Frank's cousin

No, angry with those who simply just wcant grasp the difference between the little fact we have and speculation or how the desire to know the truth BEFORE making generalisations is somehow showing bias....

Good post - fair and well reasoned. I would add though that yes its likely that Had Pearson stayed we may well have done better, but we can only judge based on speculation given that 90% of teh squad that JUST avoided relegatina last seaosn would not eb available to Pearson this season because of the finacial restrictions - the level of these has become evident - had we played at least better and averages at least 5000 a game more, we might have just survived administration to date as this would eb in effect 2 mil extra over the season, but that assumes that this would not have been spent on 5 or 6 more experienced players wages staying on rather than being loaned out.... We simply do NOT know what Crouch would have done over the summer=- would he have made the difficult decisons and released the bigger wage earners or stuck with what we had and risked a quicker incraese in the Overdraft - we dont know and anything he says about this right now is irrelevent...

That is total feckin ****** and you know it... The only FACTS we have to date in all this are that when in the prem we were well run financially and in the last4 years its got tits up. The reasons for this are what is argued about depending on what side you are and what ******, rumour and gossip you chose to believe. I just want to know the truth - I dont give a feck WHO did what that led to this mess but WHAT was done - the real reasons why we could not avoid gettingto a realistic cost base - If that means ultimately that LOowe is teh biggest c8ck and made even more mistakes than is speculated, sobeit, he will get what he deserves, same goes for teh rest of tehm Wilde or CRouch, and I dont give a rats fart about any of them, what I want to understand is what we need to new board to avoid doing in future and hope that IF fans need to understyand the limitations and time frame they learn from the past and learn how to communicate this effectively - Seriously if you still believe this is some kind of luvvie bollx then I am siorry but there is no otehr way of putting it - you must be stupid - I dont mean to be insulting, but how anyone can interpret this as some sort of defense of him just proves ignorance and nothing more.

What the feck? what ahs any of this to do with 'luvviedom' its about the truth FFS and its absolutely shocking taht some of you are so feckin blinkered as to not give a flying feck about what actually occured...

From the rumours pieced together, I think these guys actually got a bit of a bad deal why? because 1. They are rumoured to have only ratified the big spend under BUrley on teh promise of Wildes investors - when these were not fiorthcoming it made Wildes position untenable - hense teh falling out with CRouch and his removal from the board - does not excuse their naivty or that of CRouch if they did not put a hold on this or veto it without written proof of funds.... 2. SISU - when this fitst came in, 90% of fans were against a hedgefund ownig teh club - teh execs were criticised for wanting teh deal to go ahead because it was rumoured they were ona nice commission. It was teh one and only time Lowe, CRouch and Wilde actually said the same thing in knocking back teh offer for which tehy were applauded at teh time by teh vast majority - especially with CRouch saying better offers were on 3, soryy 6 er sorry 9 months away....

Love it! ;-)

Think HMRC get first dibs and are impossible not to pay....

Yep and thats all fair enough apart from the danger that a TOO low a bid although acceptable to creditors poses - because just because the creditors accept your 35 or 50p in teh pound, does not excempt the club from further penalties from the FL.... Also after all the feckin s h!te flying round against the previous regimes and teh moral and ethical accustaions thrown at them, seems just a tad feckin hypocritical if we are willing to accept new owners who get us cheaply by screwing not just Barclays and Aviva, but all those smaller compaines to whom monies are owed - who are lower down the list.

I and nor do many7 on here know what was well and poorly managed in the last 18 months - yet we seem happy to make sweeping claims? When in the prem, we were an example to other clubs as to HOW to mange inancially within ones means - what we are talking about now is a club trying to reduce costs in line with income - simple - where we failed was in that process primarily due to teh contractual obligations of players being unbreakable - These were entered into initially by Lowe then exacerbated by Wilde and Crouch - yet ultimately to some extent the major cause is the almost criminal disproportion between revenues in te prem and CCC/FL due to Sky. The players demanding unrealistic contracts - that cant be sustained in the CCC - and thats not just those who were signed in the prem either....

True, but what i suspect is that all three are offering as little as possible - rather than an obvious front runner who is prepared to service the debt close to its entirity, which is the most moral if not pragmatic approach - we do run the risk of further points reductions if these bidders are all only offering 40-50p in the pound - I cant remember where but I think if you dont get close to apying at least 60% of the debt the FL can step in.....

'Barry Briefcase's son?' ;-)

Sorry Charlie, but Fry's responibility is to creditors, not customers or the future well being of teh club. He will accept the offer (to which he is duty bound as the admionistrator) that provides the best deal for ALL creditors - irrespective of what that means top the club going forward - Fry is not doing due diligence, its teh potential bidders who are doing that, Fry will merely wait until the last possible moment and accept the best there is. IF there was a serious bidder who was by far the best and had made an offer by now it would ahve been accepted .... I get the feeling that we ill be underwhelmed.... and also that those still in the mix are playing teh waiting agme - the longer they leave it until things get despearte,, the better bargain tehy might get - better for the new owners in shelling out less, but worse fro the creditors - Its What I have issues with because we start a new era on ethically and morally dubious grounds... As far as I am aware the FL can also deduct further points if as a result of administration we avoid paying the lions share of debt off - some may think its a great way of 'clearing the debt and starting afresh' but if teh new owners want to do it on the cheap, we could be looking at another 7-10 points on top of what we have already been deducted....and some said it was the way to go....

Uhm... maybe its just me, but surely the the TYPE of ownership is irrelevent - its what teh owner/owners/shareholder DO that is the most important factor. A PLC structure in football works perfectly well IF those purchasing shares are doing so for the right reasons - there is NO real profit to be had if the team is to be successful - so if fans and those who really care own teh shares its a great way of fans owning a small stake and the bEST way of ensuring transparency in the finances - its also possible as we have seen for unpopular baordmembers to be voted off and this is ultimately in some ways the most democratic given the limitations of any ownership system. Ltd companies still have to have audited accounts held at companies house, but are not made public, and the convoluted ownership possibilities can be complex to unravel. Partnerships and private comapanies are a law unto themselves in comarison with owners being able to do as you please - when they get bored - it can all go pearshaped. But like I said its not the type really but who and how its managed that has by far the greatest impact and significance on success - the rest is just political ****** if you ask me...

True, will be interesting to see if this has legs and what it will mean for the other serious parties/party - will it force their hand?

.... must admit this is ....underwhelming...

Fair enough, Dunacan, but I dont think the revelations will be that different to what is already kinda known... just personal things.

Thats a great artical and a great philosophy, sadly missing from todays game...

I'm interested like most, but to be honest not sure what everyone is expecting these things guys to say - merel;y confirmation of the things most believe already?, How Lowe 'interfered' with player transfers or vetoed this or that? To me its not that he did these things, - that he argued, fell out with or once called them names, but HOW he did them, because most chairman will have done similar. And its hardly as if these guys dont have axes to grind... and what if some of what comes out refers to players? especally as far as Sturrock is concerned? Are we really in the mood for more mud slinging right now? We all have our own opinion on Lowe and his tenure, his failings being well documented and there are bound to be further things revealed that will have the staunch antis jumping for joy as all their fantasies on how evil he is are in their eyes brought to reality, but does it really matter now? Is there a sense that we aint had enough **** to deal with yet? What will we get? 'I wanted to sign Ronaldinho and Lowe said he did not rate him?' 'We could have had so and so, but Lowe saaid his wages were too high or would not deal with a particular agent? Is any of this now relevent? I am 100% sure that any revelations will bring to light negativity towards Lowe, confirm he was tight, dictatorial and did not give managers teh financial support they would have desired, that he argued with them, probably spat the dummy and was generally not a great boss - anything new there? Also, those wise in football are unlikely too say to much anyway, because its a small world and which chairman would trust someone in future who has proven to be shouting their mouth off the moment things dont go their way?

FFS? Seriously Alpine - of course this is all 'harmless fun' and he was 'deserving' but two more serious points - one, we may well be relying on the Burnley fans testomony with respect to the FA report/investigation - tell me how we are likely to get any cooperation from these fans if they would have to admit to what will be considered an Assult? And what kind of comment is 'you come looking for trouble, you deserve it' - last I looked mate this was not a defence that the police or judges took into account when passing sentance... You guys may believe he 'got what he deserved' but its still an assult, and sorry I cant condone that whichever club he supported. I did not think we were of that nature.

'Hands on arse cheeks' ;-)

Crouch was chairman of the football club when the then PLC board approved the spending for Burley - The present 'speculatyed' understanding is that Wilde was ousted by Crouch and the board because this spending was only ratified on the grounds that Wilde promised investment which would amke sense - how you feel about Crouch's role in this mess is then down to how much influence you think the football club chairman should/could have had in vetoing this spending in the first place because it was unaffordable - how much did he really believe Wilde would bring in the readies and was he taking Wilde at his word without any due diligence? Personally, I admire his passion, and committment to the cause personified by the donations, but dont believe he is cut out for FC chairmanship, due to his public and media naivety and his gung ho style wwhich can be both embarrassing and damaging IMHO.

on Friday obviously ;-)

At the risk of being boring, pompous and pious, should we really be applauding teh burnley fans giving this skate a good hiding? I know the way that post is written is bloody funnt, but why is this OK because he was in the away end?

Walcott, Bridge, Beatts, Scott Macdonald, Kevin Davies, Bale...

Dof + Keegan ... you are mad mate - LM would be interfering all over the place - Sorry its time for a CLEAN break and that means everybody...