Terms of Crouch's offer of £2m

[Capel Saint]

I think this is all a moot point as even if Lowe, Wilde and Crouch could have agreed on a deal for Crouch to come back into the club, how long do you think it would have been before they fell out over club/financial issues? I would have given it less than three months before they would have been slagging each off in the papers again.

 

In the end the club was left with three individuals who I don't think would have ever been able to turn the club around and if we hadn't entered administration this season, it would probably have happended next season.

[um pahars]

are you 3?

 

you know it was in the press

 

Not in October/November it wasn't, and this was when the first offer was made (you know the very first offer that you are so keen we only concentrate on;)).

 

And of course this is the offer you are suggesting was purely a PR exercise, so Crouch must be very poor at getting his PR machine working if he didn't get in in the press back then.

[um pahars]

Lot of effort being wasted on this thread.

 

In summary, Crouch's opening gambit was so outrageously unacceptable that further negotiations would be cursory at best.

 

Did you read The Echo piece Ponty, as from the spread that I saw it would appear that all sides took the negotiations quite seriously, not least because they rumbled on for three months.

 

Of course ultimately none of them could agree on anything, but I don't think Seymour Pierce and Shoosmiths getting involved would suggest they were merely cursory.

 

And I would have thought that given the current predicament we found ourselves in, then a potential £2m injection to stave off administration and avoid relegation should have been given more than a cursory look.

 

In fact, I would say that anyone in charge of a company going down the swanny would be rather negligent if they didn't give any offer (no matter how unpalatable) more than a cursory glance.

[Frank's cousin]

Did you read The Echo piece Ponty, as from the spread that I saw it would appear that all sides took the negotiations quite seriously, not least because they rumbled on for three months.

 

Of course ultimately none of them could agree on anything, but I don't think Seymour Pierce and Shoosmiths getting involved would suggest they were merely cursory.

 

And I would have thought that given the current predicament we found ourselves in, then a potential £2m injection to stave off administration and avoid relegation should have been given more than a cursory look.

 

In fact, I would say that anyone in charge of a company going down the swanny would be rather negligent if they didn't give any offer (no matter how unpalatable) more than a cursory glance.

 

Is it just me or does Crouch make it very difficult for himself to be taken seriously though?

[John B]

Is it just me or does Crouch make it very difficult for himself to be taken seriously though?

 

I think he comes over as a bit of a buffoon myself.

[fos1]

In fact, I would say that anyone in charge of a company going down the swanny would be rather negligent if they didn't give any offer (no matter how unpalatable) more than a cursory glance.

 

Very good point um, perhaps shareholders should look into this point in more detail, alot of money has been lost by shareholders, was Lowe negligent ?

[Frank's cousin]

Did you read The Echo piece Ponty, as from the spread that I saw it would appear that all sides took the negotiations quite seriously, not least because they rumbled on for three months.

 

Of course ultimately none of them could agree on anything, but I don't think Seymour Pierce and Shoosmiths getting involved would suggest they were merely cursory.

 

And I would have thought that given the current predicament we found ourselves in, then a potential £2m injection to stave off administration and avoid relegation should have been given more than a cursory look.

 

In fact, I would say that anyone in charge of a company going down the swanny would be rather negligent if they didn't give any offer (no matter how unpalatable) more than a cursory glance.

 

I appreciate this is in response to Ponty, but I would also suggest to Fos1, that yiou cant have it both ways -hint at negligence in one sentance, whilst opeening with how seriously all sides took it over 3 months of negotiations.

[Foxstone]

Is it just me or does Crouch make it very difficult for himself to be taken seriously though?

 

 

Its not just you !

 

There are a great many feel this way both on this forum and those that do not post.

 

Whatever which way you spin it, he has been involved to greater or lesser degrees as part of the clubs hierarchy for the past 2 years and is part of the problem.

I really do not see him as part of the solution.

[um pahars]

I appreciate this is in response to Ponty' date=' but I would also suggest to Fos1, that yiou cant have it both ways -hint at negligence in one sentance, whilst opeening with how seriously all sides took it over 3 months of negotiations.[/quote']

 

I am not having it two ways at all, as I am actually suggesting that by giving it more than cursory glance and by ruinning with it over a three month period that Lowe and Wilde did give it more than a cursory glance (which is contrary to what Ponty and others are suggesting) and I also think that given they ran with it would suggest it was more than a mere PR stunt by Crouch (as NickG and others have claimed).

 

I think they did treat it seriously which would indicate (a) it was a serious offer and (b) they were giving it more than a cursory glance.

 

The very fact that all three of them couldn't come to an agreement to inject new funds in to the Club was ultimately a failure, but as for who was responsible for that is something we will all have different opinions on.

[Frank's cousin]

I am not having it two ways at all, as I am actually suggesting that by giving it more than cursory glance and by ruinning with it over a three month period that Lowe and Wilde did give it more than a cursory glance (which is contrary to what Ponty and others are suggesting) and I also think that given they ran with it would suggest it was more than a mere PR stunt by Crouch (as NickG and others have claimed).

 

I think they did treat it seriously which would indicate (a) it was a serious offer and (b) they were giving it more than a cursory glance.

 

The very fact that all three of them couldn't come to an agreement to inject new funds in to the Club was ultimately a failure, but as for who was responsible for that is something we will all have different opinions on.

 

Thanks for clarification on that - Hypothetical question though, based on those initial terms would you accept such an offer if you were either Lowe or Wilde and in the subsequent negotiations, what would you say Lowe /Wilde should have accepted for teh good of the club v their personal status?

 

I would suggest that even if agreement could be reached on teh cash injection and they had it at their disposal, there would be no way LOwe would have stepped down if it involved the financial controls being handed over?

[John B]

The very fact that all three of them couldn't come to an agreement to inject new funds in to the Club was ultimately a failure,QUOTE]

 

That was probably the main reason why Barclays pulled the plug as there seemed no long term prospect of the in fighting stopping and the club moving forward.

 

 

I think it was probably the right decision although I feel sorry for anybody bar the directors who have or will lose money

[um pahars]

Thanks for clarification on that - Hypothetical question though, based on those initial terms would you accept such an offer if you were either Lowe or Wilde and in the subsequent negotiations, what would you say Lowe /Wilde should have accepted for teh good of the club v their personal status?

 

I would suggest that even if agreement could be reached on teh cash injection and they had it at their disposal, there would be no way LOwe would have stepped down if it involved the financial controls being handed over?

 

With regards the first offer I never thought it could have been accepted on those terms, mainly on the basis that I didn't think that Lowe or Wilde either had the money or the desire to put any in to the Club.

 

However, with regards how the offers and counter offers manifested, I think that by the time of the January meeting there was something that could have been acceptable to all concerned, if they were of the belief that such a cash injection could make a difference.

 

But of course against this you have to remember that Lowe and Wilde were still of the view that they were capable of turning things around and so were not in need of Crouch's money nor support or advice.

 

However, as we have now found out to our cost, the view that they could turn it around proved to be a fallacy, given it all went tts up two months later.

 

Seeing as they failed miserably without Crouch and his money, it's not that much of a stretch to suggest things might have been different had they accepted some of the strings attached to the £2m (even if it only brought about some temporary respite).

[Puddings and Monkeys]

Jeez, are you girls still going on about this FFS???

[Frank's cousin]

Seeing as they failed miserably without Crouch and his money, it's not that much of a stretch to suggest things might have been different had they accepted some of the strings attached to the £2m (even if it only brought about some temporary respite).

 

the depressing thing is that temporary respite was probably all it would have provided....

[um pahars]

the depressing thing is that temporary respite was probably all it would have provided....

 

If you consider the bank tightened the purse strings by £1m last September, then surely a £2m+ injection would have us at least £1m better off than we were last August!

 

I don't buy into the argument that we were a lost cause as Lowe and Wilde did not come back merely to preside over a funeral. It was a tough task, but certainly not a lost cause.

 

If that £2m would have meant avoiding administration, staying up, not incurring a points deduction and not facing oblivion, then the three main parties should have done their utmost to get a deal done.

 

Maintaining the status quo under Lowe & Wilde ended up with the total fckfest we now find ourselves in, so I for one would have been up for a respite and seeing if we could trade our way out of it in the long run.

[John B]

If you consider the bank tightened the purse strings by £1m last September, then surely a £2m+ injection would have us at least £1m better off than we were last August!

 

I don't buy into the argument that we were a lost cause as Lowe and Wilde did not come back merely to preside over a funeral. It was a tough task, but certainly not a lost cause.

 

If that £2m would have meant avoiding administration, staying up, not incurring a points deduction and not facing oblivion, then the three main parties should have done their utmost to get a deal done.

 

Maintaining the status quo under Lowe & Wilde ended up with the total fckfest we now find ourselves in, so I for one would have been up for a respite and seeing if we could trade our way out of it in the long run.

 

 

Sorry but I got bored with your posts but now I would be interested in a summary of what you are saying because I think you have a reasonable point.

 

I thought that the three would come to a sensible conclusion but I still find it hard to believe that Crouch had £2m Cash spare

 

 

So what was the real sequence of events again as oppossed to Nick's original post