Frank's cousin Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 One thing Frank....didn't Wilde pre his little coup, once say that his 'investors' would only invest when Lowe was gone????? So, regardless of what happened next, that's Wilde and MC who have said it... But cant you see its bullsh!t? think about it - if wilde had those buddies willing to invest, where were they then when Lowe went and where are they now, that he has joined the Lowe camp? This is more to do with 'terms' and 'conditions' - if it even remotely had any legs. I humbly suggest it is once again merely PR spin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Look up 'Bullying' jonah. Too commonly found in the workplace. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying There are courses on the subject http://www.bullying.org/ http://old.gold.ac.uk/tmr/reports/aim2_surrey1.html You can be bullied in the workplace in many ways... I worked for a while with an Assistant Manager in a High Street Bank...lazy b11tch she was...would do everything she could to undermine me, as I was seen as a threat to her little running of the office....took credit for things she hadn't done etc etc. P1ssed her right off when I moved to another office and took most of the business...haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 FFS what are you all getting so uptight about? So Rupert Lowe ****es people off, loses his temper, a female feels intimidated, so what. It happens all the time. The real problem is his sheer, arrogant, know it all incompetence is going to get us relegated and maybe worse, wound up. Agree with your first point, but surely care should still betaken with suuch stuff as its hardly helpful? The second part? Well the fat lady aint singing just yet Derry, maybe has been resting the voice for a crucendo of a performance, but even the warm up for that has not yet really started? lets hope that we can 'cancel' her performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 (edited) Thing is, we only have MCs word that 'investmnet is moving away because of Lowe' - is this not the same as Wilde said? I think investmnet will come our way when we are an attractive proposition for investment irrespective of which characters are at te helm... that i guess is my general drift. Duncan knows alot for sure, but in recent times alot of what he knows has come from one side only, and he would admit to that it mainly being a one sided info exchange - MC and CRouch will also have recognised the potential in having someone of his profile 'spread the word' as well so what is fed will undoudtedly ahve an agenda - to which Duncan also freely admits. BUt I cant say I agree with him - he is no beter placed in understanding how close we are to admin than anyone else, sorry that is simply a misconception. Also, you ahve to admit that the current crisis is a combination of the effects of teh managemnet by Lowe, Wilde and his board, then Crouch and his tenure - all contributing to it. I am not sure why there are those who inist that there are folks waiting the wings to 'bale us out' if Lowe goes. Its fiction. Bailing out suggest gifts or loans - gifts are inconceivable - simply wont happen, and loans are never liely to whilst our position is so precarious - its naive to think this and I do think Duncan is playing the PR game very well for his side of the fence - my only cobncern for him, given that I also have a huge amount of time and respect for him, is that if ever put to the test and MC is found wanting as Wilde was, he will be tarnished with that same permanent mistrust as many now see wilde for his blatent propoganda use.... I think all of those points are a fair warning to Duncan. But, as I say we have more chance of investment and moving in the right direction again once Lowe has been ousted for good. MC and Crouch have one quality over Lowe in this debate (and Lawrie Mac for that matter) they are fans - who DO want the best for the Club before themselves. They are born into and a product of football; Mary inherited it, Crouch is like us a passionate fan and Lawrie's most successful period of his life was due to this Club. Lowe has always taken from it. I can see why Duncan - who's life is Saints - would naturally ally with them. He wants the best and has realised that Lowe does not provide the best solution. So he's frustratedly trying to tell us why. Investment will come if Lowe is successful you are right. But is he going to be? Has he been? Has he not just failed again? Is League 1 not very very close if not certain? And even if we survive - by playing men at last - has Lowe's experiment and leadership not failed again? He is damned if he does and damned if he doesnt. All due to being a failure as chairman. But we can't have someone like Lowe leading a club that needs unity from top to bottom. I'm bored of Lowe leading us down and being patient. On the previous messageboard I argued strongly for Lowe until the end of the first season in the CCC when it became obvious to me that he wasnt just jinxed or unlucky, but genuinely appalling. His outward persona fooled me... I looked again... I realised there was more to him than he allowed people to say about him and it was flawed and full of weakness. No time for him at this Club any longer - every time for someone new. Edited 23 February, 2009 by SaintRobbie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 But cant you see its bullsh!t? think about it - if wilde had those buddies willing to invest, where were they then when Lowe went and where are they now, that he has joined the Lowe camp? This is more to do with 'terms' and 'conditions' - if it even remotely had any legs. I humbly suggest it is once again merely PR spin. But you can't deny though Frank that it was said....play Devil's Advocate for a minute here, why did Lowe never attract any investment himself?? Lowe NEVER challenged this comment from Wilde..why is that then? Perhaps those 'investors' did the due diligence on Wilde that Guided Missile did??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I suspect if these investors were 'true' - and I am speculating here -sorry- any deal may have actually been scuppered by Crouch and MC... why? because I susupect Wildes buddies were looking at Jacksons farm and all that it potentailly entailed? As good a piece of speculation as any really. Lowe never attracting investment himself? - fair point, but since his initial departiure we had two years of lOwe free opportunity and what did we attract? nothing. This is not a slur on any one, but IMHO a simple result of the fact we have never been or were an attrcative investment - when in the Prem, there was no money to be made, as teh costs for a club of our size menat no real profits, and indeed to much danger of not being able to susutain top flight without additional sources of cash, and when relegated to much debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Lowe never attracting investment himself? - fair point, but since his initial departiure we had two years of lOwe free opportunity and what did we attract? nothing. . Not quite FC. We had a takeover deal on the table from SISU. One which now sees Coventry in a position of strength with a strong manager and not ourselves. That was a pretty significant piece of investment that the shareholders ALL refused to accept....madness in retrospect. And as Stevegrant have often said... no one has provided a satisfactory repost as to why it was turned down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Not quite FC. We had a takeover deal on the table from SISU. One which now sees Coventry in a position of strength with a strong manager and not ourselves. That was a pretty significant piece of investment that the shareholders ALL refused to accept....madness in retrospect. And as Stevegrant have often said... no one has provided a satisfactory repost as to why it was turned down. I uspect it was very simple - not meeting the asking price for the shares... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I uspect it was very simple - not meeting the asking price for the shares... Individual interests versus Club interests then FC. I suspect you're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I suspect if these investors were 'true' - and I am speculating here -sorry- any deal may have actually been scuppered by Crouch and MC... why? because I susupect Wildes buddies were looking at Jacksons farm and all that it potentailly entailed? As good a piece of speculation as any really. Lowe never attracting investment himself? - fair point, but since his initial departiure we had two years of lOwe free opportunity and what did we attract? nothing. This is not a slur on any one, but IMHO a simple result of the fact we have never been or were an attrcative investment - when in the Prem, there was no money to be made, as teh costs for a club of our size menat no real profits, and indeed to much danger of not being able to susutain top flight without additional sources of cash, and when relegated to much debt. As there was no money to be made from us in the Prem, how much of that was based on the Lowe-led Stadium Debt...so in fact, his decision making may well have stopped investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxstone Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 If there is one thing you do get with Lowe is that he does what it says on the tin ! The fact the most people won't buy the tin is another matter of course. But the whole lot of them are just as unpalatable as each other in my opinion. Lowe is divisive, Wilde is a fantacist and the worst of the whole lot by some distance in my book, Crouch is an empty word gob-****e and I have not warmed to Mary Corbetts "fan friendly" rhetoric either when she has no other solutions to bring other than swapping yet another deck chair. I live in hope that somebody of substance will ride into SMS and soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Agree with your first point' date=' but surely care should still betaken with suuch stuff as its hardly helpful? The second part? Well the fat lady aint singing just yet Derry, maybe has been resting the voice for a crucendo of a performance, but even the warm up for that has not yet really started? lets hope that we can 'cancel' her performance.[/quote'] Trouble is Frank, it sure doesn't look good from where I'm standing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxstone Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Individual interests versus Club interests then FC. I suspect you're right. Absolutely and that goes for the whole damn lot of them... Crouch, Lowe, Wilde the whole lot !!! Bloody pitiful it is for us long suffering fans to be saddled with this bunch of idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 If there is one thing you do get with Lowe is that he does what it says on the tin ! The fact the most people won't buy the tin is another matter of course. But the whole lot of them are just as unpalatable as each other in my opinion. Lowe is divisive, Wilde is a fantacist and the worst of the whole lot by some distance in my book, Crouch is an empty word gob-****e and I have not warmed to Mary Corbetts "fan friendly" rhetoric either when she has no other solutions to bring other than swapping yet another deck chair. I live in hope that somebody of substance will ride into SMS and soon. Empty Word Gob****e? If he had no intention of putting the £2M into the club, then why would he make it clear in a TV interview (The Championship, Swansea game)? In comparison, Lowe has never delivered on anything that didn't involve borrowing. I think it is unfair to put Crouch top of the hate list...my order would be Wilde, Lowe and Crouch... The most hated prize should be avoided by all of them.... The Oscar for how to screw over the City of Southampton goes to.... Guy Askham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Fair criticism. But where I have always come from is the fact that Lowe creates these sort of knee jerks and problems because he is such a divisive and unpopular figure. The fact that the vast majority do jump on anti-Lowe kneejerks is a lesson in its own right. For me it boils down to confidence in his leadership. I think we share a similar viewpoint. I just feel a little for Duncan. The best posters on this messageboard are the ITKs and they are always ridiculed. We can all make our minds up but regardless of their allegiences without them taking taking risks and providing pieces of the jigsaw puzzle this forum would be pretty toothless. I agree 100% which is why I get my arse in my hand when false claims and hints are jumped on as it does the Anti-Lowe's no favours at all. I think we should all as fans be trying to find a positive outcome which gets rid of Lowe and Co and replaces him perminently with someone who has a plan. Crouch splits the fanbase as much as Lowe and Wilde do so IMO they are not the answer. I like the idea of a CEO in charge with the shareholders taking a back seat but I dont think we can afford one with the right experience in doing this well anywhere else. The only way I think we can effect change for the better would be if we can attract a buyer ourselves. I doubt there are many of us that will have any billionares in our facebook friends lists, at least not any that dont already own a football club but im sure there are things we can do to make us look like a better proposition. The march for example, with enough people behind it speaking a simple message followed by full house support would show perspective buyers that the fan base is big, strong and passionate rather than small, week and not sure what they are protesting about. Im not trying to have a dig at the marchers but the 2 marches have had differing reasons and a small percentage of the fans turn up. A silent march with 1 "For Sale" banner may have attracted a much larger number of fans. Followed by a full house would show any buyers that there is a potential goldmine in SMS. So I agree that the only way this club can move forward will be when we see the back of Lowe. I just dont think there is enough in the alternatives to make that happen and I dont think we are doing enough in the right areas to make better options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 As there was no money to be made from us in the Prem' date=' how much of that was based on the Lowe-led Stadium Debt...so in fact, his decision making may well have stopped investment.[/quote'] NOt strichtly true - when you think about it SMS was a no brainer - even say averaging only £15 a ticket x 15000 extra seats x 19 home games = £4.2 mil versus repayment of £1.8mil per year or so so 3 mil per year just for the move when in the prem, the problem of ciourse was relegation meaning we wer unable to maintaing 28000+ average gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Empty Word Gob****e? If he had no intention of putting the £2M into the club, then why would he make it clear in a TV interview (The Championship, Swansea game)? In comparison, Lowe has never delivered on anything that didn't involve borrowing. I think it is unfair to put Crouch top of the hate list...my order would be Wilde, Lowe and Crouch... The most hated prize should be avoided by all of them.... The Oscar for how to screw over the City of Southampton goes to.... Guy Askham. I dont really want to go over old ground as we had teh crouch and the two mil debate on another thread some time ago... it was not pretty! My point being that is 'possible' CRouch knows LOwe and Wilde dont have a spare 2 mil, so even if its genuine , he is pretty sure he wont have to dig into his pockets as hes not offered it unilaterally... I dont hate any of them, i cant because I dont know them, and I dont believe any of them are BEST for the Club, but one thing turns me offmore than anything its empty promises and fan friendly rhetoric with no substance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I dont really want to go over old ground as we had teh crouch and the two mil debate on another thread some time ago... it was not pretty! My point being that is 'possible' CRouch knows LOwe and Wilde dont have a spare 2 mil, so even if its genuine , he is pretty sure he wont have to dig into his pockets as hes not offered it unilaterally... I dont hate any of them, i cant because I dont know them, and I dont believe any of them are BEST for the Club, but one thing turns me offmore than anything its empty promises and fan friendly rhetoric with no substance... You may well be right Frank, but how out of order would it be if Lowe and Wilde suddenly find money to invest if we hit Admin??? Could well be the type of thing that Crouch could then take the moral ground over...e.g 'You wouldn't invest then but you will now' - perhaps he knows this and that was why he set down the challenge?? Sound business sense on their part...probably. Doesn't make it right though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 You may well be right Frank, but how out of order would it be if Lowe and Wilde suddenly find money to invest if we hit Admin??? Could well be the type of thing that Crouch could then take the moral ground over...e.g 'You wouldn't invest then but you will now' - perhaps he knows this and that was why he set down the challenge?? Sound business sense on their part...probably. Doesn't make it right though. Its a minefield to be honest and to try and second guess whats happening is just impossible. Its also very tricky - on here anyway - to word thoughts in such a way as to dispel any perceived bias or support from an opinion so thats its read in the spirit it was intended... eg when making a criticism of someones strategy or supporting the concept, its just too easy to be labelled as one thing or another - I dopnt mind the labels per sae, but it often means posts are read with prejudice and not taken at face value.... I say all that because, I would suspect that if Lowe and Wilde suddenly had investmnet available AFTER administraion, i to would be very surprised - I eriously cant see this as any sort of strategy that would make sense to Lowe - its too risky in potentially losiong not only his shares, but even if he pulled it off the relegation and loss of whatever good will remains amongst suppliers etc would evapourate. It would be almost impossible for him to thus re build especially given teh animosity from fans. NO I think Lowe's best chance of maintaining his grip adn thus saving his shares is avoiding relegation AND more importantly avoiding administration. So cant see the post admin cash thing happening. As for CRouch, if his two mil was the difference between admin and not, would he put it in unilaterally in the form of a long term loan? I could not bl;ame him if not, but urely the mark of a true fan is we would do anything for the club if it meant keeping it alive, whoever in the hotseat? It would be one hell of a lot to ask, but would finally see him live up to his own self professed billing. Would it be any different if he waited until the administrators were atteh door before making his move? I dont think so, although he would undoubtedly have a greater backing simply because L0we would be gone, yet this would be no different from Lowe doing the same thing really. NOI still believe Lowe will be doing everything possible to avoid teh drop and admin... whether he can or not remains to be seen, but I dont think we will go down without a fight - I hope not anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I think what we need is clarity and transparency. When Lowe returned, although not universally supported, I think a very high majority of supporters were willing to give both him and Wilde a clean slate. Unfortunately I feel that they have already ballsed it up - Lowe has not learned from his mistakes (and I felt this from his Radio Solent interview from November 07 when he ranted relentlessly regarding his achievements and how he never wanted to return). I wish I could find that interview online, have trawled through the BBC Archives, perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place but it seems to have been deleted...anyone help?? Wilde really never should have taken the Chairman role, it is obviously a farce from the beginning. TBF I felt from the beginning that in order for them to succeed they should have appointed a CEO and Chairman independently from themselves....not saying Salz, but I feel that personal egos have yet again been top of the agenda.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I think what we need is clarity and transparency. When Lowe returned, although not universally supported, I think a very high majority of supporters were willing to give both him and Wilde a clean slate. Unfortunately I feel that they have already ballsed it up - Lowe has not learned from his mistakes (and I felt this from his Radio Solent interview from November 07 when he ranted relentlessly regarding his achievements and how he never wanted to return). I wish I could find that interview online, have trawled through the BBC Archives, perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place but it seems to have been deleted...anyone help?? Wilde really never should have taken the Chairman role, it is obviously a farce from the beginning. TBF I felt from the beginning that in order for them to succeed they should have appointed a CEO and Chairman independently from themselves....not saying Salz, but I feel that personal egos have yet again been top of the agenda.... Ironically, I do actually believe Lowe did NOT want to come back - would much rather have seen someone come in and keep his shares high or buy him and his chums out as a reasonable rate - but no takers. I think he then believed rightly or wrongly that keeping Crouch in charge would make matter worse as crouch the fan had very much given the impression he was prepared to rule with his heart not his head - a ore do or die strategy, that was popular with fans, but ran a guantlet re finance - sure its been argued he was not really given a chance, but its why you have to make sure you keep your aliies close and your enermies closer - he must have known the risk in alienating Wilde... his mistake really because it paved the way for Lowe to return or made it necessaary from LOwes perpsective.... (i will avoid blaming crouch for Lowe's return ;-) - not sure anyone could cope with that mindf**k ;-)) I still find it sad that these guys could not work together, the egos too large the bridges burned, because it would have provided a unity that nothing else could have brought right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 If Lowe is as Litigious as some have suggested - Why did he never sue South Today for the programme that suggested his acquisition of shares when Secure Retirement took over SFC was at the very best immoral & potentially illegal. NickH posted the following on another thread: Originally Posted by nickh As I have alluded to during the week Wotte was not as involved in the team as some would wish to think. I had relayed that the team were together and determined.Thankfully it has transmitted onto the pitch.Now they must carry it on What did Wotte do all week then Nick? I asked Nick a question which he did not answer on the thread - Maybe he would like to expand on his comments? Admittedly the seriousness of what FF has suggested is very different, but Nick has suggested he is 'in the know' when it comes to Wotte's involvement & has yet (unless he wishes to correct me as i dont read every single posting on every single thread) not answered the question I asked OR told us exactly where he got his info from.What thread did you ask me that! I didnt seei t and will answer best i can. You may question me all you wish and of course I will not reveal any of the sources I have. If you can't live with that put me on ignore Im sure many have. I only get snippets and can confirm the above to the best of my knowledge.Wotte took a back seat when Jan was in charge and rightly Jan was left to be his own man. It has been stated by others they had never worked together before and allegedly didnt get on that well. what he did all week (Ihavent asked that question) i assume is to work with the reserves and youth.I really dont know.You have to understand that I just dont call people up to ask questions to put up on here!!! I have a life and so do my firends.Also they have to be guarded what they say as the last thing they need is to be pulled over the coals due to geeks like us on the internet. I also heard from another trusted friend that RL has a 3 year plan.the first is to stabilise the club, the 2nd year to consolidate and the third year is to push on and go for promotion. That means he is expecting to stay, administration may be avoided and the push for promotion should be for the PL not to get out of L1!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 What thread did you ask me that! I didnt seei t and will answer best i can. You may question me all you wish and of course I will not reveal any of the sources I have. If you can't live with that put me on ignore Im sure many have. I only get snippets and can confirm the above to the best of my knowledge.Wotte took a back seat when Jan was in charge and rightly Jan was left to be his own man. It has been stated by others they had never worked together before and allegedly didnt get on that well. what he did all week (Ihavent asked that question) i assume is to work with the reserves and youth.I really dont know.You have to understand that I just dont call people up to ask questions to put up on here!!! I have a life and so do my firends.Also they have to be guarded what they say as the last thing they need is to be pulled over the coals due to geeks like us on the internet. I also heard from another trusted friend that RL has a 3 year plan.the first is to stabilise the club, the 2nd year to consolidate and the third year is to push on and go for promotion. That means he is expecting to stay, administration may be avoided and the push for promotion should be for the PL not to get out of L1!!!! I know they were brought in together but I got the impression they were a team to change the direction of the whole club and not just the 1st team. I think some of the language used made everyone think the bond was going to be closer between them and I think Wottes choice of words is what continues to get him into trouble. Doesnt excuse anyone but it kind of makes a little sence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1965onwards Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Anyone who believes that Lowe doesn't wish to appear threatening and intimidating when it suits is living in cloud cuckoo land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micky Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 If there is one thing you do get with Lowe is that he does what it says on the tin ! The fact the most people won't buy the tin is another matter of course. But the whole lot of them are just as unpalatable as each other in my opinion. Lowe is divisive, Wilde is a fantacist and the worst of the whole lot by some distance in my book, Crouch is an empty word gob-****e and I have not warmed to Mary Corbetts "fan friendly" rhetoric either when she has no other solutions to bring other than swapping yet another deck chair. I live in hope that somebody of substance will ride into SMS and soon. Good to see that somebody is switched to 'panaramic view' when all else appear to be using the 'blinkered' switch.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxstone Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I think what we need is clarity and transparency. When Lowe returned, although not universally supported, I think a very high majority of supporters were willing to give both him and Wilde a clean slate. Unfortunately I feel that they have already ballsed it up - Lowe has not learned from his mistakes (and I felt this from his Radio Solent interview from November 07 when he ranted relentlessly regarding his achievements and how he never wanted to return). I wish I could find that interview online, have trawled through the BBC Archives, perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place but it seems to have been deleted...anyone help?? Wilde really never should have taken the Chairman role, it is obviously a farce from the beginning. TBF I felt from the beginning that in order for them to succeed they should have appointed a CEO and Chairman independently from themselves....not saying Salz, but I feel that personal egos have yet again been top of the agenda.... I could not agree more with your first line, but sadly as you go on to say it seems that ALL of the amigos are so wrapped up jockeying for their own positions of power that the greater good of the club is not being considered here. I was one of the people who rather naively hung on to Salz ( being the man of considerable standing he undoubtedly is), to come up with the solution but he was unable to do so on this occasion. The problem we have is that we have 2 very, very stubborn men in Lowe and Crouch who do not seem to be able to publically give one perceived centimetre towards each other and consequently the club remains in turmoil. Now surely we have enough influential supporters who might be inclined to see they can make a positive difference and try to work a way through the impasse to the benefit of the club? I am looking at people like Salz again, or even Davies here ! What disturbs me is that despite some previous posts ( and I cannot recall who from) indicating that "Gavyn would not let the club die" as an example - Nobody seems to care that much other than us ordinary fans ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Anyone who believes that Lowe doesn't wish to appear threatening and intimidating when it suits is living in cloud cuckoo land. Same could be said for any businessman.... if being honest, dont we all modify our behaviour to suit teh circumstances? Look at the cyber bullying on here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Anyone who believes that Lowe doesn't wish to appear threatening and intimidating when it suits is living in cloud cuckoo land. Im sure he can, it is the 'physically intimidating'that I was alarmed at especially to a woman.Many said that MC should be chairman ,well that would be a misjudgement as LM and LC are very intimidating characters as well, and if she can't handle RL then Im sure those 2 would be harder to. Mc has the club interests at heart as she she sees it, sitting in roads and stopping people going about their business is not the best thought out plan of attack and os perhaps her judgement is not right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1965onwards Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 The difference with Lowe is that we know he uses the legal weapon as a tool of intimidation and for silencing dissent,does not appear to be any incidents coming to light in the same vein for any others. This would suggest that Lowe has a propensity for intimidation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micky Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Anyone who believes that Lowe doesn't wish to appear threatening and intimidating when it suits is living in cloud cuckoo land. Nothing more than the harsh reality of life. Although it will probably not suite most of the agendas here - I would actually prefer that Lowe adopts this demenour when it is appropriate. Most successful business people probably have that mean streak in them - used properly, I believe it to be more than acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 The difference with Lowe is that we know he uses the legal weapon as a tool of intimidation and for silencing dissent,does not appear to be any incidents coming to light in the same vein for any others. This would suggest that Lowe has a propensity for intimidation.1965 i know ou have major issues with Lowe but I doubt if any other player had intimidated MC I doubt it would have been put up on here.Do not tell me that LM is any way any less intimidatingand perhaps MC would not risk upsetting him either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 The phrase used was "physically intimidated" - I'm not sure you can have non-physical physical intimidation can you? ;-) What like - I'm going to kill you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I really think that Duncan just worded it slightly wrong and i do understand why he doesnt wish to name places.Although we do know it came from MC herself, perhaps in hios enthusiasm to get across his point he may have made a mistake citing MC, and so perhaps she may not wish for this to be mentioned as it might make her look weak, although I somehow doubt she is in any way, just well meaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1965onwards Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Would be surprise if anybody outside of players ever considered LM intimidating,as he is a consumate salesman,capable of silver-tounging his way to what he wants. He is also very much a gentleman in the company of women,and is acutely aware that his size alone can be intimidating to anyone,and he therefore over-compensates. I have no doubt that Crouch could be intimidating,but there have been no stories surfacing over the last 3 years from those who know him,as employess or otherwise.I find this surprising,if he was the kind of man who regularly intimidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St_Tel49 Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Not quite FC. We had a takeover deal on the table from SISU. One which now sees Coventry in a position of strength with a strong manager and not ourselves. That was a pretty significant piece of investment that the shareholders ALL refused to accept....madness in retrospect. And as Stevegrant have often said... no one has provided a satisfactory repost as to why it was turned down. I seem to recollect that most posters on here were not mad on the deal either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micky Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I seem to recollect that most posters on here were not mad on the deal either Exactly - my recollection of events as well. And to be fair since the Coventry takeover they have faired little better than ourselves - let alone set the world on fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Doubtless Up Pahars will be playing some records backwards somewhere on this board and telling us that it means Lowe is the devil incarnate. I played a record backwards yesterday and here's what I posted last night after doing so: I would argue that the vast majority of sensible supporters are fairly rational in their appraisal of Lowe, and in particular his performance as CEO/Chairman. When things were going well Lowe received the plaudits and he received some very good wonga. Fair play to him and I don't think anyone has a problem for people being rewarded for doing a good job. That's somewhat revolutionary and blinkered isn't it? Fck me, who would have thought a mentalist like me would be able to praise Lowe for the good work he has achieved during his tenure???? You're just an old woman trotting out the same ill informed and blinkered rubbish with every dull visit. And you have the gall to say others post old tosh in here. Well Mr Pot, methinks you need to get back on the hob;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Fan CaM Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 For what its worth my position remains: Lowe and all associates out for good. If necessary MC/Crouch in as a temporary solution with a CEO to run the club on a day to day basis until the plc is delisted forever, so club can be sold to a new owner. Chicken & egg alert... fixed it for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 (edited) Ironically' date=' I do actually believe Lowe did NOT want to come back I dunno about that FC, I think the fact that he admitted he ignored his wife's advice to stay away is evidence enough of the fact he DID want to come back. There were many ITK-types predicting he was positioning to comeback 6-8 months before he did. I remember the cold shudder going down my spine at the thought of it. Edited 23 February, 2009 by SaintRobbie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Chicken & egg alert... fixed it for you. Ah but I was refering to the fact that Crouch would be running the plc briefly (well a CEO would be) before finding a buyer and then delisting. If that makes sense! Either way I'd be ecstatic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I seem to recollect that most posters on here were not mad on the deal either Correct. Including me. The reason was that it was believed to be one of many deals on the table and the prospect of a hedge fund made people shudder. But, the boardmembers knew exactly how many offers were on the table - ONE. We didnt at that time. If we'd have known the choice was Lowe/Dutch/Kids versus SISU I think the vast majority would have taken the SISU option and Chris Coleman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Last week Duncan posted the following comments about Mary Corbett: I really feel this needs some clarification - "threatened" is a strong word to use in itself, but even more so when talking about being "physically intimidated". Since Duncan leaves it hanging by saying he doesn't have Mary's permission to expand upon it I wanted to know whether he had her permission to make that public in the first place or whether he chose to make it public without her knowledge? I really don't see how anybody can make such a claim like this in public without backing it up. I can sense that you haven't been able to sleep ever since Duncan made that post. Your work is probably suffering too and your wife is wondering why you are acting so strangely. I urge Duncan to keep quiet about the matter and maybe even do something similar again on another subject entirely, as Jonah's reaction is providing me with some light comic entertainment. It intrigues me to know that Jonah's life is so devoid of further diversion that he has to pursue something as trivial as this and to what end? What makes him tick is a bit of a fascinating enigma to me. Is he a closet journalist, sensing some Watergate type scandal, or perhaps he always fantasised that he would one day be an emminent Barrister; or is it done purely to stroke his own ego? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 There were many ITK-types predicting he was positioning to comeback 6-8 months before he did. I remember the cold shudder going down my spine at the thought of it.They were not in the know then. I know Lowe had no intention coming back at that time. In fact in January of last year he was trying to sell his shares but could not find a buyer without Wilde and Crouch agreeing to sell as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1965onwards Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Perhaps Jonah should satisfy his journalistic zeal by finding out the definitive answers to exactly what everyone did at the time leading up to the reverse takeover. Or perhaps his masters would not like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I can sense that you haven't been able to sleep ever since Duncan made that post. Your work is probably suffering too and your wife is wondering why you are acting so strangely. I urge Duncan to keep quiet about the matter and maybe even do something similar again on another subject entirely, as Jonah's reaction is providing me with some light comic entertainment. It intrigues me to know that Jonah's life is so devoid of further diversion that he has to pursue something as trivial as this and to what end? What makes him tick is a bit of a fascinating enigma to me. Is he a closet journalist, sensing some Watergate type scandal, or perhaps he always fantasised that he would one day be an emminent Barrister; or is it done purely to stroke his own ego? I dunno Wes - I think it is important that such statements are debated. It highlights Lowe's personality and therefore where weaknesses may or may not be, and makes the point that (although we know the boardroom is split) it is split for reasons that may help us to understand why it may never be able to operate together. Regardless, it shows us we need the whole lot of them out and a new owner. I am all for transitioning though to it with a temporary appointment of MC/Crouch it means we immediately remove Lowe though, from acorns and all that. Lose Lowe and we never have to read this sort of thread again! THAT in itself has merit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 They were not in the know then. I know Lowe had no intention coming back at that time. In fact in January of last year he was trying to sell his shares but could not find a buyer without Wilde and Crouch agreeing to sell as well. January 2008???? If so, then I think those sniffing around at that time were the bllshtters being led around by Mark Jackson, so I'm not sure how much I would believe about the stories doing the rounds at that time. The Runnymede minutes in late 2007 showed that Lowe would be willing to serve on the board again (they even had him down as Director Of Football!!!!). I reckon he initially would have walked away had someone bought all his cabal's shares, but once no one came forward, then I always had an inkling he would want to come back as he thought there was some unfinished business and that he was shabbily treated (in his own opinion of course). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 They were not in the know then. I know Lowe had no intention coming back at that time. In fact in January of last year he was trying to sell his shares but could not find a buyer without Wilde and Crouch agreeing to sell as well. Sounds like ANOTHER takeover opportunity lost - do elaborate Weston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 January 2008???? If so, then I think those sniffing around at that time were the bllshtters being led around by Mark Jackson, so I'm not sure how much I would believe about the stories doing the rounds at that time. The Runnymede minutes in late 2007 showed that Lowe would be willing to serve on the board again (they even had him down as Director Of Football!!!!). I reckon he initially would have walked away had someone bought all his cabal's shares, but once no one came forward, then I always had an inkling he would want to come back as he thought there was some unfinished business and that he was shabbily treated (in his own opinion of course).Those minutes were produced by the same bllshtter you have named on this post. Actually it was someone else who showed me telephone texts and I would appreciate you not speculating on the name Steve. That said it was McLoughlin who was linked with Lowe and when Lowe could not get the others to agree to sell McLoughlin tried the direct approach with Crouch and Wilde although Wilde saw through it pretty quick. It all got quite messy and nasty after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Any chance someone could post these infamous Runnymede minutes on here? I am, afterall, the only person in the known Universe who hasn't seen them. Thanks awfully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Those minutes were produced by the same bllshtter you have named on this post. He had one redeeming feature, i.e. his ability to be indiscrete and let almost anyone get their hands on some juicy details. That said it was McLoughlin who was linked with Lowe and when Lowe could not get the others to agree to sell McLoughlin tried the direct approach with Crouch and Wilde although Wilde saw through it pretty quick. It all got quite messy and nasty after that. And everything I have ever heard about that bloke makes me think we were very wise to give him a wide berth. But I still maintain that at the time of the Runnymede minutes in Autumn 2007, Lowe was angling for a return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now