um pahars

Can't see how that figure stacks up with a "substantial" amount being offset in a barter agreement with a Corporate Box worth £25,000(ish) going the other way. There are certainly some arguments to be had over the finances, but IMHO arguing over redecoration costs is somewhat scraping the barrel and makes Lowe look rather bitter and petty (I said as much when he used the line in the SKY interview as it somewhat missed the target). Contracts given out to Thomas and Euell for example would have been very valid points (as would any serious expenditure after the parachute payments ended), but mentioning this is petty. Has this letter been mentioned before, as my old man mentioned it to me over the weekend and I assumed it was in Thursday or Fridays Echo (or is this another letter???)?

I presume you read the article then:rolleyes: I bet you didn't like the bit when he was calling for Poortvliet to be sacked;)

As that offer put up by NickG stands, I think you're quite right and I said as much in my initial reply on this thread as there was no way Lowe and Wilde would agree to that. But elsewhere in the various articles it became clear that there was movement from this initial offer (if you could call the initial gambit an offer that as I liken it to a fck off request LOL) with a final position of Croch offering £2m+ for them to step down. Maybe that £2m would have kept us clear of relegation and administration?????

Duncan the ITN reporter is not lost on me;) Maybe he could try and find where Justin Fashanu is these days!!!!!

Oh for a stay of execution of six months given our current predicament!!!!! It was only recently that NineflashmanteenBearBeast was saying people were wrong to champion administration and now it seems that you'd prefer it to accepting money from Crouch:) A bit of money to placate the bank, some money on short term loans and a decent manager to save us from relegation. I'd certainly choose that over relegation, administration and a points deduction.

It's just that I think the whole articles across 4 pages cover much, much more than your original summation. I would say that after reading it all there were a number of alternatives / offers on the table. 1. Crouch sticks in £2m, Wilde and Lowe Match it. Wilde steps down as SFC Ltd Chairman (but stays on PLC Board) and Crouch replaces him as Chairman. This was the opening gambit. It appears Wilde could participate, but Wilde and Lowe reject this offer. 2. Crouch sticks in £6m and gets full control with Wilde and Lowe disappearing. Never going to come off as Crouch does not have that money. 3. Crouch sticks in £2m and Wilde & Lowe agree to stick in some money (amounts to be decided). Crouch comes on to the Board as Chairman/CEO and Wilde steps down as SFC Ltd Chairman (but stays on PLC Board). It appears Wilde could participate, but Wilde and Lowe reject this offer. 3. Crouch sticks in £2m & Lowe matches it. Wilde rides off and Crouch replaces him. Appears that Lowe wouldn't cough up on this one and Wilde not in agreement. 4. Crouch sticks in £2m and Wilde & Lowe agree to stick in some money (amounts to be decided). Crouch comes on to the Board as Chairman/CEO and Wilde steps down as SFC Ltd Chairman (but stays on PLC Board). It appears Wilde could participate, but Wilde and Lowe reject this offer. 5. Crouch sticks in £2m, with further sums to come. Lowe and Wilde to step aside. Lowe and Wilde reject this as they want an injection of £6m to step aside (see 1. above) So whilst the opening gambit was always unlikely to be accepted (for a number of reasons), was there any potential on the others succeeding????? I can certainly see 4. or 5. as having potential and not as outlandish as some are suggesting on this thread (particularly when judged against the fact we went into administration just over 2 months later!!!). Reading the whole article I am certainly of the view that the offer of £2m+ from Crouch was not merely a PR stunt.

I reckon you've underestimated our monthly wage bill there!!!!!! I reckon as much as £600k a month, maybe even more!!

And that should answer all of your questions!!!!!!!!! Forgive me for being a pedant, but wouldn't you want to know just who did own your club??? That answer on its own would have had the alarm bells going mental.

That was indeed the opening gambit, which changed again by the January meeting (as per Crouch's agenda) and changed again as per Crouch's quotes of: "I made my approach to Lowe and Wilde because I thought it was up to the three major shareholdersto save the Club.........They refused to put in any money and said they would walk away if I put in £6m. I couldn't do that as I haven't got £6m. They could have walked away and I would still have put in my £2m and I would have taken over. They would not have that........ My £2m would have saved us from administration ..... I would also have put some of my own money in....." No disrepsect NickG, but I have to say you're paraphrasing here doesn't do the story justice and I can only recommend people either buy the paper or someone types out the whole piece and then people can interpret it for themselves.

See my post above as the story NickG has interpreted is not how I would have interpreted it (my earlier comments were based on NickG's rather biased paraphrasing which doesn't do the story justice), particularly the bit that states Crouch would have put his £2m in if Crouch and Wilde had walked, but they demanded £6m to walk. It appears that a £2m+ offer was there, but Lowe and Wilde turned it down. There was also an offer for them to match the investment, and it would also appear that various things were up for negotiation.

I've just got The Echo and I have to say i think the paraphrasing/summation on here doesn't do it justice. For instance it prints out Crouch's agenda for the latter January meeting which says: "The amounts and the terms on which monies may be received by the Company/SFC are to be discussed" which clearly shows Crouch was open to negotiations on the amounts put in by the main shareholders. And another point that has been missed is that Crouch states he would have put his £2m in (and further money after that) if Lowe and Wilde just walked away (i.e. there was no requirement for them to match his money if they departed), but Lowe and Wilde requested he brought in £6m before they walked. I think people should be reading the full article which contains many factual statments (such as letters & agendas) as the summation on here does give the full story.

Well if he did force JP to resign then it was about the only positive thing to come out of this offer!!!!! But sadly, that's not the case as Lowe & co. had already decided to give Poortvliet the push before Crouch strolled in that Friday. With regards the offer, with conditions like that it was never going to be be accepted and surely Crouch knew that, so would like to know why he felt it was reasonable to put it forward (does the Echo shed any light on his motivation for doing so???).

So we can only assume that he was OK with the appointment of Poortvliet which IMHO was the decision that took us over the edge. Saying you wanted a British manager to take over from the imbecile you first appointed is somewhat shutting the stable door. A fact made worse by having to boot out an incumbent who appears to tick most of the boxes you want. It also goes to sow who was making the decisions (i.e. Lowe) with Wilde being a mere patsy to him, but you also have to remember that Lowe only got that position and power through Wilde's support, so he has to accept his share of responsiblity.

F5 on the Echo site is all I can suggest!!!!!! Would have thought they wuld put something up there if they are running with it!!!!

I know LOL I tried my best not to get involved (kept hearing shedloads mind!!!), but this one seemed to indicate things were coming to a head. I was told just after 3 or 4 this afternoon, so presume they were indeed typing it out. My source wasn't the Sports Desk, but was from inside the media clique.

Not from any of my usual sources and probably my first contribution to these rumour threads, but I have been told that The Echo are running with the story that "Matty's" consortium have got it. What exactly "got it" means and whether it could have been agreed so quickly means I have some doubts, but thought I'd share it with you all. As I said it's not my usual source so not sure how legit it is, but they did sound genuine. Haven't had time to read too many threads so sorry if this is old news (or of it turns out to be ********!!!!).

I don't really go in for "told you so's", but in this instance considering he/she/it is now going in for the "It's got nothing to do with Lowe" line, then I thought it was apt to show how last summer he/she/it was crediting Lowe for orchestrating the new strategy and the implementation of the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up.

Have you received & read my Kate Moss/Cuban heels PM as you haven't replied???????

It gets better: There's loads of 'em out there LMFAO. Lowe was his golden boy delivering us from Crouch & Pearson last summer. Jan was showing he was better than Pearson and Lowe was the chief architect of all this (although of course now it's all gone tts up, he had nothing to do with this season;)).

Really??? LMFAO. Only last summer you were salivating over how Lowe had orchestrated the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up;) and how you had great hope for this season. Now when it's all gone tts up, then all of a sudden the conductor has gone AWOL:D Poor Lowe, he never stood a chance LOL.

A three year deferral which would have had a big impact on cashflow. LMFAO nickh. We received £16m in player sales in our first season down and still lost cash out the door!!!! Upon losing £20m from the top line should have meant we were interested in finding any cash savings. We should have been doing all we could to renegotiate this loan. Lowe & Hone failed to get Aviva to buy into this, but Crouch did. Circumstances may have changed year on year, but you can't deny that Crouch did the deal, saved us a decent wedge and therefore showed he was willing and able to deliver cost savings. Aviva aren't some hicks from Norfolk who have no idea how businesses work. They have links throughout football and they are acutely aware of the financial problems that befall clubs that fall out of the Premiership. They experienced it first hand with Ipswich for instance. Your line here does not stand up to even the briefest of scrutiny.

Looking at it that way, it certainly puts it into perspective what we thought our priorities were!!!!!!! The cost of everything and the value of nothing has probably never been more apt.:mad:

I'm not overly confident of Crouch being in the hot seat, I was merely countering why you thought we would have gone into administration even quicker had Lowe not returned and you have provided nothing substantial to back that claim up. Of course we'd have taken it up!!! £1.5m saving per annum is massive given our situation (particularly in the short term). We should have been looking to renegotiate this deal the minute we were relegated. It has been there for renegotiation since 2005, but it appears that only Crouch managed to pull it off, so he deserves the plaudits for that as opposed to your rather blase attitude here. And we would have managed to get by even better with £1.5m off the cashflow in the short term.

Well he must have some decent negotiating skills to get a deferral/holiday on the stadium "loan" something Lowe, Wilde and Hone all failed to do. He's also not stupid in realising that ultimately Barclay's and Aviva had to be kept on side and that he would have to do everything necessary tp avoid administration. In fact, I would probably argue that he would have hated to have gone into administration under his watch more than Wilde and Lowe given his "support" of the Club and his status in the local community.