SaintBobby

I was replying to this post. Having a better goal difference is handy, I agree. But it definitely does not "count for an extra point".

So, the better goal difference ISN'T worth "an extra point". Better points are what put you ahead. Not better goal difference. Having a better goal difference IS NOT worth an extra point. Is it?

If the Liebherr money is a loan, we have a problem. A big problem.

But, in regards to the WBA game, I expect a 1-1 draw from two teams on the beach. (like the last two matches, tbh)

Will people stop saying this, please? It's mad and innumerate. Which would you prefer? 1. Pld 46 Pts 42 GD -8 2. Pld 46 Pts 41 GD +5 Please tell me, in simple words, how goal difference "counts for an extra point" in situation 2? If it did, the 2nd team would be level with the first team, right?

That's not very likely. You are usually better to use your own money, if you have any available, than to borrow from the BVI. Your own investments may earn interest, of course, but so does a loan. In the same way a normal person with £5,000 in cash wouldn't tend to notch up a credit card debt, a billionaire with huge cash to spare wouldn't usually leverage a BVI loan against a piece of equity. There may be a reason - but it's not about variable interest rates. If the BVI are willing to loan the Liebherr family money at, say, 3% and the Liebherrs are making over 3% on all their cash, then the Liebherrs should borrow many hundreds of millions from the BVI and just write a philanthropic cheque to Southampton FC themselves.

Did he even have a pop at Kennedy? These pics suggest there was little contact http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lee+harvey+oswald&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=eOt1UbpF6LzRBfHcgNAP&sqi=2&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1600&bih=799#imgrc=8OATfjm4Ld72-M%3A%3BU-bAH-pixQ29lM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.biography.com%252Fimported%252Fimages%252FBiography%252FImages%252FProfiles%252FO%252FLee-Harvey-Oswald-9430309-2-402.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.biography.com%252Fpeople%252Flee-harvey-oswald-9430309%3B402%3B402

If only we'd had Hammond at centre back (even at the tender age of 10-12), this never would have happened.

Bless. It used to be quite cute. Now, it's just a little bit dull, sadly.

Well, that's reassuring then! Seriously, if anyone on hre wants to take the odds I've stated (min bet £100), I'll place them for you, with a 10% slice for myself (on either stake or winnings, you choose)

It's now quoted as either Wigan or Villa to take the 3rd relegation slot at 1/4 - that's about an 80% chance. 20% is anyone else - Stoke, Newcastle, a massive point deduction being applied to Liverpool on grounds of cannabilism etc. You can now easily get 2,500/1 in Las Vegas or - through a very good broker - 5,000/1 on Saints being relegated. You can also, in Vegas, get 4,000/1 on Saints failing to start at all next season in the Football League of 92 teams (the city is nuked, the club goes bust etc). Our chances of being relegated are about the same as Armageddon, basically. I'm inclined to worry more about Armageddon.

Just a cpl of quick questions. 1. Do you still think it will need 41-43 points to stay up? 2. What do you think we will do if we don't yo-yo? Your record to date has been so sharp, wld be cool to know what u think here. I consider myself quite fan. We're still on the cusp of relegation, right?

I looked up the link to the squad that supposedly shows their contracts and their transfer values. ( see other thread) In the entire first team squad, we only have (available at present) as many strikers as goalkeepers. Three of each. Just saying.

lmao

Debt to equity is basically tax avoidance. Reasonable, fair and totally acceptable tax avoidance (in all cases, not just Saints), but that's what it amounts to. It's also usually a sign of commitment to the enterprise from the equity owners. In the case of the Liebherrs, it's essntially a tax write off. But the BVI loan is still a curiousity....

And harsh on Bournemouth too. This saga is basically over. They won't be coming back in the next few decades.

So, you mean we might save more than £7m? Say, £10m+?

I'd say that Mayuka making the bench and getting a little bit of play time shows that he may still be somewhere on the cusp of the manager's longer term plans - in a way that some of the other players listed clearly aren't. If we were to get rid of c.15 players, then that does free up a lot of cash on the wage bill. What are these guys costing us on average? Maybe around £10K a week each? So maybe frees up as much as £7m per annum?

? Your heart says a draw, but your head says a win? Odd.

Sure, red and yellows seem to account for a good chunk of it - but that's why I referenced the Suarez chomp. That will surely hit Liverpool's points total hard. (agree that Liverpool may not take up the place as well)

I'm in two minds about this. Couldn't Saints just treat the 4 qualifying games as pre-season friendlies? It's up to us how "competitive" we seek to be in theses matches. Instead of playing Evian, Etoile Carouge etc (as we did last Summer), why not just play other small-ish European clubs with the "bonus" of qualifying for Europe if we win? My worry is that European football does increase tiredness, risk of injury etc. And lots of Saturdays with no league game, of course.

Liverpool picked up 3 yellow cards today, Saints picked up none. Surely, the Suarez bite on Ivanovic is also going to reduce Liverpool's fair play point total. I'm still struggling to work out how exactly we would qualify - where the current state of play is etc.

Because betting companies only offer odds that are rather worse than the likelihood of something actually happening. If something has a 10% chance of happening, a bookie will only offer, say, 8/1 or 15/2.

Jermaine Beckford.

Might it not be better to get (potentially large) signing-on fees out of the way this season? E.g. are we giving relatively generous signing on fees and relatively lower wages? For example, rather than paying Lambert £60K per week for 4 years, we pay him £4m up front and £40K per week?