Frank's cousin

NOt really (IMHO) as the debt resolution and level is the same in either division - the creditors, AVIVA and Barclays will not be swung by what division we are in when it comes to agreeing terms - the issue really is whether the bidders have ANYTHING in teh tank after they have purchased the club and agreed the debt, let alone how much. We need to be realistic in our expectations, but hope the bidders rather than having wads of cash, have the credibility to come to the best aggrements with AVIVA - teh ideal on being renegotiated terms that are affordable - eg clauses for promotion and relegation - AVIVA get all their cash and we have the stadoium at an affordable repayment.. Simply dumping creditors with 20p in the pound is likely to see heavier points deductions. Above all, we should in a way be greatful that some bidders pulled out when relegation was cionfirmed as it sorts out those who were doing this as an investment opportunity to make a return , v those with Saints genuinely in their hearts - which is preferred right?

I am just confused as to HOW Mr Alpine sees, what he does in certain posters posts - eg he has made his mind up about you so ignores what you actually say, and just ASSUMES it must contain the luvvie rhetoric - just wish I did not get so wound up about it ;-)

Not the FA but the FL. Basically if CVAs not agreed its standard more points - but they can also as I understand inflict further deductions if as a result of the agreed CVAs the club has written off a large percentage of the debt - might be wrong on this, but its what I heard recently.

The classic response of the defeated - you know this is true, but as it goes against what you believe in your bigotted ignorance you feel this need to repeat this mantra of the ill informed ;-)

Duncan - Fair, balanced, melancholic yet with that wonderful faith and optimism that all football fans pocess (exept Alpine saint ;-)) - just for you Buddy!

Our system is just not economically viabable - thats the biggets problem in finding a buyer - It has to be soimeone who either a) has nothing else to spend/waste his millions on as there is no return, or b) someone prepared to put up with teh flak from fans for having no ambition as they manage the club well within its revenue stream....

What beautiful irony....

Uhm... a rather simlistic view? Sure the inevitability of losing 30 mil of TV revenue is a difficult oe for any business to cope with, especially for one that sees this compounded by an additional 30% reduction in revenue from fans... but not made any easier by spending 7 mil on a promotion or bust campaign... its more complex than we realise and its easy to blame without all the facts, but I dont think any of the protagonists in this are blameless - Yet are we to in need of someone to 'blame'? Is it not our own hurt pride that causes that? Made worse by the dire financial consequences. When we were relegated under LM, it was with a young inexperienced manager who did not have a football background to the extent of the competition - the difference was twofold, 1) the club stuck by him and let him learn his trade and build on the strong foundations, and 2) this was possible because there was no big financial loss as a result of relegation...

Thing is Alpine, it may be their 'tough ****' but it agreement is not reached on the monies owed, or as a result we have avoided paying a the lions share of the debt, the FL can and will add to our poits deduction as they have that descretion as awell....

Its a good question - and one that we probably wont get the real answer to. I can only speculate. Even teh most ardent anti LOwes must surely deep down realise that this was not a deliberate strategy - something went wrong or happened that caused Barclays to pull the plug when it was noton the radar of the board - They MUST have believed that everything was in place to see us survive till seasons end at the very least - but what then? We can slag off Barclays all we like, but if there was no light at the end of the tunnel then they probably had no choice. Also with the lack of ST advance sales that usually come in from April onwards, this may also have swayed things - but the club did need to wait until our fate was known I guess.... Had Lowe been more of a sympathetic character, or had even a tiny bit of fan understanding, the club could have released the ST prices for both L1 and CCC and began sales at the lower rates with top ups required say in Oct/Nov if we stayed up, thereby guarranteeing survival over the summer.... but hey what do I know...

NOt sure there is anything really new here... we knew Pearson wanted to stay - we knew fans would have been solidly behind it, We knew Lowe and Wilde had a plan for continental set upbefore our safety under pearson was confirmed, he madehis decison and he has to live with it. We DONT know, what the squad would have been like had Pearson stayed - we Dont know what results would have been achieved had the Pearson the same resources as JP... we can guess and speculate, but thats all it is - Would we have still been in admin? We dont know but financially it looked bleak without cost cutting.... Crouch and Pearson a and 3 year plan? Which was? and how was it to be funded? If they want to rake this around fair play, but surely they should provide details - otherwise its just **** in teh wind.... So what now? Thats the question we shjoudl be more concerned about surely?

Apologies if this has been said befor, but to pose the question.... surely its in Avivas best interests to renegotiate with the new owners (if and when)? Asset liquidation, will realise them at best 25-30p in the pound against the 24 mil owed. New owners renegotiating a deal a more affordable rate over a longer term, will see them regain the 24 mil + interest. The key is obviously the credibilty and effectiveness of the potential bidders - those that inspire confidence. And naturally this would allow the potential new bidders the luxury of paying off a greater percentage of the remaining creditors - something we need to do to ensure no further points deductions. To date the NDAs are holding firm and we have no real official info on any of the potential bidders. Its speculated that they are consortia - in which case there is no single bidder with enough spondooolies individually - so we should not expect windfalls but further cost cutting and belt tightening, so the need to ensure that teh FIRST priority should be clearing and agreeing new payments on ALL debts seems vital to me, as well as ethically the right thing to do - Its no different from all those companies going bust owing customers monety, that spring up again a few months later, same folk in charge and a slightly different name leaving the creditors with feck all - just ebcuiase its our club, I cant change my view on those bastards - NO lets hope they do this right, long term plan, beginning with clearing debt and building... I hope the fans have the patience for it.

I know the risks in posting this, but... has this not really been taken out of all proportion. We all know Lawrie and LOwe dont get on, in fact cant stand each other... that their business. Dont think I would get on with either of them either. What some see as Lowe slurring teh club by removing a picture of our greatest moment, if you remove the media spin, great copy and hysteria, its more likely that Lowe simply did not want a pic of Lawrie staring at him in the board room. - childish for sure, and pathetic undoutedly, but I doubt this was because he did not respect the achievement of 76 - just couldn't stand LM.

Not quite, I think the upshot was that because there were certain groups and names involved, loads of fans gave them a load of sh!te... sad in a way, but almost symbolic. There we al wer saying how we would be unified once LOwe had gne, yet when he had fans were still having a go at others for desiring to do something positive.... cest la vie

Sorry Duncan but you are reading more into this than is intended. However, in this case I do think that whoever released the info that Lowe was heading to Nottingham like the old Sheriff, wicked and mean, did so with the intent of raking the sh I te.... there was really no need. The only benefit this has had apart from copy for the echo (but also the OS) seems to be Leon getting the opportunity to portray himself once again as the peoples champion... its this that galls and sticks in the throat - I am not responding because he has done so, but because he has been SUPPORTED for having done so. If he had not been, it would have been a no story. As to his contributions, and this should answer fos 1' point. Of course I would rather have Crouch sticking in cash and getting publicity for it than having no club, unlike those prepared to let teh club go into admin or even risk liquidation just to get rid of Lowe, for me nothing should come before club.... but it does seem that Crouch is milking all this - I just ahve a natural suspicion of the whole popularity contecst approach - following on from the 'Wilde revolution'. They are both similar in that respect - they have said alot that has appealed at one time or another to fans ('Lets go Wilde T Shirts' anyone? - Lets feckin not and forget that embarrssing episode), but with little substance on anything else. I ask myself why? If we are happy to criticise one individual for their ego dictating policy and actions, should this not apply to them all. Seriously I dislike Crouch no more than I dislike Lowe and Wilde, but I do think that CRouch's public gaffs and open gob approach is there to draw attention away from his own contribution to the mess in the first place - as Lowe tried to do with his rather ill though out media trail...

Thing is I am only pointing this out to present the other perspective - and to try and highlight that its easy playing the blame game, but if you wnat to play by those rules Leon has to accept his 'contribution' and so should his supporters. I dont hate crouch, or even dislike him, never met him so cant judge anyway and apart form the media gaffs, i am sure even those are driven by the heart being on his sleave - something that fans relate to easier than Lowe whose heart was only on dispaly when the 'NOrth LOndon yobbos' came poaching players and managers. Lowe only ahs himself to blame for his inabilty to relate to fans - he should ahve taken more care and heeded advice of those more experienced in dealing with such an emotive customer base. But To thos ethat compare LOwes 12 years to CRouchs time and use the number of mistakes made as a differentiator, if you want to do this, then you ahve to divide the number of mistakes by the time to get a truer picture - this would put them on a par, although you would like to think LOwe would jhave learned a bit quicker from the previous ones. I think the problem is he woudl probably still argue that appointing gray and Wigley, were not mistakes, but like ordinary employment - sometimes the candidates given the job dont fulfil their potential shown when interviewed - thus they are replaced - What I find disspointing is that Lowe did not appreciate the impact on the whole business that getting these decisions wrong can have. The difference between me and many is that just because of this I dont think he is evil, just sadly naive - naviety that has cost the club and business greatly - but some of our fellow posters cant see this. its all unless you hate him you must support him... thats the naive perspective if you ask me.

Football I hope!

Dont think so, there was no support for this which is ironic....

The only slight positive is that teh administrator does look to get teh BEST deal for creditors. Obviously the BEST deal for creditors is to get the most money back - and as SLH's only possible income stream that would allow this is football it is alos incumbant on the administrator to try the hardest for a deal that will allow the business to continue as a going concern. Its why in many cases someone will buy ALL the assets and debt for £1 on the proviso that they are going to then spend the money they would ahve done on teh assets on repaying the debts or continuing with any already agreed prepayments on the assumption that such an agreement can be reached with creditors - eg. Do Aviva accept 5mil for SMS and write off the rest or simply reach a new loan term with the new owners for the full amount, but renegotiate the repyments to a more sustainable level for the business and thus get their 24 mill back + interest over 40 years rather than just take 5 mil now....

Fair enough so was my response. In all seriousness, I do think its crass that he could not judge the reaction this would get... but do find it difficult to understand why we let it effectus so... if we really want closure on his tenure, just forget about him. Take the 'bigger man' approach and ignore him, let him do what he wants because he cant influence the club anymore...its over.

Yup but if liquidated, the assets still go to the reditors, depending on who had default security on the assets... so they do get something on liquidation....

I would suggest the deadline will be dictated by when the next wages need to be paid - with no summer income... Its time for fans to stop donating money - afterall ae you ahppy that your hardearned is oing straight in to playesr pockets? If I was a Plyer I would not have the brass balls to accept money from folk giving tehir last few quid...it would be embarrassing. NO we need to force teh issue , and seta dealine not keep proping things up with buckets of cash...

Yup if you are a fu ckwit

Would you agree that when Crouch was Football club chairman before Wildes departure from the PLC board, he should have checked a bit harder to see if Wilde was good for the promised investment before the FACT rather than just ousting wilde later when the money was spent and no investment was likely? What of the investment that Crouch said was iminent, firstly 3 months, then 6 then 9? - everyone is very quick to point out the failings of Lowe and Wilde and fair enough you cant argue against many of them, but same as Crouch, these were done the above in good faith, but he is not granted any absolution for that?

I think thats where we may differ... Lowe has been inviolvded in football for 13 years - more than many of the 16-18 year olds on the terraces, but he is not given any acceptance or credit for that - maiking mistakes is not unique to him... Jemba Jemba at Man U anyone? and is there anyone more 'Football' than SAF? I have to say I doi still believe that there are those who simply refuse to let Lowe be given any creidt or acknowledgement becaus he came to teh game later in life that earlier which teh football old guard never like. And to anyone under 19, remember he has been imersed in football for longer than you have.