posted Nov 2, 2007

StPete:
I too am beginning to believe the Company should accept the SISU offer. Certainly it is in no position to haggle right now, that's for sure.

The more I think about it, I begin to realise that in the Lowe era there was little investment as such. However, he realised that to go forward too fast would have been a financial disaster, thus he kept a tight financial ship. There was obviously no real spare cash after the investment in the stadium, and this appeared to mark him as being unambitious for the Club. Even so, the Club was solvent!

Yes, we flirted with relegation on many occasion, but we did survive. Sadly, once Strachan had gone - because in my view he saw no further money for players would be forthcoming, and thus he had taken the playing staff as far as he could - things began to go badly wrong, from which we have not recovered.

It will always be easy to nominate a scapegoat, but that will do us no good right now.

I would like to know the real reasons why Lowe, Wilde and Crouch are suddenly bosom pals over their anti-SISU bid stance.

Are we all missing something here?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 2, 2007

Probably because they can acheive more together Lancashire and it underlines the split between board and shareholders.

It is ironic that Lowe could end up saving the club in some way and i am glad that he is one of the 3.

Crouch is a genuine man but Wilde is a drip and a wet one at that!

I accept that investment must come soon but i failto understand how the books cannot be balanced by selling players and being prudent.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 2, 2007

"... but i failto understand how the books cannot be balanced by selling players and being prudent."

This was my point earlier CGO. We have sold so many players, yet the board is suggesting we are still struggling to survive. Where has all the money gone?! It would be interesting reading to see the clubs accounts, including the wages and expenses of the current execs

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 3, 2007

The statement serves only one purpose - to 'spin' the shareholders into supporting the SISU deal.

Why do the execs want this deal? Because of the money that they will make.

Why is club losing so much money (if that is true)? Partly because of the amount of money spent on non-football things, including the money 'earned' by the execs.

It really surprises me that this is not obvious to everyone.

SISU would be such a devastating thing for the club. The club would be just for money - any other higher purpose can be forgotten.

I am clear about this - I would rather be in Div 1 and feel attached to my club (even if tenuously, as at present) than be in Europe and be owned by a hedge fund.

Southampton would become merely the place in which the club happens to be located, rather than the reason why the club exists.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 3, 2007

People seem to be against SISU, because they are only in it to make money. Why do you think Rupert Lowe got involved with the club, because of his love of football?
Whilst we are a PLC, we will always be subject to people trying to make loads of money from the back of our club. Whether it is Rupet Lowe or SISU, they are only interested in the money............

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 3, 2007

Reality seems to be kicking in with you boys at last. SFC were never going to go forward as a PLC...that's just for making money.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 3, 2007

"Reality seems to be kicking in with you boys at last. SFC were never going to go forward as a PLC...that's just for making money."

Oh! and I suppose being privately owned like Man U, Chelsea and Liverpool isn't!!

Get real. Every club is owned by people who would like to make money. The exceptions are one or two philanthropists, one or two who want a reputation or have a BIG ego.

Portsmouth aren't owned by a fan/supporter. They are owned by a guy who wants to make money. Do you hear their fans complaining?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 3, 2007

No.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 4, 2007

How on earth can a club which sells four players in seven months for close on £20m be skint?

One has to think carefully where the money might have gone.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 4, 2007

One should also consider the timing of the various announcements.. just a few short months ago Kenwynne Jones was sold on for footballing reasons as the club had no need to raise further finance!!

All of a sudden SISU are prowling and those who seek to personally benefit from the takeover announce a finite period for survival despite the 'additional' £6,500,000.00 in the coffers.

It's not rocket science!

add comment | complain about this comment