Lots of skeletons coming out of the cupboard now..

[Alanh]

To anyone that is saying that we didn't speculate with a view to improving the team - performances - attendances, I would argue that bringing back Saga from his loan and not simply shipping him out again was essentially the final roll of the dice. On paper getting him back should have been a much better option that someone like Scowcroft both financially and in terms of ability.

 

We did speculate, but as is always the case, there are no guaranteed proven, cast iron means of securing success and unfortunately that specific one didn't work out for us.

[SFKA South Woodford]

I think Barclays actually pulled the plug before relegation was certain!

 

There is some sense to Alpine's case - if by spending, say, £500,000 on a striker's wages, you fend off relegationa dn boost crowds, then the new striker's costs are outweighed by the benefits.

 

However, the problem is that at some point you have to cease speculating to accumulate. The £6m debt, and the high % of turnover dedicated to player salaries, indicated we had basically reached that limit. You can't forever keep adding "one more key player" to the squad.

 

I doubt Braclays foreclosing on us was as big a bolt from the blue as Lowe would ahev us believe. We had been given tiem to get our house in order and failed lamentably.

 

In a way it wasn't a bolt, as we were in the red in an economy where banks were attempting to claw back every penny they could.

 

However, the problem here and where Lowe earns a bit of credit and Barclays have to pick up some of the blame, is that the board had done what Barclays had asked of them, and reduced costs and debt by six million pounds in one season. So when Barclays allegedly then turned round and moved the goalposts again and wanted further debt reduction before they would allow any further borrowing for operating capital, that is where administration became a certainty.

 

If they had held off for a couple of months, and allowed some extra borrowing, Saints may still have had a place in the division, thus giving an extra 2.1 million of revenue with the increased tv cash, Saints would also have been able to sell season tickets and memberships, generating more revenue and further reducing the debt.

 

Then over the summer, the club could of been put up for sale, with the major shareholders having been made aware of the situation and having been told that they would have to accept a less than modest offer for their shares or get almost nothing if the company then went into admin.

 

As for Aviva, they only really became a problem, when the club went into administration, as the mortgage repayments have been met and are not in arrears.

[St. Jason]

So why didnt they say to Lowe "F**k off out of it or we pull the plug". It seems they were running the show indirectly anyway..

 

OR DID THEY and our ex-Chairman reacted with his usual unique brand of stubborness mixed with spite ?

 

After all, it seems he thought he could bluff the FL with the holding company going into admin. It seems he was capable of anything..

 

I'm not sure how it all works mate but I don't really see what, if any right Barclay's have to sack or tell Lowe 'to f00k off'? I own a small business and Bank with Barclays, they couldn't tell me to 'f00k off'. What they could do if they thought I was running the business poorly and they were in danger of loosing thier money, is to simply cut my overdraft, cuts thier risk!

 

It's not Barclays fault we're in this mess. it's bad management. Barclay's have a right to protect thier shareholders and do what they see fit to protect thier investments!

[Chez]

What they did was nothing less than financially asphxyiating the club. They shoved a pillow over the face of SFC.

 

they gave us a £6m bed though first.

[alpine_saint]

I'm not sure how it all works mate but I don't really see what, if any right Barclay's have to sack or tell Lowe 'to f00k off'? I own a small business and Bank with Barclays, they couldn't tell me to 'f00k off'. What they could do if they thought I was running the business poorly and they were in danger of loosing thier money, is to simply cut my overdraft, cuts thier risk!

 

It's not Barclays fault we're in this mess. it's bad management. Barclay's have a right to protect thier shareholders and do what they see fit to protect thier investments!

 

The timing of Barclays pulling the plug, and maybe even reducing the overdraft, may have been triggered by a loss of faith in the management of SLH. In which case, Barclays could easily force a change in management simply by threatening to call their marker in. If this were the case, it was a lose-lose situation for Lowe, so he did the ole' Butch Cassidy thing of taking as many with him as he could..

[notnowcato]

In a way it wasn't a bolt, as we were in the red in an economy where banks were attempting to claw back every penny they could.

 

However, the problem here and where Lowe earns a bit of credit and Barclays have to pick up some of the blame, is that the board had done what Barclays had asked of them, and reduced costs and debt by six million pounds in one season. So when Barclays allegedly then turned round and moved the goalposts again and wanted further debt reduction before they would allow any further borrowing for operating capital, that is where administration became a certainty.

 

If they had held off for a couple of months, and allowed some extra borrowing, Saints may still have had a place in the division, thus giving an extra 2.1 million of revenue with the increased tv cash, Saints would also have been able to sell season tickets and memberships, generating more revenue and further reducing the debt.

 

Then over the summer, the club could of been put up for sale, with the major shareholders having been made aware of the situation and having been told that they would have to accept a less than modest offer for their shares or get almost nothing if the company then went into admin.

 

As for Aviva, they only really became a problem, when the club went into administration, as the mortgage repayments have been met and are not in arrears.

 

All very well and good.... surely, given the circumstances in your piece, the board should have looked for reassurance from the bank prior to the Admin cut off point? The boards actions were at best naieve and at worst totally disregarding the future of Southampton FC.

 

To continue with the what if... how do you propose we would have sold the club and include an offering to the shareholders?? We appear to be struggling to sell without the offering.

[St. Jason]

To anyone that is saying that we didn't speculate with a view to improving the team - performances - attendances, I would argue that bringing back Saga from his loan and not simply shipping him out again was essentially the final roll of the dice. On paper getting him back should have been a much better option that someone like Scowcroft both financially and in terms of ability.

 

We did speculate, but as is always the case, there are no guaranteed proven, cast iron means of securing success and unfortunately that specific one didn't work out for us.

 

Sorry mate but I disagree with you 110%.

 

Lowe did not speculate by brining Saga back. Saga's loan ended and no one else would take him, either on loan or signing. Much the same way as we didn't speculate by keeping llanna and Surman, no one matched our valuation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.shopbamboozled.com/MEERKAT_REAL.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

Simples!

[Alanh]

Sorry mate but I disagree with you 110%.

 

Lowe did not speculate by brining Saga back. Saga's loan ended and no one else would take him, either on loan or signing. Much the same way as we didn't speculate by keeping llanna and Surman, no one matched our valuation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.shopbamboozled.com/MEERKAT_REAL.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

Simples!

 

Not personally convinced, but can't prove it one way or another. I think if we really wanted to shift Saga for the second half of the season we could have done. He did after all score in the Champions League so someone in Europe would have taken him for the second half of the season. I think that Peckhart and Robertson failing in the first part of the season meant that another loan up front was too big a risk so we decided (possibly in the absence of a good enough offer) to keep Saga and his wages from January.

[St Paul]

Not personally convinced, but can't prove it one way or another. I think if we really wanted to shift Saga for the second half of the season we could have done. He did after all score in the Champions League so someone in Europe would have taken him for the second half of the season. I think that Peckhart and Robertson failing in the first part of the season meant that another loan up front was too big a risk so we decided (possibly in the absence of a good enough offer) to keep Saga and his wages from January.

 

 

They were still trying to offload him at the time of the Man Utd game. Hense why he didn't play.... Sorry, I meant.. His International Clearance didn't "come through on time".

[sandwichsaint]

In a way it wasn't a bolt, as we were in the red in an economy where banks were attempting to claw back every penny they could.

 

However, the problem here and where Lowe earns a bit of credit and Barclays have to pick up some of the blame, is that the board had done what Barclays had asked of them, and reduced costs and debt by six million pounds in one season. So when Barclays allegedly then turned round and moved the goalposts again and wanted further debt reduction before they would allow any further borrowing for operating capital, that is where administration became a certainty.

 

If they had held off for a couple of months, and allowed some extra borrowing, Saints may still have had a place in the division, thus giving an extra 2.1 million of revenue with the increased tv cash, Saints would also have been able to sell season tickets and memberships, generating more revenue and further reducing the debt.

 

****Then over the summer, the club could of been put up for sale****, with the major shareholders having been made aware of the situation and having been told that they would have to accept a less than modest offer for their shares or get almost nothing if the company then went into admin.

 

As for Aviva, they only really became a problem, when the club went into administration, as the mortgage repayments have been met and are not in arrears.

 

**** I don't buy that, it was Lowe's way or nothing, and we ended up with 'nothing'. No evidence at all that RL sought or would have taken outside finance, one word SISU.

[SaintRobbie]

Barclays got rid of Lowe. I quite like them.

[Saint Fan CaM]

Errmm, all very interesting, but the title says "lots of skeletons" - so far I count one or have I missed something here? I mean, I am slowing falling to sleep here waiting for some action.

[St. Jason]

Not personally convinced, but can't prove it one way or another. I think if we really wanted to shift Saga for the second half of the season we could have done. He did after all score in the Champions League so someone in Europe would have taken him for the second half of the season. I think that Peckhart and Robertson failing in the first part of the season meant that another loan up front was too big a risk so we decided (possibly in the absence of a good enough offer) to keep Saga and his wages from January.

 

All about opinions my friend and ours obviously differ. Lowe, Wilde and the administrator have all said there was an urgent need to sell our top assest's, sorry players (Surman & Llanna) to adhere to Barclay's and SLH plc agreement. Having not been able to shift these two, I just can't see Lowe willingly adding to the running cost's of SFC ie Saga's £8k a week!

[Frank's cousin]

Barclays got rid of Lowe. I quite like them.

 

Will you still be saying that if no buyer is found...?

[madsent]

Barclays got rid of Lowe. I quite like them.

 

You'd have liked them a lot more if they'd called in the overdraft in February after we increased the cost base rather than lowering it. The plan agreed in the summer cannot have allowed for no sales in January and for the club to be saddled with the salaries and bonuses of Skacel, Saganowski and Euell. Forcing SLH into administration in February would have been much better for both parties.

[The9]

Has anyone even bothered trying to work out the finances underpinning this whole bloody pointless argument ?

 

You know, the player x gets paid £n a week, and with more wins attendances might have risen y raising the club £z?

 

Or is it all such a load of tenuous, subjective, hypothetical balls that actually no-one can genuinely come up with a substantive argument backed by figures ?

[OldNick]

Has anyone even bothered trying to work out the finances underpinning this whole bloody pointless argument ?

 

You know, the player x gets paid £n a week, and with more wins attendances might have risen y raising the club £z?

 

Or is it all such a load of tenuous, subjective, hypothetical balls that actually no-one can genuinely come up with a substantive argument backed by figures ?

If we only knew their wages and add on then perhaps but as you are alluding to we have no way of working this out.

Unless we were in the top 6 the fans would only turn up in the more glamorous home games anyway. How many times 2 seasons ago did we hear. Im not paying that to watch barnsley or whoever and we were doing al ot better and RL wasnt at the club.

Its all a fallacy yes we may have got a few more people through the gate but not consistantly unless we had the success to go with it. Good goal by the way

[70's Mike]

3000 extra per game at only £15 per game over 23 home games just over a million extra revenue.

Rupert and co to interested in costs not enough thought to revenue generation, a couple of home games like Cardiff and Preston early in the season and the money would have come in.

The death knell was the experiment

[Legod Third Coming]

3000 extra per game at only £15 per game over 23 home games just over a million extra revenue.

Rupert and co to interested in costs not enough thought to revenue generation, a couple of home games like Cardiff and Preston early in the season and the money would have come in.

The death knell was the experiment

 

Totally. Even if we HAD to loan out the big earners, we didn't have to jettison common sense into the bargain. And anyone with half a brain could work out that losing teams are watched by smaller crowds than winning ones!

 

But no, good old Rupert had a letter from his mother and a glowing endorsement from a bloke who missed an open goal that the former could have scored with her eyes shut...

[Redondo Saint]

As usual the Echo is stirring up crap about SFC to sell more papers. Ignore it.

[SaintRobbie]

You'd have liked them a lot more if they'd called in the overdraft in February after we increased the cost base rather than lowering it. The plan agreed in the summer cannot have allowed for no sales in January and for the club to be saddled with the salaries and bonuses of Skacel, Saganowski and Euell. Forcing SLH into administration in February would have been much better for both parties.

 

Good point. Provided they got rid of Lowe then too. But I suppose they had to wait for evidence of mismanagement before swooping... and Lowe provided with bounced cheques.

[madsent]

Good point. Provided they got rid of Lowe then too. But I suppose they had to wait for evidence of mismanagement before swooping... and Lowe provided with bounced cheques.

 

I don't get what you mean. The bank holds the trading account so it must have been bouncing the cheques that SLH was writing. It would have been nice if they'd started bouncing the cheques a week earlier.

[alpine_saint]

As usual the Echo is stirring up crap about SFC to sell more papers. Ignore it.

 

Erm, no, I dont think some of us will, actually..

[Windmill Arm 2]

You mean "spending money you haven't got" - isn't that the whole reason we are in this mess? You are mad.

 

While I agree with the logic in this post, I cannot forget the old saying 'You have to speculate to accululate'

 

Its a shame Mr Strachan wasn't allowed to 'speculate' after the 2003 FA Cup final................................

[NickG]

interesting that fee for Dexter for 3 months was £300,000 - wonder what we got for more proven strikers for season/half season loans - 3 of them?

[sidthesquid]

While I agree with the logic in this post, I cannot forget the old saying 'You have to speculate to accululate'

 

Its a shame Mr Strachan wasn't allowed to 'speculate' after the 2003 FA Cup final................................

 

You mean like when we signed up Euell & John & Safri & Thomas last season? Speculation isn't a guarantee of success - that is why it is called speculation. If it works great, if it fails you go bust.... Ring any bells?

[Legod Third Coming]

You mean like when we signed up Euell & John & Safri & Thomas last season? Speculation isn't a guarantee of success - that is why it is called speculation. If it works great, if it fails you go bust.... Ring any bells?

 

The difference is the key. Strachan had been proven in the role, had built a good squad and was flying.

 

The players you list were bought by different people at different times and amid total managerial and squad turmoil!

 

And for the record without Stern John we would have been relegated twelve months ago, which rather underlines why you do need to invest in the squad!!

 

But only under the guidance of the manager. Chairman should facilitate their managers to build a squad.

 

Failure to invest in the playing staff after the cup final is one thing. Failing to back your manager and retain him after such a successful spell is suicidal.

[alehouseboys]

You mean like when we signed up Euell & John & Safri & Thomas last season? Speculation isn't a guarantee of success - that is why it is called speculation. If it works great, if it fails you go bust.... Ring any bells?

 

...but look at our situation in 2003, we had a good manager who could have bought in some decent players (I'd have taken the likes of Melbranque, etc.). We were filling SMS to bursting (there was talk of increasing capacity), we were in Europe the squad required strengthening for extra fixtures, we sold Bridgey. Someone mentioned we only made £4m from cup receipts, I remember it said we made a £1m from 'Cup Final' merchandise and then the Bridge £7m. If that wasn't the time to 'speculate' then when was it ever likely to be?

[Gingeletiss]

As usual the Echo is stirring up crap about SFC to sell more papers. Ignore it.

 

You must have good eyesight, being able to determine that from way over there. All this 'crap', is direct quotes from the main players, who are now saying their peice...........

[John B]

You must have good eyesight, being able to determine that from way over there. All this 'crap', is direct quotes from the main players, who are now saying their peice...........

 

Yes people seem to critise everything for the sake of it.

[sadoldgit]

I don't think you get it Alpine. Barclays pulled the plug before we got relegated, so admin would have come anyway. And Scowcroft was not worth 18 points in anyones money. So what difference would it have made?

 

Alpine is never one to let the facts get in the way of a good rant. I als seem to remember how Saga was going to save us ad how him not being here earlier was a big mistake. Made a big difference didn't he? One player was not going to make a difference. We were poor in all departments that is why we went down. If economies had not been made as they were earlier we would have gone into adminstration earlier.

 

The simple fact is this, once the parachute money ran out we were in no position to do anything except struggle.

 

Alpine conveniently ignores the fact that Charlton an Norwich are in the same boat, albiet not stuffed financially as we are.

 

He needs to take his blinkers off and come live in the real world where old established businesses are going to the wall every day (HMV next I hear). But he would just rather blame everything on Lowe because in his own little world he can only deal with simplicities.

[sadoldgit]

...but look at our situation in 2003, we had a good manager who could have bought in some decent players (I'd have taken the likes of Melbranque, etc.). We were filling SMS to bursting (there was talk of increasing capacity), we were in Europe the squad required strengthening for extra fixtures, we sold Bridgey. Someone mentioned we only made £4m from cup receipts, I remember it said we made a £1m from 'Cup Final' merchandise and then the Bridge £7m. If that wasn't the time to 'speculate' then when was it ever likely to be?

 

That is part of the problem. We have never had the amount of cash needed. Where was the £11m going t cme from for 2 players??? We did spend money on players but they were squad players and a bloated squad started with Strachan. A number of those players were slated by Saints fans but are still playing Prem football. YOu can survive without spending monet you don't have. We found players like Pahars and Marsden for relative peanuts. We did well to bring in players like M Svennson and Niemi. Sly we also brought in the likes of McCann. Clubs of our size have to strike a balance. WE also have to get it right when signing players. Ourselves, Norwich and Charlton have all struugle to get that balance right in recent seasons and have paid the price.

[benjii]

Alpine is never one to let the facts get in the way of a good rant. I als seem to remember how Saga was going to save us ad how him not being here earlier was a big mistake. Made a big difference didn't he? One player was not going to make a difference. We were poor in all departments that is why we went down. If economies had not been made as they were earlier we would have gone into adminstration earlier.

 

The simple fact is this, once the parachute money ran out we were in no position to do anything except struggle.

 

Alpine conveniently ignores the fact that Charlton an Norwich are in the same boat, albiet not stuffed financially as we are.

 

He needs to take his blinkers off and come live in the real world where old established businesses are going to the wall every day (HMV next I hear). But he would just rather blame everything on Lowe because in his own little world he can only deal with simplicities.

 

No doubt this is true, in the sense that if no savings had been made we would have gone into admin sooner, but it doesn't mean that the choices that were made were not utter guff.

[camdijk]

Really, only Donny, Barnsley and Plymouth scored less

 

How many of those three teams were relegated? If I recall, the idea is to try to concede less goals than you score.

[SaintRobbie]

Alpine is never one to let the facts get in the way of a good rant. I als seem to remember how Saga was going to save us ad how him not being here earlier was a big mistake. Made a big difference didn't he? One player was not going to make a difference. We were poor in all departments that is why we went down. If economies had not been made as they were earlier we would have gone into adminstration earlier.

 

The simple fact is this, once the parachute money ran out we were in no position to do anything except struggle.

 

Alpine conveniently ignores the fact that Charlton an Norwich are in the same boat, albiet not stuffed financially as we are.

 

He needs to take his blinkers off and come live in the real world where old established businesses are going to the wall every day (HMV next I hear). But he would just rather blame everything on Lowe because in his own little world he can only deal with simplicities.

 

Which is why Lowe, Wilde, Crouch et al should have SOLD the club to SISU or to another owner last summer. The ultimate incompetence along the whole road of mismanagement was what happened last summer. Putting in Lowe and failing to put the club up for sale was sheer incompetence.

 

As has been proven for weeks now, Saints have always have people out there who wanted to buy us.

[OldNick]

As has been proven for weeks now, Saints have always have people out there who wanted to buy us.

the club that is a basement bargain attracted 38 people saying they were interested.We have now perhaps 2 left. This is when the club is on the floor pricewise.

[SaintRobbie]

the club that is a basement bargain attracted 38 people saying they were interested.We have now perhaps 2 left. This is when the club is on the floor pricewise.

 

38 when we're cheap and no doubt at least one when we werent. Always been buyers Nick. Always been members of the boardroom looking for their own power and status before club.

 

Sorry but we collectively should never have allowed Lowe to reemerge last summer but got off our punchdrunk backsides and sought a buyer with legends, boardmembers, MPs et al then. Shame it has taken administration, relegation and the near complete destruction of our team to get to the stage where people act.

 

Still onwards and upwards eh?

[sadoldgit]

No doubt this is true, in the sense that if no savings had been made we would have gone into admin sooner, but it doesn't mean that the choices that were made were not utter guff.

 

We were not alone in making "guff" choices were we?

 

And as for speculation? Isn't that just wht Wilde and chums did? BLow money on the hope of promotion. It didn't come and look where we are now.

 

Spending cash is no guarantee of success. How many European Championships have Cheslea won?

 

People running business make choices all of the time, some work, some don't. The tougher the economic climate the tougher the consequences if you get more choices wrong than right.

 

We started the season in a tough financial position. Yes in hindsight the choices made were wrong. Sadly we do not live in a world where hindsight is of much help apart from being of historical interest.

 

You can bleat al day long about how a certain person sealed our fate, but he had nothing to do with Charlton (a club the wiser people on here said we should model ourselves on) or Norwich.

 

What is blindingly obvious is that the TV money makes a huge difference and once you no longer have it you are stuffed and have to cut your cloth accordingly.

 

Lowe was hated for trying to live within our means. Time and again we hear that he should have spent money. Well he did. He spent a lot in the Premiership. He brought in Redknapp and gave him £6m to keep us up ( alot for a club like us). Redknapp (not Lowe) decided to spend the money on "quality" players like Davenport and Bernard and his crippled son. Yes, guff decsions made by a man who supposedly has the Houdini touch.

 

Charlton, Nottingham Forest, Leeds, Norwich and other simliar clubs have all "failed" in recent years. What makes SFC immune to the same circumstances?

[sadoldgit]

Which is why Lowe, Wilde, Crouch et al should have SOLD the club to SISU or to another owner last summer. The ultimate incompetence along the whole road of mismanagement was what happened last summer. Putting in Lowe and failing to put the club up for sale was sheer incompetence.

 

As has been proven for weeks now, Saints have always have people out there who wanted to buy us.

 

Jeez SR what planet do you live on? Out of 30 or so interested parties we are down to only 2 (is it?) serious bidders, one of whom is seemingly worse than Lowe. That leaves 1. People who want to buy us can be counted on the fingers on a lepers hand mate.

[SaintRobbie]

Jeez SR what planet do you live on? Out of 30 or so interested parties we are down to only 2 (is it?) serious bidders, one of whom is seemingly worse than Lowe. That leaves 1. People who want to buy us can be counted on the fingers on a lepers hand mate.

 

3. There is an international one remaining out of the limelight for some reason...mmmm.

 

Imagine if we'd sold ourselves as a Premiership concern, imagine if we'd sold ourselves not long after relegation. Imagine if we'd sold ourselves last year to SISU. Now look at who we are selling ourselves to now.

 

You are wrong SOG. We couldve sold this Club for years. But each time we didnt the quality of buyer fell.

 

We are not being bought out because we're bargain basement - we're being bought out for our fanbase, infrastructure and marketting potential - that was and is always there.

 

SISU proved one thing - there were always buyers for this club, they were just the one that was confirmed and became open knowledge.The interest now shown also proves it.

[sidthesquid]

The difference is the key. Strachan had been proven in the role, had built a good squad and was flying.

 

The players you list were bought by different people at different times and amid total managerial and squad turmoil!

 

And for the record without Stern John we would have been relegated twelve months ago, which rather underlines why you do need to invest in the squad!!

 

But only under the guidance of the manager. Chairman should facilitate their managers to build a squad.

 

Failure to invest in the playing staff after the cup final is one thing. Failing to back your manager and retain him after such a successful spell is suicidal.

 

Actually they were all signed by Burley at the start of last season as we tried to move forward after the play-off season. That was my point

[Redondo Saint]

You must have good eyesight, being able to determine that from way over there. All this 'crap', is direct quotes from the main players, who are now saying their peice...........

 

Actually I've just got back from Soton and have read most of this weeks Echo.

 

My point is anyone will blame others for the failings of SFC if it means they don't get stick themselves. The paper is playing this up to sell more.

 

Why can't we all move on and let the bitterness go? (not you Alpine)

[OldNick]

3. There is an international one remaining out of the limelight for some reason...mmmm.

 

Imagine if we'd sold ourselves as a Premiership concern, imagine if we'd sold ourselves not long after relegation. Imagine if we'd sold ourselves last year to SISU. Now look at who we are selling ourselves to now.

 

You are wrong SOG. We couldve sold this Club for years. But each time we didnt the quality of buyer fell.

 

We are not being bought out because we're bargain basement - we're being bought out for our fanbase, infrastructure and marketting potential - that was and is always there.

 

SISU proved one thing - there were always buyers for this club, they were just the one that was confirmed and became open knowledge.The interest now shown also proves it.

Robbie a PLC is always for sale, they are taken over all the time. Dont fall for the nonsense that we couldnt be sold. Anything is for sale if the right price is offered.Afterall the Wilde bunch managed to do it and we know how good they were.

[SaintRichmond]

Robbie a PLC is always for sale, they are taken over all the time. Dont fall for the nonsense that we couldnt be sold. Anything is for sale if the right price is offered.Afterall the Wilde bunch managed to do it and we know how good they were.

 

 

Unless you have a Chairman called LOWE .... I don't care if people believe or not, but it was never in HIS interests to attract Investment

 

Attracting Investment normally means someone from "outside" being prepared to Invest Money. That would mean that person would most likely want a seat on the Board, and some "clout" that goes with it ..... NON RUNNER, as Lowe would never contemplate ANYONE coming in to undermine HIS authority

 

Strange how people always keep on about how good a Businessman Lowe was ....... ALL Successful Businessess need Investment from time to time to ADVANCE and PROGRESS .... those that do not get this ultimately FAIL .... and we certainly FAILED under Lowe

Edited 9 May, 2009 by SaintRichmond

[rallyboy]

Barclays do seem to have panicked and their timing was very poor

BUT

if Lowe was treating them with the same arrogance he displayed to fans you can understand why they pulled the plug when he gave them the opportunity.

 

The polite description is, he has an unfortunate manner about him - and if you treat people with disdain they will bear it in mind when you ignore their instructions and bounce cheques.

[Puddings and Monkeys]

Strange how people always keep on about how good a Businessman Lowe was .......

 

Equally strange how some people just keep going on about Lowe, period. FFS man - he's gone, finished, he aint coming back. The L, O, W and E keys on yor PC must be bloody worn out the number of times you type his name. Move on for your own health.

[SaintRichmond]

Equally strange how some people just keep going on about Lowe, period. FFS man - he's gone, finished, he aint coming back. The L, O, W and E keys on yor PC must be bloody worn out the number of times you type his name. Move on for your own health.

 

 

Equally strange how some people just seem to forget how devious he is.

 

When the "New Owners" are announced, and Lowe is not in any way involved ... then I will believe he has gone

 

My keyboard is fine ..... my health is fine .... thanks for asking

[sadoldgit]

3. There is an international one remaining out of the limelight for some reason...mmmm.

 

Imagine if we'd sold ourselves as a Premiership concern, imagine if we'd sold ourselves not long after relegation. Imagine if we'd sold ourselves last year to SISU. Now look at who we are selling ourselves to now.

 

You are wrong SOG. We couldve sold this Club for years. But each time we didnt the quality of buyer fell.

 

We are not being bought out because we're bargain basement - we're being bought out for our fanbase, infrastructure and marketting potential - that was and is always there.

 

SISU proved one thing - there were always buyers for this club, they were just the one that was confirmed and became open knowledge.The interest now shown also proves it.

 

Robbie mate, we are now snowed under by stinking rich people wanting to take us on. SISU was one outfit (vilified by many on here). By all accounts we only have one seriously decent bidder lined up. We have struggled for the last few years but ven the so called wedged up supporters have kept there hands firmly in their pockets.

 

We need to wake up. Paul Allen was a fantsay. Finding a super rich benefactor is a fantasy. We are a third divison club and most people in the bigger picture do not give a stuff about us.

[SaintRobbie]

Robbie a PLC is always for sale, they are taken over all the time. Dont fall for the nonsense that we couldnt be sold. Anything is for sale if the right price is offered.Afterall the Wilde bunch managed to do it and we know how good they were.

 

 

No it isnt. A plc is only up for sale if the principle shareholders wish to sell their shares. They didnt and would'nt. And we collectively failed as fans by not putting them under pressure to do so when it was obvious that the people in charge of this plc were... well frankly morons.

 

I agree that if someone had made an amazingly silly offer way above the value of the club then anyONE is for sale, but I'm afraid when personal ambition, pride, arrogance and power enters the equation even that can overcome pure greed.

 

No a plc is not always for sale. Shares are.

Edited 10 May, 2009 by SaintRobbie

[SaintRobbie]

Robbie mate, we are now snowed under by stinking rich people wanting to take us on. SISU was one outfit (vilified by many on here). By all accounts we only have one seriously decent bidder lined up. We have struggled for the last few years but ven the so called wedged up supporters have kept there hands firmly in their pockets.

 

We need to wake up. Paul Allen was a fantsay. Finding a super rich benefactor is a fantasy. We are a third divison club and most people in the bigger picture do not give a stuff about us.

 

Not true. The very fact we are about to be taken over by stinking rich people wanting to take us on rather reverses your whole arguement there old friend!

 

Premiership infrastructure, youth set up, fan base, passion, no competition in Southampton from other sports (eg Rugby Union team), family atmosphere, rarely trouble, huge names associated with us, history, the reasons for buying this club are more than many many others. They have always been there, lacking the will to sell was due to selfish individuals now either emasculated or removed forever.

 

We're on the up again SOG. May take a couple of rebuilding seasons in League 1 due to the massive damage inflicted by Lowe this past season, but we'll return.