Frank's cousin

Sorry Trousers, not trying to be negative, I think its all pretty close now and should be fine, but they will want thsi time to complete teh detail of the business plan and thus be as accurate as possible with the budget so that they can be sure they can run within our means based on backers proposed support. This will of course become easier when they have got rid of those high wage earners not prepared to have reduced contracts etc, so in Season two and beyond we should be less reliable of the backer unless he has a desire to donate several mil to the cause ;-) (which we know he will once hooked and can see us edging ever closer to promotion and teh premiership!)

Fair, but i would add its likely to be teh only horse left in the race so everything to lose if we dont clear it comfortably... positive signs, but not yet teh formality some consisder it to be - probably actually made simpler by there only being one backer

Thing is its the retail units that have the greatest revenue potential...

I would suspect its more detailed due diligence - I dont believe they would have had the time to go into player contracts in detail before? and these will dictate the budget and impact on what sort of time and resources are required to bring us abck in line with income - Given taht we have no advance ST sails I suspect they will budget on the lower side given that atendance and ticket prices are likely to be lower again - and therefore any increase will be a bonus... The backer will not want hidden surprises eg if prepared to suport in year 1 to Xmil, he wont want to find out there is still a mill+ shortfall at the end of next season etc ...

Wes, 1. Sure we had an academy before Lowe, but it was one of his strategies to invest more heavily in it to teh tune of some 2 mil at its height which is why we had quite a few coming through at once and for about 3-4 years were always top of the academy league or there abouts.... and yet at teh time many fans were questioning the value of the academy spend.... 2. Wes, would not expect that rather simplistic line from you... 3. Sure we want stability and Lowes record is not great, but with the exception of Pearson, the otehr good ones we had were not sacked or 'mutually consented' but left for their own reasons to be fair. 4. Only Saints fans would look to blame someone for stoneham - Those kind of planning negotiations are NOR 5. a) You are not that naive that you believe the JP/Wotte appointment was financial? It was decided BEFORE we were even safe in the CCC as rightly or wrongly its always been a thing with Lowe to go continental - so that cant be used to criticise pruduce or lack of it - For years in the prem we were a shining examplle of how a club SHOULD be run financially within its means - Lowes problem in the prem was not poor financial management, but the unflexible nature of the that policy on how it was spent, the wage cap etc restricting managers from certain levels of player b) The ticket prices where dictated to by ST prices already set by CROUCH and his team....

Think the problem as has been said before was not necessarily the additions, but the additions in that location given Eastleigh BC not wanting tehir town centre to end up a ghost town with OOT shoping and facilities ... like in most other towns... From Saints perspective the potential for additioanl revenue meant it was sound, from teh planners and Eastleigh council it was flawed - thes esort of debates hang over ALL developments in ALL councils - its called part of the planning process - all normal and all expected as all sides try and find compromise - Only with it being Saints, we are not allowed normal - only someone must be to blame for all teh wrongs in the world and who better than the arch villian himself - seriously at any other club in the country the fans would have blamed Eastliegh council for fecking us over - because the additional facilities would have been good revenue generators for teh club.

Cant knock anyone who puts the time in for whatever reasons - I just dont believe MJ would ever have been successful... why? not for the lack of self beleif certainly, but because from his Echo piece its clear there were quite a few in his consortium - mostly relatively small fry with no liquid assets - the kind that say yes in principle but when it comes to parting with 1mil + in cash drop out rapidly - same as happened to him allegedly with Bournemouth - the cash/backers 'let him down' I think his problem has not been lack of effort or willingness, and that must always be applauded, but he was I suspect out of his depth - his contacts book is perhaps not as full of the kind of wealthy folk WILLING to part with substantial cash to back a football club as he would like to (and us to) believe. It will be local businesses that have wealthy owners but not in the 20-30mil and higher bracket. Its true he may have got lucky and found someone willing to support this plans, but I suspect he found it difficult to get them sign up officially (as we see from his Echo piece) - and given his 'history' its perhaps understandable why those WITH the Assets if interested went alone or with pinnacle

Dont think anyone would disagree in that the effect is now positive, all some have said is that this was one hell of a tightrope to walk with the outcome was never guarranteed - some of us just felt that without being able to guarrantee anything beyond Lowe, Wilde and Crouch all other shareholders all losing their investment, -10 points and creditors losing a percentageof what was owed, its was folly to prefer admin and potentially no future just to oust boardmembers - and I would still say the same If pinnacle complete which is pretty lilely , like everyone else its a great chance for us to rise again.

Thats very noble of you... sod ya J2O though

just posponed ;-)

Susect if hed down the pub, we would all end up too pished leaning on each other going 'argsheagsher yer ma best pal' - we are all saints fans afterall, although Stan and Alps miight have taken an early cab home togther ;-)

See this is what I dont get? deal with what? We have new owners hopefully, modest but important investment and something tobuild on - we did not go under we survived ,...just we are all happy... that does not change the fact that admin was a russian roulette approach if advocated for a boardroom change - thats fact has not changed. Stanley posted a thread designed to provide a provocative statemnet and open teh floodgates - it worked - what the forum is for really dont you think?

I love you flip flop personality changes - one minute mr angry, spouting insults rather than replying to posts with reasoned opinion, yet the moment someone has a go back, you turn on the water works and hide behind the 'I am so mature, and well balanced, be off with you young rascals' Sheer comedy delight mate - I actually think you might be a good laugh deep down, opinionated , stubborn bastard for sure but so am I, you just need to fight you corner with more facts than the one line dismissives and stop being so easily wound up. Chill have a beer or two and feel pleased we have a new dawn on the cards...or if you want to continue scoring a few points fine with me...

Its actually quite simple really: Some fans criticised the falling attendence from those few boycotting, AND those simply fed up with CCC football and **** poor results for whom it was a convenient excuse (why the need tfor an excuse as its everyones choice) as this DID have a big impact on revenue and lead to administration. That is a FACT that can not be denied. There were some fans (a small minority) that believed Admin was good if it meant Lowe was out and could not come back. That is certainly also a FACT as admin rendered his shareholding useless. Other fans suggested that those wishing admin on teh club were wrong because of the potential risks of going under are VERY REAL and until last Friday VERY VERY REAL - and could stil,happen if Mr X decides maybe its not relaly for him before everything is signed. That is also a FACT as no one in business would every advocate administration as a method for boardroom clearout. Now it is true to say that those fans above criticised those seekeing admin as way of ousting Lowe as not understanding the true potential consequences of admininstration which they appeared not to - and to some extent still dont - as they like to point out, we would have ben dead already with no rescue had Mr Crouch not 'contributed' to the wages in April.... NOw we have a situation whereby, with luck we may have a new owner who will breath fresh air into the club and we can rebuild. Some fans such as Alpine an you Stan feel that you are vindicated for your admin over Lowe stance - as hindsight provides you with hard evidence subject to everything ebing signed sealed and delivered - its a FACT its turned out good and would not ahve been possible without Admin - FACT, cant argue with that. BUT this is really down to luck - that someone was prepared to step in and rescue us with 30 mil of debt. Admin is STILL no way to effect a boardroom coup, ITS still no way we should ever advocate the club achieving change because we could just as easily have gone under and that FACT has not changed. The best analogy is that you see a diamond on the motorway - you stop the crappy car you are travlling in on teh hardshoulder - its spouting fumes anyway and on its last legs and you think the diamond must be worth enough to buy a new car at least - but teh motor way is busy - trucks, lorries flying past at 80 miles and hour - do you risk it? sure one time in 10 maybe even 2 or 3 times you would get lucky, but the risk of being splattered by a juugernaut and teh car ending on the scrap heap is still greater, when you may have managed to get to a garage had you not stopped.....

Did you get bullied at School? you seem to have a few 'issues'. What you have always failed to recognise is that there are no 'winners' and losers' in debates about opinion as much as it seems to appeal to your ego to think you may indeed have finally said 'I told you so' - why the need for that is your **** really that small? You obviously enjoy posting , therefore you obviously enjoy debate? If so, why do persist with labels and tags that are a) inappropiate, B0totally made up in your head and c) highlight ignorance? Life is a wonderful things as you can if you have an open mind learn new things everyday - I welcome this, and when it comes to saints welcome insights and thoughts from those who have different opinions - BUT in order to learn something you need to understand WHY those opinions are held and formed - otherwise its the blind leading the blind - The problem with many who have differing opinions to me on here (not all by teh way) is that most never take the time to actrually share why they have a particular opinion, and when you dig deeper ts because its often based on the same rumour, gossip and ignoranc ethey have haerd on here in the first place, rather than seeking appropriate evidence - and then before you know it their hatred and obsseiveness is so engrained they believe everything as fact if it supports their case. You can have as much man love with CRouch as you like , no problem for me, but when ever someone asks why you like him so or questions certain of his actions or traits your defence is attack and out comes your standard 'luvvie' tag.... and you wonder why no one listens to you or takes you seriously. If you want credibilty and to educate us 'poor misguided few' - enter the debate as an adult and search out some facts... you would be surprized how you might then influence opinion. Sitting on your arse in the Alps fantasizing about Leon wont.

Surprizingly i found him quit unassuming and humble - just your average slight obsessed fan who wnated the best for the club and sure maybe as a result expects a bit much from all fans at times, but once agion not sure it deserves the vitriol... Is it not teh same as your calls to cut CRouch slack... 'sure he has made a few **** ups but his heart is in teh right place - all those donations etc saving the club' smae premise as Nick, heart is in the right place, sure has over ambitious expectations of fans ?

Keep digging ;-)

...nah stan kind of suggests you wnat to kick Matty as his head is wher teh ball was ;-)

When you put like that - YES supporters who call for all supporters to get behind and support the team called fans - shock you would never have thought it ;-)

Yes it does Alpine, my sides are spliting as I really cant take any more laughing at you ;-)

Indeed. just hope the new owner knows our history and we need to start this now (or as soon as the ink is dry) If we cant afford to employ a team, hire in a consultancy/agency (not the bloke who came up with 'lets go Wilde') with the brief to ensure that no one in this country is left in any doubt about the significance of next year for saints - about the ambition and importantly for Saints fan how the club will be looking to them as its heart and soul and its ££ to celebrate - give us someything worthwhile and fans will wnat to be part of it and prepared to pay. I would lie to see something like a 125 club - a special 3 year membership which will cost £125 with special extras etc eg ticket righst the same as ST holders, initiatives that show the club is flexibale to modern fan needs/credit crunch etc yet helps swell the initial coffers this first season in L1... lots of ideas just need the right management...

I would only change one thing in your post ;-)

Foul, whining - you really are a laugh a minute - you should be in the circus mate where the other clowns go to earn a crust, but your wind up attempts are quite amusing in a way. Does it hurt you to know that there is no one crying about lowes departure, because those so called 'luvvies' only really existed in your imagination as they suited your wind up plans? The only problem being you had neither the wit nor inteligence to spot it...Saints fans will be happy and welcoming of new owners... I susupect you on the other hand will struggle to find any threads to post on as the old debates dwindle - until you find some note of bitterness and sour scorn for teh new owners if they kept Wotte for example ;-) Alpine Saint? Peter the goat herder from Heidi....

MLT knows his onions and I think with the right publicity from Mr Lynam in terms of communicating teh plans and strategy, we should have a good list of applicants - we are a club that has hit rock bottom and now the only way is up - any young ambitious and serious manager will see us as a great opportunity - we have the infrastructure, teh training facilities and stadium all in place - just need a manager who can build a team and take us back up - seriously we have a good oopportunity here - NO problem with coaching staff still being invlved as the new owners and new manager can reinvigorate coaches as well as players.

Laughable - was there any reason for this post APART from trying to start another round of squabbling? You will be hard pushed tyo find anyone who actively wanted Lowe to stay - there were just some of us that felt and still do that the risks associated with Admin were too great to use that as a tool which you advocated. The difference Alpine is that no one on the side of being against admin is anything other than totally happy with the outcome (subject to the ink being dry) - If you wish to believe that somehow with your overwhelming foresight, experience and deep rooted wisdom you knew we would have this outcome, fine , up to you, but no one is buying it... administration when you owe as much as we did in L1 is diasterous and should be avoided at all costs - IF we scrape out of it with new owners and a better future, we will have been very lucky indeed and we should not forget that.