Are you watching Rupes??

[TNT]

I do not know why people give this nineteen canteen the time of day.

[Gingeletiss]

I found it...

 

And you thought there was no such place, huh????

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I bet he even owns this place!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SaintRichmond]

Thanks Rupes..this is what YOU have done to our club. 3-0 down to wolves after 15mins..hope you're really proud of your efforts. Or is it everyone else fault bar yours???

 

:mad:

 

Of course it is everybody's fault bar his .......

 

..... but, as per his TV "Political Broadcast", it is comforting to know that even now, he is prepared to come back and helpout if needed .......

 

..... " What greater love can a man show etc etc ........ "

[SaintRichmond]

shock in 2nd to bottom of the league losing to top of the league 3-0. Why does everyone need someone to blame? How about the fact that Wolves are simply better than us and the league proves this?

 

 

Yes, lets have a sense of reality ...... it took Saints 15 minutes to realise that Wolves had started the mATCH ............. but after that we fought out a 0 - 0 draw

[John B]

Thanks Rupes..this is what YOU have done to our club. 3-0 down to wolves after 15mins..hope you're really proud of your efforts. Or is it everyone else fault bar yours???

 

:mad:

 

Ridiculous Post

 

Of course it is not his fault entirely

 

I dont think he was playing yesterday

[Amesbury Saint]

Ridiculous Post

 

Of course it is not his fault entirely

 

I dont think he was playing yesterday

 

his legacy was

[Weston Super Saint]

Or a victim of circumstance? Its unlikely we would be relegated this year if the fans stood by the club instead of pointless protests and boycotts and petulance over the lack of playing standards that was placed upon us by Wilde and his cohort Crouch by p1ssing away the family silver under failed promises of investment. The management set up and playing staff was changed under Lowe this season because we effectively had very little choice in the matter. Pity you seem unable to grasp the reality but at least you can lace up those boots big boy they'll come in useful when you fail to win these arguments.

 

So Lowe is an innocent victim eh

[um pahars]

Daren for the record I only ever respond in kind to insults and it is posters like yourself who feel the need to initiate them rather than enter some form of rational debate. Seriously you need to grow up son.

 

It all depends what persona you've adopted though.

 

When Nineteen Canteen first came on the scene it was a straight reincarnation of Sundance, getting stuck in to individuals from the start.:smt1198-[:smt119

 

Then came the other multiple personalities and wind ups you employ.

 

So who was posting last night.

 

It would appear to be Flashman with a dash of Nineteen canteen Mk III.

[JustMike]

Ridiculous Post

 

Of course it is not his fault entirely

 

I dont think he was playing yesterday

 

Ridiculous...how??

 

Its his team, his management set up, his dream of "total football"

[Nineteen Canteen]

Please tell me what argument you've won? Ever?

The family silver? Oh you just get more and more hilarious...

We had little choice in changing management? Even more hilarious.

This years relegation is due to the fans and the demonstrations?

COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE AND SO BLINKERED AND RETARDED AS TO BE OFFENSIVE.

 

You really do need to have a look at yourself as you're not half as witty, intelligent or thought provoking as you seem to think you are. You can cut and paste googled quotes but people see you for what you are.. A wind up merchant, one that the admin should really see for what it is and forget this "freedom of speech" nonsense and just ban you for once and for all...

 

Please carry on with the doctor martins quips. I haven't forgotten the quips and insults on Essru's site. Using my mum's cancer and my efforts to raise money for charity to poke fun of me and insult me. Like I said before, your identity will come out sooner or later and you can insult me to my face. You can look forward to that I promise...

 

Ban me Daren, why what have I done? Other than try to post a more balanced view of the situation instead of some of the blind faith that exists. Supporting a football club is a religion and often requires a leap of faith to stay involved but it's not beyond question and the more blindly accepted views at times need to be challenged. This club needed Lowe second time around but the blind said otherwise hence this mess we are in.

 

When are you going to drop the cancer thing? Remember you took offence and got things out of perspective because I originally used the word to describe how I thought McMenemy was a negative influence on the club IMO. You felt that people (me especially) shouldn't use the word cancer because of those who suffer from the illness and it is offensive to them. I was NEVER insulting towards your Mum, NEVER and offered you my sympathies at the time. However I was stunned you reacted to the use of the word in the way that you did. You must write a lot of letters to the media Daren over its consistent use to describe people or things that can act insidiously and to the detriment of the greater good. There is still a hooligan element in football that acts like a cancer to its future development and public profile. Do you agree?

 

Oh and I still support the club in not supporting your individual request for a signed shirt on behalf of your Mum or for you to collect for charity on the perimeter of the ground. The club had a very good charitable profile in the community and did a lot to support causes and Crouch himself organised the Breast Cancer Day. If they started to honour individual cases they would be inundated with requests with 1 in 3 of us likely to contract cancer in our lifetime and then we have all the other illnesses. It's more than understandable you couldn't see that at the time at felt aggrieved but that didn't make you right either so lets drop it shall we?

[Lord Duckhunter]

This club needed Lowe second time around

 

 

 

 

 

We needed Lowe? For what?

 

To keep us out of admin-Failed

To keep us in the CCC-Failed.

 

8 Months down the line, we're a complete and utter shambles.Perhaps you could enlighten us as to Lowe's sucsess second time round.Because it's hard to see how it could be any worse.

[LostBoys]

I only ever read Nineteen Canteens posts when he is quoted as I put him and the other idiot Sumdunce Beast on my ignore list. Nothing he ever says would cause me to reverse my decision. He simply latches onto quite reasonable and lucid posts and states the most ridiculous nonsense.

I think we should club together and have him assessed as he is clearly delusional rather like his pal Rupes. Alternatively we could all put him on ignore and he can post to himself. I think he would like that and he can congratulate himself on his perceived wisdom every time he posts to himself.

[miserableoldgit]

Ban me Daren, why what have I done? Other than try to post a more balanced view of the situation instead of some of the blind faith that exists. Supporting a football club is a religion and often requires a leap of faith to stay involved but it's not beyond question and the more blindly accepted views at times need to be challenged. This club needed Lowe second time around but the blind said otherwise hence this mess we are in.

 

When are you going to drop the cancer thing? Remember you took offence and got things out of perspective because I originally used the word to describe how I thought McMenemy was a negative influence on the club IMO. You felt that people (me especially) shouldn't use the word cancer because of those who suffer from the illness and it is offensive to them. I was NEVER insulting towards your Mum, NEVER and offered you my sympathies at the time. However I was stunned you reacted to the use of the word in the way that you did. You must write a lot of letters to the media Daren over its consistent use to describe people or things that can act insidiously and to the detriment of the greater good. There is still a hooligan element in football that acts like a cancer to its future development and public profile. Do you agree?

 

Oh and I still support the club in not supporting your individual request for a signed shirt on behalf of your Mum or for you to collect for charity on the perimeter of the ground. The club had a very good charitable profile in the community and did a lot to support causes and Crouch himself organised the Breast Cancer Day. If they started to honour individual cases they would be inundated with requests with 1 in 3 of us likely to contract cancer in our lifetime and then we have all the other illnesses. It's more than understandable you couldn't see that at the time at felt aggrieved but that didn't make you right either so lets drop it shall we?

How exactly is your view more balanced? Virtually nobody agrees with you, so your views are 180 degrees opposed to everyone elses. That is not balanced. Balanced is somewhere around 90 degrees. You are stating the opposite to wind everyone up. You, sir, are a WUM. If you are Sundance, Flashman et al, you should be ashamed of yourself. We have enough to worry about without your atagonistic nonsense.

[View From The Top]

The Professor stopped going to SMS because he was sick of wasting his money watching Saints lose so he is hardly in a position to preach to others.

 

19C is just a c**t whom might do us all a favour by dying, soon.

[Amesbury Saint]

19C is just a c**t whom might do us all a favour by dying, soon.

 

I disagree with almost everything 19C says.

 

However, I find your statement very offensive and unneceassary.

[um pahars]

Ban me Daren, why what have I done?

 

You've been banned numerous times before, so tell us why that was then:cool:

 

Remember you took offence and got things out of perspective because I originally used the word to describe how I thought McMenemy was a negative influence on the club IMO.

 

But you did that when you were posting under your Sundance handle (which you were banned under:smt119:rolleyes:), so please forgive us if we struggle to keep up with your multiple ID's and personas;)

[Nineteen Canteen]

The Professor stopped going to SMS because he was sick of wasting his money watching Saints lose so he is hardly in a position to preach to others.

 

19C is just a c**t whom might do us all a favour by dying, soon.

 

????

 

Amesbury Saint thanks for your comments. I did type a response but decided to leave it to the mods.

[Nineteen Canteen]

You've been banned numerous times before, so tell us why that was then:cool:

 

 

 

But you did that when you were posting under your Sundance handle (which you were banned under:smt119:rolleyes:), so please forgive us if we struggle to keep up with your multiple ID's and personas;)

 

Despite our differences Um it would have been nice if you had made mention of View from the Top's comment as you must have read it just above your post, or do you condone posts like that?

[stthrobber]

Or a victim of circumstance? Its unlikely we would be relegated this year if the fans stood by the club instead of pointless protests and boycotts and petulance over the lack of playing standards that was placed upon us by Wilde and his cohort Crouch by p1ssing away the family silver under failed promises of investment. The management set up and playing staff was changed under Lowe this season because we effectively had very little choice in the matter. Pity you seem unable to grasp the reality but at least you can lace up those boots big boy they'll come in useful when you fail to win these arguments.

 

Are you sure that the 10k or so fans that were missing this season were doing so purely because of Rupert Lowe? Could it not be that the club's pricing strategy was flawed, particularly when the cost of living was rising so spectacularly? Petrol over £1 per litre, huge rises in gas and electricity and yet they still asked £25 to watch the youth team.

 

The Forest game in December showed that with a realistic match ticket price, people would go.

 

It is unlikely we would be relegated this season if the right balance had been struck between youth and experience. You cannot expect a team made up from youth players to succeed when the common practice is for 1 or 2 youngsters to be blooded a couple of times in a season, not all of them at once like we had.

 

It is unlikely we would have been relegated if at least 1 of our 20 goal a season strikers had not been loaned out, and if only it was Rasiak or Stern John and not Saganowski playing up front for us now.

 

Loyalty is a 2 way thing, and football clubs are fast finding out that the fans are fed up with being overcharged, and in our case, being overcharged to watch kids play.

 

Someone showed me a prog from a home game from 1976/77 season and I could have guessed the players in the team. 20 years from now I wouldn't remember barely anyone that has played for our team this season.

 

Whatever the circumstances that caused Lowe to team up with Wilde to oust Leon Crouch, the last thing he should have done was create more upheaval and instability when we badly needed continuity.

 

Many factors have come together to cause our current malaise and league position and Rupert Lowe has to take a fair proportion of blame himself.

[Nineteen Canteen]

Are you sure that the 10k or so fans that were missing this season were doing so purely because of Rupert Lowe? Could it not be that the club's pricing strategy was flawed, particularly when the cost of living was rising so spectacularly? Petrol over £1 per litre, huge rises in gas and electricity and yet they still asked £25 to watch the youth team.

 

The Forest game in December showed that with a realistic match ticket price, people would go.

 

It is unlikely we would be relegated this season if the right balance had been struck between youth and experience. You cannot expect a team made up from youth players to succeed when the common practice is for 1 or 2 youngsters to be blooded a couple of times in a season, not all of them at once like we had.

 

It is unlikely we would have been relegated if at least 1 of our 20 goal a season strikers had not been loaned out, and if only it was Rasiak or Stern John and not Saganowski playing up front for us now.

 

Loyalty is a 2 way thing, and football clubs are fast finding out that the fans are fed up with being overcharged, and in our case, being overcharged to watch kids play.

 

Someone showed me a prog from a home game from 1976/77 season and I could have guessed the players in the team. 20 years from now I wouldn't remember barely anyone that has played for our team this season.

 

Whatever the circumstances that caused Lowe to team up with Wilde to oust Leon Crouch, the last thing he should have done was create more upheaval and instability when we badly needed continuity.

 

Many factors have come together to cause our current malaise and league position and Rupert Lowe has to take a fair proportion of blame himself.

 

Good post much of which I agree with. I have said that an extra crowd between 2,500 -5,000 on a consistent basis would have generated enough revenue to satisfy Barclays. Even taking the lower figure over 20 games @ £26 a ticket would have reduced the o/d by well over £1m. So no I don't think 10,000 stayed away just because of Lowe and agree with all your reasons not forgetting redundancies and repossessions and people in general pulling in their horns in uncertain times.

 

My view is that fans do exist who deliberately boycotted because of Lowe and many were proud of letting us know on this forum and there are those who have yet to come to terms we are not a Premiership club and now especially will be even longer before we become one again, failing a fool or a billionaire with money to burn taking us over. Therefore, for the sake of 2,500 on the gate when it was well known we were trouble before the first game of the season it is disappointing to say the least they couldn't have provided their unconditional support from day 1.

 

I actually don't think the Forest game proved your theory because wasn't it used as a requirement if fans wanted tickets for the Man U game? If anything Lowe missed a trick and should have charged full price for the Forest games because as fans were so keen to see Man U they would have sold close to the same amount IMO.

 

As I say I agree with a lot of what you say but whilst we should have kept a 20 goal striker their wages would have been impossible to afford and we would have gone bust quicker. However, if we could have lent out Skacel or sold him and kept on Rasiak then great but we can only loan or sell what others want and John as been awful for Bristol City so perhaps his best was behind him.

 

Cost drove everything and I think the accounts will show that the board did well but like you say they made mistakes. The early games there was a lot of optimism going down the youth route and we were unlucky against Cardiff and Birmingham but by November the writing was on the wall and Lowe needed to sack JP. Then we went and beat Reading and everyone is bullish again bought JP time really he didn't deserve but we as fans were feeling good again after that result and in hindsight maybe we should have lost it and Wotte could have been bought in earlier.

 

Wotte I think is a potentially good manager similar record to Pearson and talks a good game like Pearson and in much more difficult circumstances IMO has got some good results. Recent efforts have been poor because Wotte himself said the players have been affected by the adminstration. I think that is fair enough and any employee in any situation would have their morale and performance affected by a similar situation so why should footballers be any different and it would be a shame if we judge him by what happens on the run in as I suspect many players have already got their agents securing them provisional deals with other clubs and others will be facing an earlier than expected retirement.

 

Of course Lowe was culpable but so was Poortvilet for playing some players like Gobern when he was clearly not ready for the step up and we had other options. Barclays clearly haven't helped and to a lesser degree Aviva because if we hadn't had to go through Administration and the rumours in the days/weeks before I suspect our results would have been better not least the Charlton game or have been so tardy out the blocks vs. Wolves. We now have a 10 pt deduction pending that only Lowe and the Administrators seem confident of avoiding which has only added to the gloomy air of 'what's the point' were down and were bust.

 

So Lowe made some bad calls but kept us in business and I believe we could have survived but equally we needed at least those extra 2,500 minimum that supported the club last season when we were 20 minutes away from league 1 without the drastic but must do cost cutting measures of which continuity was a unfortunate casualty. The only people I think who have come out of this with their reputation intact are some individual players, possibly Wotte and the fans who have regularly attended the home games this season. The blame lies with everyone else individually and collectively and with varying degrees of culpability.

[um pahars]

Despite our differences Um it would have been nice if you had made mention of View from the Top's comment as you must have read it just above your post, or do you condone posts like that?

 

Problem is that it is always a struggle to discuss things with people with multiple personalities, particularly when they're on a wind up.

 

Now if you would be so kind as to keep one persona for at least, say 24 hours, then we might at least have a chance. If not, then how about that tagline letting us know which personality is posting each time.

 

HTH

[Weston Saint]

Good post much of which I agree with. I have said that an extra crowd between 2,500 -5,000 on a consistent basis would have generated enough revenue to satisfy Barclays. Even taking the lower figure over 20 games @ £26 a ticket would have reduced the o/d by well over £1m. So no I don't think 10,000 stayed away just because of Lowe and agree with all your reasons not forgetting redundancies and repossessions and people in general pulling in their horns in uncertain times.

 

My view is that fans do exist who deliberately boycotted because of Lowe and many were proud of letting us know on this forum and there are those who have yet to come to terms we are not a Premiership club and now especially will be even longer before we become one again, failing a fool or a billionaire with money to burn taking us over. Therefore, for the sake of 2,500 on the gate when it was well known we were trouble before the first game of the season it is disappointing to say the least they couldn't have provided their unconditional support from day 1.

 

I actually don't think the Forest game proved your theory because wasn't it used as a requirement if fans wanted tickets for the Man U game? If anything Lowe missed a trick and should have charged full price for the Forest games because as fans were so keen to see Man U they would have sold close to the same amount IMO.

 

As I say I agree with a lot of what you say but whilst we should have kept a 20 goal striker their wages would have been impossible to afford and we would have gone bust quicker. However, if we could have lent out Skacel or sold him and kept on Rasiak then great but we can only loan or sell what others want and John as been awful for Bristol City so perhaps his best was behind him.

 

Cost drove everything and I think the accounts will show that the board did well but like you say they made mistakes. The early games there was a lot of optimism going down the youth route and we were unlucky against Cardiff and Birmingham but by November the writing was on the wall and Lowe needed to sack JP. Then we went and beat Reading and everyone is bullish again bought JP time really he didn't deserve but we as fans were feeling good again after that result and in hindsight maybe we should have lost it and Wotte could have been bought in earlier.

 

Wotte I think is a potentially good manager similar record to Pearson and talks a good game like Pearson and in much more difficult circumstances IMO has got some good results. Recent efforts have been poor because Wotte himself said the players have been affected by the adminstration. I think that is fair enough and any employee in any situation would have their morale and performance affected by a similar situation so why should footballers be any different and it would be a shame if we judge him by what happens on the run in as I suspect many players have already got their agents securing them provisional deals with other clubs and others will be facing an earlier than expected retirement.

 

Of course Lowe was culpable but so was Poortvilet for playing some players like Gobern when he was clearly not ready for the step up and we had other options. Barclays clearly haven't helped and to a lesser degree Aviva because if we hadn't had to go through Administration and the rumours in the days/weeks before I suspect our results would have been better not least the Charlton game or have been so tardy out the blocks vs. Wolves. We now have a 10 pt deduction pending that only Lowe and the Administrators seem confident of avoiding which has only added to the gloomy air of 'what's the point' were down and were bust.

 

So Lowe made some bad calls but kept us in business and I believe we could have survived but equally we needed at least those extra 2,500 minimum that supported the club last season when we were 20 minutes away from league 1 without the drastic but must do cost cutting measures of which continuity was a unfortunate casualty. The only people I think who have come out of this with their reputation intact are some individual players, possibly Wotte and the fans who have regularly attended the home games this season. The blame lies with everyone else individually and collectively and with varying degrees of culpability.

A good balanced post.

 

What a shame this forum is being ruined by snipping posts from many rather than enhansing it with posts like this.

 

How about everyone call a truce and get this forum back to a high quality debating medium with a touch of light heartedness.

[Amesbury Saint]

A good balanced post.

 

What a shame this forum is being ruined by snipping posts from many rather than enhansing it with posts like this.

 

How about everyone call a truce and get this forum back to a high quality debating medium with a touch of light heartedness.

 

I am confident the forum will get better once we either have a few wins to be positive about and / or new owners are in place.

 

It is time to let the past go but need something to replace it with.

 

 

Anyway Ron - what is the gossip from the contacts you know?

 

Andrew

[stthrobber]

So Lowe made some bad calls but kept us in business and I believe we could have survived but equally we needed at least those extra 2,500 minimum that supported the club last season when we were 20 minutes away from league 1 without the drastic but must do cost cutting measures of which continuity was a unfortunate casualty. The only people I think who have come out of this with their reputation intact are some individual players, possibly Wotte and the fans who have regularly attended the home games this season. The blame lies with everyone else individually and collectively and with varying degrees of culpability.

 

I know there are fans out there who stayed away because of Lowe, but again I also believe if they had reduced match ticket prices, then many fans would have attended. I would have gone much more often this season, but cost was the major factor.

 

I also think it a more likely scenario that JP was told to play the kids whereas Wotte refused to do so, realising that without more experience in the team we were doomed anyway. Hence we suddenly started playing Euell again.

 

I do agree with you about collective blame though, and you can trace that back many years.

[stthrobber]

I am confident the forum will get better once we either have a few wins to be positive about and / or new owners are in place.

 

It is time to let the past go but need something to replace it with.

 

Andrew

 

You are probably right here. At this time we can still only sit and hope and dwell on why we are where we are.

 

A win on Monday might help a bit

[Weston Saint]

I am confident the forum will get better once we either have a few wins to be positive about and / or new owners are in place.

 

It is time to let the past go but need something to replace it with.

 

 

Anyway Ron - what is the gossip from the contacts you know?

 

Andrew

I severed all contacts when I agreed to join the new SOS group. In any event only the Administrator will know the real facts. I am aware that one potential "bidder" may no longer be interested as previously indicated by FF.

 

Edit:

 

When I say severed contact I meant relation to information, I still speak to them but they respect my decision to not want information on SFC

Edited 12 April, 2009 by Weston Saint

[SaintRichmond]

Sorry mate but that's ********.

 

I am no follower of RL, I just believe to blame him for EVERYTHING is naive.

 

 

I agree, you can only blame what you see on the pitch ....

 

....... so what exactly do we see ???

 

We see the remnants of the Dynamic Dutch Duo (Wotte) ..... brought in by Lowe

 

We see the residue of players left after the Sale(s)/ Loans of proven Goalscorers ...... masterminded by Lowe

 

We see nothing left of the "Total Football" concept .... instigated by Lowe

 

We see some potentally good young players trying to survive in the CCC .... thrown in far too early by the "strategy" of Lowe

 

 

 

 

Bit Naive to now blame him for the results of his doctrine, don't you think ????

 

 

Sorry mate, go and think it through again

[sadoldgit]

Of course he will. Don`t forget it is all the fans fault.

 

Her we go, the blame culute again. It is not the fans fault, it is not Lowe's fault. Just as relegation from the Premiership was caused by a number of circumstances so is the situation now.

 

As Head Honcho Lowe has to take overall responsibility, but he wasn't out there defending like a schoolboy was he? Those guys are supposed to be professional footballers and know what to expect when they need to defend dead ball situations.

 

The players, the coaching staff and the manager are all culpable too.

[SaintRichmond]

Or a victim of circumstance? Its unlikely we would be relegated this year if the fans stood by the club instead of pointless protests and boycotts and petulance over the lack of playing standards that was placed upon us by Wilde and his cohort Crouch by p1ssing away the family silver under failed promises of investment. The management set up and playing staff was changed under Lowe this season because we effectively had very little choice in the matter. Pity you seem unable to grasp the reality but at least you can lace up those boots big boy they'll come in useful when you fail to win these arguments.

 

 

What a load of Balonie ..

 

The Fans have every right to express their opinion, whether it be good or bad, in any (legal) manner they wish

 

When Lowe came back, he got rid of everybody that HE had not appointed, including Nigel Pearson (not doing too bad is he ?), Sold off and loaned out all players that could score, insisted (against some very wise counselling) that we go with Youth, brought in an untried Dutch Duo, and insisted on the Total Football concept

 

Fans had every right to protest against that .... they have precious feww ways to protest. Remember, Lowe only speaks to Shareholders, not us "Customers"

 

You go on about playing standards ?? well believe it or not , it WAS better under Crouch & Co ...... at least we were not Relegated

 

Lowe has been nothing but Bad News for us, going back to the time that (due to his own greed) he failed to land the Stoneham project

 

Great Business sense that was

[Nineteen Canteen]

I severed all contacts when I agreed to join the new SOS group. In any event only the Administrator will know the real facts. I am aware that one potential "bidder" may no longer be interested as previously indicated by FF.

 

Edit:

 

When I say severed contact I meant relation to information, I still speak to them but they respect my decision to not want information on SFC

 

To be honest Weston I was hoping you were involved in one of the consortium's FF alluded to last week as I fear your efforts elsewhere may be wasted. I have been critcal of SOS only because of the disjointed way it has been presented and the focus on financial benefits it will deliver to the fans as oppose to how it will actually run the club. They have their work cut out but hopefully with you on board some of the bigger picture stuff will be addressed and communicated to the rest of us because strong leadership and at least £15m + is paramount and that seems lacking on both counts.

[sadoldgit]

Im sorry i blame Woote a bit today also. No width, 1 up front and Wooton and Schederlian in same team? All wrong for me.

 

What position was Lowe playing? Can you really blame him for the lack of professionalism at set pieces? THose guys have been around long enough to know wha to do.

 

You are right, the manager (and coaching and playing staff) have to take responsibility.

[sadoldgit]

What a load of Balonie ..

 

The Fans have every right to express their opinion, whether it be good or bad, in any (legal) manner they wish

 

When Lowe came back, he got rid of everybody that HE had not appointed, including Nigel Pearson (not doing too bad is he ?), Sold off and loaned out all players that could score, insisted (against some very wise counselling) that we go with Youth, brought in an untried Dutch Duo, and insisted on the Total Football concept

 

Fans had every right to protest against that .... they have precious feww ways to protest. Remember, Lowe only speaks to Shareholders, not us "Customers"

 

You go on about playing standards ?? well believe it or not , it WAS better under Crouch & Co ...... at least we were not Relegated

 

SR look at every club in the land and tell me which ones are run by the Board and which are run by the fans please?

 

You might not like Lowe's decsions but it was his job to make them as it was Crouch's and Wilde's before that. You only have to raed some of the tripe on here to see that fans runninng the club would be a bigger disaster.

 

The Dutch Duo were not "untried" as you put it. Both are very experienced.

 

Crouch and Wild emade a right mess of the finances and yes, we did stay up by the skin of our teeth - something we could still do this season.

 

Lowe used to speak to "customers" at fans forums remembr, something that seem to vanish when he left.

 

Yes he had his faults, but to kep braying on about everything being his fault misses the point completely.

 

Take a look at Charlton. They have made a bigger hash of this season than we have haven't they? No Lowe in charge there, just experienced football people.

[um pahars]

Just a few minor points;)

 

The Dutch Duo were not "untried" as you put it. Both are very experienced.

 

You must have a very broad definition of "very experienced" as Poortvliet's experience was mainly consigned to semi pro teams in the lower Dutch leagues.

 

Lowe used to speak to "customers" at fans forums remembr, something that seem to vanish when he left.

 

And they would also vanish and not be quarterly when Lowe was last at the helm and things weren't going too well. And they certainly didn't return in the last year either.

 

Take a look at Charlton. They have made a bigger hash of this season than we have haven't they? No Lowe in charge there, just experienced football people.

 

And once agin it gives me no great pleasure to see other clubs being in the same position as we find ourselves in. I fail to see how the success or failure at another club acn have any bearing on us whatsoever.

 

If it's some faint attempt to say "see it happens to others", well it is totally irrelevant and of no consolation to me, nor does it justify or mean we should accept the fact that our Club has been run appallingly in recent years.

[Nineteen Canteen]

A good balanced post.

 

What a shame this forum is being ruined by snipping posts from many rather than enhansing it with posts like this.

 

How about everyone call a truce and get this forum back to a high quality debating medium with a touch of light heartedness.

 

Couldn't agree more but it requires an acceptance on both sides that people have opposite views and can hold them without false accusations being made by those who disagree.

 

On a good point I think I have connected as a Saints fan with some people who have fiercely been against me and they are a great example to the way this forum should be as Weston has requested. JustMike is a case in point and I respect his opinion and as a fellow fan who regardless of who he feels is to blame is suffering as a loyal supporter and upset that he has to try hard to persuade his sons to go to the game these days with him because they are losing faith. To that degree we are exactly the same and suffering the same fate even though we may differ on how that arose and who was culpable.

 

Therefore, I believe there is a chink of light for unity but I won't stop posting opinions to satisfy those who prefer to bully or act behind a more sinister agenda that seems set out solely to defame the posters character to avoid responding to their comments in the hope they go away.

 

Anyway, Happy Easter everybody lets hope there is another resurrection in the coming weeks although I doubt it will get bank holiday status.

[Nineteen Canteen]

I know there are fans out there who stayed away because of Lowe, but again I also believe if they had reduced match ticket prices, then many fans would have attended. I would have gone much more often this season, but cost was the major factor.

 

I also think it a more likely scenario that JP was told to play the kids whereas Wotte refused to do so, realising that without more experience in the team we were doomed anyway. Hence we suddenly started playing Euell again.

 

I do agree with you about collective blame though, and you can trace that back many years.

 

I agree that if reducing ticket prices to say £15 a game generated an extra 5,000 on the gate then it would have been a must do and I'm certain the board must have looked at this and no doubt someone like David Luker would be able to advise us but probably not publicly.

 

The question is though would there have been 5,000 fans like yourself who would have stepped up to the ticket office because I doubt it would sway the beligerant stay aways with their own agenda's be it Lowe or the diet of fayre on offer. Therefore, offering tickets at that price and then say only getting an extra 1,000 on the gate would have been undermining everything else they were trying to do not to mention appeasing the ST holders who were already paying more than that a game.

 

In hindsight perhaps the club should have contacted all ST Holders, members and fans who had purchased say 10 tickets for home games last season with a questionnaire explaining the situation and with the club's ideas to raise gates and reduce process to bolster revenue. Even then the pledge to buy or acceptance from ST holders may not have have materialised in sales.

 

I agree with your theory but a very tough decision to make by the club given the circumstances and I wouldn't have liked to call it knowing what was at stake. What do you think, putting yourself in their shoes for a moment? (I accept and understand you would have liked to have seen lower prices)

[um pahars]

that seems set out solely to defame the posters character to avoid responding to their comments in the hope they go away.

 

Well then maybe you shouldn't have come on here under your new guise of Nineteen Canteen and begin by defaming others on here with lies, false accusations and allegations that had to be removed.:smt119:rolleyes:

 

It's all very well coming on here today in your new guise of the "respectable" Nineteen Canteen Mk VI, but sadly the legacy of your posts, wind ups, antagonism, rude and insulting PM's can't be consigned to history just because of your latest "24 hour" persona (in fact you can't even help yourself from your digs under this new persona).:cool:

 

Keep up the good work though as you are an interesting character;)

[ALWAYS_SFC]

Well then maybe you shouldn't have come on here under your new guise of Nineteen Canteen and begin by defaming others on here with lies, false accusations and allegations that had to be removed.

 

It's all very well coming on here today in your new guise of the "respectable" Nineteen Canteen Mk VI, but sadly the legacy of your posts, wind ups, antagonism, rude and insulting PM's can't be consigned to history just because of your latest "24 hour" persona (in fact you can't even help yourself from your digs under this new persona).

 

Keep up the good work though as you are an interesting character;)

 

He really just drones on and on like a sticky stylus...boring in the extreme...

[Nineteen Canteen]

Just a few minor points;)

 

 

 

You must have a very broad definition of "very experienced" as Poortvliet's experience was mainly consigned to semi pro teams in the lower Dutch leagues.

 

 

 

And they would also vanish and not be quarterly when Lowe was last at the helm and things weren't going too well. And they certainly didn't return in the last year either.

 

 

 

And once agin it gives me no great pleasure to see other clubs being in the same position as we find ourselves in. I fail to see how the success or failure at another club acn have any bearing on us whatsoever.

 

If it's some faint attempt to say "see it happens to others", well it is totally irrelevant and of no consolation to me, nor does it justify or mean we should accept the fact that our Club has been run appallingly in recent years.

 

Um, Im surprised as an ex-accountant that you put no stall in looking at what is happening elsewhere in your sector of business. I would argue football clubs that less than 5 years ago were doing well in the Premiership and now very likely dropping into League 1 is not a good sign or mere coincidence. With one gone bust and the other looking precarious financially it is of significant interest and is indicative that outside the higher echelons of the Premiership football clubs are becoming unsustainable in their current guise.

 

It is not irrelevent and I am sure that other Chairman are not turning a blind eye to our situation along with Charlton and perhaps beginning to consider that lessons need to be learned. The club has been run appallingly in recent years and the lack of financial constraint under Wilde, Hone and Crouch alarming IMO and perhaps had they taken a good look at Leeds they would have understood the need for tight money management vs. a tilt at windmills.

 

You can only spend what you haven't got until the credit is run dry. I'm surprised by your innocence to be honest.

[JustMike]

Um, Im surprised as an ex-accountant that you put no stall in looking at what is happening elsewhere in your sector of business. I would argue football clubs that less than 5 years ago were doing well in the Premiership and now very likely dropping into League 1 is not a good sign or mere coincidence. With one gone bust and the other looking precarious financially it is of significant interest and is indicative that outside the higher echelons of the Premiership football clubs are becoming unsustainable in their current guise.

 

It is not irrelevent and I am sure that other Chairman are not turning a blind eye to our situation along with Charlton and perhaps beginning to consider that lessons need to be learned. The club has been run appallingly in recent years and the lack of financial constraint under Wilde, Hone and Crouch alarming IMO and perhaps had they taken a good look at Leeds they would have understood the need for tight money management vs. a tilt at windmills.

 

You can only spend what you haven't got until the credit is run dry. I'm surprised by your innocence to be honest.

 

you left Lowe off of that little list!

[ALWAYS_SFC]

you left Lowe off of that little list!

 

Astounding isn`t it

he really does believe Rupert Lowe is blameless..

[Nineteen Canteen]

Well then maybe you shouldn't have come on here under your new guise of Nineteen Canteen and begin by defaming others on here with lies, false accusations and allegations that had to be removed.:smt119:rolleyes:

 

It's all very well coming on here today in your new guise of the "respectable" Nineteen Canteen Mk VI, but sadly the legacy of your posts, wind ups, antagonism, rude and insulting PM's can't be consigned to history just because of your latest "24 hour" persona (in fact you can't even help yourself from your digs under this new persona).:cool:

 

Keep up the good work though as you are an interesting character;)

 

Um, I didn't realise until last night who you were and your past roles. Things are much clearer this morning although I must say I was dumbfounded to find out what you did or now do given the way you conduct yourself. My guess is your able pupils are a little less antagonistic, less juvenile and easier to deal with than yourself and you appear to be the Hyde to Steve Grant's Jekyll.

 

At least I have my answer as to why the SOS did not choose (or so it seems) to link up with the Saints Trust for all their shortcomings they doo seem to have a little more polish and a little less egocentric. Things are clearer now Stephen and that chip must be a heavy burden that is unbalancing you not just physically. You are just someone who use to be in the know and strung along by Wilde and co, in my limited opinion. Now you are out of the loop relying on increasingly irrelevent contacts.

[Nineteen Canteen]

you left Lowe off of that little list!

 

Srry Mik, my mistak.

 

Appears on my old keyboard the L O W and E keys weren't working. Should be better now.

[JustMike]

Srry Mik, my mistak.

 

Appears on my old keyboard the L O W and E keys weren't working. Should be better now.

 

 

haha that was actually quite funny. I'll let you have that one.

[JustMike]

Couldn't agree more but it requires an acceptance on both sides that people have opposite views and can hold them without false accusations being made by those who disagree.

 

On a good point I think I have connected as a Saints fan with some people who have fiercely been against me and they are a great example to the way this forum should be as Weston has requested. JustMike is a case in point and I respect his opinion and as a fellow fan who regardless of who he feels is to blame is suffering as a loyal supporter and upset that he has to try hard to persuade his sons to go to the game these days with him because they are losing faith. To that degree we are exactly the same and suffering the same fate even though we may differ on how that arose and who was culpable.

 

Therefore, I believe there is a chink of light for unity but I won't stop posting opinions to satisfy those who prefer to bully or act behind a more sinister agenda that seems set out solely to defame the posters character to avoid responding to their comments in the hope they go away.

 

Anyway, Happy Easter everybody lets hope there is another resurrection in the coming weeks although I doubt it will get bank holiday status.

 

Why thank you, i do agree. (Its daughters btw, not sons ;-) )

[Daren W]

Ban me Daren, why what have I done? Other than try to post a more balanced view of the situation instead of some of the blind faith that exists. Supporting a football club is a religion and often requires a leap of faith to stay involved but it's not beyond question and the more blindly accepted views at times need to be challenged. This club needed Lowe second time around but the blind said otherwise hence this mess we are in.

 

When are you going to drop the cancer thing? Remember you took offence and got things out of perspective because I originally used the word to describe how I thought McMenemy was a negative influence on the club IMO. You felt that people (me especially) shouldn't use the word cancer because of those who suffer from the illness and it is offensive to them. I was NEVER insulting towards your Mum, NEVER and offered you my sympathies at the time. However I was stunned you reacted to the use of the word in the way that you did. You must write a lot of letters to the media Daren over its consistent use to describe people or things that can act insidiously and to the detriment of the greater good. There is still a hooligan element in football that acts like a cancer to its future development and public profile. Do you agree?

 

Oh and I still support the club in not supporting your individual request for a signed shirt on behalf of your Mum or for you to collect for charity on the perimeter of the ground. The club had a very good charitable profile in the community and did a lot to support causes and Crouch himself organised the Breast Cancer Day. If they started to honour individual cases they would be inundated with requests with 1 in 3 of us likely to contract cancer in our lifetime and then we have all the other illnesses. It's more than understandable you couldn't see that at the time at felt aggrieved but that didn't make you right either so lets drop it shall we?

 

Right, lets cut through the crap and get to the point shall we?

You see this is why you and I have a problem. You make everything personal..

"It's about you throwing your toys out of your pram about your charity, your mother..."

 

Now, I'd feel somewhat uneasy about the club not bothering to reply to a request from anyone in regards to, how did you phrase it?, "rattling tins" on club property. I'd feel uneasy about the club not bothering to help arrange a shirt signing visit for anyone with a illness, terminal or not. It is not about me. It's about a club that has lost its soul. A club that obviously doesn't feel it has to help people. You obviously don't seem to think so. The club "gives at the office" so why should it help anyone else??

 

I've got news for you, but with money raised for cancer won't help my mum. She's dying. That horse has bolted. Cancer research can't help her but it can help other people. Only on this messageboard can someone get slagged off for trying to raise money to help other people as it conflicts with their pro Lowe/ anti lowe agendas...

 

This ludicrous notion you're peddling that I threw a wobbly over people using the word cancer? Absolute rubbish. A lie. I'm not some word nazi. I'm not banning the word cancer, it's perfectly acceptable, perfetly applicable... but in the right context. Social ills are a cancer at the heart of society, crime can be cancerous, violence people can be cancerous. I feel Robert Mugabe is cancerous, Sadaam Hussain was, hell even Tony Blair was cancerous, but an old man you feel may or may not be earning too much? Oh plur lease!

 

It's about perspective. I had an email from someone criticising me about the use of the C word. They told me an horrendous story of how cancer had devastated their family. It was far, far worse than I could ever imagine. And they then went on to defend their right to call Rupert Lowe cancerous. All that they'd dealt with and yet they still hated Lowe that much that the use of the word seemed applicable. So much hatred, so much of it ingrained and permanent.

 

But it's all about perspective.

 

My perspective is that this club has lost touch with us, the fans. It's lost its soul. Its that notion that I tried, and obviously abjectly, failed to get across. It's not about me or even you. It's about a club that somehow feels that it can just throw a charitable request in the bin and not bother to just issue a polite rebuff. It's about a club that just couldn't be bothered to give a dying woman ten minutes of their time to get her shirt, which she paid for, signed and have a few photos taken. It's about a club that since relegation has needed to earn it's respect rather than expecting it blindly and has so far managed to alienate itself from the fanbase quite spectacularly.

 

You seem to think that dwinding attendances are down to fans staying away beacuse of Lowe or down to apathy or meaness. But the sad truth is that is mainly down to people losing faith in the club, losing touch with a club that doesn't seem to feel it has to answer to them. I didn't renew my season ticket because the club couldn't be bothered, not because they said no but because they couldn't be bothered to say no and I've met with many, many other fans whose faith in the club has been chipped away slowly.

 

And now they expect fans to bail the club out. They've sytematically pillaged the club, asset stripped it through corporate whoring, business expenses, pay offs and compensation. And now the pot's empty and it's up to the fans to bail this club out...

 

In the meantime, pleae feel free to misquote me, twist any posts you want and more importantly, please feel to slag me off on other messagboards in regards to, shock horror, cancer. You see that is why you and I have a problem and why one day, sooner or later, we'll "discuss" it face to face. I don't take too kindly to people taking something so personal as my dealing with cancer or raising money for cancer and having it twisted and used against me. I don't take kindly to people like you trying to paint me as some grief ridden weirdo obsessed with cancer, flailling out against the club in some blinkered act of grief and hatred.

 

There is a line and you crossed it and one day you will face the consquences of it.

Edited 12 April, 2009 by Daren W

[dubai_phil]

In all these debates/put downs and the like on here of late, we've been missing some final critical pieces of data that help take us back a little and put things into some context.

 

I've just looked back at the '07 report and tried to analyse - PLEASE this isn't a dig at the previous regimes or pro-Lowe, I'm just trying to understand why on earth he even TRIED to save us.... and yes I have really approximated the numbers ok!

 

Historically, empirically or however else we want to judge it, Lowe's return has been a failure.

 

Yes, 19C is fundamentally correct when he says that blame lies with the fans for administration - as admin is simply a consequence of not having enough revenues and fans supply around half of the revenue of the club on matchdays and about 20% from commercial activities.

 

The accounts will not lie we are in admin because not enough CASH has come in to the business.

 

HOWEVER The weakness of 19C's argument that he still fully take on board is WHY the revenue decreased.

Most of us have stated our opinions on that.

The fans did not go - not enough money = admin.

But that is the end result of the disease that has afflicted the club, not the cause nor even the symptoms.

 

What I wanted to really see was the background to the finances when Lowe (& Wilde) decided to return - What were they trying to achieve? It is fine to say they FAILED - the disease was terminal, but what were the symptoms of the disease?

 

In 2007 we had COSTS of 27.2 million, against Turnover of 23.2 million meaning we lost 4million. We were basically kept solvent by selling players for 5million.

 

Now, I tried to extrapolate that into the past year.

We seem to have dropped our average attendances by 2,500 - so for maths about 15% so a best guess would be revenue of 19 and a bit mil. But a great deal of our COSTS were fixed....

 

So what we are really missing is how much Lowe managed to actually cut the cost of sales - if it was by 10% costs would be just under 25mil and we would still have lost almost 6 million. Now ask any manager to cut costs by 10% and they would always tell you in one year it is an impossible dream, but to get to at least break-even we needed to cut our costs by almost 30%.....

 

Now, add to that IMHO that the absolute KILLER in the past year has been the fact that we simply have not had any crown jewels to sell, so there literally was no safety net, if the costs weren't cut, then there was NO back up plan.

 

Looking at this, simply from a "Business Perspective", IF Lowe KNEW these numbers, he KNEW we did not have any crown jewels to sell, how on EARTH could he have honestly believed that he could have turned the club around?

 

Surely we were already a basket case?

 

Forget our whingeing about not playing high earners, or even his ill thought out total football, I just do not understand what drove him to actually believe he could turn the club around in one season.

 

Did he believe he could actually sell the club or get investment?

Did he think he could sell the high earners for a fee - missing all the signals that were there as the global economy plummeted

 

To achieve a PROFIT - ie to actually have some money to pay back the bank overdraft he would have had to bring the cost of sales down from 27.2 million a year to AROUND 19million = an 8 million drop.

 

How could you plan for that KNOWING you had players making up the bulk of that cost tied into the club on long term contracts.

 

Was it belief? Was it ego? Was it REALLY a last ditch attempt to save us? Would any other sane businessman have tried it? Obviously, pick your own version, but I posted at the time that I thought Total Football, Kids and Dutchies was one gamble too many, I am starting to think that it all hid an even bigger gamble....

 

That has failed

 

So yes of course the fans COULD have rallied to the cause early. yes we were told we were in trouble, yes we did moan, boycott and lose enthusiasm. But like many terminally ill patients, realisation often only dawns far too late to make a difference and avoid catching the disease in the first place

[Gorgiesaint]

I agree that if reducing ticket prices to say £15 a game generated an extra 5,000 on the gate then it would have been a must do and I'm certain the board must have looked at this and no doubt someone like David Luker would be able to advise us but probably not publicly.

 

The question is though would there have been 5,000 fans like yourself who would have stepped up to the ticket office because I doubt it would sway the beligerant stay aways with their own agenda's be it Lowe or the diet of fayre on offer. Therefore, offering tickets at that price and then say only getting an extra 1,000 on the gate would have been undermining everything else they were trying to do not to mention appeasing the ST holders who were already paying more than that a game.

 

In hindsight perhaps the club should have contacted all ST Holders, members and fans who had purchased say 10 tickets for home games last season with a questionnaire explaining the situation and with the club's ideas to raise gates and reduce process to bolster revenue. Even then the pledge to buy or acceptance from ST holders may not have have materialised in sales.

 

I agree with your theory but a very tough decision to make by the club given the circumstances and I wouldn't have liked to call it knowing what was at stake. What do you think, putting yourself in their shoes for a moment? (I accept and understand you would have liked to have seen lower prices)

 

Ticket pricing always will be a difficult issue.

 

Not sure what our average home attendance is this year ( because I can't be bothered to work out) but lets says it's 16000 - at £25 avg ticket price that income per game of £400k.

 

If you drop the ticket price to £15, then you need nearly 27k through the turnstiles to make the same income (ignoring additional revenue from the world class catering, megastore, etc)

 

The question left for the club is - would we get an extra 11000 through the turnstiles on a regular basis if we dropped the price?

Edited 12 April, 2009 by Gorgiesaint
spelling

[Nineteen Canteen]

Right, lets cut through the crap and get to the point shall we?

You see this is why you and I have a problem. You make everything personal..

"It's about you throwing your toys out of your pram about your charity, your mother..."

 

Now, I'd feel somewhat uneasy about the club not bothering to reply to a request from anyone in regards to, how did you phrase it?, "rattling tins" on club property. I'd feel uneasy about the club not bothering to help arrange a shirt signing visit for anyone with a illness, terminal or not. It is not about me. It's about a club that has lost its soul. A club that obviously doesn't feel it has to help people. You obviously don't seem to think so. The club "gives at the office" so why should it help anyone else??

 

I've got news for you, but with money raised for cancer won't help my mum. She's dying. That horse has bolted. Cancer research can't help her but it can help other people. Only on this messageboard can someone get slagged off for trying to raise money to help other people as it conflicts with their pro Lowe/ anti lowe agendas...

 

This ludicrous notion you're peddling that I threw a wobbly over people using the word cancer? Absolute rubbish. A lie. I'm not some word nazi. I'm not banning the word cancer, it's perfectly acceptable, perfetly applicable... but in the right context. Social ills are a cancer at the heart of society, crime can be cancerous, violence people can be cancerous. I feel Robert Mugabe is cancerous, Sadaam Hussain was, hell even Tony Blair was cancerous, but an old man you feel may or may not be earning too much? Oh plur lease!

 

It's about perspective. I had an email from someone criticising me about the use of the C word. They told me an horrendous story of how cancer had devastated their family. It was far, far worse than I could ever imagine. And they then went on to defend their right to call Rupert Lowe cancerous. All that they'd dealt with and yet they still hated Lowe that much that the use of the word seemed applicable. So much hatred, so much of it ingrained and permanent.

 

But it's all about perspective.

 

My perspective is that this club has lost touch with us, the fans. It's lost its soul. Its that notion that I tried, and obviously abjectly, failed to get across. It's not about me or even you. It's about a club that somehow feels that it can just throw a charitable request in the bin and not bother to just issue a polite rebuff. It's about a club that just couldn't be bothered to give a dying woman ten minutes of their time to get her shirt, which she paid for, signed and have a few photos taken. It's about a club that since relegation has needed to earn it's respect rather than expecting it blindly and has so far managed to alienate itself from the fanbase quite spectacularly.

 

You seem to think that dwinding attendances are down to fans staying away beacuse of Lowe or down to apathy or meaness. But the sad truth is that is mainly down to people losing faith in the club, losing touch with a club that doesn't seem to feel it has to answer to them. I didn't renew my season ticket because the club couldn't be bothered, not because they said no but because they couldn't be bothered to say no and I've met with many, many other fans whose faith in the club has been chipped away slowly.

 

And now they expect fans to bail the club out. They've sytematically pillaged the club, asset stripped it through corporate whoring, business expenses, pay offs and compensation. And now the pot's empty and it's up to the fans to bail this club out...

 

In the meantime, pleae feel free to misquote me, twist any posts you want and more importantly, please feel to slag me off on other messagboards in regards to, shock horror, cancer. You see that is why you and I have a problem and why one day, sooner or later, we'll "discuss" it face to face. I don't take too kindly to people taking something so personal as my dealing with cancer or raising money for cancer and having it twisted and used against me. I don't take kindly to people like you trying to paint me as some grief ridden weirdo obsessed with cancer, flailling out against the club in some blinkered act of grief and hatred.

 

There is a line and you crossed it and one day you will face the consquences of it.

 

Daren, you exhaust me and once again you have missed the point I have always felt justified in making in that McMenemy was IMO a menace behind the scences and acted like a cancer to the future of this club. We just need to agree to disagree if was out of context and how grave the situation must or mustn't be to use it. I felt is was appropriate you didn't because of your situation.

 

We could debate this for ever but the bottom line is I have never felt any ill will towards you or your Mum and I sincerely hope she continues her brave fight for as long as she is able and I fully understand what you are going through as I too lost my Dad not so long ago through a degenerative disease and its something that you've no idea how to cope with until it happens to your family. Shortly afterwards as you know my wife was seriously ill with Breast Cancer and thankfully for us is in remission for which I awake every morning and give thanks to whoever it is who listens. At the same time we have lost a very good friend who was treated as the same time as my wife, same diagnosis and that has been difficult to comes to terms with.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by face the consequences but obviously its not pleasant and for all my faults Daren and your abuse i don't think i have ever wished you any ill. I understand your position with regard to the club and just don't believe on this occassion you our right because no doubt we could form an orderly queue around SMS with our sad situations many of us have been dealing with in our day to day lives and you continue to cope with.

 

It appears you don't want to draw a line under this and will continue to bring it up unecessarily. I would like to simply accept we agree to disagree because I never insulted your Mum or any other cancer sufferers only those perhaps who have a different view on how the club should manage it's charitable requests and the role of McMenemy. You personlised the debate Daren not me and if you want to let that to continue then fair enough but I have tried to make peace with you without compromising my personal opinions which I hope you can respect.

[Nineteen Canteen]

In all these debates/put downs and the like on here of late, we've been missing some final critical pieces of data that help take us back a little and put things into some context.

 

I've just looked back at the '07 report and tried to analyse - PLEASE this isn't a dig at the previous regimes or pro-Lowe, I'm just trying to understand why on earth he even TRIED to save us.... and yes I have really approximated the numbers ok!

 

Historically, empirically or however else we want to judge it, Lowe's return has been a failure.

 

Yes, 19C is fundamentally correct when he says that blame lies with the fans for administration - as admin is simply a consequence of not having enough revenues and fans supply around half of the revenue of the club on matchdays and about 20% from commercial activities.

 

The accounts will not lie we are in admin because not enough CASH has come in to the business.

 

HOWEVER The weakness of 19C's argument that he still fully take on board is WHY the revenue decreased.

Most of us have stated our opinions on that.

The fans did not go - not enough money = admin.

But that is the end result of the disease that has afflicted the club, not the cause nor even the symptoms.

 

What I wanted to really see was the background to the finances when Lowe (& Wilde) decided to return - What were they trying to achieve? It is fine to say they FAILED - the disease was terminal, but what were the symptoms of the disease?

 

In 2007 we had COSTS of 27.2 million, against Turnover of 23.2 million meaning we lost 4million. We were basically kept solvent by selling players for 5million.

 

Now, I tried to extrapolate that into the past year.

We seem to have dropped our average attendances by 2,500 - so for maths about 15% so a best guess would be revenue of 19 and a bit mil. But a great deal of our COSTS were fixed....

 

So what we are really missing is how much Lowe managed to actually cut the cost of sales - if it was by 10% costs would be just under 25mil and we would still have lost almost 6 million. Now ask any manager to cut costs by 10% and they would always tell you in one year it is an impossible dream, but to get to at least break-even we needed to cut our costs by almost 30%.....

 

Now, add to that IMHO that the absolute KILLER in the past year has been the fact that we simply have not had any crown jewels to sell, so there literally was no safety net, if the costs weren't cut, then there was NO back up plan.

 

Looking at this, simply from a "Business Perspective", IF Lowe KNEW these numbers, he KNEW we did not have any crown jewels to sell, how on EARTH could he have honestly believed that he could have turned the club around?

 

Surely we were already a basket case?

 

Forget our whingeing about not playing high earners, or even his ill thought out total football, I just do not understand what drove him to actually believe he could turn the club around in one season.

 

Did he believe he could actually sell the club or get investment?

Did he think he could sell the high earners for a fee - missing all the signals that were there as the global economy plummeted

 

To achieve a PROFIT - ie to actually have some money to pay back the bank overdraft he would have had to bring the cost of sales down from 27.2 million a year to AROUND 19million = an 8 million drop.

 

How could you plan for that KNOWING you had players making up the bulk of that cost tied into the club on long term contracts.

 

Was it belief? Was it ego? Was it REALLY a last ditch attempt to save us? Would any other sane businessman have tried it? Obviously, pick your own version, but I posted at the time that I thought Total Football, Kids and Dutchies was one gamble too many, I am starting to think that it all hid an even bigger gamble....

 

That has failed

 

So yes of course the fans COULD have rallied to the cause early. yes we were told we were in trouble, yes we did moan, boycott and lose enthusiasm. But like many terminally ill patients, realisation often only dawns far too late to make a difference and avoid catching the disease in the first place

 

Phil, I am literally exhausted having digested Daren's post so can't really do your's the justice it deserves. However, in essence I agree with you in that Lowe knew we were a basket case without any assets left to strip and effectively dying. That said he probably had seen the previous season and felt sitting back and hoping for an unrealistic investement was not an option. Especially as that option many of us knew wouldn't happen whilst the shrewdies sat in the treetops.

 

What Lowe do was make drastic cutbacks safe in the knowledge he could hardly make himself anymore unpopular and with the extra support from last season he could have pulled it off but I don't doubt he didn't think for one minute it was going to be very very close for survivial on both fronts. Many of us knew that anyway from day 1 so I'm sure he did.

 

Our club like many others has lived beyond its means in terms of trying to satisfy the demands of their fans. Lowes lack of investment in our first season in the CCC was to try and protect and secure a sound foundation from the future but thta not unsurprisingly did not meet the fans expectations. Prudence vs the Wilde gamble was the choice although to be fair the latter was dressed up to be something entirely different.

 

Blame rosie cheeks for relegation from the Premiership and I can see the obvious arguments with the managers merry go round but blame Lowe for what has led to this then its a resounding no and I blame Wilde and Crouch - reluctant or otherwise. Had Lowe remained as chairman we would still be a CCC side albeit a mid table one along the lines of an Ipswich or a QPR and I think it is unlikely I can be convinced otherwise.

[JustMike]

Phil, I am literally exhausted having digested Daren's post so can't really do your's the justice it deserves. However, in essence I agree with you in that Lowe knew we were a basket case without any assets left to strip and effectively dying. That said he probably had seen the previous season and felt sitting back and hoping for an unrealistic investement was not an option. Especially as that option many of us knew wouldn't happen whilst the shrewdies sat in the treetops.

 

What Lowe do was make drastic cutbacks safe in the knowledge he could hardly make himself anymore unpopular and with the extra support from last season he could have pulled it off but I don't doubt he didn't think for one minute it was going to be very very close for survivial on both fronts. Many of us knew that anyway from day 1 so I'm sure he did.

 

Our club like many others has lived beyond its means in terms of trying to satisfy the demands of their fans. Lowes lack of investment in our first season in the CCC was to try and protect and secure a sound foundation from the future but thta not unsurprisingly did not meet the fans expectations. Prudence vs the Wilde gamble was the choice although to be fair the latter was dressed up to be something entirely different.

 

Blame rosie cheeks for relegation from the Premiership and I can see the obvious arguments with the managers merry go round but blame Lowe for what has led to this then its a resounding no and I blame Wilde and Crouch - reluctant or otherwise. Had Lowe remained as chairman we would still be a CCC side albeit a mid table one along the lines of an Ipswich or a QPR and I think it is unlikely I can be convinced otherwise.

 

You already know my views on this but, in short, Lowe started the snow ball effect. He has not learnt from past mistakes and would not have done so even if he was here for the whole time. His management merry-go-round would have continued as history, and present day tells us. Yes granted Wilde should not have ******ed £7 million up the wall. Crouch however i feel a little less blame for.