benjii

Can't be arsed to trawl the archive... Was the reason given by the club for not offering next year's ST for sale that there was uncertainty over our league status or our financial status? I recall it was due to the parlous league position. Presumably even our board realised there would have to be a significant dicsount if we got relegated and so it just wasn't feasible to sell them at the current time. Now, if we really were only £100,000 over our agreed borrowing, could we not have sold season tickets at a knock-down £200 now to try to finance the club until the end of the season? Sure, it compromises potential income for next year if we do stay up, but frankly right now - so what?! People might say it is imoral to sell them when the ongoing existence of the club is in jeopardy but if they came with a massive "health warning" attached to that effect it would then be up to the punters to make a reasoned choice. In any event - a new owner would still honour them. I reckon we would get at least 8,000 sales at that price, probably over 10,000 in fact. That's £2,000,000. I find it odd that the board didn't try this.

That's why we have different threads. HTH

Was thinking about that the other day - I can't believe how easily the media let that go.

Post of the year!

Seriously though, the Wellington Arms on Park Road is class and the one down by the church near Millbrook Road (I forget its name now for some reason?!) is good too. EDIT: Pretty sure that's the Waterloo - quiet but pleasant. The Osbourne is ok. Most of the ones on Shirley Road are full of dullards. The Wellie is defo the best.

What they will know is that an average level of success in the Championship brings crowds in the 20,000s, that utter dross in the Championship brings crowds of circa 15k, which is perfectly respectable, and that if we get back in the Prem (Ha!) we would sell out every week. Our support is quite good. A "hardcore" of 15,000 is quite good. It's more than quite a few teams in the Premier League. Fact.

Even if one accepts we needed a cheaper manager (which I don't) - why on earth appoint Poortvliet? Can you honestly say that any person in the world, other than Lowe, would make such a mental decision? If we needed a manager to do the job for peanuts there were better options than that. Clearly we needed to try and reduce wages and take some difficult decisions, but to trot out the turgid "no choice" nonsense again just illustrates timid thinking.

Wotte messed up big time. The right side was only ever going to work if we retained the lion's share of possession and dictated the game. That was never going to happen with the two "wide" players spending most of their time in and around the centre circle and the team set-up to hit Euell at evrry opportunity. He should have admitted he'd messed up at half-time, taken solace from the fact we weren't behind and re-jigged things then. Lallana was truly awful and should have been taken off without a doubt. Thomson was too scared of making a mistake to go forward. We offered absolutely NOTHING down the right all match. We should have grasped the nettle and gone for an attacking system with real width. If we get crosses into the box from decent wide positions we will score goals with Saga, Euell and McG in the box.

Great post.

Probably not Tony Hart. Regards Ben

"Assistant referees"

I'm aware of that, but I just can't believe the FA rules are that easy to circumvent. I'm sure they will exercise some sort of discretionary powers.

Ok, but apart from "smug" you seem to have ignored the rest of the post. You can't say you're right or vindicated yet. Time will tell. Fingers crossed.

Er... when we start next season on minus 30 points in League 1 it may well be a terrible, catastrophic thing... bit early to start getting smug.

Whether it was or wasn't, it was in any event insignificant compared to the misguided actions of the management.

Doesn't today's expected attendance completely give lie to that final paragraph?

No.

Money spent by fans in the interim between now and the end of the season will have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the long-term prospects of SFC. I find the rallying cries on the OS particualrly nauseating today. The fact is, that the current priorities are: 1) convincing the FA not to levy a penalty 2) finding a buyer for the business of SFC Injecting small amounts of cash into a failiing business in the interim is of no relevance at all. And before someone says, "we need to show a buyer how amazing everything is" - get real. Any serious buyer will not be considering our attendances for the next three matches in their equations. Anyone who isn't an idiot knows that SFC in the Champ, doing ok, means crowds between 20 and 30k depending on league position. SFC in the Prem means crowds of 30k+. They don't need an influx of flag wavers over the next three games to tell them that. In answer to the original question, I suspect there is a cash sweep in the loan facility. Ie. the bank can sweep cash from subsidiaries with a credit balance to service the long-term debt of the PLC. If SFC isn't involved in any way in the security structure relating to the stadium finance I would be shocked - however recent noises seem to suggest that the finance may indeed be provided on some sort of limited recourse model.

Misses the point. It's not "their" club any more. For some people a club under the control of Lowe will never be "their" club again. The demise begins with Lowe, not the finances. Personally, I agree with St Landrew. Nothing to do with hatred. I just think the guy is useless at the job he's trying to do and has completely wrecked the club. Unless he changes his ways (unlikely), I would have no wish to support a club controlled by him. I make no apology for not being so conditioned as to be indubitably aligned to a club. Yes, true fans stick with a club through ups and downs, but if a club's character changes beyond all recognition from the entity that inspired loyalty in the first place then there need be no apology for setting it aside. Are AFC Wimbledon fans not true fans? Should they support MK Dons? Of course not. I also believe there is sod-all chance of Lowe being involved in SFC again so I'm not too worried.

Our position of "the holding company is in admin not the club", whilst clearly technically true, does seem to be weakened somewhat in terms of the prospect of avoiding a points deduction in any case, by the entire boards of both, save for Continuity Jones, having apparently both quit on the same day as a direct result of the admin of the holding company. Avoid a 10 point penalty, my arse.

You're a mentalist.

You really are an ignorant person. I can't be arsed to explain why, it would be pointless.

I hope to God any potential investor has the basic intelligence to realise that the club's potential attendances if doing ok in this division are circa 25,000+ and that in the Prem they would be 30,000 +, and not to give undue sway to the attendances of this season. If not, then they can sod off.

I'm not sure what the exact struture of our debt is, but if the lenders didn't have something preventing the group from disposing of its main asset in the facility documents / Note conditions then they were astonishingly inept. Also, the transaction would subsequently be unwound by the liquidators of the PLC. It would be a hell of a mess.

Get a bottle of Sangsom on your way through (assuming Oz will let yo bring it in). TBF - you'll probably get a harder time from Bruce customs plod than Mr Somnorathananapran.