derry

I doubt they will now run out of money as the gate has been underwritten by a businessman. That was in fact the original plan, so the club will get the money if needed. With the band aid coming 10 days latter that will keep us going.

The club is full of fragile lightweight players, whose football ability is questionable. The club needs a clearout. Management and players. We need senior players in their thirties who are fit and have reasonable ability with bags of guts and character. A couple of proper player coaches who are looking to move into management. I would cash in on Lallana and Surman, maybe McGoldrick and look to swop them for what we really need, goalscorers. We should have scouts at all the Eircom games this summer, there are definitely players there we could use.

Whoever buys the club has to put up shedloads of money, probably borrowed, to allow Lowe back, could see Saints gates in the low thousands. That would ensure a massive loss immediately, you can't run a football club without fans. Rupert might think it the perfect new experiment.

Not far from the tee either, yesterday watching three of them looking for a ball, or balls in the little bushes in the middle of the first just off the tee, I said to the pro that they would be better playing bowls, he said 'you ever seen them putt, bowls would be a nightmare' I'd grow 18" rough out to 150 yds every hole.

I did, but he had heard that somewhere else. It's the naming of the alleged backers that I find interesting and a bit concerning.

I found a pinnacle and a lady pinnacle golf ball this week. It's a major golf ball brand.

That's a pretty good guess. My conflicting answers were from different threads, and correct. It's the alleged backers that give me a concern. I can't confirm either is true.

Not on this thread as far as I know, I haven't read all the posts, but somewhere else on here.

Sorry hypo the source is in retail. The name I've been given is associated with football.

Sorry Ruth, it's the source that is in retail. The person is a household name, the backers a large financial institution. There has been rumours but the person who told me isn't a Saints fan. I won't post it, but I would back it. Even though I have concerns. I suppose a large element of any bid would be borrowed in any event.

If we had 75000 at every game plus their marketing, Tv, and sponsorship it would be sustainable. We don't know who the manager is, who the players will be, how many will go to div one matches, etc, etc.

Don't think he has been mentioned on here the backers are financial. My son's future father in law-retail.

It's a public company, perfectly legit but it's the fact that a lot of the money would be borrowed. If it's that or bust then it's a no brainer.

It's a financial institution and all that entails, it looks like borrowed money and a share of the equity would be the sort of speculative deal this organisation would be involved in. I can't think of a better person, it's the financial source that would worry me if true.

There is plenty of money but I don't like where it's coming from. The person would be ideal, it's the source of the money that concerns me a bit. That's why it just doesn't quite add up. It's a perfectly legitimate source but it would have to be a success. The thing that really worries me is being right, and if it becomes more than conjecture causing damage.

As per my tip, the best I can say, he is one of those mentioned on here. I'm not saying who it is, in case it confirms I am an idiot.

I didn't last time, but I'm leaning that way. I don't want him back at any price.

I have been told by somebody who half owns a massive company with head offices in London, (my son's future father in law, grandchild coming this week), the household name, who is allegedly buying SLH and his backers. It just doesn't ring true, but what do I know. The person would be ideal but I have big reservations about the money if true. I won't post it unless I am sure, or the information starts to leak. It doesn't look right but it could just be. I hope they hurry up and we can forget contingency planning. We are trying to fix up a meeting with Mark Fry to look at his contingencies and ours.

That is a bloody good point, Tom Scott backed, was yesterday's rumour.

They don't need a CVA because the club is not in administration. The creditors are allowing the club to trade and will be paid when whoever buys the club takes over. SFC will not go into administration, it would be wound up and the creditors would get little or nothing as the players would be free agents.

The league are going to get into a nightmare if they are not careful. The CVA issue, the club as long as it stays clear of administration wouldn't need a CVA. Would the league say that it now needs a CVA because it is intrinsically/inextricably linked with a public company in administration. I'd love to see them do that. However SLH is in administration but because of it's assets is solvent. SFC because of it's lack of assets and debt's about £6m is only being kept going because of the goodwill from the creditors, the cash donated and the wages being paid. It can't go into administration it's either stay trading or be wound up as it hasn't the assets to fund administration.

We do know they have asked the league to approve a buyer. We all just going to have to swim around a bit longer until some more pellets are chucked in.

The stadium could make about a million a year even if nobody played there. It won't happen. The club will survive.

I think if he was on a free transfer it would be expensive. He has been an absolutely lightweight non productive player this year and should have been in the reserves from October to try and rebuild his game.

Email dluker@saintsfc.co.uk with this idea. Tell him I told you to email him your idea, he knows me.