfc4prem]

3 minutes ago, Verbal said:

Be extremely worried if this lot turn their attention on Saints.  The whole point of a SPAC, generally, is it's a shell company designed solely to take over an asset - any asset - and drive it hard towards a low-cost, lower regulated public offering.  Once a hyped-up IPO is done, the investors are paid off and the acquired asset is left to sink or swim.  Think of Lowe, only bigger and far worse. 

It would be a disaster for Saints.  

But do Gao and Liebherr care how it works out for Saints once they've cleaned their hands of us?

[Wade Garrett]

2 hours ago, Verbal said:

Be extremely worried if this lot turn their attention on Saints.  The whole point of a SPAC, generally, is it's a shell company designed solely to take over an asset - any asset - and drive it hard towards a low-cost, lower regulated public offering.  Once a hyped-up IPO is done, the investors are paid off and the acquired asset is left to sink or swim.  Think of Lowe, only bigger and far worse. 

It would be a disaster for Saints.  

Difficult for it to work with a football club though.  Buying a Premier League club and selling them after relegation won’t give you a profit.

[Verbal]

1 minute ago, Wade Garrett said:

Difficult for it to work with a football club though.  Buying a Premier League club and selling them after relegation won’t give you a profit.

A SPAC is not interested in selling - only in the initial purchase.  And actually, a SPAC not interested in anything whatsoever except for the share price at the IPO.  That's the business model - full stop.   It's a business model in which relegation might be good thing, driving down the price to investors, so that the club is punted for its 'potential'.  

After the IPO, the club is owned not by the SPAC but by whoever, in their thousands, bought the pumped-up shares.  I don't think the severe dangers of a SPAC takeover are understood.  I doubt Saints will survive in the medium term.  

[JustinSFC]

2 hours ago, sfc4prem said:

But do Gao and Liebherr care how it works out for Saints once they've cleaned their hands of us?

Nope.

It's like selling a house.

I've got a house for sale at a price, if someone gives me that price, I don't give a shit what happens after that.

Liebherr wants shot of us and so does Gao and the as a club need shot of both of them.

[egg]

1 minute ago, JustinSFC said:

Nope.

It's like selling a house.

I've got a house for sale at a price, if someone gives me that price, I don't give a shit what happens after that.

Liebherr wants shot of us and so does Gao and the as a club need shot of both of them.

Exactly. It was same when Kat sold most of her shares to Gao. She needed to sell to gain her inheritance and sold to the highest / only bidder. 

[SuperSAINT]

It’s remarkable that nobody knows why Gao purchased the club.

[JustinSFC]

14 minutes ago, SuperSAINT said:

It’s remarkable that nobody knows why Gao purchased the club.

Nobody knows who he is let alone anything else.

[Convict Colony]

32 minutes ago, SuperSAINT said:

It’s remarkable that nobody knows why Gao purchased the club.

curry favour with his political network and have an asset with significant value outside of china.

[S-Clarke]

55 minutes ago, SuperSAINT said:

It’s remarkable that nobody knows why Gao purchased the club.

Nothing other than a political purchase. Sadly KL saw the money and just ran with it. The fact the league changed their fit and proper tests in the wake of his takeover, and that if he tried now would fail the test, says it all for me.

I'll also never buy that LD Sports had nothing to do with Gao. 

[JustinSFC]

5 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

 

I'll also never buy that LD Sports had nothing to do with Gao. 

That was the most 'suspect' sponsorship deal I've ever seen.

 

[JustinSFC]

I might have to retract my endorsement of any takeover involving Simon Jordan, he's just been on TalkSport saying how much of a good manager Mick McCarthy is.

If that his calibre of manager and his cup of tea, then I'd worry about the type of manager he'd appoint.

[SuperSAINT]

From the Q&A with Dan Sheldon:

—————-

Any news regarding a takeover, Dan? Do you think it’s likely something could happen over the summer? — Peter B

This was perhaps the most popular question, so it makes sense to start this mailbag by answering it first.

As far as The Athletic understands, a takeover isn’t imminent. There are around four very interested parties who have passed the initial checks and balances (ie, “Where is their money coming from?”). However, none of them are yet to reach the same stage Joseph DaGrosa’s Kapital Football Group reached in 2020, which saw them enter a period of exclusivity with Gao Jisheng, the club’s majority shareholder.

Those talks ended with DaGrosa losing a portion of the deposit he paid for the privilege to be at an advanced stage of buying Southampton. Despite the American’s failed takeover, other parties have now come back to the table to register their interest in purchasing Gao’s 80 per cent stake.

One source with knowledge of the process compared the stage Southampton are currently at to the final lap of a 10,000m race. Essentially, potential buyers have jogged around the track several times and now there is a sprint finish to see who will end up winning the race for that exclusivity period, which enables them to scour through all the financial books.

It’s hard to know for certain if a sale will happen before, during or after the summer. One senses that a decision would need to be made relatively quickly on a possible new buyer if it is to be completed before the 2020-21 season comes to an end. You’d expect the interested party will want to take their time studying the books, especially as the pandemic led the club to take out a £79 million loan from MSD Capital.

[JustinSFC]

Good. That bloke sounded like bad news anyway.

Everything he was saying just sounded wrong, he sounded like a typical yank smash & flip merchant who sensed a quick quid.

... Like Gao really.

[LiberalCommunist]

Better the devil you know. And in this case, I reckon that's about right. Gao is the least ambitious billionaire you will ever find. In fact, he's also the poorest billionaire. But he's our unambitiously cheap media dodging owner. Good ol' Gao. 

[Suhari]

I still believe we will see something move quite quickly once our prem survival is assured - at least as far as someone getting exclusivity.

Why would you make that commitment while relegation was still a possibility?

[Turkish]

6 minutes ago, Suhari said:

I still believe we will see something move quite quickly once our prem survival is assured - at least as far as someone getting exclusivity.

Why would you make that commitment while relegation was still a possibility?

Indeed, probably what they are waiting for, if we do down we're worth considerably less than we are today plus much less income with the same debt.

Edited 30 March, 2021 by Turkish

[JustinSFC]

I don't think this will drag either, it's not an administration takeover, it should be straightforward.

If it drags, it'll be because of Gao, somehow I don't think this is going to be entirely up to Gao, I'm still not convinced it was entirely his money that bought the club in the first place.

We'll never know the truth.

 

 

[davefizzy14]

4 hours ago, SuperSAINT said:

From the Q&A with Dan Sheldon:

—————-

Any news regarding a takeover, Dan? Do you think it’s likely something could happen over the summer? — Peter B

This was perhaps the most popular question, so it makes sense to start this mailbag by answering it first.

As far as The Athletic understands, a takeover isn’t imminent. There are around four very interested parties who have passed the initial checks and balances (ie, “Where is their money coming from?”). However, none of them are yet to reach the same stage Joseph DaGrosa’s Kapital Football Group reached in 2020, which saw them enter a period of exclusivity with Gao Jisheng, the club’s majority shareholder.

Those talks ended with DaGrosa losing a portion of the deposit he paid for the privilege to be at an advanced stage of buying Southampton. Despite the American’s failed takeover, other parties have now come back to the table to register their interest in purchasing Gao’s 80 per cent stake.

One source with knowledge of the process compared the stage Southampton are currently at to the final lap of a 10,000m race. Essentially, potential buyers have jogged around the track several times and now there is a sprint finish to see who will end up winning the race for that exclusivity period, which enables them to scour through all the financial books.

It’s hard to know for certain if a sale will happen before, during or after the summer. One senses that a decision would need to be made relatively quickly on a possible new buyer if it is to be completed before the 2020-21 season comes to an end. You’d expect the interested party will want to take their time studying the books, especially as the pandemic led the club to take out a £79 million loan from MSD Capital.

Would it be possible to post the whole article from Dan Sheldon on here as he discusses other important points, many thanks- I think its on the mailbag as I don't have the subscription.

Edited 30 March, 2021 by davefizzy14

[Medrurkin]

On 25/03/2021 at 11:33, JustinSFC said:

I might have to retract my endorsement of any takeover involving Simon Jordan, he's just been on TalkSport saying how much of a good manager Mick McCarthy is.

If that his calibre of manager and his cup of tea, then I'd worry about the type of manager he'd appoint.

😯  Mick is the non-flamboyant version of Big Sam. Has an initial positive impact then the swoop to hell.

[JustinSFC]

2 hours ago, Medrurkin said:

😯  Mick is the non-flamboyant version of Big Sam. Has an initial positive impact then the swoop to hell.

If Mick McCarthy is Jordans type of manager, then Mark Hughes would be aswell.

I think Jordan would be a bit too much of a control freak, he likes yes men managers.

If Jordan took over Ralph would probably walk within a month or sacked and replaced with a Hughes type.

No thanks.

Edited 30 March, 2021 by JustinSFC

[SuperSAINT]

3 hours ago, davefizzy14 said:

Would it be possible to post the whole article from Dan Sheldon on here as he discusses other important points, many thanks- I think its on the mailbag as I don't have the subscription.

In regards to Danny Ings’ contract situation, has there been any progress over the last few weeks? — Will L

The simple answer to this question is no — but it is obviously more nuanced than that. An offer from Southampton, which would see Ings become the club’s highest-paid player, remains on the table and is yet to be signed. This points to the fact that the striker is waiting to see whether there is any concrete interest from one of the Premier League’s top sides this summer, when he’ll have only a year remaining on his current deal.

As previously reported by The Athletic, Manchester City are one of his preferred destinations, and with City last night announcing Sergio Aguero will be leaving the Etihad Stadium this summer, the links to Ings will only get stronger. But the fact of the matter is that Erling Haaland, Borussia Dortmund’s prolific Norwegian striker, is Pep Guardiola’s top target, with Romelu Lukaku also featuring alongside Ings on the Premier League leaders’ list of potential Aguero replacements.

However, if it becomes clear that the likes of Manchester City aren’t going to come calling for Southampton’s star man, then one would expect him to remain on the south coast and sign a new deal. But how long Southampton want to wait for this is surely going to be a question being asked by the powers that be at St Mary’s. At some point, they are going to have to start searching for potential replacements, even if the 28-year-old ends up staying. They can’t allow themselves to get into a situation where the summer transfer window is in its final days and Ings leaves, which would give them very little time to find a new striker.

Another thing Southampton are determined to avoid is selling their star striker for a cut-price fee. Even though his season has been interrupted by injuries and he hasn’t hit the heights of last year, Ings has continued to show his class throughout the campaign. Letting him go for a measly sum just because he only has 12 months left on his deal would not make sense to the club. One source claims Southampton would rather let him leave on a free in 2022 than accept a low-ball figure this summer.

As long as Ings’ contract remains unsigned, there is going to be an element of flux with the summer transfer window creeping into view.

Alex Jankewitz looked good in the Swiss Under-21 win vs England Under-21. We haven’t seen a minute of him since the red card (at Old Trafford). Is this Ralph Hasenhuttl protecting him or a sign that he will be moving on? It would be a massive shame if the most talented player we have had in our youth teams for years left due to a lack of opportunities and online abuse, but I wouldn’t blame him — Rory S

Jankewitz proved to be another popular theme among Southampton fans, and it shouldn’t come as a surprise.

The midfielder, who handed in a transfer request in January, hasn’t featured for the first team since getting himself sent off after a matter of seconds on his maiden Premier League start against Manchester United. Despite apologising to Ralph Hasenhuttl and the rest of the squad for his actions, the 19-year-old has seemingly fallen way down the pecking order.

As Rory mentions, Jankewitz impressed against England Under-21s last week and put himself at the forefront of fans’ thoughts. I don’t think being overlooked by Hasenhuttl has anything to do with protection.

The club’s manager has Ibrahima Diallo at his disposal and has also played Stuart Armstrong in the midfield role alongside captain James Ward-Prowse. If Hasenhuttl had been protecting him, then surely you would give him some minutes against Bournemouth in the FA Cup quarter-final. The game was over and it would have been a good opportunity to help rebuild his confidence.

But he remained on the bench before going away on international duty with Switzerland’s under-21s.

There are enough games remaining this season for Jankewitz to get himself back in the starting XI, or at least impressing enough in training to earn cameos from the bench. As Rory says, it would be a shame for a player of Jankewitz’s potential to leave either this year for a fee or next year as a free agent.

Is there an acceptance behind the scenes that the club is in limbo until there is new ownership?— Charlie M

Good question, Charlie.

Acceptance is probably not the right word to explain it. There is obviously a sense that the ownership of the club is up in the air, although those behind the scenes are continuing to operate as normal. Given the way Southampton’s season has tailed off since the turn of the year and there is an FA Cup semi-final and transfer window to think about, they can’t afford to be stuck in limbo.

As long as Gao owns 80 per cent of Southampton Football Club, the movers and shakers behind the scenes will continue to plan their budgets around the self-sustainability model. There is little to be gained from planning for a new owner until it becomes obvious a sale will take place.

Will Vestergaard be offered a new deal or will the club look to cash in? — Jozef G

Vestergaard’s current contract runs out next summer, so other clubs will naturally be assessing the situation after the season he’s had.

The Athletic’s understanding of the situation is that talks are yet to take place over an extension. Tottenham Hotspur have recently been linked with the centre-half, which prompted the defender to admit he was flattered by the speculation.

“I can only say that, of course, it’s always a pat on the back with stories of interest from other big clubs,” he told Danish sport magazine Tipsbladet. “But right now I have a contract with Southampton, so it’s not something I can talk about.”
 

Southampton will obviously want to retain a player of his quality for the years to come, but, like Ings, a lot will depend on whether Vestergaard wants to stay at St Mary’s.

What is different to the Ings situation, though, is that Southampton already have a potential replacement in the squad should the 28-year-old leave for new pastures. After a difficult start to life on the south coast, Mohammed Salisu will be waiting in the wings to seize any opportunity that may come his way.

It would be great to have some insight into the goalkeeper situation. It certainly seems that Alex McCarthy and Fraser Forster are battling for the No 1 spot — is there a mood around the club as to who is winning that? What about Angus Gunn? Is there a hope that he’ll be able to return and fight for a place or are we just hoping to generate some transfer interest? — JoeJoe W

The goalkeeping situation is a fantastic topic and must be a nightmare for the club’s decision-makers.

Alex McCarthy, Angus Gunn and Fraser Forster will all view themselves as starters, which suggests one will almost certainly have to leave this summer.

The Athletic recently revealed that Southampton are in talks to extend McCarthy’s contract. This, you’d expect, highlights the fact that he remains part of the club’s plans going forward.

But Forster has now overtaken him as Hasenhuttl’s go-to goalkeeper in recent weeks after a string of fine performances. This has led to many wondering whether the former Celtic No 1 could be rewarded with a new deal.

While this is not yet known, it’s an interesting debate. You’d expect that if an extension was to be offered, it would be on reduced terms.

Hasenhuttl believes that in McCarthy and Forster, he has two players who can be the No 1 but, at the end of the day, only one of them can start. Keeping both would depend on either goalkeeper being somewhat satisfied playing second fiddle.

In terms of Gunn, he has spent this season on loan at Stoke City and still has over two years remaining on his contract. If Southampton were presented with an offer to sell him that would see them recoup a large portion of the £13.5 million they spent on him in 2018, then surely it would have to be taken under serious consideration.

As part of the deal that took Gunn to Stoke last summer, the Championship team can have him on another season-long loan for the 2021-22 campaign. However, Southampton can cancel that clause if a better, permanent, offer comes in or if another side who could help improve his value wants to take him on loan instead.

Hasenhuttl wants a full-back. But the team couldn’t bring a full-back to the transfer window this winter. Do you think we’ll be able to get a full-back in the transfer window next summer? Vitamin B

The winter window proved to be a difficult month for most clubs trying to sign players because other sides were reluctant to let members of their squad leave during such an intense season. But the upcoming transfer window should be a different kettle of fish.

From speaking to several sources about Southampton’s plans for the close season, signing a full-back remains a key priority. And there’s a very good chance they will get this business done.

Ryan Bertrand still hasn’t signed a new contract, Yan Valery and Jake Vokins were sent out on loan and Hasenhuttl won’t want to continue playing Salisu at left-back to cover an injury or suspension. The Austrian can’t go into another season with only Bertrand (if he extends his stay) and Kyle Walker-Peters as his two options.

Manchester United’s Brandon Williams was a player they targeted in January due to his ability to play on either the left or right side of defence, yet the Old Trafford side were reluctant to let him leave at the time. But you’d expect he will be pushing hard for a loan move after going a season without playing regularly. Southampton still admire Williams, but that potential loan deal has already shown that Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s side will need to play ball if it is to go ahead.

Williams aside, the south coast club are also exploring alternative options at the back, and could look to take advantage of a European club struggling for cash to sign a highly-rated prospect. Money will be tight for most clubs this season, especially for those on the continent, so Premier League teams may be presented with opportunities to buy players they wouldn’t normally be able to at a low-cost price.

[JustinSFC]

Dan Sheldon sounds like he doesn't know anymore than anyone else does.

Any mug on here could have guessed pretty much all of that.

[Turkish]

47 minutes ago, JustinSFC said:

Dan Sheldon sounds like he doesn't know anymore than anyone else does.

Any mug on here could have guessed pretty much all of that.

I thought that too. Really wasn’t anything new there, other than him saying how many interested parties there were I guess.

[stevy777_x]

5 minutes ago, Turkish said:

I thought that too. Really wasn’t anything new there, other than him saying how many interested parties there were I guess.

Tbh Sheldon doesn t have any more sources than Blackmore and Blackmore doesn t know fuck all about the takeover.

He said than those who made the most noise were the less serious and that there was basically no truth in it but DaGrosa was serious and paid for an exclusivity period to look at the finances.

Those really in the know are the ones closest to Gao, his lawyers and close family.

[S-Clarke]

I've noticed that with a lot of Sheldon articles, they're a lot of words wrapped up in the illusion that behind-the-scenes stuff is being shared, but in reality he's just fluffing up what is already in the public domain and any of us can find.

Nothing new is ever presented in what he posts. It's either his opinions or fluffed up words that can be found anywhere. I expect more 'in the know' stuff from the Athletic to be honest.