up and away

Last year we had 2 record lows near this time of just over 17000, we just have to face up to it. We just don't have great fans for what ever reason.

Totally dumb idea. I have looked at the response Luker has given over ticket prices and cannot fault the logic. You seem to believe that reducing the ticet prices will suddenly fill the ground, it just does not happen like that. Reducing the ticket price by £6 from £24 to £18 will not have a significant overall effect for a lot of fans. The ticket price is just part of the costs for many fans, sometimes not even the biggest outlay and I don't see £6 as a do or die in going to watch Saints. We have already seen with the 15% reduction in season ticket prices that this has resulted in a drop in revenue greater than the original figure. Just look at any club in the UK and give the example where your theory has worked, without results biasing the attendances? But David Luker, head of supporter services at Saints, said cutting prices would not be popular with existing season ticket holders. And even if prices were cut, there was no guarantee enough extra fans would turn up to make it financially viable. “Reducing ticket prices doesn’t actually mean that you would generate more sales,” said Luker. “Added to this, given our well documented financial situation we need to generate extra revenue. “The average adult ticket price is £24. By reducing this to £18 we would have to sell an additional 33 per cent of tickets to make the bottom line the same. “As there is no guarantee that we could actually increase sales enough to generate extra revenue, this would be a huge gamble for the club at the present time “Added to this, by reducing the price this much we effectively would remove the price benefit of the season ticket holders.

Talk about clueless, you are redefining that position. Redknapp spent more than £4.5M over his period than that tactical genius Bryan Robson, who tucked him up like a kipper. No wonder you are hanging your hat with a fish fiddler.

When you look at teams that have been established in the Premier and subsequently get relegated it is normally down to injuries and the manager, normally being changed. At Saints we had both of these with virtually an acceptable first team out injured. If we had just hung on to Svennson I am sure that would have been enough, but our luck was out that year. The Sturrock situation was a pity, but even the man himself concedes he was partly to blame. At the end of the day it was the appointment of Sturrock, Wigley and Satchel that cost us our Premier position and for that Lowe has to take responsibility. Satchel failed us badly, so much time, even points and resources not available to the other teams and he failed abjectly. We should have avoided that one, but could we have gone on indefinitely avoiding the drop when adversity came our way? Just look at the teams in the Premier today who have any chance of staying in there even medium term. There is one very consistent factor which sticks out like a sore thumb. They all have independent financial backing we could never dream of at Saints. It just requires that well timed bit of adversity and your number is up for clubs without that umbrella. Falling from the Premier was bad enough, but what has subsequently happened to us in the CCC is stupidity beyond belief. There should be no reason we cannot establish ourselves in the CCC and eventually get another crack at the Premier, but our whole existence is even in doubt now. In comparison to your average CCC club, we recieved more that £30M in from players fess (even after Lowe went) and additionally we had £14M from parachute payments and all we managed to do was run up debts greater than any other club in the CCC. Our relegation season was littered by if's, but's and bad decisions. But they are not on a par with the idiotic goings on whilst we have been in the CCC.

NickH - you would be wise to read this as it is correct. Um Pahars is also spot on. Sometimes I think you do not read other's [posts carefully. No offence because I think you mean well but if you are going to respond on complicated issues raised it would be best to try and fully understand what is being said. I think this is the reason Um Pahars resorts to smilies which you seem to spend more time considering. The executives polled the major share holders regarding the position of chairman and whether they wanted Thompson to be elected. If the share holders wanted Thompson in, that would have been done and the executives paid off. When the share holders indicated they did not want Thompson installed as chairman, they also polled about the direction of the club. If any 2 of the major share holders demanded financial prudence, it would of happened. As for that financial dinlo that is UMP, he still cannot figure out that when Lowe left there was only half a squad.

Crouch said: "I have only two non-executive supporters on the PLC board - Keith Wiseman and Patrick Trant - who will vote for me. That means there will be five against. I am bound to lose. It is all over. "I am gutted it has come to this. I have spent the last nine months working tirelessly for this club representing the fans, but I have been a thorn in their (the executive board members) side. "I opposed the mass exodus of staff at the club, we are losing too many good people. I knew it would be a real battle and it has been. I am devastated. I have spent the last 18 months battling these people." There are many on here who totally ignore this statement from Crouch's own lips and still maintain he had nothing to do with our financial mess. Even to the extent that Crouch would have done the opposite.

The increase in players wages (to a level commensurate with what it was under Lowe in the first season down) occurred when Hone & his cohorts had effective control of the day to day running of the Club. Crouch had had no real power from the day Wilde stepped down, when power was effectively handed to the Executives, led by Hone. They were the ones who were in control and decided to let the wage bill increase during that period. The position of the Executives was enforced in the summer with Crouch being removed from the Football Club Board, Hunt stepping down from the PLC board and Oldknow being appointed to it. All this effectively gave Hone a free run of the place. He and his inner circle were taking the decisions that led to the increase in players wages. Someone with a good source has already pointed out that Crouch was against giving Euell such a handsome contract, but Hone pushed it through. In fact, in the early days, when the board was more evenly balanced and Crouch played a role along with Wilde and others, wages actually fell by £3million from when Lowe left office. When Crouch resumed any real control he was limited by what he could do, given it was halfway through a season. Contracts normally run out in the summer (i.e. Claus and others) and the main dealing period is the summer close season. Nonetheless he oversaw the loans of our two highest earners in Skacel & Rasiak, whilst keeping the bank on side. This probably allowed for some flexibility when we hit the rocks on the pitch and allowed us to bring in some very important loans (even if they did cost some money) under Pearson. But the cost of these loans to the Club is small time in comparison to the cost of relegation and the disaster that would have surely followed. Crouch made mistakes, I'm sure even he would admit to that, but blaming him for some poor financial decisions when others had their hand on the tiller is somewhat misguided, a common theme that comes across in many of your posts. The reference made to the increase in players wages is from information quoted by Lowe and Wilde regarding the period we have seen no accounts for as yet. Throughout all of the period where Crouch has been involved in the club, can you point to one instance where you believe he has tried / or urged others to try and remedy the financial position, before it was too late? I can give you examples of where the opposite is true and so many statements telling us it was not true. Crouch made a big point of stating the executives were incorrect with their summary after the SISU bid in that we would have to sell the senior pro's to survive. This was clearly true but once again Crouch buried his head in the sand again, mumbling the opposite. In fact things were so bad that failing to find a buyer, we had to let them go out on loan. One for a player we could have gained £2M in fees 3 months previously, only to keep him and barely use him, then find we could no longer sell him on. Don't try and make out Crouch was urging Hone to get the club on a level financial standing , because that was not the case, in fact the opposite. If at any time either Wilde or Crouch had asked the executives to get the club on a sound financial footing, it would have happened with the support of Lowe. The executives could not ignore that major share holding.

I think there is something in what you say, a significant amount but one very difficult to put a figure on. I remember certain lads at work and other venues giving it the big one in respect to Paul Allen and who we would be buying etc. Similar to when looking over at the Itchen / Northam corner, who always seemed more concerned with the opposition fans than the match itself. Having gradually had the **** taken out of them over those years it is clear to see some no longer have the same interest in Saints. But at the present there just seems to be a general malaise regarding Saints apart from the hardcore (who are diminishing). A few that come to the games with me are less bothered about going anymore. They are not interested about the boardroom events or chairman, get their admission for free, but just don't seem to get the same exitement out of things anymore, even though I think the football is so much better. Then take into account those whose enthusiasism has only dropped a small amount, throw in the cost of living increases and travelling costs outside of the city area and it comes as no surprise attendances are down. Someone posted the other day that Saints had one of the highest proportions of home fans that travelled the furthest. Factor that into the above and it is not difficult to understand what is happening in this current climate.

Crouch is a very successful businessman and has been generous to Saints financially within his own conditions. That does not mean he has carried that business acumen over to Saints. He would have sacked any employee of his own companies, taking similar directions as he did with Saints. When passions become involved, sometimes even the most competent of people have trouble with 2+2, such is what happens in football. Wilde is another good example and even more successful than Crouch, but I bet he finds it hard to explain those initial weeks at Saints. But to try and paint Crouch as being being in favour of living within our means until his final last few days in the bunker is ridiculous. Throughout his tenure he had been advocating against cuts and player transfers with the execs. As immortalised in the statement he gave when being removed from the football board to allow the plc board to do just that. Or how else do you interpret "We have lost too many good people. I have fought them at every turn"? Don't try and make Crouch out as some Jack Walker figure, you just do not know which side he will come down on. He could easily give all his shares to the benefit of Saints if it suited his other conditions. Equally he could be more than happy to burn the lot over some petty grievance, irrespective of the harm it would do to Saints. You can talk all you want to about Crouch being prepared to close parts of the ground and various other initiatives, but in reality he did next to nothing. You can point to the opposite where he actually allowed the players wage bill to increase significantly. And throughout all of this what was the master plan he was placing our survival on? This mythical investment from Fulthorpe to save the day from the financial mismanagement he had been up to his neck in.

You can point these facts out until you are blue in the face, but unless they meet with the Lowe haters agenda, they will never be accepted.

Just as I believe Crouch helped us in the purchase of Andrew Davies, I believe Wilde did likewise with Schniederlin. I have heard rumours that Pearson was on £9k a week, give the Dutch a good pay rise each from their previous salaries and there is a significant saving. The saving though is a red herring, because the difference does not really come into the decision on the right manager. I suppose the saving is worth mentioning as an aside, when you are looking at figures similar to that of closing the corners.

I can't believe someone sane could write this - especially the last sentence. Turn the season around? Our season was already a bad car crash when he took over - at least he managed to salvage something from the wreckage. I know quite a lot of people at SMS and Staplewood and they are all full of praise for Pearson. Within a short period of time he galvanised all the players right down to the younger ones and lifted the whole club with his enthusiasm and honesty (which had been sadly lacking). His departure was purely political. The week he was appointed I heard first hand how p*ssed off Lowe and Cowan were with his arrival and I gather they made their displeasure known at the time. So there was no way he was going to stay even if he offered to work for nothing. I was / am a fan of Pearson, mainly from two things. The manner in which he conducted himself throughout his job and he actually got the team to compete. There is nothing to back any of this faith in Pearson, with the exception he kept us up with a lot of luck. The Burnely game was a big negative against Pearson, Burnley had not won a game in ages, several key players out and had not won on their travels or St Mary's in a very long time. We blew the Burnley game big time, just did not show up on the day and in all reality that could well of been it for us. That all leaves everything riding against Sheffield Utd, relying on others to fail to have any chance of staying up. With Burnley having the worst current form in the CCC prior to playing, Sheffield Utd were the form team. Fortunately they just lost the leagues top scorer and the centre backs both out from the previous weekend. With no recognised centre backs to play they had to make do with full backs in the centre. We played well on the day and got a 3-2 win, but you can easily say the story could have been a lot different if just 1 of those 3 players were not missing. Bearing in mind pearsons limited success with all the players he had available to him, can anyone say he would improve on that with all those senior players sold off and none of the loans? Even the most optimistic of us would put that at highly doubtful, as I stated at the time. As for the comments at the time of Pearsons arrival, that was mentioned in reference to the manner of his appointment and Chris McMenemy's part. I do remember something attributed to the Fulthorpe group at the time about not being the correct appointment, but not from Lowe. I was disappointed when Pearson was not kept on, but equally I could see the logic in appointing the Dutch. The financial position dictated that it was full steam ahead with the youth and on that grounds understand the decision.

And when those players are sold, I do hope you add the income to your tally of money pis5sed up against the wall over recent years, and then also add Lowe and Wilde to those who you think presided over the aforementioned pis5sing up the wall. There is absolutely no choice now, this money has to go on getting us out of the financial mess we are in. The reason we are in this financial mess is because the previous money from player sales was totally wasted and the spend allowed to continue on the basis of investment being around the corner. If you can't work that out, best to keep quiet and leave some doubt.

No offence intended but a bit simplistic perhaps, I think Phil may have hit the nail on the head, gates are almost now an irrelevant part of the game. It's all about assets and preferred creditors now. We're stuck really - Askham as non-fan will just squeeze what he can out of SFC on top of his already obscene profits and Wilde is in a real hole, he can't just write off what he's invested in his shares - GM has posted previously that a number of Wilde's interests allegedly aren't going so hot. I'll keep going but until we see the back of Wilde and Askham, I don't see why people should spend even more (and £26 is a lot on a walk-up ticket for an U19 side in a downturn period) on proven failures like Guy and Mike. Something has to give by May, that is the only fact we can probably all agree on. Simplistic or otherwise, that is not really a problem. But I cannot see anything within your post that has any merit. I completely agree with Phil regarding the financial situation forcing the path of developing the youth. The issue of gate receipts is a completely different matter and the main source of our income in the CCC. So any major drop in that revenue stream has a very big effect. Not a supporter at all of Askham, but fail to see any relevance in what you have stated or proof thereof. I don't know what money he has dragged out of the club, but as far as I know he still has all his original shares and has not cashed in, unlike McMenemy? Askham to me is an irrelevance, he has nothing to do with the running of the club and the only possible remuneration he could have obtained over the last 10 years, would have been from dividends and directors expenses. If Askham has received more than a fraction of a % from the clubs income over this period, I would be surprised. As for Wildes interests and finances it is not as clear cut as GM makes out. Just because Wilde has taken the assets from Merlion under his personal holding makes no difference at all. Future profits from Merlion look remote, but it does not diminish his already established assets, even safeguards them.

Do you really have any idea how big business works? Play the kids as Possible future assets? PLC is about today and thats about avoiding relegation. Not only do we have to avoid relegation, we have to show the bank we can develop revenue for the future, enabling us to trade in the future. Another important aspect that would have originally presented to the bank will have been revenue from gate receipts. Such is the precarious financial position of the club that all these balls have to be kept in the air for our survival and it does not look good at this present time. Our only chance in all of this is for player sales to get us out of trouble and as we have had little luck with every senior pro at the club, selling some youth players remain our only hope. Any other normal business and the plug would have already been pulled, but for some reason football clubs lead a charmed life in this respect. The ability to borrow / continue to borrow against what few remaining assets we have is going to be precarious in the current market. Your only chance is to get the bank to buy into the idea that we can square that by developing the youth, there is no other source / opportunity available to us. If the bank get jittery or they don't see the youth policy working out and they can halt things there and then. This is not only for this season but for several seasons to come. The plan has to be both long and short term or the bank may see little point in continuing. We have got ourselves into a extraordinary financial mess of epic proportions over the last few years by living beyond our means, only to wander into a world economic crisis of possible equal severity. I don't realistically feel we can get out of this with the current gate receipts, but that is down to the fans and as a club we will get what we deserve. If our own fans can't support this club, why should anyone else.

In what is approaching the worst financial crisis since the original Wall Street crash, there are people out there with the belief that finance will be found for buying a CCC football club, riddled with debt. Europarts recently had finance denied on a motor factor with limited exposure, we have no chance in comparison. The financial situation is such that a club could easily sink without trace if the current climate does not improve. If the market rejects the bale out in the USA, everything is in doubt.

I agree. If Lowe buys the club in admin, he's just throwing away money that might have done more good now... :confused: It's perfectly acceptable being a schizoid nowadays, but you really should talk to each other.

But gambling the house on a bunch of kids and inexperienced but malleable managers is? When you have already lost the house, you have very little choice but to play a bunch of inexperienced kids. And just hope you can get the bank to go along with you before pulling the plug.

I agree. If Lowe buys the club in admin, he's just throwing away money that might have done more good now... It's only idiots like yourselves who believe Lowe will try and buy the club post administration, it just will not happen. But we do know one group that is looking to pick up the club post administration, Crouch et al, possible Fulthorpe if he can crack the code on the piggy bank. But as you say "that might have done more good now...", strange how you never considered that alternative? With only minimal funds at their disposal I feel they cannot afford the debts and require administration to wipe everything out, along with any remaining assets. If you think things are bad now, wait for that little lot to settle out. Anyone that believes by Crouch coming back as Chairman will actually increase the gate is sadly deluded. We deserve to be where we are and if the supporters wanted to do anything about it they could.

Crossing your fingers and hoping for an investor is not a plan!

You forgot to add the unstinting loyalty to a mate / alien met down the pub. Who has fed you so much ****, that you should require an outlet in Langstone harbour.

I don't disagree with this, but as a manager what can you do? If you don't have a better player in your squad, all you can do is play what you have and hope the adage form is temporary, class is permanent applies (i.e. they get through the bad patch). The manager / coaches are the only ones who see the players day in, day out - they're the only ones who can (and have to) make a judgement on it. The rest is just opinion (for all we know Bart may have been shocking (absolutely woeful) in training under GB, hence why a low on confidence KD was his only option). What irritates me is those fans who nail their colours so firmly to one mast that they can see nothing but fault in another player. e.g. stupid comments last season blaming KD for goals that not even Superman could have saved. There are none so blind as those that will not see.... etc. yep, that is the other side of the coin and what happens in the real world. I have never booed any of the players, with the exception when Kenwyne got substituted after about game 9 and Fuller stayed on. Nothing wrong personally with Fuller, he just was not fit. The big point with KD has always been his command of his area costing us big time, rather than personal errors. I could never see any difference between KD and Miller who we let go, but we all know at what cost difference. I think we are all very happy with KD's performances this season and he seems far more positive in line with the Dutch duo. It's never going to help by booing players but I cannot argue about anyone who vents ther opinion on here, but it should be subjective. It was only under Burley I really felt this as an issue, as both Pearson and JP seem different animals in that respect.

Some truth, but that "good of the club" comes with a so many proviso's and personal foibles, that you can not be certain what would happen at the end of the day. I still fell Wilde has the greatest lump, but how much of that is expendable I could not say. Don't be put off by Merlions poor books, as there looks a good reason for that. As for Rupert Lowe putting more money in, that would be a major surprise.

Just think about it for a minute! If Kelvin had put in the performances he is doing now, when he first arrived at the club, we would not be having this conversation. The fact that fans now are over joyed at having him in goal, after all the dross he has served up previously, is even more evidence that this is down to performance. Fans were quite right to be disappointed that we paid £1,25M for the worst goalie in Premier history who's confidence was so shot to pieces, that it has taken him until now to recover. The acceptance of the fans of Davies now, clearly show that it is only the performances that count, otherwise he would be doing a life sentence for previous crimes. Go back and look at Fuller, Wright, Davies and Euell and there is one consistent theme throughout. A player that continues to keep their place irrespective of how bad their performances are. This is the one thing that angers fans to boiling point. Everyone accepts players can have bad days, but few can accept continual selection irrespective of the bad performances. The same happened to Drew last season after his U21 call up, even though he managed to put in a lot of good performances previously.

Absolutely. as for not knowing the facts, just one would be nice. Newcastle had such large debts there was a real issue of them being able to continue for long, if Ashley never came. A chairman who was prepared to bang in £20M per season of his own money without expecting to see anything back! Who already had ploughed in £110M just to reduce the debts, then gradually clear them. Being only a billionaire Ashley soon realised that his wealth could not support the black hole that is Newcastle and their only way of being able to square things for the future was to sort the finances. Keegan could / would never get his head round that part and what is actually needed for Newcastle in the long term. Ashley will not be getting involved with any other football club, who would after their own have turned on someone, who even now are only just coming round to the mistake they have made. Well the brain dead hopefully will soon have a Nigerian consortium showing them how real supporters on the board turn things round. I wonder if the fan base will be receiving investment opportunities in Newcastle by fax or email?