Frank's cousin

Crouch/Wilde/ LOwe/- all amateurs when it came to running a club - and they all failed to get the right people in to help - the fans group would be about employing the RIGHT people - interviews CVs and the works answerable to the owners - the fans themselves, cant see how that is about amateurs running a club can you?

The dilemma for many though is that do they donate to the clud direct knowing a % will go straight into teh pocket of the administrator (first and formost), wages for playesr and then lastly any bills etc? Or do pledge your hard earned to the group looking to buy the club?

I appreciate teh money concerns - but this has been complicated by the CRouch call to donate to the club direct - Monies that will ultimately go towards paying the club costs including player wages The pledging that is being called for by the joint group indicated as I understand it, is to accumulate sufficient interest to be able to mount a realistic bid for the club AND the training ground and hopefully getting the council to buy SMS. HOw much this needs to be is still unclear as we dont know what sort of offers the administrator is considering for the club alone. Whilst Crouch's call for funds donmated directly to the club, may help keep the club alive a bit longer, ultimately its just about paying bills and wages The Mark/Derry group is about raising funds that will give donors a stake in the club itself and buying it for fans. The trust involvement - I have to say that I feel the Trust has been given a bad rep for teh obvious reason that they wer Not vocally anti Lowe (IMHO) - The truth is that the TRUST is NOT a supporters association that exists purely to stand up for fans rights against the club, but was an honest attempt to slowly build a shareholding amongst fans that would eventually become big enough to have a serious voice. The Truth is that no matter how much we might dislike or hate the board, the only way fans (trust) would be taken seriously and be offered a board position is if they have shown that its NOT single agenda and NOT about shouting to get rid of him or her, but by demonstrating a calm, rational and importantly PROFESSIONAL approach to negotiations and discussion - with a desire to offer positive criticism for sure, but by working constructively with WHOEVER was in the boardroom. I appreciate that the opinions of NI and SG are not everyones cup of tea, and indeed I would probably disagree with both of them more than agree, BUT from the occasions I have met both of them, talked to them etc, they are actually passionate fans who are also prepared to listen and represent teh MAJORITY view even if that is not their own and that is all we can ask for. The reason for lack of interest to date in the trust has NOT been down to their opinions or approach but down to our own Apathy TBH. Please dont go round in circles about 'committees' and all that nonsense, I know no one likes that guff but like it or not these processes are a required part to maintain a legal framework and to some extent credibilty if thats not an oxymoron. ;-)

I really lose the will to live at times. From the couple of occasions I have met Derry at matches - he is about the least egotistical person I have met - I have 100% confidence in him doing this purely for love of OUR club. To rip into ideas and those willing to give their own time FREE OF CHARGE to try something, anything to help in a crisis, is to be honest a bit of a S hitty thing to do. As I have said in the past on and on this thread, there are names on the 'joint list' that I can not agree with, others that I can only agree with in part, but the WHOLE concept of fan ownership is that it will be based on a democratic system and that will mean there will be folk and things I would vote against - but the beauty is in having that chance to start with. If we need fans to try and step in, because no one else comes in for us, its these guys, warts and all that should be getting our support, not ridicule etc. If you feel that they dont represent your views get off your arses and get involved - I would suggest they would welcome your support and input because the MORE representative of fans these things are, the more representative of ALL factions, groups and opinion, the more unified they become and a successful outcome becomes more likely - we cry out for unity, yet it us very fans who now the big bad wolf has gone seem at times to stepped outside and are huffing and puffing to blow our own house down.... Good luck to all involved - I would happily volunteer to be part of this, but a) I dont have the time right now as other things are a priority and b) I suspect my 'luvvie' tag might alienate rather than unite...

I too am confused by the different approaches - eg what has happened to the moneies raised or pledged directly to the club already? I think teh Mark and Derry thing is about getting these groups togther and maybe gettig a common purpose that ideally we can all get behind. PS,on teh LM /MC thing - I do think it might be better for these guys to take a back seat for a while - because they can still create 'frictions' - let them be voted back in when you have gotton your bottles lined up - its still a bit soon to the whole issues with CRouch etc IMHO...

To be fair, its not necessarily impossible to work with folk who may (speculation) be doing things for perhaps not purely the same reasons as you or I might be, the key is to know this and recognise it and ensure you dont sucked into any traps - Micheal Wilde played a few of us like a cheap fiddle over that first SOS and as long as everyone is 'once bitten' its actually a good learning opportunity. LM may well be publicity hungry, but having such an icon involved can also BRING publicity to the cause - If he is also interested in actually being involved in the running, then he has every right to stand as anyone else if he qualifies through whatever criteria are established, and then the voters decide on merit. Personally I feel he is perhaps a little tainted by the Crouch involvment, but democracy is about choice and freedom and he has as much right as Chorley to stand if tehy fulfil the criteria.

Come on Derry, that bit is part of any fans Saturday afternoon routine! ;-) 'we need more width' - Seriously good luck guys because anyone prepared to help in this way deserves the respect from fellow fans. Just be prepared for some neighsayers and dont let them get you down. Make it democratic, and open to as many fans as possible even those who would struggle to make a contribution - eg ST holders and members 1 vote, if you give 10 grand maybe 2 or 3, but going down the route of votes for contibution is really a dangerous road IMHO.

You weren't that poor bugger who after teh match soaked through to the skin threw his shirt over to an away fan expecting a staeua shirt back, only to get thrown teh guys flag which was about 6 inches x 4 inches! Classic, LOLage.... there is a taxi driver in BUcharest driving around in one of my old Saints shirts - got a nice Nike Steaua away shirt in exchange

Bald, wasn't Lenin bald? ;-)

Apologies, its just taht I heard about it all via Derry's post and although he made no claim as it it being his, I just gave it that tag... what in summary are the key points of the proposed voting system? For that is the crux because thats what willbe teh difference between a true 'ownership by fans' and ownership by fan who can afford it... not much different to a PLC except you cant trade your share! ;-)

In principle I would support any democratic ownership - not in some chorleyesque cooperative Ragged trousered philantropist ideal, but a modern democratic system suchas at Barca could in theory work - the key is the democracy. For me anyone who has held a ST or membership in the last 5 years gets 1 vote, and is a member, anyone who then pays a tenner a year get in effect 2 votes.... the problem i had with Derry's original plan if I understood it correctly is that it could resulted in fewer richer fans who could afford the big donations having all biggest say - sure they stumped up the cash, but what of those that have paid their money to the club these last 5, 10, 20 years but cant afford £500 as a one off donation, should they not count as voting members with the freedom to stand in teh future? Its those details that make a difference in folks attitudes. If you exclude a huge majority on the grounds of non affordability - it will be elitist anncliquey, you simply open it up to everyone and you get a greater chance of unity

Simple really I would make anyone who has held a ST or membership in teh last 5 years an automatic member with one vote - then a Tenner a year gets you full membership wwhich is sy worth 2 votes - tis group would then in effect have 60,000 voting members electing the leaders - but this should be for two years and for a MAX of two sittings...

I dont agree with what NIck says all the time, far from it, but if you have met him you will knowhe is sincere and would be happy to represent the majority view even if against his own as required by theleadership of such an organisation - seriously whatever you might have heard or speculated he does have that integrity.

Think RCs problem was his attitude, - put folk off, I have met NI SG and Derry for example and they are simply ordinary fans really, we assume NI is media hungry because he is one of only a handful who get called up the moment the media have a story and he seems a perfectly ordinary dedicated fan to me, dont agree with everything he says, but can respect waht he believes in and can respect him, Stevie G as well, cares has strong opinions and gets of his 'Skinny' arse ;-) to do something - cant always say i agree either, but I could support him in all this because he is doing his bit for teh right reasons - Derry, a true gent with a very sound footballing brain - whinges like feck about lack of width mind ;-) Seriously guys, these folk give a sh** and whilst we might not agree with EVERYTHING they believe in, you can trust that they care - and if they do bad, vote em out if it ever came to that. For me the only concern is that this needs tobe about the future NOT the past, LOwe was rightly criticised for his recent media preseence, but we shouldalso try and keep teh likes of LM talking about the future, not gloating about the demise of teh previous, its just childish and divisive..

What we see again and again though is this knocking of those trying to do something - anything even if not perhaps in your opinion ideal, at least its something. Why the need to criticise these guys anyway - so what if indeed they were ego driven - aren't we all to some extent, and if teh spin off is that the club is aided then I can live with that. The very fact that they are trying to unite the different factions si a bloody good start - as has beens said before the first step is to achieve this unity, the second to be prepared to do what they can should no one else step forward... I am not sure why. I dont like what rent a gub chorley says or does, but he does at least do something. IF and its a very big IF this group did need to step in and we did not like those at teh top, the simple beauty is that at least we could vote them out later - something we cant do with a new owner should they not come up to our expectations.

cynic ;-)

Why not? whats really in a name? and the Trust do havethe experience of the legals with the whole 'trsut' issue.... but if its just the name that can be easily changed how about: the SSU - Saints Supporters UNITED ;-)

Kind of a little sad to see the reaction =- like many I had little faith in the individual set ups and factions, because they were all ighting against each other, and precisely because these things will always remain ineffective when disjointed. Unify behind a SINGLE group nd you have a serious and unifying force, even if you dont agree with all thsoe involved, or have believe they have baggae etc - as long as this is about a positive drivie froward FORGETTING the past it cant be a bad thing... dont worry about ego or characters you dont like being in the board room, They do a good job, tehy get reelected, they provve iunpopular they dont, its quite simple.

You have gone off on a bit of a tangent, but to illustrate the point, we had 30K against Utd in the cup at full price under the old board ... HOw many will we get week in week out in League 1 even with the ideal chairman? This is not a criticism of fans, but a comment on the numbers that will be prepared to shell out regularly for lower league football;, and If you believe that we will see 20k next seasona as an average if mid or lower table, i think thats wishful thinking.

Good luck Derry, unification of all the supportive factions is a great first step. To get everyone on side, there does need to be a collective understanding that now is the time to move forward and forget teh past, forget the sniping and schardenfreude that is sometime in evidence from thos ecritical of previous regimes -especially those strong personalties in volved - and focus purely on the future. Its must stand and fall opn its own merits, not present failure as a success because its better than what we had before. If that is done and gobs can be tightly shut with respect to the past, i think it could work in uniting the fans purpose - we should not forget as well the impact a positibve and united face will have on other potential bidders. Good luck to all with your efforts.

JUst a bit of gallows humour really Alpine, Its a very valid point Stanley makes - but on a more serious note, I would argue that many of teh mistakes made histoprically are similar to those made at many clubs, but teh consequences have hit us harder than most as we have no underlying financial support - they are easy mistakes to make when you get sucked into this game, and I doubt very much, that a new owner will be mistake free after 12 months - the question is how these impact on the pitch and thus how supportive the fans remain of both the team and the board.

... OK so let me get this straight, you have a business proposition that offers me 100% of your company for £1, has 27 million of debt, a shrinking customer base as the product being sold has reduced in quality to such a level that there are at least 50 competitors with a better product, sometimes as cheaper price points - and it would take at least 5-10 mil to improve said product, but then the opporating costs would be in excess of sales revenues? Did I hear that right? Hahahahahahahahahahah falls off chair....

...it smply shows that we dont have the fanbase to sustain lower league football that will have sufficient quality of players, entertainment and success that matches our expectations.

Buy a football club - guarranteed to get you hours of grief from fans who demand excessive spending on players to show 'ambition', will forget very quickly that its wise to live within your means and then start demanding we show more ambition, get on your back the moment the manager seems clueless, complain about the ticket price, the beer, lack of free BJs at halftime...and demand you sell the club if we dont winj teh Champions league within 5 years... oh and guarranteed to turn every pound you spend into 10p ;-)

or both, all, does it matter?