Consortium / Prospective buyer in now!

[Wes Tender]

Why do you keep peddling this total ******, Wes?

 

Just to antagonise you, GM, didn't you realise?

 

By the way, have you therefore taken me off ignore?

[sadoldgit]

They're obviously shrewd businessmen

 

Which is what worries me enormously. Someone comes in when we are going down the toilet. Where were they when we needed help to stay in the Prem? Where were they when we needed to bring in some cash earlier in the year?

 

It will be much harder to bring this club back from the third tier of English football, but they have sat back and waited until that is virtually the case. Thanks guys.

[miserableoldgit]

Which is what worries me enormously. Someone comes in when we are going down the toilet. Where were they when we needed help to stay in the Prem? Where were they when we needed to bring in some cash earlier in the year?

 

It will be much harder to bring this club back from the third tier of English football, but they have sat back and waited until that is virtually the case. Thanks guys.

You may well be right, but it will be interesting to see what sort of model Leicester will be for this.

[OldNick]

Which is what worries me enormously. Someone comes in when we are going down the toilet. Where were they when we needed help to stay in the Prem? Where were they when we needed to bring in some cash earlier in the year?

 

It will be much harder to bring this club back from the third tier of English football, but they have sat back and waited until that is virtually the case. Thanks guys.

That is why I dont wish for any of the people who had been interested in us pre administration.They have sat back and waited for us to basically get relegated before really showing interest.Does it not concern people thay may only be in it for themselves yet again?

As a fan and if I was worht multi millions I odnt know that i oculd have waited until the club had gone omnto life support before acting.That is one thing that i lkie about LC he at least shows a true passion like a normal fan.

[sadoldgit]

Fair points - where I disagree is to the importance/relevence of the 'togetherness' and community spirit. Yup these are important and yes they can be influenced by the board 0- but ....only if we let it. There are many soundbites and cliches banded around in football and too often they are sghouted one minute and ignored the next as its convenient to do so... the best of these here would be how 'fans ARE the club, its life blood, its soul' etc - well if that is true, then the fans should be able to be together and in good spirit irresepective of which clowns are in the board room and what they are up to.... we as fans DO have that abilty to make teh atmosphere if we chose to... its simply too easy to blame someone else for our own frailities and lack of enthusiasm when the going is tough. If sainst fans want to demonstrate how they are so good they can do, irrespective of the chairman.

 

What is so often overplayed (and not without agenda in MHO) is that fans have been 'divided' - bollx. Thats just another cliche tused to either support or undermine the board - the reality has always been that a few of us on here arguing the same old same old has little impact on teh atmosphere at teh club, the protest of a 1000 or so are popular because its a spirit of togtherness for sure, but for the vast majority, its not divisions, its simply different POV which encourages healthy and often entertaining debate over a pint pre and post match - the only reason it gets so 'heated' is because of the interwebnetflameablity and a few stirrers on both sides - the rest of us would be doing this with a smile and pint - and it certainly wont stop uus going and cheeriong and CREATING the right atmosphere when we go to matches. Sure, bad form, bad results cause fan misery, but thats been going on since the first ball was kicked and teh first miserable moraose fans turned up to watch! ;-) its nothing new. Again it becomes even more frustrtaing when you believe something could be done with different controllers in the boardroom, but the reality is the lifeblood of the club should be pumping through the fans whatever division we are in as it did in tey old 3rd division south days as well as the 'glory' of the prem.

 

We the fans cant do anything about who now buys us, we cant suddenly make bad players good, or change poor manger decisions, but we CAN and SHOULD take the responsibilty for the atmosphere we create, for the spirit and sense of community we feel, because thats the one thing THEY CANT TAKE AWAY, because we should be dicttaing it, NOT the board. It belongs to us, and I think too many of those who became bored with the losses, poor entertainment, or genuinely simply could not afford to go as often have had a convenient excuse in Mr Lowe.

 

One thing is for sure. Next seasson, if we still exist, that excuse will be gone

 

Don't worry FC, the Lowe excuse will run for some time yet as it did last time he left. Some people will always need to blame someone or something and Lowe is the perfect fall guy. No matter that Wilde and Crouch made a mess of the finances themselves.

 

The next people to come in will get the same treatment that teh Wilde Bunch did. Because they are not Lowe they will be welcomed as saviours. I just hope the next bunch truly are saviours and not another well meaning bunch without one iota of nous when it comes to running a football club.

[Weston Super Saint]

and what does 19 Canteen do???

 

The only person who would employ him is Rupert. I wonder if Rupert is allowing him a place in the bunker.

 

I think you'll find he is gainfully 'employed' in the House of Lords

[washsaint]

I know of some (fairly) wealthy Saints fans that have been trying to put something together (on and off) for the past year.

 

One of the guys I know personally and he is a great bloke - by all accounts, dealing with the complexity of the share holdings and feuding parties made it just too difficult to try and do any deal.

 

I have no doubt that this guy is busy trying to put something together right now - a genuine nice guy and a massive Saints fan.

[sadoldgit]

You may well be right, but it will be interesting to see what sort of model Leicester will be for this.

 

I don't think people will be unhappy if we do a Leicester. With our luck though we are more likely to do a Leeds!

 

Whatever happens it is likely to be a long way back, with no guarantee that we will ever get "back".

 

It would be great to get a new dawn at SFC but right now this is the lowest point in the the 43 years I have been supporting this club and I am finding it very hard to find anything to be optimistic about.

[ottery st mary]

Which is what worries me enormously. Someone comes in when we are going down the toilet. Where were they when we needed help to stay in the Prem? Where were they when we needed to bring in some cash earlier in the year?

 

It will be much harder to bring this club back from the third tier of English football, but they have sat back and waited until that is virtually the case. Thanks guys.

 

COME ON FOR fluuuck sake...YOU ARE AT IT AGAIN....youand your little gang.

 

you AND NICK AND THE REST OF RUPERTS SUPPORTERS.

 

One day it is...THEY ARE ALL TO BLAME....NOW you are back to Leon and Lawrie etc etc etc.....Calling you names and pulling your leg or you to me like The Chuckle brothers has been fun..But now you and your chorus girls:)

are getting bitter and twisted.....LET US TRY ONCE MORE....ALL TOGETHER AS A GROUP OF FANS.....The past is gone...LOOK FORWARD AND IF NECESSARY ENCOURAGE RUPERT TO HELP THE CAUSE.....NOT CAUSE MORE DIVISION.....Have a word with him....We need to help the club.....Where is he now each day.:mad: YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTERDRUM MAJORETTE.:smt049

[OldNick]

You may well be right, but it will be interesting to see what sort of model Leicester will be for this.

Letys hope we have a new regime who will underwrite us to the tune of 10m like Leicester have been fortunate to have done.

[miserableoldgit]

Letys hope we have a new regime who will underwrite us to the tune of 10m like Leicester have been fortunate to have done.

You never know. There must more than Milan Mandric.

[Wes Tender]

Which is what worries me enormously. Someone comes in when we are going down the toilet. Where were they when we needed help to stay in the Prem? Where were they when we needed to bring in some cash earlier in the year?

 

It will be much harder to bring this club back from the third tier of English football, but they have sat back and waited until that is virtually the case. Thanks guys.

 

Personally I would much prefer the people who were astute enough businessmen to wait until this very situation arose before putting their money into the club, rather than the naive, gullible ones who might have been so short-sighted that they did not realise that they could get the club on the cheap by waiting until this very situation came to pass.

 

I'm sure that they would have hoped that we came to this situation a bit earlier when there was still a better chance of survival in this division, but they obviously reckon that even in the third division we are still a decent prospect. Most of them who are interested could surmise that the mad experiment employed by Lowe this season was bound to end in failure and that the resultant loss of revenue through the turnstiles would bring us to this end. Give me some good reasons why they would have put money into us earlier? These reasons ought to be based on sound business accumen, not on sentiment, mind you.

[Wes Tender]

I know of some (fairly) wealthy Saints fans that have been trying to put something together (on and off) for the past year.

 

One of the guys I know personally and he is a great bloke - by all accounts, dealing with the complexity of the share holdings and feuding parties made it just too difficult to try and do any deal.

 

I have no doubt that this guy is busy trying to put something together right now - a genuine nice guy and a massive Saints fan.

 

Nice to hear that there is actual anecdotal evidence that the situation of complex shareholdings and feuding parties made it too difficult for many interested parties to do any deal with the club. Now that we are not encumbered by these difficulties and are effectively open to all offers without those obstacles, at least that is a benefit.

 

That's also a decent reason why these people did not or could not make a move earlier, isn't it, Bern?

[OldNick]

Personally I would much prefer the people who were astute enough businessmen to wait until this very situation arose before putting their money into the club, rather than the naive, gullible ones who might have been so short-sighted that they did not realise that they could get the club on the cheap by waiting until this very situation came to pass.

 

I'm sure that they would have hoped that we came to this situation a bit earlier when there was still a better chance of survival in this division, but they obviously reckon that even in the third division we are still a decent prospect. Most of them who are interested could surmise that the mad experiment employed by Lowe this season was bound to end in failure and that the resultant loss of revenue through the turnstiles would bring us to this end. Give me some good reasons why they would have put money into us earlier? These reasons ought to be based on sound business accumen, not on sentiment, mind you.

Wes if you are happy to march behind people who waited for us to be in this position then Im worried. RL was a hard nosed businessman who lloked at the balance sheet first. They are basically carper baggers and only want to buy when we are lying in the road waiting for the vultures to pick us to the bone.

Fans seem happy that we have 15+ plus people interested in us, i doubt the will be there next week and then when we have a week or so left and there are only 2 thats when the bowels will start to move, and there are only hours to save us.

[1576]

Wes if you are happy to march behind people who waited for us to be in this position then Im worried. RL was a hard nosed businessman who lloked at the balance sheet first. They are basically carper baggers and only want to buy when we are lying in the road waiting for the vultures to pick us to the bone.

Fans seem happy that we have 15+ plus people interested in us, i doubt the will be there next week and then when we have a week or so left and there are only 2 thats when the bowels will start to move, and there are only hours to save us.

 

Why would someone want to spend the 65p a share that Lowe wanted when the price kept falling?? Maybe they want to use that money for the club instead.

[itchen]

I keep looking on this thread to see if any more rumours have surfaced about a take over and all we get is some crap about which chairman had the best attendance record, over and over again.

 

Me too. But none of our ITKers are actually ITK. Probably even less so in the current circumstances.

[jonah]

I was on the phone laughing with Dave Jones about most of your claims, and refuted them one by one on here.

 

Ugh, I have Um Pahars on ignore so I don't have to waste time going through this tedious stuff time after time, but if he's going to talk nonsense again I suppose I will have to reply in full (and I mean full).

 

As far as the figures go which UP claims to have "laughed about" with David Jones and dismissed "one by one", well I contacted DJ myself at the time and stated that someone had claimed the figures were wrong but that he (in true UP style) seemed unable to explain what was wrong. Here are the details (again):

 

 

Jonah: I stated the Open Offer raised £3.1m cash.

UP: Called it a Rights Issue (a different thing) and that it raised only £3m.

DJ: Confirmed it was an Open Offer, not a Rights Issue, and that it raised £3.1m not £3m.

Conclusion: UP wrong on both fronts.

 

 

Jonah: I stated that Secure brought in £3.5m cash, £2.5 property, £0.5m healthcare business = £6.5m total

UP: £3m cash *only*.

DJ: £3m cash, £1.1m properties, £1.3 fixed assets, £0.8m healthcare business = £6.2m

Conclusion: £6.5m is rather closer to £6.2m than £3m, UP wrong again

 

 

Jonah: We raised £25m (£17m construction loan from MeesPierson; then £12m from Deutsche, £5m from Sovereign, £5m from Barratt, £3.6m from trusts/grants). The £17m DB/Sov part was floating rate but I don't have the rate.

UP: stated "the facts of the loans which [you] have incorrectly stated here" but no corrections or own figures (there's a surprise!)

DJ: "All your numbers are correct"

Conclusion: Jonah 3 - 0 UP

 

 

Jonah: £25m changing from 10-year floating rate to 25-year fixed rate - this freed up £1.4m per annum in terms of our spending power. Andrew Cowen quote: "there will be more repayments but each will be smaller"

UP: "LMFAO(PS that's even before you get into the facts of the loans which have incorrectly stated here again!!!). David Jones particularly liked this one (not)." No alternative figures provided again - spot the common theme here?

DJ: Agreed that it was £25m over 25 years. Agrees the original loan was over 10 years. Can't recall the original loan payment amounts, but believes AC quote is accurate. Stated that only £17m of the original £25m was a loan but otherwise the loan figures were correct.

Conclusion: My net figure relating to savings was obviously wrong as I was basing off £25m not £17m. Otherwise details were all correct. Despite the savings being obvious (our payments reduced by £160k despite converting a further £8m into the loan notes - the debt would have had to be paid somehow!), and despite the other details being correct, I will be extremely generous and concede this one is a draw even though the core point stands that the loan rate was significantly cheaper. Final Score: Jonah 3 - 0 UP.

 

So, what to conclude? Did Um Pahars really talk to DJ at all? It doesn't look like it. If he did talk to him, did he deliberately lie about what he'd been told or did he just not understand? It's hard to explain, especially with someone who so quickly criticises everyone's figures without providing his own.

 

Meanwhile, we can rest safe in the knowledge that even if he's unable to remember figures apparently provided by the Finance Director, we have the same level of astuteness that saw his absolute backing of that honourable financial genius Wilde 3 years ago, and the integrity of lying about share proxies (I think the Trust claimed to have nearly 4% at one point, LOL, that's a legally disclosable interest!). And of course the propagation of allegations of irregularities to help Wilde come to power - "I expect further revelations from him [Thompson] which will make Lowe's position untenable.". He even calculated Lowe's percentage holding incorrectly showing it to be much lower than it was, not really a difficult calculation to make (especially if you can use a calculator). Speaking of which, what were those posts about players being on minimum wage again? And the list of big names he posted who would invest once Wilde came to power. And then there were these 2 classics:

 

"I now understand Lowe agreed to underwrite about £250,000"

"Lowe did not underwrite £250k by himself!!!!!

 

Confusing eh? And you'd wonder how he backed Wilde by (ab)using the Trust when he also said:

 

"Coming and posting snippets on message boards is not the way to conduct business, and it is certainly not the way to acquire the ownership of an entity that is a part of the fabric of this city and something that is dear to the hearts of the many thousands of fans."

 

Completely inconsistent and incoherent.

 

Of course it's not all bad though, a Saints fan is still a Saints fan however much they struggle with certain things, and we had some nice cheap drinks at the student bar before home games for a while - personally I just wouldn't want him heading a fans trust, and the continual chest-beating, nit-picking and use of crayons on here does get tiresome (God bless the ignore button). However I can never thank him enough for the famous quote of "if you cut me I bleed red and white". What a classic! :-)

[Wes Tender]

Wes if you are happy to march behind people who waited for us to be in this position then Im worried. RL was a hard nosed businessman who lloked at the balance sheet first. They are basically carper baggers and only want to buy when we are lying in the road waiting for the vultures to pick us to the bone.

Fans seem happy that we have 15+ plus people interested in us, i doubt the will be there next week and then when we have a week or so left and there are only 2 thats when the bowels will start to move, and there are only hours to save us.

 

You put a different slant on it than I did, Nick, or perhaps I did not express my sentiments well enough. Essentially, the business people who might take us over would be fundamentally wanting if they did not have the basic accumen to realise that it makes far better sense to buy a company out of administration than one struggling to keep its head above water with increasing debts. As Washsaint says and I'm sure he's right, there were also obstacles in the way of people wanting to buy the club before we reached this stage anyway.

 

Pertinent that you consider those queuing up as carpet baggers; that is precisely the analogy that I put on the arrivistes who benefited from the reverse takeover over a decade ago. At least the people chosen by the administrator to take over will probably with luck, have to put some of their own money into the club.

 

Lowe might have been a hard-nosed businessman, but he lacked balance and did not have a decent appreciation for the type of business that we are. If he was really astute, he would have had a better appreciation that quality is more desirable than quantity, that revenue is generated by results on the pitch and that it was probably a good idea to have as a right hand man somebody on the board expert in running a football club, something that he had nil expererience of when he arrived here.

[OldNick]

Why would someone want to spend the 65p a share that Lowe wanted when the price kept falling?? Maybe they want to use that money for the club instead.

He wanted 65p a share when LC had just paid the same elsewhere.

If your neighbour sells their house for 100k would you not want the same for your house?

The price dropped dramatically and so would have the asking price.

I want the best for our club, watching us going into administration or relegation before acting is not my idea of buying us in the best interest.

Had we been bought out only 3-4weks ago the team may have been strengthened enough for us to be clear by now.

[Gordon Mockles]

Wes if you are happy to march behind people who waited for us to be in this position then Im worried. RL was a hard nosed businessman who lloked at the balance sheet first. They are basically carper baggers and only want to buy when we are lying in the road waiting for the vultures to pick us to the bone.

Fans seem happy that we have 15+ plus people interested in us, i doubt the will be there next week and then when we have a week or so left and there are only 2 thats when the bowels will start to move, and there are only hours to save us.

 

Ludicrous viewpoint and smacks of the Lowe cabal all over. Any half sensible businessmen would not touch Lowe with a barge pole, knowing this situation was more than probable, and hold on to his/her money until the time was right - I am hoping, NOW. Why line the pockets of feuding and obstinate businessmen who have personal profit prioritised ahead of any consideration towards the club?! I'm with Wes, I'd have more respect for a businessman who had a wise head on his shoulders and anticipated this opportunity rather than being scornful that some mug didn't plug millions in to support 2 failing businessmen and their nightmare reign of incompetency!!

 

As 1576 so rightly says, maybe the interested parties intend to do something bereft of the past Chairmen/Boards and actually put money into the CLUB, rather than share holder pockets via dividends and such. Maybe, MAYBE they care about the football side of matters and want to see some prosperity return to the South Coast with sensible ideas and wise planning and appointments?!

 

You may feel bitter that the Saints have been led into this situation but that is the situation brought upon us by the p*ss poor management of past Chairman and execs (chiefly down to the recently departed incumbents). If it had been easy for interested parties to deal with the Chairman re: investment/buying the club then maybe the club would have been taken over by now...but it hasn't happened! You don't need to be Miss Marple to figure out why. The main positives that may arise from admin is (FINALLY) the opportunity for Saints to be taken over and attract investment (and the clear benefits of finally being unshackled from Lowe and Wilde who were dragging us further and further down). Sadly, the management has been so poor, down to terrible decisions and egotistical disregard for both fans and infighting board members, we're left teetering at the gates of oblivion and are now totally reliant on finances being plugged into our rapidly sinking club.

 

SOS

[Gordon Mockles]

You put a different slant on it than I did, Nick, or perhaps I did not express my sentiments well enough. Essentially, the business people who might take us over would be fundamentally wanting if they did not have the basic accumen to realise that it makes far better sense to buy a company out of administration than one struggling to keep its head above water with increasing debts. As Washsaint says and I'm sure he's right, there were also obstacles in the way of people wanting to buy the club before we reached this stage anyway.

 

Pertinent that you consider those queuing up as carpet baggers; that is precisely the analogy that I put on the arrivistes who benefited from the reverse takeover over a decade ago. At least the people chosen by the administrator to take over will probably with luck, have to put some of their own money into the club.

 

Lowe might have been a hard-nosed businessman, but he lacked balance and did not have a decent appreciation for the type of business that we are. If he was really astute, he would have had a better appreciation that quality is more desirable than quantity, that revenue is generated by results on the pitch and that it was probably a good idea to have as a right hand man somebody on the board expert in running a football club, something that he had nil expererience of when he arrived here.

 

Great post. Couldn't have worded it better myself. ;o)

[Wes Tender]

Had we been bought out only 3-4weks ago the team may have been strengthened enough for us to be clear by now.

 

Were the board looking to sell us then? That's news to me. What price did they want per share? As far as I am aware, the board were quite happy to soldier on, even if we got relegated and were mightily upset that Barclays had pulled the plug on them.

 

Otherwise, I agree that had Lowe and Wilde actually shown some intention of selling up earlier at a sensible price that reflected our share value, then we might indeed have had more scope to put urgent survival measures in place. Such as sacking both of the Dutch guys and replacing them with somebody who knew what he was doing.

[Gingeletiss]

That is why I dont wish for any of the people who had been interested in us pre administration.They have sat back and waited for us to basically get relegated before really showing interest.Does it not concern people thay may only be in it for themselves yet again?

As a fan and if I was worht multi millions I odnt know that i oculd have waited until the club had gone omnto life support before acting.That is one thing that i lkie about LC he at least shows a true passion like a normal fan.

 

FFS.........as soon as someone posts a negative, you appear, and support it. FWIW, again, there were people interested, but not while Lowe was at the helm. Now how many more times do you need telling this:smt017. As for telling them to F off......sheer madness Nick, especially when said by someone who 'will be a Saints fan until put in the incinerator'....

[jonah]

FWIW, again, there were people interested, but not while Lowe was at the helm.

 

Ah yes, I remember Wilde, Trant and the Saints Trust telling us this 3 years ago. Can you remind me what happened to their investment after Lowe was removed then?

[ottery st mary]

You put a different slant on it than I did, Nick, or perhaps I did not express my sentiments well enough. Essentially, the business people who might take us over would be fundamentally wanting if they did not have the basic accumen to realise that it makes far better sense to buy a company out of administration than one struggling to keep its head above water with increasing debts. As Washsaint says and I'm sure he's right, there were also obstacles in the way of people wanting to buy the club before we reached this stage anyway.

 

Pertinent that you consider those queuing up as carpet baggers; that is precisely the analogy that I put on the arrivistes who benefited from the reverse takeover over a decade ago. At least the people chosen by the administrator to take over will probably with luck, have to put some of their own money into the club.

 

Lowe might have been a hard-nosed businessman, but he lacked balance and did not have a decent appreciation for the type of business that we are. If he was really astute, he would have had a better appreciation that quality is more desirable than quantity, that revenue is generated by results on the pitch and that it was probably a good idea to have as a right hand man somebody on the board expert in running a football club, something that he had nil expererience of when he arrived here.

 

 

Sums it for me.....jonah and nick let us all unite and bring Rupert and your good friend Michael along to.:smt049

[Gingeletiss]

Ah yes, I remember Wilde, Trant and the Saints Trust telling us this 3 years ago. Can you remind me what happened to their investment after Lowe was removed then?

 

Jonah.....we may not agree on much, if anything, but I am willing to concede a point to you, regarding Wilde. Yes, we were carried away on the 'anyone but Lowe', and I would that again 10 times out of 10, because of Lowe.

[Gordon Mockles]

Ah yes, I remember Wilde, Trant and the Saints Trust telling us this 3 years ago. Can you remind me what happened to their investment after Lowe was removed then?

 

FFS, this was a mistake. We now know this but do we need to constantly chase our tails?! Come up with a new argument, PLEASE!

 

No-one knew Wilde was to be such a shallow, hollow man whose words were worth less than Icelandic Bank Balances!

[ItchenRob]

FFS, this was a mistake. We now know this but do we need to constantly chase our tails?! Come up with a new argument, PLEASE!

 

No-one knew Wilde was to be such a shallow, hollow man whose words were worth less than Icelandic Bank Balances!

 

 

He doesn't need me to big him up but GM knew this ! I, along with many others, got carried along on the ABL argument, whch I now feel slightly embarrassed about.

[jonah]

No-one knew Wilde was to be such a shallow, hollow man whose words were worth less than Icelandic Bank Balances!

 

We did, you just had your fingers in your ears going "laa laa laa, can't hear you" because it was Anyone-But-Lowe. This included false claims over Merlion turnover, being unable to raise enough cash to buy out Wiseman and Co (hence he took options), a delayed manifesto full of rhetoric and mis-spelling the name of the club, warnings about him charging Vantis' costs to SFC, details of how he increased Merlion's debt by £2m and paid himself £2m in divvies, details of Dulieu's background, Anderson's background, failure to provide proof of funds to back up investment promises, Trant's lack of investment, being a tax-exile, abusing the Saints Trust's supposed neutrality, missing meetings, the excuses over the 60 day audit, the excuses over the takeover panel, etc etc. And nearly all of that was available before the EGM and certainly before we'd even kicked a ball that season. Still, none so blind as though who can't see.... the problem is when the next lot take charge and the same lack of rigour is applied.

[ottery st mary]

We did, you just had your fingers in your ears going "laa laa laa, can't hear you" because it was Anyone-But-Lowe. This included false claims over Merlion turnover, being unable to raise enough cash to buy out Wiseman and Co (hence he took options), a delayed manifesto full of rhetoric and mis-spelling the name of the club, warnings about him charging Vantis' costs to SFC, details of how he increased Merlion's debt by £2m and paid himself £2m in divvies, details of Dulieu's background, Anderson's background, failure to provide proof of funds to back up investment promises, Trant's lack of investment, being a tax-exile, abusing the Saints Trust's supposed neutrality, missing meetings, the excuses over the 60 day audit, the excuses over the takeover panel, etc etc. And nearly all of that was available before the EGM and certainly before we'd even kicked a ball that season. Still, none so blind as though who can't see.... the problem is when the next lot take charge and the same lack of rigour is applied.

 

AND after all that Rupert joined forces with a similar failed business man as you describe.:smt017 So many financial experts at Saints and on this forum...AND

we are still in the proverbiallll:rolleyes:

[Scummer]

We did, you just had your fingers in your ears going "laa laa laa, can't hear you" because it was Anyone-But-Lowe. This included false claims over Merlion turnover, being unable to raise enough cash to buy out Wiseman and Co (hence he took options), a delayed manifesto full of rhetoric and mis-spelling the name of the club, warnings about him charging Vantis' costs to SFC, details of how he increased Merlion's debt by £2m and paid himself £2m in divvies, details of Dulieu's background, Anderson's background, failure to provide proof of funds to back up investment promises, Trant's lack of investment, being a tax-exile, abusing the Saints Trust's supposed neutrality, missing meetings, the excuses over the 60 day audit, the excuses over the takeover panel, etc etc. And nearly all of that was available before the EGM and certainly before we'd even kicked a ball that season. Still, none so blind as though who can't see.... the problem is when the next lot take charge and the same lack of rigour is applied.

 

Why didn't you block Wilde's takeover then? You could have saved us all the hassle of the last few years.

[OldNick]

FFS.........as soon as someone posts a negative, you appear, and support it. FWIW, again, there were people interested, but not while Lowe was at the helm. Now how many more times do you need telling this:smt017. As for telling them to F off......sheer madness Nick, especially when said by someone who 'will be a Saints fan until put in the incinerator'....

I dont say F off to people who wish to invest as we do not have that luxury.I have stated that RL took interested parties around the club some weeks ago.I know that for certain, wheras you are only going by your bigotted stance.

We have had a lot of window shoppers/tyrekickers under all the regimes, none have come forward with the goods.

If you would only try and be a bit more evenhanded with those bigotted views i wouldnt need to reply would I?

[ottery st mary]

I dont say F off to people who wish to invest as we do not have that luxury.I have stated that RL took interested parties around the club some weeks ago.I know that for certain, wheras you are only going by your bigotted stance.

We have had a lot of window shoppers/tyrekickers under all the regimes, none have come forward with the goods.

If you would only try and be a bit more evenhanded with those bigotted views i wouldnt need to reply would I?

 

My guess Mr Scott ...Also the Hungarian connection who now appear to be joining forces with Celtic......Thanks a lot for Liptak:smt017

 

Mr Scott does NOT give his money away readily...Far too canny....The Hungarians no money to give away;)

[jonah]

Why didn't you block Wilde's takeover then? You could have saved us all the hassle of the last few years.

 

If only it was that simple eh.

[OldNick]

FFS, this was a mistake. We now know this but do we need to constantly chase our tails?! Come up with a new argument, PLEASE!

 

No-one knew Wilde was to be such a shallow, hollow man whose words were worth less than Icelandic Bank Balances!

Well plenty warned on S4E but we were told we knew nothing and were Luvvies, yes that expression has been around a long time.Rather than 'Cautious ready for change' we were slagged off.Nothing new there.Again weeks ago I was again but again told that administration was easy and we'd be taken over without any problem.Well I believe it will be seat of the pants time and yes probably will get taken over but beggars cant be choosers.

It will be galling if we miss out to a proper investor who loses the battle against an asset stripper.The administrator will take the best bid for the creditors and will not worry for our long term future as long as he does it by the book.

[OldNick]

My guess Mr Scott ...Also the Hungarian connection who now appear to be joining forces with Celtic......Thanks a lot for Liptak:smt017

 

Mr Scott does NOT give his money away readily...Far too canny....The Hungarians no money to give away;)

What great strides we have made again then Lol

[Scummer]

If only it was that simple eh.

 

Exactly. There was bugger all any of us could have done about it, so it didn't matter if we were in favour or not.

[corky morris]

I cant prove this in writing, but as i understand it the main obstacle to taking over Saints was having to come up with a premium over the share price to get RL & MW interested.

Why would someone pay £5+m for a business that was clearly going bust?

I was really interested in Jonah's rant at UP about Jones & inaccuracies which completely forgot Ruperts salary in the equation & all those divi's & share buy backs!

Attached is the list

Dividends

 

Sept 2000 - £324,123

 

Sept 2001 - £328,070

 

Sept 2002 - £593,218

 

Sept 2003 - £856,227

 

Sept 2004 - £856,227

 

Sept 2005 - £140,000

 

TOTAL - £3,097,865

 

Share Buybacks

 

May 2002 400,000 @ 35p = £140,000

 

June 2002 2,746,153 @ 30p = £823,845

 

Oct 2002 1,120,000 @24p = £268,800

 

Sept 2004 450,000 @ 44p = £198,000

 

TOTAL - £1,430,645

 

Care to disagree with that Jonah? What a complete & utter waste of football club money!

 

Keeping that money may well have saved us? What is quite interesting is how close the number is to the overdraft we had with Barclays.

[OldNick]

I cant prove this in writing, but as i understand it the main obstacle to taking over Saints was having to come up with a premium over the share price to get RL & MW interested.

Why would someone pay £5+m for a business that was clearly going bust?

I was really interested in Jonah's rant at UP about Jones & inaccuracies which completely forgot Ruperts salary in the equation & all those divi's & share buy backs!

Attached is the list

Dividends

 

Sept 2000 - £324,123

 

Sept 2001 - £328,070

 

Sept 2002 - £593,218

 

Sept 2003 - £856,227

 

Sept 2004 - £856,227

 

Sept 2005 - £140,000

 

TOTAL - £3,097,865

 

Share Buybacks

 

May 2002 400,000 @ 35p = £140,000

 

June 2002 2,746,153 @ 30p = £823,845

 

Oct 2002 1,120,000 @24p = £268,800

 

Sept 2004 450,000 @ 44p = £198,000

 

TOTAL - £1,430,645

 

Care to disagree with that Jonah? What a complete & utter waste of football club money!

 

Keeping that money may well have saved us? What is quite interesting is how close the number is to the overdraft we had with Barclays.

Corky Iam not a shareholder or have any stake in the club other than being a fan. Any shareholder is entitled to a return on their investment and so like any business you have to pay those out.

If we had a 1 owner club would you not expect him to take a dividend in the good years? Not saying im happy but that is business.

[ottery st mary]

What great strides we have made again then Lol

Well at least Rupert showed someone the PICTURE OF THE TRAIN in the boardroom.:cool:

[jonah]

Exactly. There was bugger all any of us could have done about it, so it didn't matter if we were in favour or not.

 

I disagree, the reason Wilde swept to power was firstly as a result of the reception he got when he dipped his toes in the water on S4E; then when these problems were surfacing we had certain people deliberately trying to suppress the dissenting views - eg. Keith; after that you had people desperately pushing their own agendas in order to convince people to support Wilde - eg. the Saints Trust in lying about proxies, well known "figureheads" ranging from Duncan H and Mary C who put their full support behind Wilde without doing any checks into him at all; all these people helped convince the undecided to side with Wilde with complete disregard for the consequences, and most of them were rewarded for their "support", be it trips to Sweden, promising a "fan on the board" or being given Directorships. As it happens, even then it came down to one man to make that decision - Leon Crouch. And he, like the rest, believed a worthless manifesto and hollow promises over doing a simple bit of due dilligence and forcing Wilde to commit the promised funds up front.

 

If fans had been more balanced, more answers would have been demanded from Wilde and it would have been clear (and unacceptable) that he was never going to put a penny into the club, like Crouch and Trant.

[OldNick]

Well at least Rupert showed someone the PICTURE OF THE TRAIN in the boardroom.:cool:

better tahn showing thm a picture of himself or any other man who has used the club for ego or profit.

[corky morris]

Nick,

Not all companies pay dividends, indeed Invesco Perpetual's Andy Crossley who was the largest shareholder at the time ran an accumulation fund & was not interested in dividends - he wanted capital appreciation. Also Rupert & his cronies were the largest shareholders & stood to be the biggest beneficiaries of the divis. Thus rewarding themselves in addition to things like salary, pension, bonus & options.

That does not also account for the share buy back either which the audience at the AGM by way of vote of hands rejected only to be outvoted by proxy.

[OldNick]

I disagree, the reason Wilde swept to power was firstly as a result of the reception he got when he dipped his toes in the water on S4E; then when these problems were surfacing we had certain people deliberately trying to suppress the dissenting views - eg. Keith; after that you had people desperately pushing their own agendas in order to convince people to support Wilde - eg. the Saints Trust in lying about proxies, well known "figureheads" ranging from Duncan H and Mary C who put their full support behind Wilde without doing any checks into him at all; all these people helped convince the undecided to side with Wilde with complete disregard for the consequences, and most of them were rewarded for their "support", be it trips to Sweden, promising a "fan on the board" or being given Directorships. As it happens, even then it came down to one man to make that decision - Leon Crouch. And he, like the rest, believed a worthless manifesto and hollow promises over doing a simple bit of due dilligence and forcing Wilde to commit the promised funds up front.

 

If fans had been more balanced, more answers would have been demanded from Wilde and it would have been clear (and unacceptable) that he was never going to put a penny into the club, like Crouch and Trant.

Without a doubt I questioned my support of RL when Duncan made his powerful post about Lowe. Had the post been put up recently it would not make a difference to me as he has stated his position.That is right and correct he has done so, but it was something that made a lot sit back and review the position at that time. There was a rush of sentiment of support for Wilde bunch and they used that to pressure all the major parties, even LC who was doubtful was swayed.I recall when he put up that he may side with Lowe there was an outcry and that may well have coloured LC decision.

[Torres]

I was on the phone laughing with Dave Jones about most of your claims, and refuted them one by one on here.

 

Maybe we should get Dave to get you to sit down before or after the next home match to set you straight. I'd be more than willing to arrange and help you out. He's a very amenable man (despite being left in the lurch by some shtty bosses over the years) and I'm sure he'd be more than willing to walk you through some of your more outlandish claims.

 

If you want I'll have a word with him as he often walks past my place when he's out for a stroll.

 

lol - it's the reincarnation of Richard Chorley.

[OldNick]

Nick,

Not all companies pay dividends, indeed Invesco Perpetual's Andy Crossley who was the largest shareholder at the time ran an accumulation fund & was not interested in dividends - he wanted capital appreciation. Also Rupert & his cronies were the largest shareholders & stood to be the biggest beneficiaries of the divis. Thus rewarding themselves in addition to things like salary, pension, bonus & options.

That does not also account for the share buy back either which the audience at the AGM by way of vote of hands rejected only to be outvoted by proxy.

Fair point, I do hope the board did not vote in Fred Goodwin type packages before they left.

[OldNick]

If it had been easy for interested parties to deal with the Chairman re: investment/buying the club then maybe the club would have been taken over by now...but it hasn't happened! You don't need to be Miss Marple to figure out why. The main positives that may arise from admin is (FINALLY) the opportunity for Saints to be taken over and attract investment (and the clear benefits of finally being unshackled from Lowe and Wilde who were dragging us further and further down). Sadly, the management has been so poor, down to terrible decisions and egotistical disregard for both fans and infighting board members, we're left teetering at the gates of oblivion and are now totally reliant on finances being plugged into our rapidly sinking club.

 

SOS

And your excuse why it didnt happen under any other tenure? I dont doubt that the Wilde bunch and LC didn't try for investment.I know for a fact RL did, unless he was doing the stadium tours

[Johnny Bognor]

Corky Iam not a shareholder or have any stake in the club other than being a fan. Any shareholder is entitled to a return on their investment and so like any business you have to pay those out.

If we had a 1 owner club would you not expect him to take a dividend in the good years? Not saying im happy but that is business.

 

 

Oracle, one of the worlds largest software companies, has just paid its' first dividend after 23 years of being a listed company. These guys make billions in profits every year and they've not paid out dividends before.

 

http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/news/2238804/oracle-announces-first-dividend

 

Therefore you don't HAVE to pay out dividends if the shareholders chose not to have them. Considering a small number of people owned a large percentage of the shares, they could have easily decided not to pay them.

[OldNick]

Oracle, one of the worlds largest software companies, has just paid its' first dividend after 23 years of being a listed company. These guys make billions in profits every year and they've not paid out dividends before.

 

http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/news/2238804/oracle-announces-first-dividend

 

Therefore you don't HAVE to pay out dividends if the shareholders chose not to have them. Considering a small number of people owned a large percentage of the shares, they could have easily decided not to pay them.

You should go to the stock market and put the idea forward Johnny. I dont know what Oracle's business plan is, do they give a percentage to charity? They must have a particular reason as I dont see why they would have £m's sloshong around doing nothing.

[warsash saint]

What a tedious thread...that's 15 minutes I will never see again