alpine_saint

I refer you to the thread title. Why must everything else come below your tastes on the priority list ?

Yep.

Look, I could possibly be swayed, if say Aviva would accept 5-7m, and the new owner of the articles would allow them to come back on loan occasionally. IF the stadium were owned by the council, that for me means we will always have a football team representing the city, however many Rupert Lowes come along with tin-pot dictator mentalities to balls things up. However, its a seriously f**king slippery slope. Before you know it, every minority interest group is clamouring for a painting to be sold to enable financing of its goals.

Lest we forget how the stadium actually got built in the first place....

I believe you have answered your own question...

Wow, sounds like Rupert Lowe...

Then what's your point ? You say they are not necessarily active but pull me up for saying "one-time buyer". What are they then, two-time buyers ? As for your question about how many care for what more, I couldnt care less what the current percentages are. And I find it embarassing that you, a fellow Southampton boy, would argue to break up a fine art collection that has taken decades to collect for the people for the city, in order to bail out a private business that has f**ked up, and to pay theives like BWP and incompetents like Rupert Lowe.

Davies hates Lowe, I believe.

I said he is a Scottish Patriot. A bit like Shane MacGowan of the Pogues is Irish.

Spoken like a true webmong. You reckon there are 200,000 active ticket buyers on the database then, do you ? Get lost on Saturday afternoons on the way to the ground, do they ? :rolleyes:

Tenous. He's such a Scottish patriot, if he were to buy a team it would be north of the border.

What possible interest would Rod Stewart have in us ?

Sounds like an Illingsworth special to me. He's been talking to the council a lot recently..

Erm, one who likes art and football ? Does that make me a pooftah like Graeme Le Saux then ???

Well, I agree with 2 of the 3, and the third I would just say they should stop procuring for now at taxpayers cost.

Do you have a source for this ? I thought T & G was being turned back into parkland, for a start.

What else can be used as a basis for this discussion ? You reckon the council should flog off the few jewels in the crown for the football club then ? This discussion gets more daft by the minute.. And I thought it was Lowe who argued quantity over quality..

You cannot claim it is exclusively for those reasons, just as nobody can claiim all 10,000 extra turned up because Lowe has gone. And your comment about Leicester was unnecessary; their attendance has gone down because they are in League 1.

Now you are being silly. Most of it goes to the police, the firebrigade, refuse collection, and public-sector gold-plated pensions. I doubt you pay more than 50p towards the art gallery.

I think that is a good idea, and I wouldnt dismiss it out-of-hand. It looks like if they deduct points from us it would ahve to be a "discretionary" action under their own rules. So they need to punish us without making it look like its a witch hunt. If they push too hard, they probably face a messy legal battle from us. The thing that will stop them implementing the letter of the law (no points away) is that if we escape relegation, another team goes down and will start legal action. We are definitely going down with your proposal, one way or the other, so I reckon it might happen that way. I cannot see why anyone in League 1 will contest this at the end of this season when they dont know if they will be affected by us not being on -10 points yet, and by the end of next season any legal contest will be laughed at as sour grapes.

Aye. Its populist Nu-Labour "class war" crap. Welcome to the Big Brother/ X-Factor generation.......

Not really. I for one am fed up of our club being used in petty points-scoring between egotisitcal arseholes

I dont understand the point you are trying to make. The database is irrelevant. Probably 60-70% is made up of one-time buyers. I do not know what the average attendance of the art gallery is, nor do I think it is relevant either. The collection is there for the people of the city to enjoy (is it still free entry ?). SFC charges over 20 quid for entry and ploughs most of its revenue back into 20-odd spoilt, privelledged and often underperforming egomaniacs. Reading people trying to justify this is f**king bizarre..

So, that means selling off ca. 20% of it. Unacceptable.

A fair question. The football team, of course. However, I wouldnt want the club, a private business run by ego and ineptitude, to be rescued like this. Sorry.