Capel Saint

Problem is the quality will be sold and the dross will stay as is the nature of 'selling only' football club.

I suggest he looks at some kind of long term purchase of STs over a 5 year period which also carry a value in shares in a "Saints 2009". We need a Club part owned by supporters committed to STs. We need a club not owned and run by a bl***y plc!

Yes, because Lowe needs Wilde on board due to being tha largest shareholder. It also suits Wilde as it allows him to be part of SFC again.

Unfortunately nothing except individually decide if we want to part with our hard earned pennies and go along and support the team. As I said, this is the last roll of the dice for Lowe and if it doesn't work (which currently it isn't) then relegation and the inevitable administration will follow. Cheer up though, it will soon be Christmas!

Agreed. Crouch will not forgive Lowe and Wilde for hoisting him out of the Chairmans seat.

Kelvin Davis Rudi Skacel Andrew Surman David McGoldrick Adam Lallana Nathan Dyer Morgan Schneiderlin Lloyd James Bradley Wright Phillips Highlighted the ones most likely to go. Dyer, Rasiak and John will also be sold if they impress their respective teams they are currently loaned to.

Unfortunately a 4-5-1 formation relies on the wingers able to pass the opposition, deliver quality crosses and for central midfielders to come up and support the lone striker when attacking. The fundamentals of which our team is not doing, hence not scoring goals.

Compared to the likes of us he is very rich. However, in football terms, he is not.

In that respect Mandaric and Lowe are similar in that respect. When a manager does badly they soon get the chop. However, as we have seen, weild the axe too often (3 managers in 1 season) and the team will have a huge chance of being relegated.

Interesting points GM, not that I agree with you on all of them but I think everyone interprets what has gone on differently. That is a sensible way of looking at it but do you truly believe that?! I don't. I don't think money comes into the equation. It's relative but cheapness doesn't transend directly into finance. I'd hoped Lowe had learnt this from his Premiership/lack of ambition days and not building on relative success post FA cup. It seems arrogance and stubborness can cloud common sense, if evident. No, I am not convinved this is true as, like most fans, we were not in the room when Lowe and Pearson sat down to discuss if he was going to continue at the club. But any of the reasons you state below could be true or could not be. However, one thing that Lowe does do is look at the cash the club has incoming and what is outgoing. He knew when he came in that the club's finances were a mess and the bank was calling for some serious action. Maybe the bank wrote to the major shareholders to tell them that drastic cost cutting had to be done? I think Pearson never stood a chance because of a few reasons: 1.) He was appointed by Chris Mc Menemy/Lawrie/Leon (possibly) 2.) Any success he may have achieved would NOT reflect on Rupert Lowe (Conjecture I accept, egotistical by Lowe, but not beyond possibility). No, can't think that that would be a factor in his decision. 3.) He was not a "yes man" and had his own ideas and would possibly not respond well to any (alleged) interferring by Lowe (which I cannot prove but I truly do believe goes on. I do think he has direct involvement in which players are brought in, salary negiotiations etc, but not telling Jan who picks the team, as some posters feel he does. He is a chairman, not a manager and not even a yes man would not allow a chairman to pick the team. That would be ridiculous! 4.) He did not fit this new, revolutionary idea that Rupert had been sold/invisaged in his mind. I don't know how much is attributed to Lowe/Woodward/Hockaday/Poortvliet/Wotte, esq. (and I am not against new techniques, when plausible) but this was so clearly a disaster waiting to happen (i.e. having a small percentage of capable youth team capable of stepping up to 1st team, ignoring all advice and throwing in the boys against men and putting way too much pressure on young minds/shoulders - just look at Mc Goldrick as an example or James, Gillet, etc.!) Quite agree. Lowe is making a last gamble on hoping that Jan, with his Dutch training techniques, could get the young (cheaper) players to mould into good players. The major problem is that Jan has less than a season to get these players up to be able to cope with the rigours of a CCC season and improve them enough to win enough games to avoid relegation. An extremely tall order as players need time to improve and develop and I just can't see how Jan is supposed to do this in such a short time frame. Interesting point. I'm not so clued up on the loan issue and PLC status as the business side bores me slightly but it's an issue I was only partly aware of and another point to show how self-serving Askham and co were (i.e. share profit before club achievement/prosperity) but those type of people have nibbled away at our club ever since, and we are still not rid of the parasites. The reverse takeover will always bug me, more in the fact the consortium (Davies/Frost) that could have been should have offered us more, and a group of money hungry a*seholes leeched shares and it made these very greedy, unethical men (who clearly had no scruples) rich overnight but little money made it's way back into the club (but that's another, well worn story *grunt*) - Yep, would have been much better if the Davies/Frost consortium had taken over rather than a plc. I heard a whisper that before Saints were relegated from the Prem, Lowe had realised that a plc owning a football club was clearly not working and was hoping that the plc could start to buy back the shares. Unfortunately, we were relegated and the idea went out the window. Indeed. I've moaned about that episode enough. We all know about Hone (and his conduct towards shareholders wanting good for the club! *cough* Mary Corbett), Dulieu, Oldknow and those bunch of idiots and the contracts they dished out, whilst no-one kept Burley reigned in, and look at the damager he did. We've still not recovered! Wilde has a lot to answer for. This is my main point. Wilde AND Lowe coming back with a proxy to attain power, it's a nightmare you couldn't imagine and I fathom to understand WHY?! They must have realised the welcome they would get, especially with such crushing decisions and massively risky strategy. If they did not realise, they are truly idiots of the most lowest common denominator! - Yes, Burley should have been reigned in when dishing out the contracts but unfortunately Wilde and Crouch are fans (as opposed to emotionally detatched businessmen looking at the sustainable business element), had no experience of running a football club and it wasn't until the gamble of being promoted back to the Prem when we reached the play-off failed, that the financial wheels came off and we have ended up being broke. I think Wilde saw what he and the Board of idiots had done, the lack of any serious bid on the table and he jumped ship before the fans learnt of what had gone on and started singing for Wilde to be hung from the Itchen Bridge. With regards to their return, I genuinely think Wilde and Lowe knew that as the biggest shareholding of the plc, they had to unite in the vain hope that an investor would be attracted to buy the shares and gain control of the club. I also think they were alarmed by the SISU proposal and realised Hone, Dulieu and Oldknow were trying to bale and get a takeover done at any price. They also saw that Crouch had no idea how to run a football club and the financial mire was increasing and their shares dramatically becoming worthless. Alas, no investor has come forward and now, I don't think one will until the club goes into administration and they will lose their investment anyway. I'm not a Lowe luvvie but he is good at managing the financial side (eg reducing costs) but is a very poor communicator (eg to the fans). He has also made the biggest gamble of his tenure by hoping that the young players can learn very quickly in 6 months rather than what would probably take 2-3 years. Unfortunately, the stats show that winning one home game so far, is relegation form and this gamble will end up costing the club relegation and administration. For Lowe, it is a no brainer, he knows that administration will end his association with the club and will walk away having ultimately failed. (Not that his arrogance will see it that way). I also think, despite what other posters have said, he hasn't got the financial muscle to buy the club back from the administrators, as he won't have enough to service the debt and buy the assets of the club. All in my humble opinion of course!

I think he is a good coach as Jan has got the young side generally playing good flowing football. However JP is a poor tactical manager by not using substitutes effectively to change the game and continually persisting on playing only 1 up front when the side is clearly struggling to score goals.

I think if Administartion and League 1 football was an almost certainty Lowe would sell his shares, however, no investor will actually buy them. The main reason being they will not need to buy any shares when the plc goes into administration. The Administrators will sell the club as a going concern and the new owner gets a football club a lot cheaper. What happens then is anyones guess but any shareholder will lose their 'investment' as the shares are dissolved along with the plc.

My first question is – What was the main motive or Michael Wilde and Rupert Lowe returning to power at St Mary’s? I think the main reason for them returning to power was the realisation that between them they would have effective voting control (by proxy) of approximately 45-50% of the share vote and therefore if a serious bid for the shares and control of the club came in, being on the Board, a deal would not take too long. Secondly, both men had fallen out with Leon Crouch so neither could team up with him and thirdly they are hoping to avoid a bid from the likes of SISU who's motives for buying the club were questionable. (Haven't seen them let Coleman spend the £20m alledgidly available for transfers during the summer). My second main question - Why did Lowe replace Pearson when he could have gained some sense of appeasement from the fans for retaining his services? Unfortunately being on the outside, no-one really knows but I assume that Pearson wanted too much money to stay on as manager. Lowe knew he had to cut costs and therefore Pearson was too expensive. Was releasing Pearson down to arrogance by Lowe and Wilde, the fact that Leon Crouch appointed Pearson? Or, was it because Lowe was back to finish what he started before he was ousted and Pearson didn’t fit into that ideal? I would hope it was done for a financial reason rather than a personal one, but again, we simply are not on the inside and therefore we do not know what the real reason is. Why are such bad decisions continually made and why does Lowe never seem to learn? Please – do NOT use the worn out money line (we all realise, we have none!) Unfortunately our problems started right back to when SFC became owned by a plc. Lowe wrongly thought that being a plc, it would actually generate money for the club. Unfortunately it proved the opposite as money coming into the club as an investment can only be done so if it is a loan. Therefore the club can only buy new players out of the income of the club. Eg Sky money, sponsorship, player sales etc. All fine when you are in the Prem but as soon drop out of it, available money for players virtually dries up overnight. Also, constantly changing your manager does not help. It means that there is no continuity and a balanced side is never achieved. Admittedly Souness and Hoddle walked away from the club but there was no excuse in experimenting with Wigley and Gray. This is one area Lowe didn't ever seem to learn. Wilde must also shoulder some of the blame as it was under his stewardship that Burley was given £7m to spend on new players which to be frank, the club could not afford. Wilde in turn was let down by investors who said they were going to give funds to the club, suddenly walk away and disappear. Wilde was also responsible for brining in Hone, Dulieu etc who proved to completely help in mis-managing the club. Why did Lowe not operate in the background if he was to come back, not take such a forefront role? (i.e. Chairman who never speaks to the fans!) Maybe he feels he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. I must admit that it would be better if he came clean with the fans and explained the reason for so many of our better players being farmed out and cheap, inexperienced replacements coming in. Unfortunately he seems to have gone overboard as most of team now seem to be under the age of 23 (including the loans). Fans are not stupid and will understand the decisions made if they are explained ie the bank are calling the shots. To say nothing just angers the fans, especially when the quality of the side reduces , which snowballs more defeats etc. My final question is, WHY? Why such bad decisions?! See above. There has been a string of incompetent chairmen and Board members. Unfortunately no-one will save us until we are in administration which will happen if we are relegated to Div 1. (The taxman usually causes comapnies to go into administartion rather than the bank). In the cold, hard world of business, investors will not come knocking whilst a plc is in charge of a football club. Far less expensive to wait for it to go into administration so that they can get the club much more cheaply and don't have to shell out millions in buying shares from the shareholders who may also decide not to sell their shares anyway. Administrators will sell the club as a going concern and the shares become worthless as the plc would be dissolved. As fans, our hope is that we get an investor who generally cares for the club and wants to rebulid Southampton back towards being a Prem team. (Which could take many years) It would be great if the club could survive in

12,400

Unfortunately football is a results business and therefore no wins = fewer fans attending. Win a couple of games = fans will return. It is a fact of life that a lot of people will not continually churn out £24 each home game to see their team lose. Simple as that!

I actually think having the club run by a plc was probably the biggest mistake made. It meant that the club couldn't get in any investment unless it produced share issues and deters any takeovers as investors would have to spend a fortune to acquire the number of shares needed to get control of the club. It is slowly strangling the club into administration, in my humble opinion.

Unfortunately football is also entertainment and as had been said before, a results business. In an ideal world it would be nice if fans went along and supported their teams no matter how bad the financial status of their club or the quality of the football. However, these days, some people simply do not want to fork out £20+ on watching a team that isn't winning games. As is said, 'winning breeds success' which in football terms is more bums on seats, more revenue for the club, promotion etc.

Quite agree. The problem is if the squad is allowed to stay together or whether the bank insists that players who become bankable are sold to service the debt.

I always remeber an interview Redknapp gave in where he said he always loves the cut and thrust of buying/selling players. To me that shows a manager not interested in developing youth! I know they are in the Prem but I haven't seen many young players breaking into the Portsmouth senior squad since he has been there.

When I saw the Birmingham league game, in the first half, all the players were closing down the opposition and getting stuck in. It was impressive to watch and it was very effective as for the first half an hour the young Saints side made Birmingham look extremely average. Unfortunately they didn't carry that on as much in the second half and eventually Birmingham managed to nick the points from us but I thought if they continue to do that then we should be ok this season. However, watching the Blackpool game and subsequent games they don't seem to do it half as much and I just wonder why that is, as it is so effective in disrupting the opposition getting into the game.

I think what amazed me since Redknapp left Saints (at the first opportunity) is that when he was being touted as a possible replacement for the England manager when McClaren was sacked, the media were praising how well he had done as a manager! Most journalists at the time seemed to conveniently gloss over the fact that he got Southampton relegated and in some reports, they actually wrote that he had been successful while at Saints!!! Unbelievable!!!!!! It is a shame that he was never big enough to apologise to Saints fans for getting us relegated and then just up and walked away halfway through the first season. I'm actually not bothered that he went back to Portsmouth but I can't respect anyoneif they are not prepared to apologise for their mistakes!!

I must confess to feeling the same. On the positive side I have been impressed with the type of football Jan is trying to get the team to play and it is nice to see the team being a bit more positive going forward. My biggest concern, like St Paul stated (and others) is the number of times our defence becomes exposed and but for the brilliance of Davies in goal, our point tally would not be so healthy. I know a lot of the players are young and have been thrust into the 1st team probably before they are ready, but it is still worrying all the same. I would like to see more closing down by the midfield players to help out the defence. I hope Jan will address this problem. Also Jan has been guilty of a few basic manager mistakes which I do sometimes wonder if he is of a good enough calibre, even at CCC level. However, I hope he learns quickly from these mistakes and can, like the team, improve as the season goes on. Fingers crossed!

Quite right. As a whole english clubs cannot keep up the demand of players demanding ridiculous salaries of £80K, £100K, £150K a week. There will come a point, which could be soon where clubs will simply stop paying these stupid amounts of money to players (and their agents) and which I hope will make the game much better for it as clubs will be able to compete on a more even keel. As has been said already, Saints are already going through this painful process and I would like to think we will actually be in better shape than when a number of Premiership clubs feel the major financial squeeze. On another point, it was interesting to see that Fifa are starting to voice concerns regarding the nature of the english game. Platini especially had some valid points that if controls are not put in place you could end up with a lot of english sides without a single english player in them. How Fifa or Uefa could impose such contols to insist on a club fielding a minimum of home nation players in the team whilst ensuring that it would not contravene European employment rights, I'm not sure!

I think we will have a better idea by Christmas whether Jan has what it takes to be a successful manager at CCC level.

'As for steadying the ship and rebuilding next season, all of the best young players will have been sold either in the January window or at the end of the season, so we never will be able to rebuild under this situation. It will be a constant struggle to survive, both on the field and financially' That is part of the problem and the club only ever goes one way. Look at Luton, Crewe etc. Consistently they had to sell their best players to try to balance the books and ended up relegated to the lower tiers as the general quality of the side reduces and they didn't have the time of a season or two to get their youngsters experienced enough. Our problem is that we also have a large stadium which isn't being filled hence higher overheads. I fear for Saints if they have to sell what quality we do have in the January transfer window.