trousers

Got one of those 'Leisure industry only' AIM graphs yet? Or was that my job?

My understanding was that option (1) would result in less points deduction NEXT season than option (2)....?

I'm on your side in principle, but can you imagine the uproar if Lowe had taken the VA path last week and then we proceeded to win enough games that would have kept us up and solvent?

Share price down 13.04% already today....

We're not allowed to go into voluntary administration if we're still a 'going concern'....

A Wilde discovery from the Channel Islands. Since when did good players come from there....? [racks brain....]

Out of curiosity, how much money would Crouch have in his pocket if he sold off his other company(s) ?

SLH share price closed down 11.54% today. Last trade @ 10p (In other news.... WH Ireland Share Price down 15.25% to 50p)

So, given that we'll be shaagged financially one way or another if/when we go down, wouldn't the 'best' thing to do now be to blow caution to the wind and recall all of our 'expensive' players and spend the money and be damned? What is there to lose? Either: (a) We stay up and use some of the new £4m TV money to pay back the extra we spent on the experiences players for the last 7 games or (b) We still end up being relegated but the money's gone so who cares?

c.8%

Aye. 4,000 @ 10.40p Cripes

Cheers for that research - interesting reading. As always, I'm more than happy for my "devil's advocate" theories to be proven wrong

Yep, I agree.

I'm glad I shop at posh Tory supermarkets in that case

This is probably a thought for a separate thread but given we will inevitably have to cut our cloth even thinner for next season, is there an ECONOMIC case for us playing in Division 1 next season where such an inexperienced team is more likely to win games than in the CCC which MAY attract more crowds than uus languishing at the foot of the CCC for yet another season? I know people will come back with "how can a true fan advocate relegation" but that's not what I want in my heart. But my head is thinking that we stand more chance of having a 'buoyant' season in Division 1 which may give us a better long term springboard to recovery? I just think we'd be better off being in a league that matches the level of cloth cutting. Would we get bigger crowds at the top of League 1 than at the bottom of the CCC? Just looking at it logically rather than emotionally.

Does that only apply to online shopping I wonder? As above, if I'm in an actual shop the onus would be on me to spot the BOGOF offer and take two boxes of cornflakes to the till.

Common sense says that they should have chucked in the additional items but I guess the onus is on you technically. An online store is a virtual shop, so if I took one box of cornflakes to the till at Sainsburs they wouldn't usher me back to the cornflake aisle to pick up another box. Harsh but probably fair, although, as I say, a little thought from the human being processing your order would have been nice.

Therein lies my problem....I know nothing, hence the daft theories. Am happy to be enlightened though.....

I wouldn't like to deny you the honour

So many witty retorts available to that one but, alas, too many lawyers

Here's a wacky theory... Perhaps, somewhat perversely, the 'credit crunch' has worked in SLH's favour? [Trousers enters 'thinking out loud' mode] Perhaps the likes of Barclays would have been more aggressive in calling in our debts in a more buoyant market but now there's a pressure on Banks (from the Government etc) to help keep companies on the brink afloat so that they (the banks) can be seen to be helping in repairing the foundations of the economy rather than undermining recovery? Of course, the above theorem (got the spelling right this time BTF! ) would only hold water if SLH's financial plight is more down to mis-management and/or 'on the field' bad luck than the credit crunch per se. So, here's raising a glass to Fred the Shred & co for saving SLH. In theory.