um pahars

My old mate, ANDY COOK

I posted this a few weeks back, and it is still something that I can imagine is causing us problems: The Annual Report and accounts do indeed relate to the financial period, which on the whole was before Lowe & co returned. But these reports also include a forward looking perspective, namely the concept of Going Concern (i.e. the concept that assumes that the Club will continue in business in the foreseeable future). I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was much heated discussion between the Board, the Auditors and the Bank about this issue. Signing off last years numbers won't be the issue, it will be convincing the auditors that we are a going concern that is probably causing us problems. BTW, they aren't "late" as in overdue, as although in normal seasons they were often out in September, last year they came out late November (although that delay also probably had a lot to do with the SISU offer, Going Concern issues, forcing the Executives to jump etc etc etc).

Their sole strategy for bringing people back throught the turnstiles is to get some wins under our belts. They have no other means of convincing those who stay away to return, as they lack the ability to galvanise the supporters in any other way. They do not have the support, the belief or even thesympathy of the vast majority of the fans. However, I doubt that all those who have been lost will return just because of a few wins, as like you I fear that for many the link between the team has been crudely broken in recent months. Additionally, I'm not convinced that this team can string a couple of wins together on a regular basis, and that the situation on the pitch will get worse come January. The current regime are not the future.

I would have thought you would have been here: http://www.windmillshotel.com/ or maybe you're on an information gathering trip: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windmills_in_the_Channel_Islands Round and round, windy miller me up.

Did he steal it from Bazza?????? Which fool paid Tommac money?????

Better have a quick witch hunt, because I predict a rebuttal of this story in The Echo in a day or so.

It's all a part of Granty's masterplan to drive traffic and make GM earn his wages;). No one reads GM's crappy stories (Gridiron and Groundsharing no less), so he has to get traffic by starting noddy threads. Attention seeking me up. Spoiling for a fight, just like Don Quixote tilting at windmills.

And there I was commenting on how good it was to see some debate and alternative viewpoints:rolleyes: And of course you never said we were poor when we were in the top flight:rolleyes:

At about the same time that he sold them Dean Richards!!!!!!! Who was the other guy talking on there, because as much of a legend Mark Dennis is, I don't think he is an oracle on all things Saints??? If it was Stewart Dennis, then it might have some legs as he is on the inside. And as other have said can this be done outside of the transfer window???? Is it possible to have a pre contract arrangement???

Just imagine you've got a windmill in Bursledon or somewhere, but because you only get 21 visitors and only grind 2 lbs of flour each year, you think about sharing it with someone. The only people who come forward are some old biddies from Clayton who have a few bags of wheat to mill, but to be honest they've already got their own windmill, it's quite a way to travel, they tend to suffer from incontinence and the Social Services aren't keen on supervising them. And ultimately as they haven't got any realy affinity with the Bursledon area and it's windmill, they decide it probably just isn't worth the hassle, and leave the Bursledon Windmill up to the self appointed committee to run it.

Fccukc me, this is turning into a love in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When the Executives were ousted last December, the scenario I outlined above was one that I was pushing for. 1. Find an Independent Chairman who the fans could support, 2. Employ a non alligned empowered CEO, 3. Keep the FD (Jones) for continuity, 4. And then have Non Execs representing the three shareholding factions (e.g. Wilde, Crouch and Richards &/or Cowen as that stake is 26%ish). I wouldn't have had the divisive Lowe as a Non Exec, certainly not as Chairman and no way as CEO. Instead, Crouch couldn't find a way of involving the others (and the other two couldn't find a way of working with each other anyway) and so we missed that option and instead got two former enemies kicking out a common foe leaving us with Lowe making the big decisions again. Quality all round.

How many seas [sic] surround Milano, and which seas surround Milan???

And there was I thinking you weren't like one or two on here (I'm in too good a mood to mention who) who you don't have to spell out everything in a monosyllabic manner.

And considering SMS (and my place) is on the Envionmental Agency's flood warning area map, maybe we should be thinking of stilts, dykes & boulders or an Itchen Barrier!!!!

P15sed up or attention seeking????? I'll let you decide!!!!!! Love the bit with the sign off of SAN SIRO which is in Milan. AC Milan and Internazionale Milano sort of ruin that line of argument :rolleyes:.

IMHO you are missing the point here. Whilst some are staying away as a form of protest, the majority of the stay ways are doing so because quite simply the product on offer doesn't interest them i.e. poor quality team (seen or perceived), lack of home wins, lack of goals, lack of atmosphere, poor value for money, lack of community spirit/no sense of purpose etc etc etc. They therefore may not be the loyal uber fans that we want, but there is nothing we can about that. That is their decision and as a Club we have to accept that, but at the same time look for a solution to entice them back. For me, the damage starts by all of the problems I have listed above (along with many others) that then manifests itself in reduced attendances. That would mean a loss of approx 2.5million, a reduction of some 11m - 12m if you're talking at an Operational level from last years figures. Whilst I'm sure we have made savings, I don't think they have been at that level. As I said above, I don't think the majority are staying away as a demonstration (although I fully accept many are staying away in protest). We either need to win them back by on the field performances, or by achieving something off the field that galvanises the support and creates something people believe is worth rallying behind in the absence of those winning performances. Sadly I don't think that the current regime can deliver on either of those fronts, as we stand here today!!!!

I just think that when you least expect it, something will come up. I reckon Reading will have the balance of play, the majority of chances, but we will come away with a point. 1-1 with Surman scoring late on.

Have to agree Wes in that at last there are some decent exchanges of ideas (and I'll take my fair share of blame for being an antagonistic little shytte at times:rolleyes:). So here's my thoughts: 1. If we're talking about representaion on the board then currently one large tranche of shares. i.e. Crouch's 10% (or something like 16%+ if you include his closest supporters) has no representation on the board. If we think representation is a good thing, then it should probably be consistent. 2. I too am yet to be convinced of the problems of having some independent Directors and/or Chairman on board. So would it be possible to have an Independent Non Executive Chairman, a non alligned CEO, retain the FD & have representation from the three larger groups as Non Execs????? And maybe I'm being really picky, but given the "Lowe" factor over unity, couldn't Mike Richards and/or Cowen represent that shareholding group???? 3. I see no reason why Lowe must retain both the positions of CEO & Chairman, and being honest I would much rather he held neither role. Firstly as a CEO he has made too many errors in recent years on an operational basis, and secondly at Chairman level I don't think he has the independence, the respect or the personality for such a role at this Club. 4. So although a balance of Independence and shareholder representation could be the way forward, how would this actually work in practice??? How do we arrive at the big decisions over the manager, the strategy, transfer policy??? How would Crouch react if the majority voted for a French duo playing the youth as our next managerial set up??? How would Lowe/Cowen react if the the majority voted for a Geordie duo playing 35 year olds??? Would they accept a majority vote, would a consensus develop or would you just task the CEO to deliver in much the same way as a manager is tasked to deliver on the pitch. I personally think something needs to be done as I just don't tink the current set up is delivering on or off the pitch. I also fear that we may soon have to bite the bullet with regards Jan, so potentially the next decision we have to make could be so important for the future of this Club.

Where I knew about boardroom politics and reshuffles I put it down (Derby & Leicester for starters), but I'm sure Sunderland had Murray through the early days and then on to Quinn and his consortium (of course I dont knowall the ins and outs of clubs). We were stable in the boardroom for 9 or so years, although of course many would liken it to a stable dictatorship;) (dont get too wound up there, just tongue in cheek). Of course we're not unique and there are probably quite a few teams whohave gone through managers and coaches, but I think we must be up there with the worst of them for going through managers and the backroom staff that goes along with it (as well as the changes in playing personnel brought upon by the different managers having their favourite players and favourite playing styles).

Is my memory playing tricks on me, but didn't another fanzine at the time (or it might have been On The March again) have a smartie sellotaped to every front cover as some of sort of suicide pill to take if you though the football was bad. Sort of twisted, but IMHO that sort of twisted balck terrace humour.

What happens at other clubs has no bearing whatsoever to what happens to us. Just because other clubs have fallen on hard times doesn't mean we should just shrug our shoulders and accept crap managers, crap chairman and crap players. "They're rubbish, so we might as well just be as bad":rolleyes::rolleyes: You're quite right it was no accident, rather it was as a direct result of a number of poor decisions which culminated in relegation. And the person overseeing the majority of those poor decisions (and particularly those that had the most negative impact) was Lowe. I have no problem with the issue of relegation, the meritocracy of the league system or that the league table never lies, but I also believe you shouldn't bury your head in the sand and ignore what saw us relegated (mainly because I would not like to see those mistakes repeated!!!). They may well face the same economic constraints, but that does not mean they have to make the same stupid mistakes that we made, mistakes which have cost us millions and mistakes which look as if they are being repeated again, ultimately seeing us hurtle towards oblivion. In your world it would appear that you have no control over your own destiny and you just have to accept your fate. IMHO, that's defeatist and negative. We may not have a divine right to dine at the top table, but that certainly doesn't mean we just accept our fate down here and don't give it our best shot at getting back up there. Then again when we were there last time you reckon we were merely a poor team:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Actually going through those clubs, although many have fallen on hard times for a multitude of differing reasons, how many have gone through shedloads of managers in the same way we have (and also had the costs of change that this thread alluded to)???? Sheff Weds (Would certainly say mismanaged with all the costs of those foreign premiership stars carbone etc, plus they've gone through about 8 managers in 10 years) Derby County (From Pickering to Sleighthome & others fcugking up, along with 7 managers in the last ten years, you woould argue they've been mismanaged). Leicester (the last club to use the administration option to their benefit and not be penalised has certainly gone through managers. Not overly sure of mismanagement prior to going in to Administration, but Milan has installd the revolving managerial door). Bradford (Geoffrey Richmond and his overspending wrecked the club) Portsmouth (enough said) Spurs (6 managers in 10 years, but not sure they've been mismanaged to the same extent as we have, although you could argue they have underperformed) Newcastle (once again not really sure of mismanaged as from Hall through to Shepherd they've raised the cash, 6 managers in 10 years) Sunderland (3 managers in ten years & not sure of massive mismanagement, just suffering from falling out of top flight). We've had 10 managers over the last ten years and a few boardroom reshuffles and I'm bored now!!!!!!!!!!

A drop kick (I think from the Archers, scoring at the Milton), whilst playing for Leicester in 1967. You're right in that Forsyth was in goal. I'm sure I've seen it on the TV somewhere (will go and have a look around).

There's a few Scottish teams in there!!!!!! But my mistake with the technical vocabulary, I meant listed PLC's of which there are a handful. This is a good article and I like the bit that says : From Arsenal to Millwall, all of the remaining quoted football clubs are private companies in all but name, as they are controlled by a single owner or group of investors. Could certainly apply to us, with a cabal in control of 42%, which whilst not representing an overall majority, it means that this group is able to run the Club as they see fit. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/marketreport/2787675/Listed-football-clubs-score-own-goals.html

But the misguided actions of Lowe and Wilde are the things that have directly, and indirectly, brought this Club down. Their actions have had a disastrous affect on attendances. You can shout, pontificate and moan as much as you want, but that won't make the fans return. They have to be lured back by either winning matches or by believing in those in charge. Neither is happening at the moment. It is the actions of those in charge (both direct and indirect) that has driven the fans away. Let's be clear about that fact.