um pahars

I agree it sounds more than aweek, but it certainly does not sound permanent and it wasn't even said it was until the end of the season. Then you missed out the quotes from the Lawrie, Crouch and others around 6/7 February regarding "we will not be rushed into an appointment", "It allows the Club more time over the hunt for a replacement", "We always said we would take our time to make sure we appoint the right person". which demonstrates they were out there on the hunt, something confirmed by Dodd himself in a conversation with a friend when he said he knew all along he was only a stopgap. This wasn't the same as a Stuart Gray/Stuart Gray appointment when he really had the job in the bag, despite a half hearted attempt at finding an alternative manager. Instead it was the same as the Wigley/Sturrock time when despite saying Wigley had the job until the end of the season, lowe quickly moved to bring Sturrock in.

Two things from me. Firstly, whilst it is within the letter of the law, I just fear that the League will say it is not within the spirit of the law and will then invoke some other "catch all" clause and still deduct us points. Fingers crossed they don't invoke this other. Secondly, can someone point to anywhere that shows Derby did actually do this. I can't believe they didn't, but have yet to find it anywhere on the net.

I think you've lost your objectivity because only recently I was praising Lowe for getting the support of Barclay's and keeping us afloat as a "going concern", only for you to lambast me for such support. I have never believed Lowe was the devil, as that post in 2005 and many others since would show, so to suggest I do makes you come across as rather ignorant and rather rabid. I was happy to judge Lowe by his reults and never once did I venture into the realms of inverted snobbery. If he did well, I praised him and if he did poorly then I criticised him. Things are fluid, times change, circumstances alter, good leaders sometimes become poor leaders and I have never shyed away from trying to be as objective as possible (as that 2005 post clearly shows). In the early days he got much praise from me, but in the latter years of his first tenure that slowly swung towards more criticism as his leadership started to falter. Sadly, his comeback has also received much criticism as I have honestly not found much to eb able to commend him for the way he has run this Club this season (apart from gaining Barclay's bank support and recognising Poortvliet was out of his depth). I have said on more than one occasion that Wilde's initiative ultimately failed and that in supporting it I made the wrong call. In fact, when I did apologise regarding Wilde on one occasion, you even replied to me up on here and complemented me on being so open and honest (why don't you go and dig that post up ), so no idea why you're off about it again tonight (particularly when you haven't seen me running around asking for you and others who supported Lowe to be eating humble pie and apologise). Sometimes I have alot of time for you, but on others, such as tonight you come across as a right prize *****.

I have to say that's a great post by me and I stand by everything on there. Fair, balanced, not knee jerk, deserved praise where it's due and like wise criticism where it was worthy and an honest assessment that he ultimately failed. What part of it don't you like???? In fact I even allude to the forthcoming financial cost of relegation in the last sentence (something which I then extended on once relegation was sealed).

We could do with a re-rewind back to the 80's!!!!!!! Throw Artful Dodger in for a knees up as well. Then of course you could go for Howard Jones (although I've never been sure whether where he was born was Hythe in Hants or Hythe in Kent, but beggars can't be choosers).

Ok Don Quixote, I'll go a bit slower this time: 1. I don't think we wil be able to raise the necessary funds in time, given the financial crisis that is affecting everyone, our debts etc etc etc BUT, 2. That doesn't stop me from hoping (if not praying) that some benefactors out there might be just find it in their hearts to club together enough money to see us through. In layman's terms: my head says we have little chance, but that doesn't stop my heart from thinking someone might just be able to pull it off.

Which is why if you have read any of my other posts you will clearly see that I too think we may well fold, as I think it will be impossible to come up with any funds given the financial crisis we find ourselves in. Unless some benefactors let their hearts rule their head and pump some money in, then I think we're done for, as I can't see any bank providing cash to a fledgling consortium. Which is also why I welcomed Barclay's support of both Crouch and Lowe in recent years, because I was aware that without it we were dead ducks (although you didn't seem as happy when Barclay's gave ther support and berated me for suggesting it was positive news, so I wonder how youre feeling now???). And if you go back and dig up all of my posts then you will see that I was first concerned about our financial status way back in 2005, but of course then it was just dismissed as anti Lowe rhetoric, despite it being patently obvious that any "established" club who gets relegated will have some serious financial problems. You will also see that I said piecemeal cash injections would not solve our underlying problems and that I was also worried that our cist structure and set up would be very difficult to maintain on revenues of £13m-£15m. And the cash has not just been flying out of the door in the years that Lowe was away. In our first year down under Lowe we lost something like £10m out the door on normal operations (even after banking a £7m parachute payment). We've been holed below the waterline ever since we were relegated and successive regimes have failed to patch up the hole. I fully accept that some have even made the whole worse; Lowe in our first season down when a battle between Redknapp and SCW meant we were never in with a shout of promotion, the Executives in 2007 and their refusal to implement implement Plan B and lastly the all round disaster that is this season. So if you want to solely pin the blame on Wilde for us going under, then I think you have a slightly blinkered view of how we got ourselves into this mess and are rather missing the bigger picture and the part played by Lowe and hs cabal.

No they wouldn't. Going through some numbers with Granty last night and I mentioned to him that as far as I could see the original purchase price of the SMS land only was just over £4m. I have no idea how prices have moved since then, nor what the current climate would do to it's value, but I can't see it being worth that much, particularly when there would be some demolition costs to get it back to it's original state:mad:

I'm sure we al know someone who culd lay his hands on one, but not sure we'd want to bring him back on to here. Fck me, I'd rather read Jonah and GM than the photocopier man!!!!!

Thanks for that GM, it was good to be reminded that I never assumed the change in ownership would lead to a massive influx of cash as I was always of the view that if it was to happen it would have to be a grouping/consortium of people putting in say a £1m each as opposed to just Wilde and Crouch as they never had the money to do it on their own. Hopefully those who showed an interest in 2006 will now finally step up to the plate and make something happen this time around e.g. Goodenough, Salz, Davies (and even Crouch maybe). I wouldn't even be averse to Lowe chipping into the pot.

IMHO Barclay's lost faith in Lowe's ability to reduce the overdraft and if anything they probably looked at the numbers going forward and saw that the overdraft was going to increase and decided against increasing their risk. Other than that, feel free to let me know why a bank pulled the plug on a company that they were confident would be able to happily trade it's overdraft off. BTW The overdraft as of 30/6/08 last year was already down to it's current level of just over £4m.

Net cash overdraft when Crouch took over the reins as Chairman (31/12/07 Interims): £5.8m Net cash overdraft when Lowe came back (30/6/08 Annual Report) £4.4m So it actually dropped during his tenure (although of course his tenure doesn't exactly match those dates, but it's a good enough feel for what was happening) And even though Lowe spoke about the overdraft peaking at higher than this over the summer of 2008, during Crouch's period in control it doesn't appear to be the cash nightmare you are trying to claim (although of course there are a myriad of other factors in play, once again your arrogant kneejerk posting has been found wanting).

Sounds to me that Lowe lost the support and confidence of Barclays going forward and considering events on the pitch affected the business so much, along with having the baggage of Lowe and others around, it's probably not surprising that he didn't manage to get Barclay's on side. For Barclay's to pull the plug in the manner they did (with all the inherent risks of losing their monies) would suggest that they had no faith whatsoever in the management of the Club. Considering they were privy to the inner workings of the Club, then it is probably a very daming indictment. As an aside, whilst there is no doubt that the Executive team made some big mistakes once the parachute money ran out, to suggest a claim for negligence or breach of fiducary duty is OTT and displays a rather knee jerk and misguided appraisal of the situation.

Would be only too happy to see any announcement or statement saying they were appointed until the end of the season. We have gone over this numerous times before and the best that was out there was along the lines of "forseeable future", "there is no time limit", "we will not be rushed into an appointment", "It allows the Club more time over the hunt for a replacement", "We always said we would atke our time to make sure we appoint the right person". No one has ever been able to find anything to show the appointment was permanent, or even until the end of the season. Indeed, Exit2 who knows Dodd very well has said it was only ever on a short term basis.

But what if the alternative is just to fold??? Surely it would be better to do anything to keep the Club ticking over and then look to move forward once things are more secure. I'm sure Swansea went down the route of involving their Supporter's Trust in the first instance to stave off going into obscurity and then built on that when others came in once the Club was a more stable and viable proposition.

Even £20m is way too far north.

He would never have that picture sat in his desk as it's never his fault!!!!! I've even seen it mentioned on another site that a few of the more, let's say blinkered, are suggesting Lowe is not to blame as he just the mere "fireman" brought in to put out the fire originally started by the "arsonists" who ran the Club before him.:rolleyes: I can only assume that they didn't notice that the fire has been well alight since the summer of 2005. :smt017 Additionally, I can also only assume that they believe Jan Poortvliet was Head of the Helmond Fire Service brought in to help put the fire out;) Getting back to the OP: 1. "Ahead Of My Time : The Football Revolution" 2. No

NickG's igure is way over the top. We're not looking for a £30m investment.

A view that I can empathise with. I would happily do my bit to try and keep this Club afloat. However, I can also see the argument that says given the way this Club has been run by some in recent years I would like to sees oemthing put in place to hold them to account!

I only mentioned the Saints Trust from the perspective that there is a shell vehicle that could be used as opposed to having to go through the motions of setting some formal structure up. Of course if there was some other quick way of doing it and starting afresh then no problem, but with such a short deadline things need to be moving fast.

Your last line is very valid as it would certainly affect the finances. I also agree that we are still a loss makign business, but maybe, just maybe a decent spirit and sense of togetherness could see some good attendances and £££'s on the top line. I reckon our drop of about 6,000 punters has cost us something like circa £3million this season!!!!!

But if the money raised by supporters was an amount which meant the whole deal could be arranged, then wouldn't that be good enough, in that it would at least get us out of our current predicament???? Many other clubs nave used a mix and match approach and IMHO considering how deep in the sht we are I wouldn't be too worried how the ownership ultimately stacked up. I always feared we would one day be doing bucket collections outside SMS, and like you I think we should ensure we get something in return for our dosh.

The vehicle is already there in the Saints Trust, you just need some credible people to step up to the plate to run with this idea. IMHO even if there are some out there launching a bid with some "big" hitters, then I can't see why this could not be complmentary. Any money raised could be given to the Club in return for a stake or it could even just be loaned.

Maybe it would still be a good idea as perhaps any monies raised by supporters could be invested in the Club in return for a stake alongside these "big" hitters.

Not many clubs have been looking for a buyer/investment in such dire times!!!!