Nineteen Canteen Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 It was well documented prior to administration that Crouch offered to invest £2m into the club under the condition that Lowe and Wilde match his contribution. It is reasonable to assume Lowe or Wilde did not have that amount of cash available and it was well known right up till the last minute Lowe was franticly searching for investment to satisfy Barclays and save the club. Assuming I am correct in my understanding I find it inconceivable Lowe would not have approached Crouch and asked him to at a minimum loan the club £2m in order that we could get back within our operating limits imposed by the bank. Do you think Lowe contacted Crouch? Did Crouch refuse his request and if so was he aware that his refusal to invest unconditionally would be put the club into or on the brink of administration? Do you think he MUST have known it? Finally as we know Crouch and McMenemy travel to games together can we still believe McMenemy's comment on the OS that he was unaware of the perilious state the club was in? Are those who are held in such high regard by many fans acting as we would expect them to in accordance with that position of respect they are afforded? I don't know but I would like these questions clarified.
alpine_saint Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 It was well documented prior to administration that Crouch offered to invest £2m into the club under the condition that Lowe and Wilde match his contribution. It is reasonable to assume Lowe or Wilde did not have that amount of cash available and it was well known right up till the last minute Lowe was franticly searching for investment to satisfy Barclays and save the club. Assuming I am correct in my understanding I find it inconceivable Lowe would not have approached Crouch and asked him to at a minimum loan the club £2m in order that we could get back within our operating limits imposed by the bank. Do you think Lowe contacted Crouch? Did Crouch refuse his request and if so was he aware that his refusal to invest unconditionally would be put the club into or on the brink of administration? Do you think he MUST have known it? Finally as we know Crouch and McMenemy travel to games together can we still believe McMenemy's comment on the OS that he was unaware of the perilious state the club was in? Are those who are held in such high regard by many fans acting as we would expect them to in accordance with that position of respect they are afforded? I don't know but I would like these questions clarified. Why should he have put money into the club when Lowe and Wilde wouldnt ? Would Lowe have relinquished control of the club to Crouch, a bloke who actually owned more of it than him anyway ?
trousers Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Do you think Lowe contacted Crouch? Dunno. Try asking him at the next WH Ireland board meeting?
Tamesaint Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 It was well documented prior to administration that Crouch offered to invest £2m into the club under the condition that Lowe and Wilde match his contribution. It is reasonable to assume Lowe or Wilde did not have that amount of cash available and it was well known right up till the last minute Lowe was franticly searching for investment to satisfy Barclays and save the club. Assuming I am correct in my understanding I find it inconceivable Lowe would not have approached Crouch and asked him to at a minimum loan the club £2m in order that we could get back within our operating limits imposed by the bank. Do you think Lowe contacted Crouch? Did Crouch refuse his request and if so was he aware that his refusal to invest unconditionally would be put the club into or on the brink of administration? Do you think he MUST have known it? Finally as we know Crouch and McMenemy travel to games together can we still believe McMenemy's comment on the OS that he was unaware of the perilious state the club was in? Are those who are held in such high regard by many fans acting as we would expect them to in accordance with that position of respect they are afforded? I don't know but I would like these questions clarified. Lowe pays you. Why don't you ask him???
Saint Billy Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Lowe pays you. Why don't you ask him??? Like it!
Colinjb Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 I don't know but I would like these questions clarified. Why? It's all utterly irrelevant now.
JonnyLove Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 It was well documented prior to administration that Crouch offered to invest £2m into the club under the condition that Lowe and Wilde match his contribution. It is reasonable to assume Lowe or Wilde did not have that amount of cash available and it was well known right up till the last minute Lowe was franticly searching for investment to satisfy Barclays and save the club. Assuming I am correct in my understanding I find it inconceivable Lowe would not have approached Crouch and asked him to at a minimum loan the club £2m in order that we could get back within our operating limits imposed by the bank. Do you think Lowe contacted Crouch? Did Crouch refuse his request and if so was he aware that his refusal to invest unconditionally would be put the club into or on the brink of administration? Do you think he MUST have known it? Finally as we know Crouch and McMenemy travel to games together can we still believe McMenemy's comment on the OS that he was unaware of the perilious state the club was in? Are those who are held in such high regard by many fans acting as we would expect them to in accordance with that position of respect they are afforded? I don't know but I would like these questions clarified. You forget all the other money he put into the club. Paid for a new statue, Payed for players wages and is still helping the club financially by giving more money. The only reason he did not save us from admin was he does not have that sort of money. (he's not shy of a few bob but not to that sort of tune). He put money in. Wupert took money out. Enough said.
Gemmel Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Assuming I am correct in my understanding I find it inconceivable Lowe would not have approached Crouch and asked him to at a minimum loan the club £2m in order that we could get back within our operating limits imposed by the bank. Do you think Lowe contacted Crouch? Did Crouch refuse his request and if so was he aware that his refusal to invest unconditionally would be put the club into or on the brink of administration? Do you think he MUST have known it? Perhaps it says more about lowe than Crouch and as for finding it inconceivable....... Crouch said.... "He was informed as a major shareholder the night before the shares were being suspended" Now if lowe has asked him when they bounced the cheques, things may be a little different. Now Crouch could always be telling porkies, but if Lowe had asked Crouch for a bail out and he had declined, i'm sure lowe would have told us about it during his media rounds
aintforever Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 I think Crouch said just after it happened that he was unaware of the situation.
cellone Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 This is the most important issue at the moment. The whole future of this club lies on the answer to this question.
PAULACZT Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 It was well documented prior to administration that Crouch offered to invest £2m into the club under the condition that Lowe and Wilde match his contribution. It is reasonable to assume Lowe or Wilde did not have that amount of cash available and it was well known right up till the last minute Lowe was franticly searching for investment to satisfy Barclays and save the club. Assuming I am correct in my understanding I find it inconceivable Lowe would not have approached Crouch and asked him to at a minimum loan the club £2m in order that we could get back within our operating limits imposed by the bank. Do you think Lowe contacted Crouch? Did Crouch refuse his request and if so was he aware that his refusal to invest unconditionally would be put the club into or on the brink of administration? Do you think he MUST have known it? Finally as we know Crouch and McMenemy travel to games together can we still believe McMenemy's comment on the OS that he was unaware of the perilious state the club was in? Are those who are held in such high regard by many fans acting as we would expect them to in accordance with that position of respect they are afforded? I don't know but I would like these questions clarified. NC you are so past tense its cringingly awful...Stupert has never put a penny into the club and never will..so why question Crouch and his investment in this football club..Crouch has just put another 50k in on top of what he has lost in his shareholding. Your question is so out of touch with what is currently going on its a bit like asking why is Stupert not on the TV and radio this week? Thats because he has been forgotten by EVERYONE outside of his little un-important circle, of which you are an impotent satellite...adios NC..you are no longer required!
saint lard Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Dunno. Try asking him at the next WH Ireland board meeting? Excellent reposte
L1Minus10 Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 who gives a flying one? your lord and master has gone. why bother giving everyone an opportunity to call him names again
John B Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 I thought Crouch would helped us to avoid administration but in the end he did not. Barclay's did suggest there were problems with the main shareholders if I recall
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 It seems probable to me that Leon Crouch would indeed have invested in SLH in return for real influence in the running of the business via a seat on the board - it doesn't appear likely that this was acceptable to Lowe & Wilde given their expressed dislike of LC . Successful businessmen seldom in my experience get into the habit of signing blank cheques and it seems perfectly reasonable to me that LC would require something in return for his money - who the hell wouldn't ? The importance of personal relationships (even in business matters) should not be underestimated either , it's common knowledge that these three men despise each other so it should come as little of a surprise really that they don't cooperate together effectively - this is the way of the world . SLH under the Lowe & Wilde regime was a dead duck anyway so £2m could only have delayed the inevitable descent into Administration for a few months - better for Leon better & the club that the money be used to help raise the Phoenix from the flames as it were rather than just sink it into Rupert's chronically mismanaged money-pit .
Doctoroncall Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 This is the most important issue at the moment. The whole future of this club lies on the answer to this question. Surely not as important as clarifying the original question?
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 (edited) Prepare yourselves people, Numpty canteen is making one of his monotonous,tripe filled post`s for this thread.. Edit; Well he was going to, but maybe he is hiding or finally realised no one is interested in his dross. Edited 16 April, 2009 by ALWAYS_SFC
Rebel Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Lowe and wilde put the club into administration out of arrogance, pride, ignorance, hubris and spite.... I don't think they were willing to ask certain people for help - this left them no option but to put the club into administration and which in their eyes they can then blame on other people its a get out clause for them .....we did our best...its everybody else fault.....we're not to blame etc they broke the relationship with Barclays, they destabilised the club again by ousting Crouch, Pearson and co, they drove the fans away from the turnstiles, they failed to sell players in January to fund the gap its simple really - administration was avaoidable - the fact we are now in administration is their fault
saintwarwick Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Why should he have put money into the club when Lowe and Wilde wouldnt ? Would Lowe have relinquished control of the club to Crouch, a bloke who actually owned more of it than him anyway ? But less than Wilde.
VectisSaint Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 it was well known right up till the last minute Lowe was franticly searching for investment to satisfy Barclays and save the club. Was it? First I have heard of it. Can't imagine Lowe doing anything frantically Assuming I am correct in my understanding I find it inconceivable Lowe would not have approached Crouch and asked him to at a minimum loan the club £2m in order that we could get back within our operating limits imposed by the bank. I find it inconceivable that Lowe would have approached Crouch. Do you really think the pompous oaf would swallow his pride and go cap in hand to his worst enemy (having already shacked up with his other worst enemy to get back in power) Do you think Lowe contacted Crouch? No trying to shift the blame for Lowe and Wilde's massive ****-ups onto Crouch is really quite pointless at this stage.
stevegrant Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 NC you are so past tense its cringingly awful...Stupert has never put a penny into the club The hypocrisy in those 18 words is incredible.
Nineteen Canteen Posted 16 April, 2009 Author Posted 16 April, 2009 Interesting that the majority so far deem it of little concern. At the eleventh hour I believe Lowe would have given up control of the club if he could have saved it and would have offered Crouch something in return. Even if Crouch received a phone call the night before there was still time to save the club and invest the £2m he had recently offered. If he didn't have the money why offer it so publicly if he couldn't back it up if pushed? If Crouch didn't have the £2m why did he offer it a few weeks before or was he still banking on his £1.9m of shares returning to his original purchase price?Was it just a bluff in an attempt to make the board look bad? Hardly supportive and bordering on dirty tricks IMO. Fair enough if he didn't want to save the club but why act so publicly that he was willing to save it a few weeks before and then turn his back assuming he was asked - which would have been most likely IMO. If he refused to invest why? Is he planning a comeback because he has stated he isn't? If he could have invested as per his previous offer surely he becomes enemy No 1 in the likely event we will now be relegated because of the chaos administration has caused regardless of pending decision from the league? McMenemy knew IMO the club was in meltdown because of his close relationship with Crouch who as a successful businessman and with close ties to Barclays would have been aware of what was happening IMO regardless of any communication from the club. So did McMenemy lie in his statement on the OS to support Crouch? To repeat Lowe was frantic in his efforts to source investment and he must have contacted Leon Crouch and discussions taken place. What were the result of those discussions and did Leon Crouch let this club go to the wall by withdrawing his offer of £2m? There is no suggestion that had he done so it would have been a temporary stay of execution and no doubt he would have been offered a role at the club so he could have made his subsequent touchline pleas as Football Chairman (or whatever) of a club still in charge of its own destiny and with costs increasingly under control about to turn around its fortune not put it on the verge of extinction. However, although we may be relegated perhaps we will be safe from extinction and our 'white knight' rolls into town with his consortium to Save our saints once again, inconceivable? I'm beginning to wonder if it's very probable and if so Division 1 football and a probable points penalty seems a hefty price to pay considering the alternative. Are Leon Crouch and his trusty sidekick beyond reproach or is Crouch especially as culpable if not more so than Lowe as we assess the situation in a little more detail. I would suggest there are questions that need answering if only to clear the murky waters in the run up to administration. A subsequent £50k donation and his PR exercise with the statue doesn't cut it for me I'm afraid and I would like to Crouch to be given the Paxman treatment in a public interview around the issue of the £2m and if it was revisited before Fry marched in. Some are saying it's in the past why does it matter. It matters because we need a clean slate, strong leadership and open and honest communication. If Crouch is positioning himself for a return can we be certain that we will get any of these criteria satisfied to take the club forward? I think we would need satisfactory answers to the points I have raised and I suspect others have many more questions, before a Crouch consortium could be readily accepted. I'm fed up with the look at me look how many pennies I have invested and his representation as the club's 'major fan'. Do we want more bs rhetoric and talk of play off places as we head south down the table, the Peter and the Wolf act over investment, Its an investor! Its an Investor! Its an Investor or the classic players will not need to leave because of Finances - Er Lee, go and tell 'em about Rasiak and Skacel, allegedly.
Colinjb Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Interesting that the majority so far deem it of little concern. At the eleventh hour I believe Lowe would have given up control of the club if he could have saved it and would have offered Crouch something in return. Even if Crouch received a phone call the night before there was still time to save the club and invest the £2m he had recently offered. If he didn't have the money why offer it so publicly if he couldn't back it up if pushed? If Crouch didn't have the £2m why did he offer it a few weeks before or was he still banking on his £1.9m of shares returning to his original purchase price?Was it just a bluff in an attempt to make the board look bad? Hardly supportive and bordering on dirty tricks IMO. Fair enough if he didn't want to save the club but why act so publicly that he was willing to save it a few weeks before and then turn his back assuming he was asked - which would have been most likely IMO. If he refused to invest why? Is he planning a comeback because he has stated he isn't? If he could have invested as per his previous offer surely he becomes enemy No 1 in the likely event we will now be relegated because of the chaos administration has caused regardless of pending decision from the league? McMenemy knew IMO the club was in meltdown because of his close relationship with Crouch who as a successful businessman and with close ties to Barclays would have been aware of what was happening IMO regardless of any communication from the club. So did McMenemy lie in his statement on the OS to support Crouch? To repeat Lowe was frantic in his efforts to source investment and he must have contacted Leon Crouch and discussions taken place. What were the result of those discussions and did Leon Crouch let this club go to the wall by withdrawing his offer of £2m? There is no suggestion that had he done so it would have been a temporary stay of execution and no doubt he would have been offered a role at the club so he could have made his subsequent touchline pleas as Football Chairman (or whatever) of a club still in charge of its own destiny and with costs increasingly under control about to turn around its fortune not put it on the verge of extinction. However, although we may be relegated perhaps we will be safe from extinction and our 'white knight' rolls into town with his consortium to Save our saints once again, inconceivable? I'm beginning to wonder if it's very probable and if so Division 1 football and a probable points penalty seems a hefty price to pay considering the alternative. Are Leon Crouch and his trusty sidekick beyond reproach or is Crouch especially as culpable if not more so than Lowe as we assess the situation in a little more detail. I would suggest there are questions that need answering if only to clear the murky waters in the run up to administration. A subsequent £50k donation and his PR exercise with the statue doesn't cut it for me I'm afraid and I would like to Crouch to be given the Paxman treatment in a public interview around the issue of the £2m and if it was revisited before Fry marched in. Some are saying it's in the past why does it matter. It matters because we need a clean slate, strong leadership and open and honest communication. If Crouch is positioning himself for a return can we be certain that we will get any of these criteria satisfied to take the club forward? I think we would need satisfactory answers to the points I have raised and I suspect others have many more questions, before a Crouch consortium could be readily accepted. I'm fed up with the look at me look how many pennies I have invested and his representation as the club's 'major fan'. Do we want more bs rhetoric and talk of play off places as we head south down the table, the Peter and the Wolf act over investment, Its an investor! Its an Investor! Its an Investor or the classic players will not need to leave because of Finances - Er Lee, go and tell 'em about Rasiak and Skacel, allegedly. I admire your desire to ignore the reaction of the rest of the forum who consider you a joke and have treated this as such. However, no one will take you seriously. Give up.
Nineteen Canteen Posted 16 April, 2009 Author Posted 16 April, 2009 Why? It's all utterly irrelevant now. Is it Colin when Crouch is positioning himself as the man along with Richards to organise cash donations to save our club. To act like the big saviour when he actually could have saved the club with his recent offer of £2m. Irrelevant maybe in terms of the crisis we are now in but worth understanding the integrity of everyone now trying to save the club at least IMO.
Colinjb Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 'Same old crap' Again, I admire your persistence, but really. I've had enough now. Is it possible to set an 'ignore' status to people on this forum?
Tamesaint Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 I admire your desire to ignore the reaction of the rest of the forum who consider you a joke and have treated this as such. However, no one will take you seriously. Give up. Admiration ??? He gets paid to write this carp on this board - probably by the word if the verbage of his postings is anything to go by.
Colinjb Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Admiration ??? True, perhaps a bit far. Maybe 'acceptance' would have been a better term.
Gemmel Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Interesting that the majority so far deem it of little concern. At the eleventh hour I believe Lowe would have given up control of the club if he could have saved it and would have offered Crouch something in return. Even if Crouch received a phone call the night before there was still time to save the club and invest the £2m he had recently offered. If he didn't have the money why offer it so publicly if he couldn't back it up if pushed? If Crouch didn't have the £2m why did he offer it a few weeks before or was he still banking on his £1.9m of shares returning to his original purchase price?Was it just a bluff in an attempt to make the board look bad? Hardly supportive and bordering on dirty tricks IMO. Fair enough if he didn't want to save the club but why act so publicly that he was willing to save it a few weeks before and then turn his back assuming he was asked - which would have been most likely IMO. If he refused to invest why? Is he planning a comeback because he has stated he isn't? If he could have invested as per his previous offer surely he becomes enemy No 1 in the likely event we will now be relegated because of the chaos administration has caused regardless of pending decision from the league? McMenemy knew IMO the club was in meltdown because of his close relationship with Crouch who as a successful businessman and with close ties to Barclays would have been aware of what was happening IMO regardless of any communication from the club. So did McMenemy lie in his statement on the OS to support Crouch? To repeat Lowe was frantic in his efforts to source investment and he must have contacted Leon Crouch and discussions taken place. What were the result of those discussions and did Leon Crouch let this club go to the wall by withdrawing his offer of £2m? There is no suggestion that had he done so it would have been a temporary stay of execution and no doubt he would have been offered a role at the club so he could have made his subsequent touchline pleas as Football Chairman (or whatever) of a club still in charge of its own destiny and with costs increasingly under control about to turn around its fortune not put it on the verge of extinction. However, although we may be relegated perhaps we will be safe from extinction and our 'white knight' rolls into town with his consortium to Save our saints once again, inconceivable? I'm beginning to wonder if it's very probable and if so Division 1 football and a probable points penalty seems a hefty price to pay considering the alternative. Are Leon Crouch and his trusty sidekick beyond reproach or is Crouch especially as culpable if not more so than Lowe as we assess the situation in a little more detail. I would suggest there are questions that need answering if only to clear the murky waters in the run up to administration. A subsequent £50k donation and his PR exercise with the statue doesn't cut it for me I'm afraid and I would like to Crouch to be given the Paxman treatment in a public interview around the issue of the £2m and if it was revisited before Fry marched in. Some are saying it's in the past why does it matter. It matters because we need a clean slate, strong leadership and open and honest communication. If Crouch is positioning himself for a return can we be certain that we will get any of these criteria satisfied to take the club forward? I think we would need satisfactory answers to the points I have raised and I suspect others have many more questions, before a Crouch consortium could be readily accepted. I'm fed up with the look at me look how many pennies I have invested and his representation as the club's 'major fan'. Do we want more bs rhetoric and talk of play off places as we head south down the table, the Peter and the Wolf act over investment, Its an investor! Its an Investor! Its an Investor or the classic players will not need to leave because of Finances - Er Lee, go and tell 'em about Rasiak and Skacel, allegedly.
Nineteen Canteen Posted 16 April, 2009 Author Posted 16 April, 2009 I admire your desire to ignore the reaction of the rest of the forum who consider you a joke and have treated this as such. However, no one will take you seriously. Give up. Colin it is for people like you I won't give up. I think my questions are genuine and well founded and worthy of debate. People in the know can put me right and if the answers withstand scrutiny we can all move on with our integrity intact IMO. If the questions cause offence...........
saintwarwick Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 trying to shift the blame for Lowe and Wilde's massive ****-ups onto Crouch is really quite pointless at this stage. I read it as a lot of questions asked and not apportioning blame, still it's how you want to read the post. Not many have made an attempt to answer the questions but more mud slinging. At least you replied with answers.
stevegrant Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 I'm not going to comment too much on Crouch - I think my opinion of the bloke is fairly well known - but what I will ask is why he was supposedly willing to invest £2m a couple of months ago and yet took the role of chief begging bowl passer-rounder in the corporate areas at the Charlton game, saying the club needs £500k to get through the rest of the season, when his original "available" sum would more than cover it.
Colinjb Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 (edited) Colin it is for people like you I won't give up. I think my questions are genuine and well founded and worthy of debate. People in the know can put me right and if the answers withstand scrutiny we can all move on with our integrity intact IMO. If the questions cause offence........... Not offence, more annoyance that a stuck record can continue for so long. It no longer matters that you may have a point, that you continue to bang on for so long has rendered your novelty worthless. Edited 16 April, 2009 by Colinjb
saintwarwick Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Admiration ??? He gets paid to write this carp on this board - probably by the word if the verbage of his postings is anything to go by. Does he, by who the administrators?
saintwarwick Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 I'm not going to comment too much on Crouch - I think my opinion of the bloke is fairly well known - but what I will ask is why he was supposedly willing to invest £2m a couple of months ago and yet took the role of chief begging bowl passer-rounder in the corporate areas at the Charlton game, saying the club needs £500k to get through the rest of the season, when his original "available" sum would more than cover it. A few of us was discussing this at the Charlton game when he went cap in hand on the microphone. Where is that magic £2million?
Tamesaint Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Does he, by who the administrators? No. Think a little bit harder.
Tamesaint Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 At the eleventh hour I believe Lowe would have given up control of the club if he could have saved it and would have offered Crouch something in return....... To repeat Lowe was frantic in his efforts to source investment How does an "ordinary fan" like 19C who has "no association with Lowe" know this???
stevegrant Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 How does an "ordinary fan" like 19C who has "no association with Lowe" know this??? These things do have a habit of finding their way down the food chain, so to speak. There's all sorts of stuff that's been doing the rounds which would put the other side of the argument in a very different light.
Colinjb Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 How does an "ordinary fan" like 19C who has "no association with Lowe" know this??? Pure speculation to make Lowe seem better then all his actions and demeanor suggest.
Legod Third Coming Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Oh I think we do Lowe a dis-service. It takes a class act to turn a £60m turnover business into bankruptcy.
Tamesaint Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 These things do have a habit of finding their way down the food chain, so to speak. There's all sorts of stuff that's been doing the rounds which would put the other side of the argument in a very different light. ..and nobody else has heard it ???? Very strange if you ask me Steve.
Colinjb Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Oh I think we do Lowe a dis-service. It takes a class act to turn a £60m turnover business into bankruptcy. Indeed, that small folly makes massive questions like the one raised in this thread seem even more important.
Nineteen Canteen Posted 16 April, 2009 Author Posted 16 April, 2009 I'm not going to comment too much on Crouch - I think my opinion of the bloke is fairly well known - but what I will ask is why he was supposedly willing to invest £2m a couple of months ago and yet took the role of chief begging bowl passer-rounder in the corporate areas at the Charlton game, saying the club needs £500k to get through the rest of the season, when his original "available" sum would more than cover it. Thank you, Steve. I think that is a very reasonable observation which should be clarified by the man himself. Begs the question was the original £2m offer given, knowing the conditions couldn't be matched? If so why? If the offer was genuine why did not stand a few months later? IMO £2m would have been enough to see us through and start rebuilding as everything else seemed to becoming under control. No doubt Crouch could have demanded the FC chairman role which he seemed to covet and no doubt would have been offered it as for all Lowe's fault his ego did not want him to contemplate failure and even as a last resort I think would have turned to Crouch IMO.
stevegrant Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 When you say "nobody else has heard it", presumably you mean "and I've not heard it"? Some people are happier to divulge that sort of information, others prefer to keep their counsel for various reasons - on here, I suspect that's mostly because people like you who won't even entertain that their side of the argument might not all be sweetness and light accuse the messenger of being "paid". What's the point in putting information in the public domain if it's just going to be rubbished without any sort of reasonable thought process behind it other than "I don't like him/the person he's backing, therefore he must be talking crap"?
saintwarwick Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 No. Think a little bit harder. Who then and please provide facts.
docker-p Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 I'm not going to comment too much on Crouch - I think my opinion of the bloke is fairly well known - but what I will ask is why he was supposedly willing to invest £2m a couple of months ago and yet took the role of chief begging bowl passer-rounder in the corporate areas at the Charlton game, saying the club needs £500k to get through the rest of the season, when his original "available" sum would more than cover it. Because his original 'available sum' was an investment into a company he owned 10% of. Now it is just 'dead' money never to be seen again. Why do that when he can put it towards a bid???
Tamesaint Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 When you say "nobody else has heard it", presumably you mean "and I've not heard it"? Some people are happier to divulge that sort of information, others prefer to keep their counsel for various reasons - on here, I suspect that's mostly because people like you who won't even entertain that their side of the argument might not all be sweetness and light accuse the messenger of being "paid". What's the point in putting information in the public domain if it's just going to be rubbished without any sort of reasonable thought process behind it other than "I don't like him/the person he's backing, therefore he must be talking crap"? Nothing to do with whether I have heard it. Lowe has a history of paying people to write on websites like this. I am sure that you can remember the S4E PR fiasco. I consider it strange when his chief defender comes up with information which by its very nature must have come from a source close to Lowe and which has not been disclosed by anybody else on this forum. Don't I have the right to say so? Come and live with me in the land of honey. It is "all sweetness and light" over here.
saintwarwick Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Because his original 'available sum' was an investment into a company he owned 10% of. Now it is just 'dead' money never to be seen again. Why do that when he can put it towards a bid??? Has he put it towards a bid? Are you another ITK'er?
saintwarwick Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Nothing to do with whether I have heard it. Lowe has a history of paying people to write on websites like this. I am sure that you can remember the S4E PR fiasco. I consider it strange when his chief defender comes up with information which by its very nature must have come from a source close to Lowe and which has not been disclosed by anybody else on this forum. Don't I have the right to say so? Come and live with me in the land of honey. It is "all sweetness and light" over here. So wheres this evidence that Lowe is paying NC to post on a messageboard, surely it would be cheaper to post himself.
stevegrant Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Because his original 'available sum' was an investment into a company he owned 10% of. Now it is just 'dead' money never to be seen again. Why do that when he can put it towards a bid??? But he can't afford £6m (or so he said in the Echo), so how would he manage that, with the current levels of interest, which is only driving the asking price upwards? If he was the only interested party, and was offering £2m to buy SFC from SLH (the money from which would go to Barclays as settlement, leaving SLH to be liquidated), he'd own the football club in its entirety. "Dead money", apparently.
docker-p Posted 16 April, 2009 Posted 16 April, 2009 Has he put it towards a bid? Are you another ITK'er? Yep. He told me so on Saturday. He sits behind in Block 4. Leon consults me before doing anything.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now