Askham & Richards

They were both in the directors' box today. Why? They're not directors. Did they pay for their seats and corporate tickets/dining privileges? I very much doubt it! On the take once again. Noticed they've dumped their Ex-directory box thus denying the club vital income. Good on Leon for backing the club with two corporate boxes (The Fuller group and Leon and Lawrie) and the player sponsorship. Also well done to Ian Gordon for his continued player sponsorship support.

Good post.

 

Would be nice if we could get regular updates on the rampant cronyism / true support angle..

They were both in the directors' box today. Why? They're not directors. Did they pay for their seats and corporate tickets/dining privileges? I very much doubt it! On the take once again. Noticed they've dumped their Ex-directory box thus denying the club vital income. Good on Leon for backing the club with two corporate boxes (The Fuller group and Leon and Lawrie) and the player sponsorship. Also well done to Ian Gordon for his continued player sponsorship support.

 

Well you have said you very much doubt it which means you don't know so it could be that they did pay.

who gives a toss?

The club is in a financial mess and it's dissappointing when both Merlion Group Ltd and Lowe Holdings are missing from the list of corporate cutomers. Also shame on Gavyn Davies for not helping the club out with a small amount of business.

Well you have said you very much doubt it which means you don't know so it could be that they did pay.

I bet you believe in father xmas as well;)

I bet you believe in father xmas as well;)

 

Nah, he's just arguing the point for the sake of being pedantic.

 

It's what he does............

They were both in the directors' box today. Why? They're not directors. Did they pay for their seats and corporate tickets/dining privileges? I very much doubt it! On the take once again. Noticed they've dumped their Ex-directory box thus denying the club vital income. Good on Leon for backing the club with two corporate boxes (The Fuller group and Leon and Lawrie) and the player sponsorship. Also well done to Ian Gordon for his continued player sponsorship support.

 

Does it really matter?

boring

Does it really matter?

Yes I believe it does. The club has made many staff redundant and is struggling severly financially. It should not be giving out freebies to such people. Lawrie got alot of stick over his perks! I see no difference.

Nah, he's just arguing the point for the sake of being pedantic.

 

It's what he does............

 

Or offering an alternative view to something we don't know. Still nothing new for you to disagree with this.

Yes I believe it does. The club has made many staff redundant and is struggling severly financially. It should not be giving out freebies to such people. Lawrie got alot of stick over his perks! I see no difference.

 

I for one believe that it matters, and I'm very surprised that certain members of this board are so flippant about it when SFC are in such dire straights atm.

Michael Richards, Guy Askham, R M Withers and other old club directors are back on the scene renewing the take take culture whilst the club goes down the swanny. Though as I quoted previously ex-director Ian Gordon (a true Saint) is doing his bit to help the club out financially.

I would not be in the slightest bit surprised to see those three re-appointed to the board between now and the next AGM, to be honest.

I would not be in the slightest bit surprised to see those three re-appointed to the board between now and the next AGM, to be honest.

 

Are they Ruperts buddies by any chance?

Are they Ruperts buddies by any chance?

 

You got it in one.

The vultures circling the rotting carcass that was once SFC.

The vultures circling the rotting carcass that was once SFC.

 

Comparing Askham to a vulture is an insult to vultures.

Michael Richards, Guy Askham, R M Withers and other old club directors are back on the scene renewing the take take culture whilst the club goes down the swanny. Though as I quoted previously ex-director Ian Gordon (a true Saint) is doing his bit to help the club out financially.

 

To take what, our debts?

To take what, our debts?

 

LOL, totally predictable.

Good post.

 

Would be nice if we could get regular updates on the rampant cronyism / true support angle..

 

Well, if you ever came and watched a game you may not have to rely so heavily on supposition and conjecture to form the basis of your continuous tirades.

LOL, totally predictable.

 

Nothing more constructive to say on an honest question? Totally predictable.

What a pathetic, mean minded, mean spirited, chip-on-the-shoulder thread. pah.

Yes I believe it does. The club has made many staff redundant and is struggling severly financially. It should not be giving out freebies to such people. Lawrie got alot of stick over his perks! I see no difference.

 

Its a fair point

Comparing Askham to a vulture is an insult to vultures.

amen to that

I agree, if our financial situation is so dire then every penny and every pound makes a difference. Was there not a thread about this earlier in the year, when the club could not aparrently pay a bill for some clerical goods, which was a small amount?

 

If so, then that's why the little thing's make a difference, if you look at it like that, then the amount the likes of these do not pay could then be paying for the little bills, that used to get paid with pet cash etc

 

It does sound frivolous, then again, we are led to believe that our situation is at a critical level, so the small amounts are just as important in our plight.

 

In any case, it shouldn't have to come to this should it, those who are within the club should be paying anyway, even if a freebie is offered, it used to be known as 'doing the decent thing', however, in the world of Southampton FC, it would appear that this phrase is also as redundant as a lot of the staff and there are those whose self interest is the primary concern, with the club as a whole a rather distant second. If a freebie is offered, then they should be saying 'no thanks' and paying their way.

 

Of course, they may have paid and apologies to anyone concerned if you did, but in answer to the thread then I think it's about time that the club treated those in the upper echelons of Southampton FC consistently with the way they treat the fans at times, well ok, maybe not with so much contempt :-)

 

Just for the record, i'm not anti Lowe but i'm sure some will assume that if I am critical of the board or the directors of the club.

I agree, if our financial situation is so dire then every penny and every pound makes a difference. Was there not a thread about this earlier in the year, when the club could not aparrently pay a bill for some clerical goods, which was a small amount?

 

If so, then that's why the little thing's make a difference, if you look at it like that, then the amount the likes of these do not pay could then be paying for the little bills, that used to get paid with pet cash etc

 

It does sound frivolous, then again, we are led to believe that our situation is at a critical level, so the small amounts are just as important in our plight.

 

In any case, it shouldn't have to come to this should it, those who are within the club should be paying anyway, even if a freebie is offered, it used to be known as 'doing the decent thing', however, in the world of Southampton FC, it would appear that this phrase is also as redundant as a lot of the staff and there are those whose self interest is the primary concern, with the club as a whole a rather distant second. If a freebie is offered, then they should be saying 'no thanks' and paying their way.

 

Of course, they may have paid and apologies to anyone concerned if you did, but in answer to the thread then I think it's about time that the club treated those in the upper echelons of Southampton FC consistently with the way they treat the fans at times, well ok, maybe not with so much contempt :-)

 

Just for the record, i'm not anti Lowe but i'm sure some will assume that if I am critical of the board or the directors of the club.

Sums up how I feel. I would have not had a problem with the likes of Askham, Richards & co etc if they had kept their corporate box this season and thus providing the club some much needed income. Most of us fans are doing our bit by buying season or matchday tickets, programmes, food & drink etc. My criticism is not just aimed at Askham, Richards and co. We have a lot of wealthy saints fans that are happy to point the finger but have recently contributed nothing financially (corporate business income) towards the club. I'm not a fan of Leon and I've heard many negative things about him but at least he is doing his bit. Therefore come on Gavyn, Rupert, Michael, Patrick and others, show some commitment financially towards this club. Us ordinary fans are doing our bit. Of course, I apologies if I'm wrong with any of the above but I'm reading the situation how I see it from afar.

It would be nice if Wilde's missing £2million became available or if Lowe and Cowen loaned back their portions of the £563,000 termination payments on favourable terms.

 

Would more than cover the annual interest on the stadium bond.

It would be nice if Wilde's missing £2million became available or if Lowe and Cowen loaned back their portions of the £563,000 termination payments on favourable terms.

 

Would more than cover the annual interest on the stadium bond.

I was looking through the programme yesterday and you see the usual income coming from Draper Tools, The Fullers Group, Bandai & Cedar Group etc. They're doing it for the right reasons and because they're the real corporate fans of the club. It's a shame that Wilde (Merilon Group) and Lowe (Lowe Holdings) have chosen not to follow the examples above.

It would be nice if Wilde's missing £2million became available or if Lowe and Cowen loaned back their portions of the £563,000 termination payments on favourable terms.

 

Would more than cover the annual interest on the stadium bond.

more pertinent that Askham who has been in the shadows taking the big money pay some into the pot.

more pertinent that Askham who has been in the shadows taking the big money pay some into the pot.

 

Well, quite.

 

The more the merrier!

 

Ultimately he is small-fry though and isn't even close to being in the same league as Wilde.

Well, quite.

 

The more the merrier!

 

Ultimately he is small-fry though and isn't even close to being in the same league as Wilde.

I suspect cummatively Askham is miles in front especially if you take into account the reverse takeover etc.

I suspect cummatively Askham is miles in front especially if you take into account the reverse takeover etc.

 

You're having a laugh?

 

He's a local accountant. He made about a million on the paper value of his shares. I think he may have realised some of it but I'm not sure.

 

I don't know what Wilde's net value is precisely but it's in the many millions. There's no way Askham could afford to buy the shareholding Wilde did.

You're having a laugh?

 

He's a local accountant. He made about a million on the paper value of his shares. I think he may have realised some of it but I'm not sure.

 

I don't know what Wilde's net value is precisely but it's in the many millions. There's no way Askham could afford to buy the shareholding Wilde did.[/QUOTe] Are you talking overall wealth or what they have each earned from SFC. Of the latter Askham has, he also owns a major slice of Burnett Swayne, not bad.

I suspect cummatively Askham is miles in front especially if you take into account the reverse takeover etc.

 

Nail, Head. Hit. If you want to know why were are in this mess, knock on Guy Askham's door. If I were Rupert, I would keep him well out of sight of the fans after his and his cronies' activities. Guy Askham is no more a fan of Saints than Milan Mandaric or Kevin Phillips and has creamed off a lot of money at our expense. Don't forget, Lowe and Secure Retirement cleared a £3m overdraft Guy's poor Chairmanship had accrued. After all, we are talking about the man who awarded Branfoot a 3 year deal and then squandered millions paying off all the rejects - Dixon, Speedie, Hurlock, Lee. Lowe pales into insignificance compared to Mr Burns who still pulls a lot more strings than most people realise, despite being about a million years old. Askham, Richards and Wiseman should never show their faces at SFC again and if they do, they should get the fans ire, not our young players who are trying to repair the tangled mess of shares Askham left.

Does it really matter?

 

Of course it does

Are you talking overall wealth or what they have each earned from SFC. Of the latter Askham has, he also owns a major slice of Burnett Swayne, not bad.

 

Overall wealth.

 

Wilde is supposed to have tens of millions. Askham has nothing like that.