lordswoodsaints Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Rupert Lowe tried to get us to work within our means Crouch took a gamble to get us back to the promised land. Wilde was a true fan who tried to do his bit but was poorly advised They all gave their best under difficult circumstances and have each have more business acumen than all of us put together. We need to move on! ******.........lowe tried to get us to work below our means,penny pinching and trying to survive and the cheap will only get you relegated.
Mole Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Crouch took a gamble to get us back to the promised land. Wilde was a true fan who tried to do his bit but was poorly advised It was Wildes Fulham boys that spent the £7 million, but i expect LC agreed with this move. Rupert Lowe often spoke of the "war chest" so i expect he'd have done the same. Wilde may well be a true fan, but not a Saints fan. Anfield is his spiritual home.
John B Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 ******.........lowe tried to get us to work below our means,penny pinching and trying to survive and the cheap will only get you relegated. As we were a cash strapped club perhaps we did not have the financial income to be a Premiership club
Window Cleaner Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 It was Wildes Fulham boys that spent the £7 million, but i expect LC agreed with this move. Rupert Lowe often spoke of the "war chest" so i expect he'd have done the same. Wilde may well be a true fan, but not a Saints fan. Anfield is his spiritual home. Everyone always looks at what the execs spent but never mentions the 15 or 16 million's worth of players they sold when our all out push for promotion failed. I've never done the maths but on the player sale front I don't doubt that the "execs" made a fabulously large profit.
Polaroid Saint Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 It was Wildes Fulham boys that spent the £7 million, but i expect LC agreed with this move. Rupert Lowe often spoke of the "war chest" so i expect he'd have done the same. Wilde may well be a true fan, but not a Saints fan. Anfield is his spiritual home. Funny. I thought he was a Tranmere Rovers fan...
superstevesaints Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Pinnacle have not delivered. The unnamed 'Overseas' group have made a bid and have gone through the process. They will be named preferred bidder and are likely to take over within the next few days. An announcement will be made around midday tomrrow from Fry saying they are the preferred bidder. Thanks
Master Bates Posted 19 May, 2009 Author Posted 19 May, 2009 Maybe it is the Sandman. Just wish he could sprinkle some of his special dust and make all our dreams good ones. Sandman's first post was a scary one.
Wade Garrett Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Pinnacle have not delivered. The unnamed 'Overseas' group have made a bid and have gone through the process. They will be named preferred bidder and are likely to take over within the next few days. An announcement will be made around midday tomrrow from Fry saying they are the preferred bidder. Thanks How overseas are we talking. Are we talking deserts or the emerald isle?
Fan The Flames Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Rupert Lowe tried to get us to work within our means Crouch took a gamble to get us back to the promised land. Wilde was a true fan who tried to do his bit but was poorly advised They all gave their best under difficult circumstances and have each have more business acumen than all of us put together. We need to move on! How can we move on when people like you keep trying to perpetuate these myths. If you lot stop myth making then people will stop myth busting.
hypochondriac Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Pinnacle have not delivered. The unnamed 'Overseas' group have made a bid and have gone through the process. They will be named preferred bidder and are likely to take over within the next few days. An announcement will be made around midday tomrrow from Fry saying they are the preferred bidder. Thanks You're wrong. Thanks.
70's Mike Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 How overseas are we talking. Are we talking deserts or the emerald isle? Jersey
TNT Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Rupert Lowe tried to get us to work within our means Crouch took a gamble to get us back to the promised land. Wilde was a true fan who tried to do his bit but was poorly advised They all gave their best under difficult circumstances and have each have more business acumen than all of us put together. We need to move on! LOL Move on yes but get your facts right first ! ouch i bit
trousers Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Pinnacle have not delivered. The unnamed 'Overseas' group have made a bid and have gone through the process. They will be named preferred bidder and are likely to take over within the next few days. An announcement will be made around midday tomrrow from Fry saying they are the preferred bidder. Thanks
Ludwig Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 You're wrong. Thanks. For what reason would you say that?
hypochondriac Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 For what reason would you say that? Because he is.
trousers Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Because he is. That's up there in the top five reasons of all time, to be fair
hypochondriac Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 That's up there in the top five reasons of all time, to be fair Well what other reason would there be?
hypochondriac Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 he is very close but not spot on Doesn't make him right though.
saint77 Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Doesn't make him right though. closer than most of the predictions so far
damers Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Well I will roll with it........ at least it is better than were doomed...
RoswellSaint Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 But which one? close Is this some private game or does one of you care to explain where the guy was wrong and where he was right? Or more likely, neither one of you has a clue like the rest of us.
hypochondriac Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 I was guessing saint77's identity via PM but had to post my response on here as he did not PM me back but put his response on the forum for an odd reason. I'll shutup now.
Wade Garrett Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 I remember being told by a source very close to the club that the Paul Allen deal was going to go through 'in the next day or so' (don't wet yourselves this was a couple of years ago). My point is - be very wary of what you think you know.
OldNick Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Is this some private game or does one of you care to explain where the guy was wrong and where he was right? Or more likely, neither one of you has a clue like the rest of us.Perhaps they both think they are right about the 2 different parts of the post. Im with Hypo in being right
saintjay77 Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Is this some private game or does one of you care to explain where the guy was wrong and where he was right? Or more likely, neither one of you has a clue like the rest of us. I was about to ask everyone to get back to arguing about ex chairmen cause im confused to hell! lol
Delmary Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Pinnacle have not delivered. The unnamed 'Overseas' group have made a bid and have gone through the process. They will be named preferred bidder and are likely to take over within the next few days. An announcement will be made around midday tomrrow from Fry saying they are the preferred bidder. Thanks http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=299719#post299719 Post #90 What makes you so confident this time?
Minsk Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 My only question would be do you think as Chairman of the FC he could not have said to teh PLC board - stop! we cant afford these unless wilde stumps up the investors he promised? because these recommendation must have come through the football board from Burley?...and I cant believe Crouch was not privvy to the financial situation? Did you not read what I wrote? Or do you simply refuse to believe the facts? When that money was spent Leon Crouch WAS NOT chairman of the football club. Rupert Lowe was chairman for the first 2m and Wilde was chairman for the other 5.6m!!!!!!!!! So why oh why did Lowe and Wilde allow that money to be spent??? And why oh why, in the very short period of time that Leon was in the chair, didn't Wilde stop the (comparitively very minimal) spending with his 16% share-holding (against LC's
martel Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 I was guessing saint77's identity via PM but had to post my response on here as he did not PM me back but put his response on the forum for an odd reason. I'll shutup now. Thanks for the laugh Hypo, it reminded of the ship when the front fell off.
TNT Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Did you not read what I wrote? Or do you simply refuse to believe the facts? When that money was spent Leon Crouch WAS NOT chairman of the football club. Rupert Lowe was chairman for the first 2m and Wilde was chairman for the other 5.6m!!!!!!!!! So why oh why did Lowe and Wilde allow that money to be spent??? And why oh why, in the very short period of time that Leon was in the chair, didn't Wilde stop the (comparitively very minimal) spending with his 16% share-holding (against LC's Well i can say is Rupert Lowe knew full well what was going on as he had his little spy Dave Jones telling him everything. You simply cannot change boardroom decisions if you are not actually in the boardroom and indeed have executive status. You can also ask why Barclays continued to allow such expenditure as they have had a say on everything since relegation.
hypochondriac Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 Thanks for the laugh Hypo, it reminded of the ship when the front fell off. I love all this takeover stuff. I don't care if people laugh or call me ITK. I do some digging and find out what I can and then try to find out more! It makes it more interesting, gives me some hope about the future of SFC and takes my mind off the potentially dire consequences. Apologies to anyone I irritate through doing it though!
ooohTerryHurlock Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 I find it amazing that Fry has just been dealing with 1 group all this time. I thought the 30 were wittled down to just 2 or 3? Surly until a perferred bidder is decided then all groups should get equal treatment? Its no wonder that the deadline keeps getting moved as Fry hasnt got any other options either because the others wernt good enough (if so why was the 30 knocked down to 2 or 3?) or he hasnt kept the other partys in the loop. Hats off to Crouch and he will get much more respect than any of the others if its true about him paying the wages. I think the other main partys should be dragged out of there dark corners by there balls and made to share the load of keeping the club afloat for the time being. I will always remember the main 3 for screwing the club up in various ways but I will also remember Crouch for keeping the club going in its darkest time. .... and for sorting out the Ted Bates statue .... and for honouring the Sophies gift pledge I don't know him from adam but he comes across like a gentleman business man rather that the rest of them.
saintjay77 Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 .... and for sorting out the Ted Bates statue .... and for honouring the Sophies gift pledge I don't know him from adam but he comes across like a gentleman business man rather that the rest of them. As a fan I and I doubt any others can fault him. Im not his biggest fan but point scoring or not some of his gestures and actions have helped us out several times. Would be nice to remember him in years to come for the good things rather than remembering him being mixed up with the other donkeys.
SaintJackoInHurworth Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 I love all this takeover stuff. I don't care if people laugh or call me ITK. I do some digging and find out what I can and then try to find out more! It makes it more interesting, gives me some hope about the future of SFC and takes my mind off the potentially dire consequences. Apologies to anyone I irritate through doing it though! OK... you claim to be vaguely ITK as does Saint77, so let me put to you my hypothesis for what is going on... The Pinnacle bid failed because they could not match the guarantees required (possibly a lack of funds). Consequently, Fry has introduced the bidders to each other to go away and see if between them they can come up with a combined bid, based largely on the same model as the Pinnacle bid. As a result of Leon Crouch's support for the wages of the club, there is now a bit more time, so in order to allow time for the various parties to meet and redraw ther plans or else find extra finance, a bid is expected in a few weeks time. Is that a possible/likely scenario?
hypochondriac Posted 19 May, 2009 Posted 19 May, 2009 OK... you claim to be vaguely ITK as does Saint77, so let me put to you my hypothesis for what is going on... The Pinnacle bid failed because they could not match the guarantees required (possibly a lack of funds). Consequently, Fry has introduced the bidders to each other to go away and see if between them they can come up with a combined bid, based largely on the same model as the Pinnacle bid. As a result of Leon Crouch's support for the wages of the club, there is now a bit more time, so in order to allow time for the various parties to meet and redraw ther plans or else find extra finance, a bid is expected in a few weeks time. Is that a possible/likely scenario? Firstly I don't claim to be remotely ITK. I'm not even clear in my own head what is going on. I don't think that's what is happening at all though.
hypochondriac Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 Pinnacle promised money but got a closer look at the books and a couple of their major backers did a runner. This meant that they couldn't keep to their original agreement, giving other parties an opportunity supposedly.
cynicalsaint Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 Just a thought - do you think Fry's apolocolyptic statement earlier in the week could have been aimed at the creditors rather than the bidders? Plenty of speculation about break up value being less than value of SFC as a going concern - maybe he was signalling to barcalys, aviva etc that they need to get their heads out of their ar5e5 and accept whats on the table (and soon) rather than trying to ratchet more out of the pinnable (or whoever else is out there)?
cynicalsaint Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 apolocolyptic - like apocolyptic only worse. pre breakfast postings are alwyas bad. remember kids - never type on an empty stomach. i'm off to read the forum handbook to see if i can find out how to edit a post.
JustMike Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 Firstly I don't claim to be remotely ITK. I'm not even clear in my own head what is going on. I don't think that's what is happening at all though. yet you were sure with your response to another poster when they suggested the over seas bidder would be named. So if you are not ITK, how can you possibly dismiss anyone?
thorpie the sinner Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 yet you were sure with your response to another poster when they suggested the over seas bidder would be named. So if you are not ITK, how can you possibly dismiss anyone? Tell you one thing Mike, I would accept any bloody takeover at this moment in time!!! I am desperate to get onto mundane things like sorting a new manager out and making sure we have a squad ready to challenge!
dubai_phil Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 Tell you one thing Mike, I would accept any bloody takeover at this moment in time!!! I am desperate to get onto mundane things like sorting a new manager out and making sure we have a squad ready to challenge! Having our 476th manager in 4 seasons - you're calling that MUNDANE Won't that be fun, watch the moans and groans then when that happens. If we had gambling here I'd open a book on the trollish comments all of which would end with new owners out Total lack of ambition Too high a risk, no experience He's past it He's an idiot/numpty/carp/proven failure He's too inflexible with his tactics Has no passion for the club Only picked him because of his passion for the club How will he know what players we need in L1 How will he be able to cope if he gets us into the CCC He'll be off to a bigger club at the first sign of money/success Only a short term appointment, no long term planning How on earth can we afford his wages Should have kept Wotte Why did we keep Wotte lol that ain't gonna be mundane, but I pray it's a problem we will have sooner rather than later
thorpie the sinner Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 Having our 476th manager in 4 seasons - you're calling that MUNDANE Won't that be fun, watch the moans and groans then when that happens. If we had gambling here I'd open a book on the trollish comments all of which would end with new owners out Total lack of ambition Too high a risk, no experience He's past it He's an idiot/numpty/carp/proven failure He's too inflexible with his tactics Has no passion for the club Only picked him because of his passion for the club How will he know what players we need in L1 How will he be able to cope if he gets us into the CCC He'll be off to a bigger club at the first sign of money/success Only a short term appointment, no long term planning How on earth can we afford his wages Should have kept Wotte Why did we keep Wotte lol that ain't gonna be mundane, but I pray it's a problem we will have sooner rather than later I do like the 8-1 shot, he's an idiot/numpty/carp/proven failure!!! ****, Burley is coming back!!! i just want to make sure you and luggy (sorry Nick) are in the running!!!!
um pahars Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 The problem I have with this Pinnacle lot is that I suspect they are not doing this from a "love of the Club" perspective, but instead from a hard nose business POV. In which case I have no doubt they are getting cold feet as I think it is understandable to be baulking at the numbers particualry those required to fund us going forward, when viewed purely as an investment opportunity. I really worry for the future of the Club as I'm not overly confident of any group coming up with the funds to acquire the Club, nor having the funds to run it going forward.
thorpie the sinner Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 The problem I have with this Pinnacle lot is that I suspect they are not doing this from a "love of the Club" perspective, but instead from a hard nose business POV. In which case I have no doubt they are getting cold feet as I think it is understandable to be baulking at the numbers particualry those required to fund us going forward, when viewed purely as an investment opportunity. I really worry for the future of the Club as I'm not overly confident of any group coming up with the funds to acquire the Club, nor having the funds to run it going forward. As someone said steve, we have to keep the faith, it is the only thing we have left!
Professor Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 The problem I have with this Pinnacle lot is that I suspect they are not doing this from a "love of the Club" perspective, but instead from a hard nose business POV. In which case I have no doubt they are getting cold feet as I think it is understandable to be baulking at the numbers particualry those required to fund us going forward, when viewed purely as an investment opportunity. I really worry for the future of the Club as I'm not overly confident of any group coming up with the funds to acquire the Club, nor having the funds to run it going forward. Not sure that people 'invest' in professional football in order to make money. It may not be love of this club for for everyone involved in these bids, but I think there is genuine interested in being involved in the game. Anyone just looking for an investment opportunity will try almost anything except football! The point Um makes about any group having money to take the club forward is a real worry though. If the bidders are struggling to convince the Administrator that they can pay him, how can they find anything to spend on the team except what the club earns through the gate and the usual commercial activities - which leaves us worse off than we were before with less gate income.
thefuriousb Posted 20 May, 2009 Posted 20 May, 2009 The problem I have with this Pinnacle lot is that I suspect they are not doing this from a "love of the Club" perspective, but instead from a hard nose business POV. In which case I have no doubt they are getting cold feet as I think it is understandable to be baulking at the numbers particualry those required to fund us going forward, when viewed purely as an investment opportunity. I really worry for the future of the Club as I'm not overly confident of any group coming up with the funds to acquire the Club, nor having the funds to run it going forward. With a great many of the high earners' contracts coming to an end, surely the gap between the income/expense will severely reduced at the very least, with the view of operating within budget in the next 12-18 months when the last remaining vastly-inflated contracts come to an end? If that lot down the road can break even in this same period with a restricted ground capacity (all be it with TV money), then why are do you feel we won't ever, and therefore will scare off anyone with an interest? I think the majority of supporters will take an SFC over a club continuing to live beyonds its means?
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