Guided Missile

Adkins is responsible for the players we signed. As far as I can see, he was as responsible as Mark Hughes at QPR for a very average return for a shed load of money. Unless you're suggesting that Cortese should have taken the responsibility for the way he spent the money.

...and Danny Fox is? The problem that Adkins had, was that he was supported by Cortese to the tune of £30million in the summer transfer window. That made Southampton FC the SEVENTH biggest spenders in Europe, ahead of Real Madrid, Inter Milan and Juventus. That has worked out at nearly £1.5M a point, so far. I'm sorry, but if I had given £7M to Adkins for a player and he came back with Jay Rodrigues, I'd have slapped him round the face, then sacked him. Sadly, he's proved he's a championship standard manager that has a degree in physcho-babble, not football tactics and recognising a premiership standard player...

...and a reminder. It's a results driven business: Appalling...

Nigel Agkins deserved the sack for playing Danny Fox for about 6 games too long. He was keeping Shaw out of the team, which must have cost us a decent start to the season. Sh !t, he was keeping a traffic cone out of the team, which would have saved us a couple of points on its own.

If you were going to get a new manager in, it had to be before the transfer window closes. Adkins has gone as far as his talent will take us. Cortese is simply more ambitious than our fan base. Either it will turn out to be an inspired decision or a bad one. We will find out soon enough, but I am all for it. I certainly wasn't one of the "One Nigel Adkins" brigade. Underachievement on nearly a QPR scale, to be 15th.

[TABLE] [TR] [TD][/TD] [TD=class: text, colspan: 2]Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers. syn- socialism.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

From what I heard, it was very much against Antony Fanshawe's advice...

Exactly what I said, but he was insistant that there was a period and set of conditions when it was available. I think that once they had a bulsh !tting property developer involved, offering better terms than the Council, they hitched their wagon to that particular horse, with the Council disappearing over the hill...

I had another chat with my contact at Begbies Traynor who are advising the Pompey Trust, yesterday. Interestingly, he said that there was "pots of money" coming in from the fans, which is being deposited in escrow. Begbies Traynor are disappointed that the Trust did not take advantage of the Councils funding offer they managed to negotiate on their behalf and they said that it was now too late to receive that loan. He agreed with my theory that Stuart Robinson could not raise the funds to buy Fratton. The Trust is just not a good bet for a landlord, particularly to one that is relying heavily on bank financing. The picture painted was very much one of the Trust members all being more interested in being on the board, than facing the business challanges of a football club and they just don't have the knowledge or experience required. The parting comment on what was the most likely outcome was the same as last time we talked. Liquidation...

I'm taking a wilde guess that you weren't a creditor, but just another disenfranchised and detached fan with a class based prejudice. Go to the ground we play our home games in, look around, remember the Dell and thank Lowe. It was Barclays and Wilde, not him, nor his background for which he had no choice in that fu cKed us. Still, if you think forcing a football based business into administration is a plan, feel free. I think we got lucky, unlike Glasgow Rangers, Luton, et al...

This is what you meant to post, Duncan....

May I add that the damage the Saints Fans Trust did to our club was highlighted in this blast from the past: The main problem was that the Saints Trust was only representing a few hundred, out of touch, impressionable Lowe haters who believed that every Saints' fan thought like them. Easily manipulated by Wilde and quickly betrayed by him, many of them now congratulate Barclays for pulling the plug, when, if it was destroying the club they wanted, they should be thanking Wilde and his wasteful spending spree. Why does the Trust now issue a rallying cry, when a year ago, with their messiah Wilde returning as chairman, it may have made a difference and avoided the inevitable relegation we now face? Simple, really. Following a class inspired agenda that included a deliberate destruction of 94% of the club, to get rid of the 6% they hated, the majority of Saints fans realised what the Trust stood for. Now the damage has been done, all that is left is a battle to save face, while a few dreamers fight over the corpse....

To be fair, it took me 5 minutes at a cost of £2 on Companies House. Mind you, I have had experience of seeing through bullsh!t: Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 3:36 pm Thank Mike for the information and I am glad to hear that the plc he controls is growing from strength to strength. A couple points of clarification, if possible, as I am sure you want to get away from the computer to enjoy the sun in Jersey. 1. Do you intend to run Southampton Leisure plc with similar borrowing and thus interest coverage as you do Merlion plc and also a similar dividend policy? 2. £1,008,378 in dividends was taken out of Merlion plc in the financial year ending December 31st, 2003. Taxable profits before taxation were £569,069. Did you get the 50% round the wrong way that year?

Because they're just fans with no money and no clue. If they were smart, they'd all be rich...

REL's Cashflow is interesting: Over a million a year just to service the debt! I can only assume he loaned £91M to his group of companies, personally. (Then again, probably not)

The train wreck that explains why Stuart Robinson could not buy the portakabin at Fratton Park... Mindblowing....

Errrr...yes he is short of a bob or two. Actually he's short of over £1.5M...

Take it from me, his group of companies are fu Cked...

Total assets of £89M and short term debts of £91M.

His real company is even worse. The group accounts show a net loss of nearly £1.5M and a negative worth of the same. A real train wreck and the end of the Trust Bid, I would say...

Correct. Wrong bunch. Must be another dodgy company with a similar name.

[TABLE] [TR=class: bluemidtext] [TD=class: padding36]Name & Registered Office: REL LIMITED 24 LANDPORT TERRACE PORTSMOUTH HAMPSHIRE PO1 2RG Company No. 04113822 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] [TABLE] [TR] [TD=class: dotDevider] [/TD] [TD] [/TD] [TD=class: dotDevider] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: padding30] [TABLE] [TR] [TD] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: yellowCreamTable]Status: Dissolved 02/12/2008 [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

The problem may be related to the fact that REL Ltd. was struck off and dissolved on 02/12/2008 according to Companies House.

You're the one living in a PO postcode!

I have seen some old photos of the Romanys that lived in Sholing and I can tell you they look nothing like the Irish travellers you are talking about (nor Brad Pitt, for that matter. He's American.)