Weston Saint

And with the "escape" from Administration for now has prompted the stock in SLH shares to drop to a new low of 12p Our market capitalisation is now £3.37m

Tesco's is ok. A few months back we purchased 6 bottles of wine, retail price £7.99 each but the shelf showed a special offer of £5.19. My wife did not notice we had been charged full price less 5% bulk purchase until we got home so she phoned the store. They said the wine was not on offer but they would check the shelf and took our number. Half an hour later they phoned back and said the price on the shelf was incorrect, thanked us for pointing it out, confirmed that we would indeed only be charged £5.19 per bottle, less 5% bulk purchase for 6 and doubled the refund for the inconvenience we had suffered and credited our barclaycard account. RESULT

If you buy an item where there is a free second on offer the onus is on you to "pick up" the second item. I think what the lady meant was that you had to order two but the cost would have been charged only for one. If you go back to the club and explain your position, ie you wanted two I am sure they will satisfy. Phone the lady back and ask for her to refer you to her Manager.

Nope, he has gone off the radar. He is not ITK. He has no contacts (other than me )

I am afraid St Robbie is so bias, blinkered, uninformed and naive that his posts, I am sure meant in good faith, cannot be taken serious. And Trousers, if you really knew the pressure Barclays are putting on SLH at present you would not have expounded your lighthearted theory. We may have figeratively jumped out of the frying pan of admininstation threat yesterday but the fire may not be far away. Let's hope we "Southampton Football Club" can pull though without fatal third degree burns.

As I said, treat it with caution, it was not from my usual sources and I do not want to credit Lowe for something unless I am told by trusted sources. I doubt he is paying. It just does not fit.

I think you will find that would be challenged at law. As I understand it the idea of a pre pack is to secure the main business and it's employees. That means the football. They would not be able to asset strip. But I am not qualified in this field at all. I am applying common sense. Any qualified practioners want to comment further?

Part of the rules, as far as I am aware, is that a CVA and paying off football debts is necessary to get back the Football League share and allow us to continue to compete in the football league. If a CVA is not agreed then that is a breach. This will allow the authortities to suspend or more likely issue a further points deduction/demotion into a lower league. So for Saints, assuming today passes without event and they go into Admin before or at the end of the season, 10 points deduction will apply at the end of the season unless we are in the bottom 3 when it will apply next season. Then comes the possibility of another heafty deduction next season. The going rate is 17 points but it could be demotion to the next lower league. Anyone want to shoot me down?

Let me put to you a more realistic idea (at least to me). The club do not know what division we will be in at present. Once they set the season ticket and gate prices they will be set in stone as renewals will commence. If they set at CCC prices few will renew becasue the "value for money" might not be realised. So to support their customers they wait. What does that do for cash flow. l suspect most of the season ticket renewal money goes to Aviva as interest payment for the loan. Aviva have always been sensible, supportive and fair with SLH plc. They will have likely agreed a deferment. The clubs problem is Barclays Bank. They are the ones putting on the pressure. They will be one of the main culprits if we go into Administration. It is hard to comprehend the pressure Lowe and particularly Andrew Cowen are going through on financial matters at present but I can assure you, from those I speak to with direct contact, they are nearly at breaking point but taking every possible action to keep this club afloat. I know, from what I have been told by those near to him, Crouch and his advisors went through almost as much financial pressure leading up to the end of last season.

The Southampton flower and balloon festival was axed after rebranding failed to breathe new life into the event. Visitor numbers plummeted from 150,000 in its heyday to just 10,000.

No.

And my prediction.....IF we go into Administration we will not get someone with buckets of cash. We will limp from one crisis to another and in a few years will disappear alltogether, like a few other clubs are likely to in the next few years. Administration is a scar that will unlikely heal.

As I understand it if we go into Administration the Administrator will try to keep the club running but he has a duty to sell anything that has value to realise money for the creditors. One of those sale consideration will be the club itself. Let's say he sells the clb to a new party (or Lowe Group if you are of the view he will want to purchase). Whatever is agreed, that money is distributed to the creditors hopefully by way of a CVA. Let's say that is 10p in the pound. That would include all "football debts" The purchaser would then have to find money to pay off the other 90% "football debt" in addition to get back the "golden share" allowing the club to continue to play in the football league. That is my understanding.

http://www.hextalls.com/download.asp?DocID=141

You will be lambasted if you do.

Ot of interest quote from Blackpool Manager on BBC Blackpool boss Tony Parkes: "We set out not to lose this game and we achieved that point. We have gone four games unbeaten but I still think we need two more wins to reach safety. "We missed one or two chances in the first half which would have killed the game off and they came back strongly at us. "And we got our luck at the end when they hit the post and the ball rebounded so fast their players following it in could not get at the ball." http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_div_1/7937193.stm

Lets look at their stats for the clubs they are at now. John 13 starts plus 11 as sub 2 goals 2 assists Dyer 9 starts plus 3 as sub 1 goal 2 assists Rasiak 10 starts plus 8 as sub 5 goals 3 assists Hardly setting the world alight. With what they would have cost in wages you have to ask if they could have done any better than those in their positions in Saints present squad. I suggest the answer is no.

It is indeed a moral issue, just like tax avoidance. There is a law out there. If companies loaning money do not comply there are many who will take advantage just like there are those who find loopholes to avoid paying their taxes. A football club or any other business going into Administration just so they can wipe the slate clean and start again meaning many who are owed money lose out. It is legal but morally wrong. Don't knock those trying to legally avoid paying. It is those who make the laws and those who are too incompetent to apply them who are at fault. From a moral point of view I find it reprehensible that someone, whether it is an individual or a company, can get away with not paying back something they owe but that is just the way I was bought up and I am lucky enough not to be in debt. I have always been able to pay as I go through life.

It was not an observation

Just put my postcode in, clicked streetview and can see my house, front and back jst like a good photo. I can tell the picture was taken between Sept & Dec 2008.

I did not befriend Sundance Beast. I befriended Nineteen Canteen who had altogether a different style and much more polite. Anyway he has gone now. Whilst WestTender and a couple of others could engage him is sensible discussion many could not.

Quite simple really. Some, including me are fed up with the bickering on this site and see no useful purpose in posting much anymore.

Steve, can you put up the rest of the seasons fixtures. None on there to predict

It will be a two way communication forum, nothing more, nothing less. It will have no power to act, just recommend. The power within will lay with those who hold the purse strings. The power without is with the shareholders in the public domain. If you want effective communication but understand its limitations support the "parliament". It is a useful tool but not a stick to beat the club with.