Corporate Ho

1. Disappear for days after bad results? Was that why I posted on here on Monday two days after we lost to Wigan? Sorry Mavis, you're wrong (again) 2. I went "AWOL" for 3 weeks because I was on holiday. Pompey were, as far as I can remember, around the top 10 of the Prem at the time. Just what is it you're saying I was running from? I only tend to post once or twice a week because I'm not in the office as much as I used to be and as I keep telling people, I only post when I'm at work. 3. I "disappear" when things go tits up? Surely the biggest thing that could come into that category recently was Redknapp leaving and - guess what - I posted the day after the story broke. Is that me disappearing Mave? :grin: 4. I only post gossip about us being linked to "star" players? How does that explain the hilarity on here when I posted that we'd been linked with Nathan Dyer then? Or Ian Walker? Or any number of foreign internationals to who the inevitable response on here was "who"? Face it Mave, everything you've posted above is completely wrong. Maybe it's senility or maybe you're just clutching at straws but you really coming across as a complete buffoon now. Better give up eh? Norris is exactly how I picture him looking (and remember, it was a Saints fan who called him that not me) but the more he blathers on making less and less sense the more he reminds me of Mavis. Says the man who accused me of "abusing" a Saints fan because I called him BIG DAZZA. If that's not someone who overreacts to nothing I'd hate to see one who is. Night Night Mavis, drink up all your ovaltine :grin: One last thing. Mave often mentions my "mummy" allowing me to use the internet. People might be interested to read about the psychological term "transference" and draw their own conclusions. Am I becoming a kind of therapist for you Mave? transference /trans·fer·ence/ (trans-fer´ens) in psychotherapy, the unconscious tendency to assign to others in one's present environment feelings and attitudes associated with significance in one's early life, especially the patient's transfer to the therapist of feelings and attitudes associated with a parent. http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Transference+(psychology)

PMSL. Posted that the stadium was a done deal? I remember posting that I'd been told that Gaydamak was confident it would get planning permission but have seen too many stadium plans not come to fruition to say they're a done deal. Like the current one. Looks better than the previous one from a planning perspective but in the current economic climate it's a tough one to say when/ if it will happen. Only posting when in a position of strength? That would be why I started posting on here when you were in the Prem and we were in (what's now) The Championship. Also why I continued to post in the first few seasons after we were promoted when we looked certain to go down. You need to come up with a better argument Mavis because that one doesn't hold water. As for going off to support another club, surely I'd have done that already if that was what I was like? It's not as if pompey are going to win loads of trophies is it. As for three groups taking over Pompey, you seem to see what you want to see Mavis. I said there were three groups interested in Pompey, not that they were all going to take them over. There have been several groups interested and it now seems that one of those has committed to buying. Try and learn to read what's actually written will you, not what you want to see. I'll also post the Pompey transfer gossip when it gets nearer the window and things start to bubble. Not much out there at the moment so not much to report. Is that hard for you to understand? Now, finally, as you have avoided answering the question three times now when did I "disappear" recently and just how has the "going got tough"? As you alleged. Please answer Mavis. Why won't you answer?

1. Difficult for my mummy to call me to take her tea as she's been dead for sevaral years. 2. The sheds at the back of Fratton Park were knocked down. 3. Jesus Christ Mavis, how many times do I have to spell it out for you morons, the gossip I post is pulled from various websites and newspapers. Do you genuinely think I believe every rumour linking us with a player on crap like Tribal Football? If I did I'd think we'd have a squad of about 400 players you gimp. The reason I'm not posting any at the moment is (can you guess, you poor old senile, incontinent duffer?) because the transfer window is still 2 months away and there's not a lot of rumours out there at the moment. LOL. No doubt the amount of rumours will go down anyway now that Redknapp has left. 4. You still haven't told me when I "disappeared" or when the "going got rough". Care to enlighten me? 1. Getting ****ty? I would have thought the smilies at the end of the posts indicated the exact opposite. Just replying to comments and asking some questions of my own. Which most on here don't seem to have answers to. 2. Broadband in caravans. How original. Are you the founder of the Southampton branch of the Oscar Wilde appreciation society?

Well, Mavis, you seem to have disappeared this time. Could you not face it? Did the going get too rough for you? LOL We've had 6 home league games so far this season and had 117,000 people through the turnstiles. Considering that of the games we've played, 4 of the teams (Boro, Stoke, Fulham and Wigan) are traditionally games where most clubs would get their smallest gates of the season that means we've averaged 95% sell outs so far. Given that apart from Stoke none of those clubs took their full allocation of tickets either that's consistent with our crowds since we came up. More than you had at The Dell prior to moving to St Marys I might remind you and also, as BIG DAZZA said on a thread on the main board a week or so ago you didn't always fill The Dell so I can't see what issues we'd have in a bigger stadium, can you? :cool:

When was that that I "disappeared" then Nick (also, just when did the going get rough?) Very confused over both those comments. Perhaps you could tell me when and what you're referring to? We've drawn up plans for two stadiums (three if you count Mandaric's one). However, the current proposed site has gone back to the drawing board to include more commercial and less residential dsevelopment. As you'd have already seen if you read the post properly. So, it's inaccessible but Tesco built one a 1/4 mile away. How does that work then? The rumour is that it's Tesco that wants the site to build a bigger store than the one currently at North Harbour. One thing you forgot Archie, in addition to the money needed to buy Everton any buyer would need to factor in the cost of building their new stadium. That would take the cost well in excess of what it would take to buy Pompey and build the new ground. I've seen Everton valued at anywhere between £80m - £125m to buy. Add in another £150m or so for their new stadium and Pompey looks comparatively cheap. Better opportunities to make some money back from commercial and residential developments with Pompey too. Look Nick Nack/ Mavis, if you're so dumb that you can't understand that the "gossip" (look up the meaning of the word) is lifted from the papers and websites rather than me claiming that all those players would be arriving at PFC then I feel sorry for you.

There were several groups/ individuals who have been looking at buying Pompey. The German group were one of them, as dear old Nick Nack confirmed he'd heard. The Arab group that were going to buy Charlton were also interested but dropped out when Gaydamak wanted a company he has interests in to be given the building contract for the new stadium. There was also a group backed by money from the Rausing family (owners of the Tetrapak, richest family in Britain I believe) and a couple of others. However, I've been told that a deal ha now been done and will be announced within a couple of weeks. Like I said, wait and see. I'm very confused by your statement here because I've been repeatedly told that Redknapp had assembled an expensive team of players that would have no resale value. However, looking at your list above I reckon that if we did sell them we'd pull in around £45 - £50m on those alone. And you've omitted Johnson (£5m?) Nugent (£3m) Kaboul (£4m?) plus a couple of others.

Given that the plans for the new stadium are still being drawn up there has unsurprisingly been now work started on it yet, nor will there be until Gaydamak leaves and the new owners take control (if you were selling the club would you spend multi millions on a new stadium - or anything for that matter?) The plans are changing to incorporate more commercial development rather than residential and if the rumours are to be believed two supermarket chains want to be involved, one to build a new store on the current Fratton Park site and the other one to build one adjacent to the new stadium. That should certainly help finance the new stadium. Like I said, give it a couple of weeks and see what happens. How's the takeover of Saints coming along? How many players will you have to sell in January to stave off administration?

Don't tell me, this is just another example of your complete and utter disinterest in all things Pompey, isn't it? You couldn't care less about us in any way, shape or form could you? Storrie's comments about it being boring were because he's already answered the same question over and over again. He didn't say finances were boring. What he said was that journalists asking the same question was boring and that he'd already answered it, hence the "move on" comment. As for Gaydamak being unable to offload the club and your glee at that apparent fact, what I'd say is that if you wait two weeks (or possibly even sooner) an announcement will be made that will leave you all with egg (or maybe egg foo yung) all over your faces. Sorry to disappoint you :cool:

PMSL at you bunch of mongs. How many threads have you devoted to this topic. Can I assume that this is yet another example of just how disinterested you all are in all things Pompey? Redknapp's been offered more money to go and manage a bigger club. How surprising that someone who's offered more money to do the same job would choose to do that. I would and so would you. For the record he's not a "Judas" or a "traitor", he's a guy doing a job. He's done a great job at Pompey and he'll do a good job at Spurs. Thanks for the great memories Harry (cup win, promotion and taking us into Europe). One thing that does puzzle me - you lot on here constantly tell me what a **** manager he is so if that's true, why should Pompey be worse off now that we've got rid of a man who's crap at his job? Could you explain that one for me? Also, no-one seems to have picked up on his comment that Pompey have new owners coming in. Which mega rich new owner will that be I wonder and why didn't they go for you instead seeing as you all insist you're a much bigger club than us with more potential? Off to the airport now. I'm sure Nick Nack (Mavis/ Norris) will stick nonsensical two pennerth in after me.

I met this really kinky girl last night. 'Humiliate me,' she said ...So I bought her a Scum shirt Tesco are releasing new Oxo cubes in Scum colours. Customers are told to look out for laughing stocks. A young boy goes to social services and tells them he has nowhere to live. "What about your parents?" asks the social worker. "No, they beat me," says the boy. "What about your grandparents?" says the social worker. "No, they beat me even harder!" says the boy. "Well ...where do you want to stay then?" replies the social worker. "Southampton," says the boy. "They don't beat anyone. I just went down to the newsagents and bought the Southampton FC magazine. Thank goodness they had porn mags to hide it in. What does a Scum fan do after he sees his team win? Turns off the Xbox. A man was found dead floating in the Itchen, wearing a blond wig, full make-up, bra, knickers, suspenders and a Scum shirt. Before informing the next of kin the police removed the Scum shirt to save the family embarrassment. A man is sitting in a pub with his jack russell dog one Sunday afternoon. The football results are coming up on the television in the corner: "Scum 0, Watford 3," reads the announcer. Suddenly the jack russell jumps up and shouts out, "Oh, no, not again." The shocked landlord says, "That's amazing. Why did he say that when it was announced that Scum lost?" "Because he's a Scum supporter," the dog's owner replies. The landlord then asks what the dog says when Scum win a match, to which the man replies, "I don't know. I've only had him six months." All trains through Southampton have been cancelled due to a massive points failure. What's the difference between Bigfoot and the Scum defence? Bigfoot has been spotted several times.

LOL at you lot desperate to find fault in anything to do with Redknapp. Of course the coin was aimed at him. The Villa fans were banging on at him all afternoon because of the comments he made about them last season at Villa Park. What next? Hadron Super Collider causes a mini black hole - will that be Redknapp's fault too?

Blimey! That's almost exactly how I imagine he looks too. Nick Nack no more. Norris it is from now on

PMSL. Are you saying that you count me calling you Nick Nack as abuse? Christ, you must have been easy to upset back in the playground. What a delicate little flower. Again PMSL - trying to "inflame" Big Dazza? By saying LOL at him? I see nothing else in the post I made that could possibly "inflame" him, just a few points in response to his observations. Why would I crap myself if I ever met him? Is he incredibly violent? If not I fail to see what there is about him that would make me **** myself. Nick Nack (is that more to your liking) for someone on a messageboard you seem to have an extremely inflated sense of people's rights and etiquette. I suggest you start your own forum and only allow people to post that match your delicate sensibilities. You could call it the Pompous Buffoon. You might find it a little lonely but at least you'd be happy

Nick, I'm sorry to say this but your post above makes you come across as one of the most pompous sounding blokes I've ever had the misfortune to encounter. Mods turning a blind eye? Abusing respected Saints fans? (just who have I abused exactly? writing LOL at Dazza is abuse is it?) Nick, this is a football messageboard, not the house of Lords. I seriously suggest that you get a grip on yourself and get over it mate. All I've posted on this forum is serious stuff on a Saints related theme (ie Redknapp). I really COULD abuse you after the rubbish you've written above but out of respect for the rules I won't. You constantly post wrong info about me (like saying I slagged Redknapp of and called him Judas) which any long time user of this forum knows is incorrect and that I always said I rated him. You're the one throwing abuse, you've got a real chip on your shoulder about me. If you don't like it, don't read it. Get a life and grow up

All those die hard Pompey fans? Sorry to disappoint you Nick Nack but as an individual I don't do everything exactly the same as every other Pompey fan. And as I've already said, I don't only crow about the good times. I came on here when we looked odds on to go down. Where does that sit with your argument. Maybe you could just leave these points and concentrate on the points I've made about football, which is what this forum is supposed to be about. Not the personal insults that you seem to have to resort to whilst ignoring what I feel is a valid area of discussion?

Nick Nack loves to throw this accusation at me even though he knows nothing about me at all. Seeing as I've been going to Fratton since the late 70's - and therefore have seen the very worst of times for PFC, far worse than you guys are currently experiencing - it seems unlikely to me that anyone could classify me as a plastic fan. Moreover, Nick Nack seems to think I'll disappear from here if we hit a rocky patch. Funny that for the first three years we were in the Prem and looking like getting relegated each season I didn't disappear (although I'm sure many wished I would :cool:). It seems to me Nick Nack, that you don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about. Great argument. which, as I've already pointed out completely fails to take into account the kind of profit we could make on several of our younger first team players like Diarra (bought for £5m, currently valued in excess of £15m), Kranjcar (£3.5m - value now £10m +) Glen Johnson, Defoe etc etc. given his scoring start and the number of clubs who were interested in him before we signed him I'm pretty sure we could even turn a profit on Crouch should we wish to sell him. As I've already said in this thread, you need a blend of experience and younger players in any team. Can anyone say that James (signed for £500k and now England's keeper) Distin (signed on a free) Hreiarsson (free) or Campbell (whose massive wages were 50% paid for by Arsenal until this season and arrived, once again, on a free) have been bad buys? How many posts have there been on this forum saying you need more experienced players to play alongside your kids? I can't understand why you're having a pop at Pompey for doing exactly what many of you appear to be asking your own club to do

Nick, you are such a pompous oaf it's untrue. It's a football messageboard, not a £10,000 a year exclusive gentleman's club FFS. If I'd come on this forum spouting abuse I could maybe understand your post but seeing as all I've done is post a couple of times in a completely serious, logical and factual manner I fail to see quite why you're getting so het up about it. Just what have I posted on this forum that's an attempt to wind anyone up? Grow up. He's already satisfied the Premier League over the comments supposedly made by his father in Israel's version of The Sun I think you'll find. As for whether he's a white knight, the answer is and has always been no. he bought Pompey to make money, initially from property development. As that's no longer possible, he's looking to sell. And as he's looking to make money I can see no reason why, even if he's already made a profit, that he would just walk away when he could make even more money by selling the club to a new owner - can you? I'm also interested to note that no-one has been able to refute pretty much anything I've written on here today. Says a lot really

I do love the way Saints fans fixate on a couple of older players that Pompey have like Campbell having no sell on value, especially when your forum is full of people crying out for you to buy a couple of experienced defenders. Of course, we only have players with no sell on value don't we? We'd never make profit now if we sold Diarra. Or Kranjkar. Or Defoe. Or Johnson. It's called building a balanced team. Frankly, something your lot would have done well to look at what Redknapp has done and try and emulate.

LOL at BIG DAZZA 1. Pompey are vulnerable because of the credit crunch but no more than most Prem clubs and less than a lot of them. A list in the Sunday Times showed that Pompey don't even make the top 10 of clubs with debts in the Premiership. Even clubs like Boro have more debt than us. As for our empire being built on borrowed money, are you really naive enough to beliive that the other clubs don't borrow from the banks to buy players etc? Are you so naive that you believe that the billionaires who own the clubs pay for these players with their own cash? PMSL. If that was the case how would Chelsea have racked up debts of over £500m? 2. You think our "proper history" is "laughable"? I'd call two league titles and two FA Cup wins a history, wouldn't you? Most of them a long time ago but a history nonetheless. Remind me of Saints history Dazza? 3. Thanks for confirming that The Dell with it's capacity lower than Fratton's wasn't always sold out (The Dell was damn nearly full all the time). Since promotion to the Prem Fratton has averaged 96% sell outs. I'd say that was damn nearly full all the time, would you disagree? 4. Spending 90% of our turnover on wages is clearly unsustainable, which is why we need a bigger ground. However, looking at a list last week we are far from the only Prem club with figures like these and even Villa spend 85% on wages and Liverpool about 80% (!). But your ridiculous, childish statement that Gaydamak might "scoot off" is so laughable it's untrue. Do you really think that a man who clearly bought Pompey to make money would walk away with nothing when he could sell the club very easily to any number of foreign investors who would be keen to buy a Premiership club relatively cheaply? Why would he do that Dazza? It's just extremely wishful thinking on your part.

Redknapp buys the players but to blame him for crippling clubs is stupid. He doesn't hold the purse strings, the chairmen do. If he says he wants to sign Diarra and pay him £90K a week it's the chairman's decision, not his. They can say no to him. And who are all these dinosaurs on huge wages? Campbell yes but are you saying that players like Crouch, Defoe, Kranjcar, Diarra, Johnson, Davies etc are over the hill? Most of those would deliver us a healthy profit over what we bought them for if we wanted to cash in on them. But you need a blend of younger and older players and no-one can say that Campbell, James Kanu and Distin (signed for a combined fee of £500K between them) haven't delivered spectacularly for the club. He was the wrong choice for you, of that there's no doubt but to blame him for the woes of West Ham and Bournemouth is either blinkered or very naive. Lay the blame for those clubs ills at chairmen with poor control over their finances or poor choice of managers to succeed Redknapp (Roeder at West Ham for example).

Really? How many tens of millions did he spend to get us promoted as champions from the championship when we got promoted to the Premier League?

Interesting article on this very topic by Martin Samuel in the Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/martin_samuel/article4902271.ece Sepp Blatter finds no refuge in Foreign Legion So quite why the new owners of Premier League clubs are viewed as united, or on the brink of joining forces like some axis of evil to conquer the world, is a mystery. England, and the English, are frequently painted as parochial and xenophobic, yet it is those beyond these shores, most specifically Blatter and Platini, the Uefa president, who are most likely to fall into intellectual shorthand, viewing all outsiders as one, and as a threat. As if the biggest train wreck in English football is not Newcastle United, owned by Mike Ashley, of Burnham in Buckinghamshire. As if the greatest financial catastrophe of recent years had not occurred at Leeds United under Peter Ridsdale, a native of the city and lifelong supporter. Four legs good, two legs bad, chant the sheep in Animal Farm, and what is being advanced here is its football equivalent, in which all English owners have only the interests of the game at heart and those from Foreignia conspire and plot, their minds fixed firmly on the next quick buck. Except the divide is not between foreign owners and English owners; it is between good and bad, effective and ineffective, successful and unsuccessful. For all their avowed hatred, would Manchester United supporters swap Malcolm Glazer, of Rochester, New York State, for, say, Daniel Levy, of Tottenham Hotspur and Essex? The ability to run a club is not something that shows up on a passport. Yes, some of these new guys will be passing through, some will be looking for a swift profit or will find the air too rich for their taste, but that has always been the way. Football clubs mess up. It is what creates movement between the divisions. The reason the hinterland is littered with names that could once be found in the Premier League is that somebody got it wrong. This can be a manager or the playing staff, but in most cases the trail leads to the board and can be pinned on poor management decisions, unfortunate executive appointments, unwise investments or flawed dealings in the transfer market. Blatter's organisation has helped to create a football environment inspired entirely by financial issues and now he throws up his hands in alarm at the logical conclusion. The only football event to which I have been refused admission for carrying a small soft drink manufactured by a rival sponsorship brand was a Fifa World Cup game. The stewards wouldn't even let people into the area around the ground with a Pepsi. So the president can get off his high horse about the motivation of this new generation of club owners, because his lot are worse. Platini, too. Like Blatter, he witters on about the four clubs who dominate the English game, while devising a Champions League format that may kill competition in domestic leagues across Europe by admitting one club from a smaller country and giving it a level of resource that will, in time, end sporting rivalry. If a single club from Bulgaria makes it into the Champions League two or three times in succession, gaining upwards of £10million on each occasion, what will happen to the domestic league? The same as happened in Greece (Olympiacos have been champions in 11 of 12 seasons), the Netherlands (PSV Eindhoven champions in seven of nine seasons) and Platini's country, France. In the seven seasons before 2001-02, Ligue 1 had five different winners; in the seven seasons since, it has had one: Lyons. Perhaps the Uefa president's battle for equality should begin closer to home. What is the difference, therefore, between a domestic league that is made less competitive by Uefa money and one that is changed by investment? The financial clout of Arpad Paszkany propelled CFR Cluj to the top of the Romanian league last season and broke the domination of the Bucharest clubs that had existed since 1990-91, when Universitatea Craiova became the last team from outside the capital to be crowned champions. This is a good thing, surely. And while Paszkany may hail from Sfantu Gheorghe in Transylvania, the kernel of his fortune was made in Germany, so who is to say where foreign ownership begins and ends? Steve Gibson, of Middlesbrough, made his fortune from the global transportation of bulk liquids, powders and gases. Got that? Global transportation. Not up and down the A19, or in a ten-mile radius of Stockton-on-Tees with a van. Business is global and as clubs are businesses they are global, too. They market globally and are owned globally. Some will be professionally managed and successful, others less so. To wrap up all investors in one parcel, with a single motive and ambition, as Blatter does, is superficial. Randy Lerner, the owner of Aston Villa, was born in Brooklyn, New York, but has been an English resident and keeps a house in Chelsea. It is possible that he spends more time over here, in fact, than Ken Bates, the owner of Leeds United, who also has a house in Chelsea, but resides permanently in Monaco. Both get to matches when they can and are achieving limited success with their clubs. So who is the foreign owner, and why should only one set of motives be questioned, when the circumstances of both are so similar once birth certificates are discounted? Events around West Ham United are a prime example of the baseless nature of Blatter's suspicions. The previous administration, all English, brokered the deals for Carlos Tévez and Javier Mascherano that caused so much trouble and could yet work out as the most expensive loans in football history. Subsequently, Terence Brown, the former chairman, and most of his allies have left, to be replaced by Björgólfur Gudmundsson, the former chairman of Landsbanki, who was sacked yesterday after the Icelandic bank entered receivership. Some might argue that neither administration has served the club well, but it would be preposterous to rank one as preferable to the other, simply on the grounds of nationality. All that is protecting West Ham now is Gudmundsson's personal investment, so financially at least he is a bigger friend to the club than Brown ever was. And if outside pressures force him to review this relationship, or it has a negative impact on West Ham's fortunes, these are the breaks. Something must have gone very wrong when Swansea City slipped through four divisions, too; and Huddersfield Town. Indeed, there was no golden age of club ownership in which pure and generous benefactors with unimpeachable business ethics and a world view taken straight from the films of Frank Capra moved through the marketplace dispensing joy and a generous bounty. All that has changed is that as the economic power of the Premier League has spread worldwide, so the identity of those who are interested in harnessing that power as a means to an end has spread, too. Some will be better for their clubs than others; it was ever thus. Blatter described English football as the phenomenon of the era, but he was not talking about the sport, only the business. In sporting terms, English football is a little above average, at best. Its national team are recovering from spectacular failure in the Euro 2008 qualifiers and its club sides are no more prominent in Europe than they were between 1977 and 1984, when seven out of eight European Cup winners were English. So, having defined the success of the English game in purely financial terms, Blatter expresses concern when others do the same. Ownership in England is out of control, he says. Yes it is. And that is what makes it healthy, because with so many vested interests pulling in different directions, the Republic of Foreignia will never have things all its own way; unlike life as lived in Blatter and Platini's own little fiefdoms.

If the buyers are from the four groups I was told about I don't think spending £130m on a stadium will make much of a dent in their finances.

Interesting quote in the 365 piece about Ashley failing to perfrorm due diligence when he was buying Newcastle. Interesting because I'm told that one of the groups that were trying to buy Pompey have agreed a fee with Gaydamak and are running due diligence right now. Which of the four groups that were in for us will it be I wonder? Whichever it is, all of them have considerably more money behind them than Gaydamak does. Happy days

That's an interesting question, isn't it? Newcastle have a big fan base but are priced at over £300m. Then you have the cost of buying players to get them to the level to compete for euro places. There are also other Prem clubs nearby so there's little hope of attracting new fans. Everton have a decent fanbase but need a new stadium that's being priced at £150m or more. Add in the cost of buying the club (I've seen £100m mentioned) and the added cost of new players and you're up to £300m to compete. Plus they're in the north west with Liverpool and the Manchester clubs so drawing in new fans would be difficult. Pompey are up for sale at around £60 - £70m. Add in the new stadium and training ground costs and you hit around the £200m mark. A very rich investor who could turn a team into champs league contenders might look at the clubs and decide that Pompey would require less investment to turn into a top team. Couple that with the fact that there are no competing Prem clubs within 70 miles of us and the fact that the catchement area is pretty affluent and full of people who could be attracted to spend money watching such a team I'd say Pompey could actually be a pretty good investment. Which part of that would you disagree with? last post today. According to Granty my fiver never reached him. A likely story