Frank's cousin Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 admin and the removal of Lowe could leave us as the next Leeds Utd who crashed spectacularly and have never recovered... Or should that be, a club currently making a healthy profit and with every chance of swapping divisions with us quite soon. Fair enough...but with Ken Bate's injecting funds...where is our ken bates....??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 That was such a good point, Franks Cousin felt he had to make it twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alanh Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 I don't believe all this end of club malarky, tons of clubs have gone into admin without folding. SMS has only one use, it will never be financially viable to bulldoze it for housing as long as there are 15,000+ people wanting to pay to watch football there every other week, and no Southampton Council would give planning permission for that anyway. Pompey went into admin and a few years later won the FA Cup - sure, they got lucky but so could we. Sure admin is not good and very risky, but I think the risks are just as great if Lowe is left to carry out more of his experiments. This current setup would go through League 1 like a vindaloo IMO. There isn't a single club from the CCC that has gone into administration since the FA's rules regarding points deductions came into force and have subsequently improved their position. I select CCC to give a comparison to us rather than using comparisions from much lower down the leagues. There is a chance that Leeds might be the first to do so if they win promotion this season but all the rest are suffering more after admin than before. Rotherham and Luton have been in admin three times each and have fallen further each time. Is there a reason why Saints would automatically bounce back stronger post admin? Haven't we learnt from what happened last time an 'anyone but Lowe' strategy was followed? From what I can see the primary goal of those advocating admin is as a mechanism to remove Lowe. If that is your aim use an alternative strategy - lobby shareholders with a rationale why he is not the best person to run the club, buy shares so that you have a voice at shareholder meetings, write to the papers, protest outside the ground day and night, find an alternative CEO. IMO admin carries far more potential long term risks than short term benefits. For those saying that admin is inevitable if we are relegated just think about our cost structure. The wage bill takes up the biggest chuck of our costs and with many players contracts expiring in the summer, including the big ones of Davis, BWP, John and Euell we have an automatic reduction in that big cost regardless of which division we are in. Couple that with revenue from selling the main playing assets - Surman, Saga, Lallana - and I believe that there is every chance that the cost structure of the club could be managed to accomodate L1 revenues. Whether we could be competitive in L1 is entirely another matter, but I don't believe that admin is inevitable at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint lard Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 (edited) Move on,nothing to see here. Edited 26 March, 2009 by saint lard the boss was looking over my shoulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 Move on,nothing to see hear. ....Smell or taste? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 There isn't a single club from the CCC that has gone into administration since the FA's rules regarding points deductions came into force and have subsequently improved their position. I select CCC to give a comparison to us rather than using comparisions from much lower down the leagues. There is a chance that Leeds might be the first to do so if they win promotion this season but all the rest are suffering more after admin than before. Rotherham and Luton have been in admin three times each and have fallen further each time. Is there a reason why Saints would automatically bounce back stronger post admin? Haven't we learnt from what happened last time an 'anyone but Lowe' strategy was followed? From what I can see the primary goal of those advocating admin is as a mechanism to remove Lowe. If that is your aim use an alternative strategy - lobby shareholders with a rationale why he is not the best person to run the club, buy shares so that you have a voice at shareholder meetings, write to the papers, protest outside the ground day and night, find an alternative CEO. IMO admin carries far more potential long term risks than short term benefits. For those saying that admin is inevitable if we are relegated just think about our cost structure. The wage bill takes up the biggest chuck of our costs and with many players contracts expiring in the summer, including the big ones of Davis, BWP, John and Euell we have an automatic reduction in that big cost regardless of which division we are in. Couple that with revenue from selling the main playing assets - Surman, Saga, Lallana - and I believe that there is every chance that the cost structure of the club could be managed to accomodate L1 revenues. Whether we could be competitive in L1 is entirely another matter, but I don't believe that admin is inevitable at all. Hooray. Someone with a brain. Most people advocating administration have no clue about what to do next, alternative personnel, or what it would mean for the club, just that it might mean the end to boo hoo pantomime nasty man Rupert - 'behind you!'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 That was such a good point, Franks Cousin felt he had to make it twice. LOL - not sure what happened there, i though teh opriginal went missing in CYber space only to return and double up... ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 There isn't a single club from the CCC that has gone into administration since the FA's rules regarding points deductions came into force and have subsequently improved their position. I select CCC to give a comparison to us rather than using comparisions from much lower down the leagues. There is a chance that Leeds might be the first to do so if they win promotion this season but all the rest are suffering more after admin than before. Rotherham and Luton have been in admin three times each and have fallen further each time. Is there a reason why Saints would automatically bounce back stronger post admin? Haven't we learnt from what happened last time an 'anyone but Lowe' strategy was followed? From what I can see the primary goal of those advocating admin is as a mechanism to remove Lowe. If that is your aim use an alternative strategy - lobby shareholders with a rationale why he is not the best person to run the club, buy shares so that you have a voice at shareholder meetings, write to the papers, protest outside the ground day and night, find an alternative CEO. IMO admin carries far more potential long term risks than short term benefits. For those saying that admin is inevitable if we are relegated just think about our cost structure. The wage bill takes up the biggest chuck of our costs and with many players contracts expiring in the summer, including the big ones of Davis, BWP, John and Euell we have an automatic reduction in that big cost regardless of which division we are in. Couple that with revenue from selling the main playing assets - Surman, Saga, Lallana - and I believe that there is every chance that the cost structure of the club could be managed to accomodate L1 revenues. Whether we could be competitive in L1 is entirely another matter, but I don't believe that admin is inevitable at all. Excellent post, but I think it will fall on the deaf ears of those who believe any mechanism, that keeps Lowe at the helm, even as a by product, unintentionally, that you advocate means you must be a Lowe luvvie and need to have your genitals placed in front of the ball on the penalty spot whilst awaiting the kick from someone with a Lorimeresque reputation ....;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 There isn't a single club from the CCC that has gone into administration since the FA's rules regarding points deductions came into force and have subsequently improved their position. I select CCC to give a comparison to us rather than using comparisions from much lower down the leagues. There is a chance that Leeds might be the first to do so if they win promotion this season but all the rest are suffering more after admin than before. Rotherham and Luton have been in admin three times each and have fallen further each time. Is there a reason why Saints would automatically bounce back stronger post admin? Haven't we learnt from what happened last time an 'anyone but Lowe' strategy was followed? From what I can see the primary goal of those advocating admin is as a mechanism to remove Lowe. If that is your aim use an alternative strategy - lobby shareholders with a rationale why he is not the best person to run the club, buy shares so that you have a voice at shareholder meetings, write to the papers, protest outside the ground day and night, find an alternative CEO. IMO admin carries far more potential long term risks than short term benefits. For those saying that admin is inevitable if we are relegated just think about our cost structure. The wage bill takes up the biggest chuck of our costs and with many players contracts expiring in the summer, including the big ones of Davis, BWP, John and Euell we have an automatic reduction in that big cost regardless of which division we are in. Couple that with revenue from selling the main playing assets - Surman, Saga, Lallana - and I believe that there is every chance that the cost structure of the club could be managed to accomodate L1 revenues. Whether we could be competitive in L1 is entirely another matter, but I don't believe that admin is inevitable at all. The thought of hanging around the lower reaches of League 1/2 for the next 15 years while Lowe attempts to pay off our debts is way more depressing than possibly being worse off after admin. We will never be in a position to move forward while the club is a PLC and it's shares are held by a bunch of paupers who hate each others guts - there will just NEVER be any investment. The Chairman/Cheif Exec are clueless, the debts are crippling and the set up makes change impossible. Admin could be a bitter pill worth taking, short of a Billionare sugar daddy show me another way out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 We will never be in a position to move forward while the club is a PLC and it's shares are held by a bunch of paupers who hate each others guts Thats a very astute comment - the infighting is the biggest problem thats been generated by teh share fragmentation - it inevitably seems to lead to ****ing contests and ego bashing. That does not mean we cant reamin a PLC with a different share make up - the advantage of being a PLC is that the financial controls are stricter and we can have someone skimming off the top...despite some of teh 'lowe's pockets' comments ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 The thought of hanging around the lower reaches of League 1/2 for the next 15 years while Lowe attempts to pay off our debts is way more depressing than possibly being worse off after admin. We will never be in a position to move forward while the club is a PLC and it's shares are held by a bunch of paupers who hate each others guts - there will just NEVER be any investment. The Chairman/Cheif Exec are clueless, the debts are crippling and the set up makes change impossible. Admin could be a bitter pill worth taking, short of a Billionare sugar daddy show me another way out? The only way Administration would work is if we are picked up by a sugar daddy. I personally don't think there are to many of those out there intrested in Saints, although i would add, anybody interested at the moment would almost certainly wait and see if admin does happen before making a move. But putting that to one side, (And i'm not sniping here) but what do you think would happen if we went into admin....as in the end results, the final outcome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 Excellent post' date=' but [b']I think it will fall on the deaf ears of those who believe any mechanism, that keeps Lowe at the helm, even as a by product, unintentionally, that you advocate means you must be a Lowe luvvie[/b] and need to have your genitals placed in front of the ball on the penalty spot whilst awaiting the kick from someone with a Lorimeresque reputation ....;-) I think your wrong Frank (But this comes from someone who was just about to google "lorimeresque", until i realised what you meant ) I want lowe gone, as i have completely lost faith in his ability to do a half decent job and run the club consistent with it's best interests. But that desire to see him gone, does not mean i would like to see the club go into admin to make it happen and i'm sure many fans would feel the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 The only way Administration would work is if we are picked up by a sugar daddy. I personally don't think there are to many of those out there intrested in Saints, although i would add, anybody interested at the moment would almost certainly wait and see if admin does happen before making a move. But putting that to one side, (And i'm not sniping here) but what do you think would happen if we went into admin....as in the end results, the final outcome I would expect someone would pick us up on the cheap, I wouldn't be surprised if Crouch sorted something out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 I would expect someone would pick us up on the cheap, I wouldn't be surprised if Crouch sorted something out. Personally I think Rupert came back to stop this happeneing, or a least make it harder for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 Thanks Gemmel, I'd forgotten about the CVA without which we wouldn't get the Football League's Golden Share and therefore wouldn't be able to compete. That's right, isn't it? I was looking at it more from the point of view of assets being sold on to a 'new' company, thus ensuring that the 'new' company got its mitts on Jacksons Farm etc. etc.Part of the rules, as far as I am aware, is that a CVA and paying off football debts is necessary to get back the Football League share and allow us to continue to compete in the football league. If a CVA is not agreed then that is a breach. This will allow the authortities to suspend or more likely issue a further points deduction/demotion into a lower league. So for Saints, assuming today passes without event and they go into Admin before or at the end of the season, 10 points deduction will apply at the end of the season unless we are in the bottom 3 when it will apply next season. Then comes the possibility of another heafty deduction next season. The going rate is 17 points but it could be demotion to the next lower league. Anyone want to shoot me down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 I agree with you Weston. The point I was trying to make was that perhaps a 'new' company that bought some of the assets in a pre-pack - wouldn't give a jot about getting the Golden share. - wouldn't give a flying **** about whether the football club survived. - would only care about getting their hands on realisable assets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 I agree with you Weston. The point I was trying to make was that perhaps a 'new' company that bought some of the assets in a pre-pack - wouldn't give a jot about getting the Golden share. - wouldn't give a flying **** about whether the football club survived. - would only care about getting their hands on realisable assets.I think you will find that would be challenged at law. As I understand it the idea of a pre pack is to secure the main business and it's employees. That means the football. They would not be able to asset strip. But I am not qualified in this field at all. I am applying common sense. Any qualified practioners want to comment further? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 I would expect someone would pick us up on the cheap, I wouldn't be surprised if Crouch sorted something out. Never in a million years, at least not without backers. If some magician managed to persuade Barclays and Aviva to accept 33p in the pound, then it would still cost over 9 million to buy Aviva out and Barclays, 2.3 million (Ultimately Barclays might not get a choice, but Aviva do, administration or not) but lets say they went for, then throw in the administrators fees, the other creditors and Inland revenue and as orginal shareholders will get feck all, include the money he has already laid out and youre looking at over 13 million to buy a football club that is losing money and wwill stand a real chance of getting relegated again due to the points penalty. Leon is a successful business man and is net worth is estimated at under 10 million pounds. Why would a man at his time in life risk his entire fortune on one of the riskiest, cash hungary businesses known to man. Of course he could just opt to take the debt on, but again, why would he commit himself to that burden in such an uncertain business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 Anyone want to shoot me down? Nope that's my understanding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 With Ken bates injecting cash... fair enough' date=' but where is our Ken Bates??????[/quote'] We have Master Bates? Or does he not post anymore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGF Posted 26 March, 2009 Share Posted 26 March, 2009 Interesting piece. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/samgreen/blog/2009/03/26/southampton_dodge_administration_for_now_but_dark_clouds_hover_over_football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 27 March, 2009 Share Posted 27 March, 2009 Interesting piece. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/samgreen/blog/2009/03/26/southampton_dodge_administration_for_now_but_dark_clouds_hover_over_football Worth a thread on its own IMO. One sec.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paris Posted 27 March, 2009 Share Posted 27 March, 2009 Sigh of relief..>I'm glad that we haven't gone into administration. 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