Not happening, is it ???

[Junior Mullet]

We have a great stadium, and potentialy a great fan base, yet 2 weeks after administration is called, the only likely buyer of a club asset is the f**king council.

 

Is this adminstrator doing his f**king job properly ?

 

Relax Alpine, these things don't happen over night unless it is done by way of pre-pack, which is not the case here.

 

The Administrators are busy making sure they get the best deal possible. Bidders may be waiting to see our final league position before making an offer. Bidders are also busy gathering finance. All of this takes time.

 

Expect to see major developments within a month of the last game of the season. Until then relax and enjoy the fact that Lowe and his muppets have walked away with nothing but egg on their faces.

[dubai_phil]

Simply put, the course we took from the start of this season precluded us ending up here..

 

I wonder how different things would have been under Crouch and Pearson

 

What we are REALLY missing in that debate are the actual figures. No issue with the sentiments at all.

 

As you know, by all criteria nobody can argue that Lowe did anything OTHER THAN fail this year, so it is his fault we are where we are now.

 

But I also wonder whether we may have actually been dead even before he tried the Norwegian Blue Parrot sketch trick on us...

 

I'm sure we'll get some facts once the whole NDA thing gets finished or new people want to let "the Truth be Out there"

 

Shame they were never able to publish the half year figures to see what was really happening behind the scenes

[Big Bad Bob]

I would hope that a professional like Mr Fry would be putting it a few more that 7-8 hours per day on the Administration and potential buyout of Football Club!

 

I said 7-8 working hours, the other 4-5 would be, ahem, working lunches (all expense paid by the admin fees!)

[Torres]

We have a great stadium, and potentialy a great fan base, yet 2 weeks after administration is called, the only likely buyer of a club asset is the f**king council.

 

Is this adminstrator doing his f**king job properly ?

 

[John Smith]

Nothing is happening. Lots of enquiries but everybody is sitting on the fence and waiting.

I have it on the highest authority that unless 400k is raised by the Burnley game then we will not play that match, and the club will go to the wall.

A big celebrity kick about is being arranged at St Mary's (the end of next week I believe, announcement imminent) in a desperate attempt to raise funds and get us through to the end of the season.

 

I don't get this post, by that I mean, the 'situation'? If nothing is happening, why all the inquiries? If there are enquirers and people are sitting on the fence and waiting, waiting for what? Liquidation? If EVERYBODY is sitting on the fence, surely that means people are looking, surely they can't all be interested but just want front row seats for the sinking of the Titanic.

 

If we don't raise 400k by next Saturday, the game won't go ahead. What this omits is, how much have we currently raised and how much further do we have to go?

 

If there is to be a charity match, then it has to be held on Thursday of next week. If the game is needed to help find 400k, how much are they going to charge? When will they announce it? How will they sell enough tickets in one week to make a difference? And if it isn't next week, what's the point, apparently we're liquefied anyway, so no cause to play for?

 

On another note, many on here are talking about L1 and CCC. I have a little problem with this. If enquirers come in and they are waiting for the end of the season to decide, they obviously don't give a monkey's about securing our future, it is clearly just an 'investment' and we've had one of those before with Lowe and Askham et al.

 

The sort of people that are waiting to see which league we are in next season are also the type of people that will be happy for the fans to foot the bill so that they don't have to pick up the true expenses of running a football club ie. the summer period. This type of 'interested party' isn't interested in football, isn't interested in Southampton, they're only interested in themselves.

 

So, 1 of 2 things will happen, no one will actually commit and we go into liquidation; or 2, someone will commit but they won't be in it for the football or the club, just trying to make a few bucks from a poorly run business that has a potential to get a big pay day through promotion. The recession should have passed, buy for peanuts, sell for mega bucks. Change of owners again, new owners have to be far richer than the last lot in order to progress.

 

We are in the sh*t and the vultures are circling. Even if we do survive, it won't be any sort of existence I fear. Lowe mark II step up, your time is here!

[Frank's cousin]

What we are REALLY missing in that debate are the actual figures. No issue with the sentiments at all.

 

As you know, by all criteria nobody can argue that Lowe did anything OTHER THAN fail this year, so it is his fault we are where we are now.

 

But I also wonder whether we may have actually been dead even before he tried the Norwegian Blue Parrot sketch trick on us...

 

I'm sure we'll get some facts once the whole NDA thing gets finished or new people want to let "the Truth be Out there"

 

Shame they were never able to publish the half year figures to see what was really happening behind the scenes

 

I think the biggest irony is that what probably killed us financially is the the very thing that helped on the pitch get a few better results - the inability to loan out or sell on those high earners that returned during the Januray period - It has been speculated that the OD was reduced prior to this and then has seen a gradual increase as these players returned to the books and gates reduced do to poor results. The only thing that could have really prevented it was probably 25000-28000 every home game, but that was never going to happen in the CCC, as we never got that even in the playoff season.....

[Channon's Sideburns]

Good shout.

 

But I think it's July 1st, so we still have almost two months to get by.

 

How about the Club ask ST purchasers to pay by Credit Card only?

 

The credit card providers will refund purchases over £100 if a firm goes under...

 

Everyone's a winner........apart from the club if it went of course.

[dubai_phil]

I don't get this post, by that I mean, the 'situation'? If nothing is happening, why all the inquiries? If there are enquirers and people are sitting on the fence and waiting, waiting for what? Liquidation? If EVERYBODY is sitting on the fence, surely that means people are looking, surely they can't all be interested but just want front row seats for the sinking of the Titanic.

 

If we don't raise 400k by next Saturday, the game won't go ahead. What this omits is, how much have we currently raised and how much further do we have to go?

 

If there is to be a charity match, then it has to be held on Thursday of next week. If the game is needed to help find 400k, how much are they going to charge? When will they announce it? How will they sell enough tickets in one week to make a difference? And if it isn't next week, what's the point, apparently we're liquefied anyway, so no cause to play for?

 

On another note, many on here are talking about L1 and CCC. I have a little problem with this. If enquirers come in and they are waiting for the end of the season to decide, they obviously don't give a monkey's about securing our future, it is clearly just an 'investment' and we've had one of those before with Lowe and Askham et al.

 

The sort of people that are waiting to see which league we are in next season are also the type of people that will be happy for the fans to foot the bill so that they don't have to pick up the true expenses of running a football club ie. the summer period. This type of 'interested party' isn't interested in football, isn't interested in Southampton, they're only interested in themselves.

 

So, 1 of 2 things will happen, no one will actually commit and we go into liquidation; or 2, someone will commit but they won't be in it for the football or the club, just trying to make a few bucks from a poorly run business that has a potential to get a big pay day through promotion. The recession should have passed, buy for peanuts, sell for mega bucks. Change of owners again, new owners have to be far richer than the last lot in order to progress.

 

We are in the sh*t and the vultures are circling. Even if we do survive, it won't be any sort of existence I fear. Lowe mark II step up, your time is here!

 

It isn't that easy.

 

In CCC we will get more TV revenue than we would in L1. We are also likely to get a slightly higher average attendance.

 

The cost of running the actual club - paying for the players is pretty much set in stone as the club are bound by contracts - we have to pay Rasiak for example IF we cannot give him away.

 

So our costs are pretty much fixed

What players they COULD sell is pretty much flexible

Our Income is dependent on which league we are in

 

So the BUYERS must have SOME cash to cover the losses next year.

 

Losses in L1 are likely to be higher than if we are in CCC with increased TV

So the new owners NEED to have money to keep the club running even IF they are benevolent fans.

 

Would it not be wise to give LESS to the administrator IF you can and keep more to keep us in with a chance of getting out of L1? Especially IF as I suspect, people looking at us have only afixed amount of cash to play with (I ain't ever found money growing on a tree)

[Torres]

I know Lowe wanted to avoid admin AND keep us up, but looking back, shouldn't he have sold off more people? Yes we'd likely have finished bottom, but perhaps losing Lallana, Surman, Davis, Saga, Skacel etc. was the way to go. Wipe out the overdraft, reduce wage bill etc.

 

But then, I doubt anyone would have claimed that to be a success would they. Even though it would have been necessary.

 

I think he feels that the rug was unexpectedly pulled from under him by Barclays. Doubtless had Barclays made their intentions clear in January then anyone of any value would have been flogged to avoid the sh*tstorm we're in now.

[Highfield Saint]

I don't get this post, by that I mean, the 'situation'? If nothing is happening, why all the inquiries? If there are enquirers and people are sitting on the fence and waiting, waiting for what? Liquidation? If EVERYBODY is sitting on the fence, surely that means people are looking, surely they can't all be interested but just want front row seats for the sinking of the Titanic.

 

If we don't raise 400k by next Saturday, the game won't go ahead. What this omits is, how much have we currently raised and how much further do we have to go?

 

If there is to be a charity match, then it has to be held on Thursday of next week. If the game is needed to help find 400k, how much are they going to charge? When will they announce it? How will they sell enough tickets in one week to make a difference? And if it isn't next week, what's the point, apparently we're liquefied anyway, so no cause to play for?

 

On another note, many on here are talking about L1 and CCC. I have a little problem with this. If enquirers come in and they are waiting for the end of the season to decide, they obviously don't give a monkey's about securing our future, it is clearly just an 'investment' and we've had one of those before with Lowe and Askham et al.

 

The sort of people that are waiting to see which league we are in next season are also the type of people that will be happy for the fans to foot the bill so that they don't have to pick up the true expenses of running a football club ie. the summer period. This type of 'interested party' isn't interested in football, isn't interested in Southampton, they're only interested in themselves.

 

So, 1 of 2 things will happen, no one will actually commit and we go into liquidation; or 2, someone will commit but they won't be in it for the football or the club, just trying to make a few bucks from a poorly run business that has a potential to get a big pay day through promotion. The recession should have passed, buy for peanuts, sell for mega bucks. Change of owners again, new owners have to be far richer than the last lot in order to progress.

 

We are in the sh*t and the vultures are circling. Even if we do survive, it won't be any sort of existence I fear. Lowe mark II step up, your time is here!

 

My understanding is that the continuance of the season after Sat is to a degree dependent on Sat's result as this will affect the forecast attendance for the Burnley game. It may be that if the forecast for this is low because of perhaps results going against us then the decision may be made to "pull the plug". Part of the problem is that the Forest game is in May which is an additional month for all the overheads etc.

 

I also understand that serious bidders have been asked for proof of funding.

 

There will undoubtedly and inevitably be an element of brinkmanship and politics within this process.

[slickmick]

I know Lowe wanted to avoid admin AND keep us up, but looking back, shouldn't he have sold off more people? Yes we'd likely have finished bottom, but perhaps losing Lallana, Surman, Davis, Saga, Skacel etc. was the way to go. Wipe out the overdraft, reduce wage bill etc.

 

But then, I doubt anyone would have claimed that to be a success would they. Even though it would have been necessary.

 

 

Need a buyer first.

[Saint_Ash]

Seeing as Fry was at the Wolves game he's come for a little Jolly and using his status to get free games and hospitality!

[John B]

Seeing as Fry was at the Wolves game he's come for a little Jolly and using his status to get free games and hospitality!

 

Yes it is called the perks of the job

[rallyboy]

I'm not a scaremonger but my understanding is like one or two others, that we are struggling to make it as far as the Burnley game.

The finances have obviously been managed more badly than any of us realised, and that is saying something.

 

If someone had said in January, we must sell or we won't be able to complete our fixtures then maybe more would have taken notice and would have realised that the club itself was in far more trouble than other clubs on the brink of administration.

[Kingsland Codger]

because its a non-issue

 

You have no idea, like the rest of us what is involved or going on. Why dont you just do what the rest of us are doing and wait??

 

Well said.

 

At times like this one might consider the words of one of fiction's Great Philosophers ...

 

It was a Very Windy Day, and Winnie-the-Pooh and Piglet were walking in the Hundred Acre Wood. Piglet's ears streamed behind him like banners as he fought his way along. Being a rather anxious sort of animal, Piglet turned to Pooh and asked nervously, "Supposing a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"

 

After careful thought, Pooh, being somewhat wiser and less anxious, replied "Supposing it didn't" .

[bridge too far]

Yes it is called the perks of the job

 

Or it could be called a) learning more about the product you are selling and / or b) entertaining a potential buyer :smt102

 

What a cynical lot you are on here

[Cabrone]

We have a great stadium, and potentialy a great fan base, yet 2 weeks after administration is called, the only likely buyer of a club asset is the f**king council.

 

Is this adminstrator doing his f**king job properly ?

 

We're all going to have to be patient on this one. It's going to be brown trousers all round as it goes down to the wire.

 

If I was a buyer I'd want to hang back on any offer until I knew where this club will be next season. Once I knew I would then adjust my bid accordingly.

 

Jumping in now could cost a lot of money.

[TheCholulaKid]

Would have had far more chance with 2 sell out crowds, instead we left over 13,000 empty seats over the 2 games.

 

It's the fans fault is it? Yawn.

[Saint_Ash]

Yes it is called the perks of the job

 

Well as we're in such a state he should've been doing his job and when his job is done he can have as many perks as he likes.

[Alanh]

To put it into perspective, Coventry did their deal with SISU 30 minutes before their winding up deadline. We haven't got an official winding up deadline yet, but I would not be surprised if this story goes down to the wire just like Coventry's did.

[Torres]

Well said.

 

At times like this one might consider the words of one of fiction's Great Philosophers ...

 

It was a Very Windy Day, and Winnie-the-Pooh and Piglet were walking in the Hundred Acre Wood. Piglet's ears streamed behind him like banners as he fought his way along. Being a rather anxious sort of animal, Piglet turned to Pooh and asked nervously, "Supposing a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"

 

After careful thought, Pooh, being somewhat wiser and less anxious, replied "Supposing it didn't" .

 

Excellent. It's a little grey and depressing this morning and this made me actually laugh out loud. Thanks.

 

Mods - can we have a name change please? Alpine_Saint to Piglet.

[Nineteen Canteen]

We have a great stadium, and potentialy a great fan base, yet 2 weeks after administration is called, the only likely buyer of a club asset is the f**king council.

 

Is this adminstrator doing his f**king job properly ?

 

Last Friday the Administrator was interviewed on Solent and he said (paraphrased) that potential investors were strongly urged to put in bids and not to be put off by the fact they had already received 34 notes of interests. That suggested to me he was working hard at trying to get some more attractive bids in for the club and that what was on the table at the moment was maybe not enough hence subsequent rumour from Morph about 'cross pollination of bids' in other words 'encouraging' others to unite and work together. Where have we heard that before?

 

The Administrator is essentially just an agent with regards to selling and can't dress it up to be something it isn't. If people don't want to buy it then its a combination of the economy, the product and its potential and a wider problem in football that it is unsustainable outside the big clubs in the Premiership at current levels of costs/revenue. Football needs to downsize.

[John Smith]

I think the biggest irony is that what probably killed us financially is the the very thing that helped on the pitch get a few better results - the inability to loan out or sell on those high earners that returned during the Januray period - It has been speculated that the OD was reduced prior to this and then has seen a gradual increase as these players returned to the books and gates reduced do to poor results. The only thing that could have really prevented it was probably 25000-28000 every home game' date=' but that was never going to happen in the CCC, as we never got that even in the playoff season.....[/quote']

 

Come on FC, let's not avoid the facts. Fact is, the high earners were loaned out or sold all bar one - Rudi. The problem was that we loaned in sooooo many cr*p loanees and that the youth team weren;t up for the job, Lowe had to sanction the playing of Saga AND Rudi. So that was only one extra player and one extra bonus. The real problem was the season long loans of highly paid cr*p loanee's santioned by Lowe. HE thought, along with JP and Wotte, that a team of youth team players with a few youth players from bigger clubs and some smaller ones, was our ticket to survival. Add to that bringing in 'cheap' management (how much did we end up paying JP when he left - oh the accounts weren;t released) and you have Lowes 3 point plan for disaster.

 

In short, the overdraft was always going to rise because the costs were not reduced enough in order to account for the returning ONE player. Something tells me that Barclays or AVIVA told Lowe to sell players or they will put us into admin and Lowe just laughed it off (see his interviews and the baby in the pram throwing his dummy), didn't sell and the bank actually called it in. Lowe thought he knew the financial world HE WAS WRONG!

 

And so, at the end of the day, when all is said and done, THE MAIN REASON WE ARE IN ADMIN IS BECAUSE OF WHAT LOWE DID LAST SUMMER - FACT!

[um pahars]

The only thing that could have really prevented it was probably 25000-28000 every home game' date=' but that was never going to happen in the CCC, as we never got that even in the playoff season.....[/quote']

 

So effectively we were a lost cause right from the off then???

 

Doesn't really reconcile with everything that was said by Lowe, Wilde, even Luker about a year ago when they came back.

 

It was a lost cause the minute we employed a no hoper of a manager who delivered failure and the gates assoicated with those results.

[trousers]

Fast forward to now

 

The TIMING is set by the Administrator. This means that possible bidders have to get their act together before they can walk in. One example is a consortium say of 3 people - what name do they use? Do they have a legal entity such as a Ltd Company.

 

Talking of which...as in the good old days of LLS, HelpMeRhonda, Asturius Sports, NamG, etc, has anyone done any scouring of the Companies House website to see what new Ltd companies have been set up in the last couple of weeks with anything 'interesting' in the title...?

[Nineteen Canteen]

I'm not a scaremonger but my understanding is like one or two others, that we are struggling to make it as far as the Burnley game.

The finances have obviously been managed more badly than any of us realised, and that is saying something.

 

If someone had said in January, we must sell or we won't be able to complete our fixtures then maybe more would have taken notice and would have realised that the club itself was in far more trouble than other clubs on the brink of administration.

 

The fact we didn't issue ST renewal in February for March discounts and that Lowe's silence was more powerful than any words he could have used should have been enough to most if not the Echo who could have perhaps commented and encouraged attendance instead of their usual kneejerk response.

[John B]

Come on FC, let's not avoid the facts. Fact is, the high earners were loaned out or sold all bar one - Rudi. The problem was that we loaned in sooooo many cr*p loanees and that the youth team weren;t up for the job, Lowe had to sanction the playing of Saga AND Rudi. So that was only one extra player and one extra bonus. The real problem was the season long loans of highly paid cr*p loanee's santioned by Lowe. HE thought, along with JP and Wotte, that a team of youth team players with a few youth players from bigger clubs and some smaller ones, was our ticket to survival. Add to that bringing in 'cheap' management (how much did we end up paying JP when he left - oh the accounts weren;t released) and you have Lowes 3 point plan for disaster.

 

In short, the overdraft was always going to rise because the costs were not reduced enough in order to account for the returning ONE player. Something tells me that Barclays or AVIVA told Lowe to sell players or they will put us into admin and Lowe just laughed it off (see his interviews and the baby in the pram throwing his dummy), didn't sell and the bank actually called it in. Lowe thought he knew the financial world HE WAS WRONG!

 

And so, at the end of the day, when all is said and done, THE MAIN REASON WE ARE IN ADMIN IS BECAUSE OF WHAT LOWE DID LAST SUMMER - FACT!

 

I dont think it is a fact just your analysis not based on facts.

 

It was obvious we had to sell players but probably no one wanted to buy them at reasonable prices

 

 

Getting in good loan strikers at low wages I would have thought was very difficult

[Nineteen Canteen]

It's the fans fault is it? Yawn.

 

Blame can be proportioned across a spread of problems. Fan's apathy is one of them and yawn indeed if you believe otherwise.

[John B]

So effectively we were a lost cause right from the off then???

 

Doesn't really reconcile with everything that was said by Lowe, Wilde, even Luker about a year ago when they came back.

 

It was a lost cause the minute we employed a no hoper of a manager who delivered failure and the gates assoicated with those results.

 

I think it was a lost cause when we were unable to sell off our top earners to reduce the debt

 

 

Also the wrong tactics were employed for home games

[um pahars]

I think he feels that the rug was unexpectedly pulled from under him by Barclays. Doubtless had Barclays made their intentions clear in January then anyone of any value would have been flogged to avoid the sh*tstorm we're in now.

 

Barclays made their intentions pretty clear last September when they unilaterally reduced our overdraft by £1million. We did nothing during the trasnfer window to raise funds, we did nothing to sell other assets to raise the shortfall and it appeared that we walked blindly into breaching Barclay's restrictions.

 

Lowe was made aware of Barclay's decision a fair while back, and IMHO he took his eye off the ball and/or totally misjudged the situation.

[um pahars]

Blame can be proportioned across a spread of problems.

 

What were your views last summer????

 

What forums/outlets did you voice your vociferous opinions on back then????:cool:

[John B]

Barclays made their intentions pretty clear last September when they unilaterally reduced our overdraft by £1million. We did nothing during the trasnfer window to raise funds, we did nothing to sell other assets to raise the shortfall and it appeared that we walked blindly into breaching Barclay's restrictions.

 

Lowe was made aware of Barclay's decision a fair while back, and IMHO he took his eye off the ball and/or totally misjudged the situation.

 

So what would you have done as I agree with your analysis.

 

 

He may have been hoping to sell in the January Window but may not have got any offers

[trousers]

No one will commit to a bid until they know a) our points status and b) our league status. Also a lot will depend on this saturdays result and next saturdays attendance. As the Burnley game is the last home game of the season, that has to generate enough cash for the club to survive the season, otherwise the administrator will just fold it up. Time and circumstances are definitely against us.

 

So, with my skewed logic goggles on, in a way, by winning the odd game here and there and thus prolonging our relegation status we could actually be shooting ourselves in the foot? Could it be argued that had we been effectively (if not mathematically) relegated by (e.g. like Charlton) then this would have made things clearer for both the administrator and the potential bidders - i.e. everyone would know where things stand.

 

So, in summary, could the very future of the club be in greater jeopardy by us being in limbo (league position wise) compared to being in a dead cert relegation position?

 

An unpalatable and slightly bonkers thought I guess but a smidgen of reality in there somewhere?!

Edited 16 April, 2009 by trousers

[Pancake]

Excellent. It's a little grey and depressing this morning and this made me actually laugh out loud. Thanks.

 

Mods - can we have a name change please? Alpine_Saint to Piglet.

 

I see him as more of an Eeyore myself.

[alpine_saint]

What we are REALLY missing in that debate are the actual figures. No issue with the sentiments at all.

 

As you know, by all criteria nobody can argue that Lowe did anything OTHER THAN fail this year, so it is his fault we are where we are now.

 

But I also wonder whether we may have actually been dead even before he tried the Norwegian Blue Parrot sketch trick on us...

 

I'm sure we'll get some facts once the whole NDA thing gets finished or new people want to let "the Truth be Out there"

 

Shame they were never able to publish the half year figures to see what was really happening behind the scenes

 

The whole reason for the frisson of fear doing the rounds at the moment are a few rumours that because the last couple of attendances havent been all that was hoped, we arent even going to make it to the end of the season.

 

If Crouch and Pearson had been here still, with Crouch putting a friendlier and more fan-oriented slant on the club communications, and Pearson motivating and employing tactics that actually, well, made sense and getting better results because of them, I am certain attendances over the 23-odd games would have held up better, let alone the last 3 games.

 

Ergo, we would have been in a lot less money trouble and would ahve made it through the season and perhaps not even ended up in admin.

 

I have seen nothing to indicate Crouch would not have made the necessary cost cuts to keep us going. After all, he made the unpopular decision to loan out Rasiak and Skacel.

[Nineteen Canteen]

Come on FC, let's not avoid the facts. Fact is, the high earners were loaned out or sold all bar one - Rudi. The problem was that we loaned in sooooo many cr*p loanees and that the youth team weren;t up for the job, Lowe had to sanction the playing of Saga AND Rudi. So that was only one extra player and one extra bonus. The real problem was the season long loans of highly paid cr*p loanee's santioned by Lowe. HE thought, along with JP and Wotte, that a team of youth team players with a few youth players from bigger clubs and some smaller ones, was our ticket to survival. Add to that bringing in 'cheap' management (how much did we end up paying JP when he left - oh the accounts weren;t released) and you have Lowes 3 point plan for disaster.

 

In short, the overdraft was always going to rise because the costs were not reduced enough in order to account for the returning ONE player. Something tells me that Barclays or AVIVA told Lowe to sell players or they will put us into admin and Lowe just laughed it off (see his interviews and the baby in the pram throwing his dummy), didn't sell and the bank actually called it in. Lowe thought he knew the financial world HE WAS WRONG!

 

And so, at the end of the day, when all is said and done, THE MAIN REASON WE ARE IN ADMIN IS BECAUSE OF WHAT LOWE DID LAST SUMMER - FACT!

 

John typing in capitals is one thing when its to simply highlight your anti-Lowe hysteria its another thing entirely especially when its wrong.

 

Was Lowe responsible for a wage bill that was 81% of Turnover?

Is Jason Euell not a high wage earner?

Fans were already boycotting the club because of Lowe the need to use Youth and expected impact on performance from Day 1. Supportive?

If Lowe had been able to lend out Saga (again), Skacel and Euell what would be the impact on the crowd numbers by those unable to calmly assess the situation?

Like last season we can identify with good signings and bad signings and for every Pekhart, Hammill and Pericard we can point to Saejlis, Holmes and Cork.

Is it Lowe's fault or the manager's that players like Surman and lallana have not stepped up to the plate in the same way as Davis, Perry and increasingly James and McGoldrick?

 

At the end of the day we are where we are because of the hysterical reaction by the likes of yourself at the return of Lowe and your decisions like many to boycott the club instead of supporting it through one of its most traumatic periods in its history.

 

You threw your toys out of the pram and continue to blindly ignore the reality of what went before that hamstrung us from the day that Lowe came back and at the same time you decided to walk away without giving anyone a chance. Why did you choose to do that? So you could make yourself look like some kind of smug smartar5e juggling the facts to suit his own agenda. Well done objective achieved but I guess you overlooked the fact the club may go out of business or be starting in League in 16 months time.

 

With respect you have a degree of responsibility for this mess along with Lowe and all the other factors which makes your hissy fits somewhat harder to take than those who were vehemently against Lowe but still continued to define the role of a true supporter where they were not restricted by economic or geographic restructions. What have you achieved John this season?

[trousers]

I cannot see many people parting with money for ST's until they know our future and who will own us...

 

A catch-22 situation is looming that FL non-decision could prove fatal

 

So, are we left with these two scenarios in that case....?

 

1) The football club goes under because there's still a chance we could stay up (which breeds indecision amongst the pool of potential investors)

 

or

 

2) We forfeit our remaining results which, whilst guaranteeing our relegation, removes the 'indecision' catch-22?

 

Of course, the above assumes that of the "34" potential investors there is at least one who will buy a league 1 Football Club....

 

In other words, does there come a point of no return where we force ourselves into relegation to protect our very existence?

 

edit: actually, throwing matches is probably a tad illegal so ignore me!

Edited 16 April, 2009 by trousers

[dubai_phil]

So, with my skewed logic goggles on, in a way, by winning the odd game here and there and thus prolonging our relegation status we could actually be shooting ourselves in the foot? Could it be argued that had we been effectively (if not mathematically) relegated by (e.g. like Charlton) then this would have made things clearer for both the administrator and the potential bidders - i.e. everyone would know where things stand.

 

So, in summary, could the very future of the club be in greater jeopardy by us being in limbo (league position wise) compared to being in a dead cert relegation position?

 

An unpalatable and slightly bonkers thought I guess but a smidgen of reality in there somewhere?!

 

 

Oh keep up! I said that about 4 hours ago as well as a couple of times before - an indavertent consequence I called the thread8-[

[trousers]

Oh keep up! I said that about 4 hours ago as well as a couple of times before - an indavertent consequence I called the thread8-[

 

Whoops. Humble apologies!

 

I'm just in a daze at the very thought that our mini winning spree a month or so ago, coupled with Monday's victory V Palace, could actually be doing us harm rather than good.

[Torres]

Barclays made their intentions pretty clear last September when they unilaterally reduced our overdraft by £1million. We did nothing during the trasnfer window to raise funds, we did nothing to sell other assets to raise the shortfall and it appeared that we walked blindly into breaching Barclay's restrictions.

 

Lowe was made aware of Barclay's decision a fair while back, and IMHO he took his eye off the ball and/or totally misjudged the situation.

 

So you're saying that we should have had a January firesale to raise as much cash as we could just in case Barclays hardened their position towards us further?

 

Can you imagine the outcry?

[Alain Perrin]

And the season ticket issue is just a nightmare situation. On one hand these funds could tide us over and I could imagine that many could use it as a rallying point to show their support for the Club, but would people buy a season ticket knowing that there is a risk it might not be honoured????????

 

Agree that ST sales are vital, but I'm not sure why the club can't put that money in escrow.

 

Open up an escrow account where the condition of release is the ongoing existence of the football club. Fans 'buy' their season tickets in the usual way, but the funds aren't released until the future of the club is assured.

 

Not sure if it would work given the admin situation, but that would be my first thought.

[trousers]

So you're saying that we should have had a January firesale to raise as much cash as we could just in case Barclays hardened their position towards us further?

 

Can you imagine the outcry?

 

Only if the reasons why weren't communicated transparently

[Nineteen Canteen]

So effectively we were a lost cause right from the off then???

 

Doesn't really reconcile with everything that was said by Lowe, Wilde, even Luker about a year ago when they came back.

 

It was a lost cause the minute we employed a no hoper of a manager who delivered failure and the gates assoicated with those results.

 

Oh dear, seems it's catching. Gates were down UM by about 5k before a ball was kicked and after the Norwich win crowds actually rose during one of our worse home runs on record. Its therefore arguable if its Lowe related or performance (JP) related. Personally, it would suggest it is Lowe relate and who's to say had he kept on Pearson the Caveman the likes of John Smith woudl still have got thier knickers all twisted and stayed away in a girly huff.

 

Even after the renewed hope delivered by Wotte gates barely crawled above 18k (prior to admin) supporting my theory that performance actually had little to do with it.

Edited 16 April, 2009 by Nineteen Canteen
It seems an opening bracket '(' followed by 'until' suggests a ladies front bottom

[trousers]

Agree that ST sales are vital, but I'm not sure why the club can't put that money in escrow.

 

Open up an escrow account where the condition of release is the ongoing existence of the football club. Fans 'buy' their season tickets in the usual way, but the funds aren't released until the future of the club is assured.

 

Not sure if it would work given the admin situation, but that would be my first thought.

 

Sounds good to me.

 

And to offset the League 1 vs CCC "dilemma" that fans would have in deciding whether the price offered good value for money, simply cost them on a tiered payment basis. So you pay, say, £300 now, which covers League 1 football, and £100 later if we stay up.

 

Simple?

[um pahars]

So you're saying that we should have had a January firesale to raise as much cash as we could just in case Barclays hardened their position towards us further?

 

Can you imagine the outcry?

 

Barclay's had already hardened their position and capped our overdraft at £4m. We must have some pss poor firecasting skills if we didn't realise we were going to breach that and needed to do something to avert administration.

 

My guess is that Lowe misread Barclay's stubborness, but as they had made their initentions clear with capping our borrowing at £4m, then that is Lowe & co's fault and not Barclay's.

 

As for an outcry, then I'm afraid (a) the outcry with regards administration would be worse (b) this is where they needed to be able to engender support and a degree of trust and empathy with the supporters to get the story out and © quite frankly those in charge need to make decisions for the long term benefit of the club, regardless of what we think sometimes.

[Alanh]

And so, at the end of the day, when all is said and done, THE MAIN REASON WE ARE IN ADMIN IS BECAUSE OF WHAT LOWE DID LAST SUMMER - FACT!

 

I'm gonna diagree on this one. You're right that actions last summer have contributed to us being in admin now, but the actions that caused us to generate the level of debt with Barclays that eventually resulted in them pulling the plug go back further - giving rasiak a 4 year contract in 2006, signing Euell and John on effectively Prem wages in 2007, not cutting more high earners like Idiakez, Lundekvam, etc from the squad when the parachute payments stopped in 2007, not being able to sell Skacel, Rasiak, Saga, John or Euell at any point in the last 18 months.

 

With hindsight the only thing that would have helped last summer was the the last item on that list above. Perhaps the loaning out of several of those players and the freezing out of others in an effort to get them to move was, while unpopular with fans, the only means left at the boards disposal of getting the main huge overhead - the wage bill - under control.

 

Overall the summer of 2008 was 'last roll of the dice' time as a series of decisions made several years earlier combined to put is in an untenable situation.

[um pahars]

Oh dear, seems it's catching. Gates were down UM by about 5k before a ball was kicked

 

What were your vociferous views before the season started???

 

What forum/s did you post these vociferous views on up until coming on here a few months ago???;)

[Torres]

Only if the reasons why weren't communicated transparently

 

Everything that came out of the club was branded "bullsh1t" by half the supporters anyway, regardless of the truth.

[Nineteen Canteen]

Sounds good to me.

 

And to offset the League 1 vs CCC "dilemma" that fans would have in deciding whether the price offered good value for money, simply cost them on a tiered payment basis. So you pay, say, £300 now, which covers League 1 football, and £100 later if we stay up.

 

Simple?

 

Trust and public perception. I would not invest a penny if the forensic accountants need to be employed to determine if we have have broken some basic inter company structure. If the FL aren't sure of the transparency between the two entities then nor am I and neither should anyone else.

 

I may have missed it but has anyone determined where these charitable donations are being paid and how they are being used? Bit much if some very high earners are deferring their salaries when others are not when perhaps above a threshold they should be taking a 50% pay cut as would be common in other industries.

[trousers]

Everything that came out of the club was branded "bullsh1t" by half the supporters anyway, regardless of the truth.

 

Maybe there should have been a joint statement with Barclays then? Or would that have flouted LSE rules perhaps?