Frank's cousin

I think in most cases this is possible... but for a football club where promotion and even revenue is not guarranteed no matter how cast iron your business plan is, I doubt creditors would have been interested in such a structured deal with further payments due on promotions etc. I think this was possibly a weakness of the Pinnacle deal - The total offer may have been higher, but the way its structured would ahve potentially put creditors off accepting it. ML went for a straight cash bid which would if you ask me have been the bets option for creditors given that you get your 40-50p now not 20 now and the rest on 'potential promotions' especially as it would have indicated that teh buyer did not have that big a pot to spend and thus making promotion less likely - Any bid that was based around a structured deal would have IMHOP spelled disaster as the if by some miracle we were promoted, what would th eimpact have been on the club if any additional revenues were then paid back to creditors thus leaving the club in a tougher division with no money left over for strengthening the squad?

:-) Made me chuckle Alps

Hi again I also believe that if Pinnacle had teh best interests of teh club at heart, as you say they should have bowed out teh moment it became clear investors were having second thoughts... The problem was that if Crouch had stumped up the 500k, I can see why he would have been reluctant to throw in the towel - I know I would have been. I suspect that communications between Cortese and Fry were such that Fry did believe ML would come back, but the danger was in the timing - For ML/Cortese, it would have been a balance between waiting to get the best deal, and not being too late and seeing all the playing assets sold... which also illustrates why the ML bid was accepted at a lower value as Surman and dyer? had been sold etc as far as I recall. Dubai Phil, makes the point about it being too simplistic to assume the highest bid must be paid - fair enough, but the point I was trying to make was that Fry's duty was to get the best DEAL for creditors, or one they would accept, and that would in our case also have included who was offering the most cash given that we really only had 2 major creditors- Aviva and Barclays. Yes it may have been possible to buy the club for 5 mil by paying off Barclays, but taking on the 25 mil Aviva loan by demonstrating it could be properly serviced, but why do that when you can in effect write it off by offering 50p in the pound?

I am speculating as with everyone else, but lets assume that given the obvious credibilty of the Liebherr bid, at around ay 12-13 mil, Fry will have known he had a banker. Now had FRy's role been all about ensureing what was best for the club, I am positive he would have seen this as such and gone with the Liebherr Bid from the start. The issue is that he was not employed to do that, but to get as much as possible for the creditors... as such he would would not be concerned about the characters involved in pinnacle if they ahd initially shown proof of funds - now as someon else pointed out, the 500K exclusivity deposit is not something that is that normal in these circumstances and to me this says quite simply that, given the fact we were inundated with some 30 or so 'interested parties' - mostly time wasters and pinnacle may not have had the best credibilty, Fry put in place the 5ook thing to test the seriousness of the bidders - I suspect he was probably surprized that Pinnacle came up with the cash first. As mentioned previously, I think if ML had been offering 15 mil from the start, they would have secured a deal then and there, but as they were (speculation again) maybe as much as 3 mil shy of what pinnacl were potentially offering, Fry would not have been doing his job had he ignored the pInnacle bid, simply because of the 'credibilty or lack of it of the pinnacle bid. I can only speculate again, that initially the pinnacle bid/consortium did contain names that would have provided the credibilty necessary for Fry to take them seriously. Its VERY interesting that Matt Le God, only became involved later - possibly when some of these backers pulled out in an attempt to add a PR face that might attract new consortium members within the 3 week time frame - it no coincidence that the pinnacle bid suddenly had alot more interest and support after matty became involved. So I dont see Fry as having done anything wrong depsite how frustrating and worrying it was at the time for fans - I susupect he knew if Pinnacle failed the Swiss would be back, albeit in a stronger negotiating position, but that given he was duty bound to get as much as possible for creditors, it was risk worth taking? All speculation of cause, but its an interesting theory.

Thing is, if a period of exclusivity HAD been entered with pinnacle then its likely thet calls were not taken as it may have been in breech of such an agreement? I think we ned to be careful about speculating here... as the timing of any alleged not taking of calls could actually have been contrctual...? Also Astute BUsinessmen like Mr Liebherr and Mr Cortese are unlikely to be phased or withdraw from wat they consider a good deal, just because of a few potential 'snubs' (speculated). They will ahve analysed and judged their bid on its merits and value and would always have gone ahead unless the opportunity was closed IMHO... which has been absolutely fantatstic for us so far! ;-)

I think there is something in this... although personnally I am not sure why there are these concerns about Mr FRy's competence or otherwise. As I see it ML/Cortese came in and put their cards on the table - possibly confirmation that they could proceed now at about 12 mil I believe. We were all under the impression that at the time a deal that the creditors would accept would be mopre like 14-15 mil eg about 50p in the pound. It is encumbant on te administrator to satisfy the demands of the creditors FIRST. If a consortium then apprears that initially shows proof of funds, that is offering more, Fry had to look at this seriously. Because things were slipping and bills needed to be paid, I suspect the 500K non refundable deposit was initiated to help pay these bills and test whether pinnacle were indeed serious. As they came up with teh cash, It would then have been necessary to go with pinnacle and see if a deal could be completed - I recall that at teh time the general thinking was that Pinnacle were offerig around the 15 mil mark which may have been another reason why that route was initially accepted. WEe have to be careful that we dont judge Fry based on what we as fans feel was in the the clubs best interests or ours - all that guff about 'handling the sensitivities of the fans' is just hot air and irrelevent - this was always about what they could get for the creditors. When Pinnacle collapsed, it actrually put ML/Cortese in a better position as the only bid in town and would probably have helped them negotiate a better price. Its the mark of how astute and business like ML and Cortese were that they simply made an offer and waited patiently and quietly and importantly professionally out of the media, with no big names campaign fronted PR rubbish - as we have seen, it was not necessary if your actions build the trust and goodwill from fans - which has been the best thing about ML/Cortese. Actions speak so much louder than words..... as I believe someone clever might have said sometime ago

NIce to see passionate, yet fair poinst from both sides of the debate here. I think Weston makes several good points - I think there is an interesting philosophy here to think about as well. In life we are as they say 'far more forgiving of the beautiful people' - its human nature. Those who have personalities and looks that please us will bemore sympathetically dealt with. CRouch is an obvious one here - (not the looks thing ;-0) - he endeared alot of support by his practical support he gave to the club - the cash injections the statue etc , his heart on sleave passion as a fan...and even if totally cynical and of the belief this was calculated as a PR excerise -(which would be disengenuous) the fact remains he still did what he did, so his mistakes or naivety is not treated as such a crime.... I wonder whether if Lowe had done exactly the same, but had a) been an obvious empassioned fan, been communicative at a strong level with fans andhad hidden his ego, whether the mistakes would have been seen more sympathetically? I think they would have. The one thing that makes me struggle with all 3 is simply that the only time they were prepared to issue a joiunt statement - or come together to fight together, was when I think SISA came in for us and they joined forces to tell shareholders and fans it was the wrong deal - eg when it came down to their investments, they were happy to forget their differences - despite many fans calling for them to show unity and act together for teh best of the club...

Think its partly due to the fact that for some being able to understand that you CAN have respect for achievements AND also criticise the mistake off teh same person seems too difficult - Mistakes dont make folk a waste of space, the sames as the successes dont make them untouchable gods...

Fair point - as long as we learn from it - the best thing about the current ownership is how they have removed all traces of the political shenaigans... and we strated winning again, which is bonus! ;-)

Football's for dreamers though ;-)

Indeed bt the figures were right ;-)

Think you are letting this get out of hand - as to credibilty, well each poster can make their own judgement on that, I am comfortable with my own posts...actions, words... ...not really sure fan forums warrant 'end games' as if there is some cohesive strategy at work? I though this was all about opinion? As you know i do not advocate the blatent and rampant hatred towards any of the protagonists, and often get in conflict with a few of those who seem obsessed with the ones ide argument...

Sure we win 28 of the last 36 games and we would end on 95 points which would see us promoted I reckon ;-)

Jeez is it that bad down the road? Sorry cant wish that on any club - especially as we have been through it ourselves.. at the risk of going over old ground, it shows what over stretching the borrowings and trusting harry with the cheque book can lead... I would say this, but makes me glad Lowe was a tight fecker when fans were clamouring for him to spend big when in the prem... there but for the grace...

NOt worried about being 11 off the playoffs.. we just need to think about ourselves - played 14 - 32 games left thats 96 possible points - If we get 60 of those which with luck effort and form is possible, we would finish on 71 which might be enough? Just got to keep winning!

NC, I dont think a bit of humour does any harm surely? MOst have if anything taken the whole political sage of the last few years TOO seriously surely?

Fife, Mrs C has a new job in St Andrews ... I'll be comuting....to Bracknell

Never really went away old boy... just moving house at the mo ..... to Scotland so will be at less games ;-( but Mrs Aviators has said That I can come down for the odd one now and then...)

If in mint condition the ones from the early 70's are at most £2-3 each - first editions form earlier must be worth more I guess I'll get my anorack....

The 'Dyson the little feckers' seems to be the right way to go - although I only have a Meile - its going to get treated to a new bag and the power turned up to max and then its 'here's Johnny' time....

True, but Kind of glad we agree on an issue that is sadly way more important than football... Although deep down you know I am right about that to! ;-)

That's a great summary and I totally agree with what you say. I think though that poilitics will inevitably return to any club, if things dont go as planned on the pitch. After what we had been through as a club, it was natural that our reaction over the start of the season was simply glad to still have a club and add to this teh acknowledgement that AP had no real preseason and we understood it would take 10 games or so to get going - the only fear was would this be enough to ensure we avoided another drop. NOw that things have picked up we have again adjusted the goalposts with expectations moving from survival to 'can we make the playoffs?' - And although its great to be politically free right now, I wonder what would happen if we are stil in L1 in 2 years time?

Not quite sure who 'my lot' are, but one man's fence sitting is another's try to see the pro's and cons of both sides. We are afterall talking about football politics which in teh grand scheme of things is frankly irrelevant to life..its not some high moral judgement we are making, just discussion on the merits or lack of of the politicised windbags that used to at various satges run a football club... The previous post was meant in jest by the way... Although Alps it seems both you and Alps are taking all this so very seriously. FYI, I have never met Lowe or Crouch (only Wilde) so am in no position to judge them as people. I can only make judgements on their actions and interpret these based on my own opinions on things such as financial risk, ego, communication etc. I would say from that its fine to put yourself in one camp or the other if you so chose, but not enough information really to act like zealots in an unwaivering support of either man... IMHO, acknowledging that all parties had Pros as well as the inevitable cons, seems more reasonable...

Do I need a special permit?

TBH at the risk of 'fence sitting' I dont really think anyone has any anger or resentmnet towards Crouch etc, at worst he was naive, or to stubborn, which is hardly a hanging offence. But these threads naturally divide down the old lines as old wounds are opened and its quite fun and interesting in some ways, as not a lot else to talk about when we keep winning ;-)