Window Cleaner

Doubt it, he's probably dead,not that that would stop us signing him anyway.

Ghost Squad

But taking the advice of a significant shareholder regarding the next step wouldn't be at all unusual would it?? I mean it might be for SLH but I would have thought it pretty common elsewhere.

No but Sunday is the start of the working week rather than Monday. Phil says so.

That's Monday in Kuwait though

So would I, should have happened 5 years ago. It would be an excellent thing,a great step forward.You'd be able to log on to TSW on fine morning and not find it awash with negativity,or at least get a 30% reduction of it..

THat total shareholding comes to less than 17%, it's nothing to do with 19% and I don't think the Corbetts actually total a full 6% It's about 9.95+5.4+0.58 if the truth be known, not 20%, not 19% not 17% but a rough 16% ie less than Wilde.

But there you've a fundamental error in your assumptions. The totality of the holdings of Crouch,Corbetts and McMenemy don't even shape up to Wilde's professed holding.McMenemy is a very minor shareholder. Don't even start me on Patrick Trant who wheedled his way into the board room on the back of a (supposed) promise that he would buy up Lowe's shares.

I bet we'd win more home games if there we no fans at all in the stadium.

No ,because we only get the 4 million TV money if we're in the CCC. There's nowhere near that in league 1.

Playing at left back probably didn't help.Thanks for that one Nigel,still with all those old jerk-offs to accomodate there was nowhere else for Drew to play.

Whatever Um, you're always right. Just can't be bothered any more today. I will re-iterate, if you now want to control SLH and thus SFC there are 2 routes. Via Wilde or Via Lowe all the rest are dead ends. If they don't want to sell then you ain't going to get control. That's it on this subject for today. Have a nice meeting. Just add here that document is very carefully worded. At no time was the impression given that anyone controls in concert or not more than 30% of the total issue.For obvious reasons.

Who from ??? If there were 6 million traceable shares currently for sale, Crouch would have bought them, so would Fulthorpe or whoever. 6 million shares is a 20% or so holding.

Just the cash, stop dreaming about Baird, if Baird comes to us and Surman goes to them we'll end up giving them money. Anyway their supporters aren't fussed about Surman.

A true supporter of SFC who rises above the melee and the playground fighting in the act of supporting his club.A supporter who accepts the fact that just now we're stuck with Lowe,that he's trying to cut costs and get us back on a level keel. That there is no viable alternative. A person who would welcome a takeover but realises that the current bunch of tyre kickers have no money.

Nah Skates will take a dump on them, 5-1 to the Skates.

Well not really, if he says that now the Pompey fans (not being the brightest of individuals) will focus on that and that alone and not his thievery in one of their venerable nightspots last year. He'd probably settle for just being called Scummer reject and not Pikey Scummer tea leaf.

Don't go there Bob, you know he gets tetchy about stuff like that.

I bet Richard Chorley turns up, whether he's a shareholder or not and bogarts the meeting.How do they actually know who's a share holder and who's not. I am but my name isn't on any publically viewable list anywhere.

How about Janet Jackson flashing her tits at the Superbowl

Wave FM apparently

A very salient argument, until you reflect on players like David Prutton and Neil McCann.Acquired for a good few quid, probably no better than a few we'd let go.

Sarwan Singh, about 5% at the height of his activity. A former Southampton resident he's now a farmer in the Punjab. A pure investment, has sold most of his holding but not all. Shifted quite a bit out during PAmania

And not at 12p a share either. If someone wants them they'll have to pay 40p (I bet he's already on a promise from Lowe, well not Lowe, someone else who knows Lowe's brother's, sister in law's housemaid's daughter's stableboy's father -in law)

But we never gave them a chance, that's the problem. I know you can't take risks with untested players in the Prem but to me he was too trigger happy with letting our younger players go, untried and untested. Chala was a decent player, so he didn't understand jock gibberish, so what, loads of others get by in the globalised prem nowadays.