Weston Saint

Take away the s and you should then realise why!

Let's clear up the SOS interview with Wilde on the Manager subject. Wilde was asked about Pearson (he had only been employed a few weeks at the time) and Wilde said he was untried, inexperienced and not a good choice. I asked what he would do and he said he would get an experienced continental manager in, that was his present thinking. He did not link that with Lowe specifically. We had no idea that he was linking up with Lowe until a few days later when it was becoming obvious via telephone conversations and then I received a note from someone proposing a joining with someone as an independent Chairman. I contacted Wilde who said I knew his position on an Independent Chairman (we was against the idea) but he was talking to Lowe. We pulled SOS contacts from then on not wanting to be associated with another splinter group (we would have supported them all coming back until a buyer had been found)

Yep it seems that way. First real evidence. Mostly hearsay before that.

Very.

Actually last time I was in contact they hated each other with a passion just like Lowe & Wilde di.......oh sht.

Doubt they paid their £5 so no PM. Actually I disabled mine today. Those I know well have my home email address or mobile number.

McLoughlin reads this site. Jackson does as well.

Those minutes were produced by the same bllshtter you have named on this post. Actually it was someone else who showed me telephone texts and I would appreciate you not speculating on the name Steve. That said it was McLoughlin who was linked with Lowe and when Lowe could not get the others to agree to sell McLoughlin tried the direct approach with Crouch and Wilde although Wilde saw through it pretty quick. It all got quite messy and nasty after that.

They were not in the know then. I know Lowe had no intention coming back at that time. In fact in January of last year he was trying to sell his shares but could not find a buyer without Wilde and Crouch agreeing to sell as well.

Now if you had told me it was Rule 16 I would have accepted your advice unconditionally

Found it myself under AIMS rules An AIM company must prepare a half-yearly report in respect of the six month period from the end of the financial period for which financial information has been disclosed in its admission document and at least every subsequent six months thereafter (apart from the final period of six months preceding its accounting reference date for its annual audited accounts.) All such reports must be notified without delay and in any event not later than three months after the end of the relevant period. The information contained in a half-yearly report must include at least a balance sheet, an income statement, a cash flow statement and must contain comparative figures for the corresponding period in the preceding financial year. Additionally the half-yearly report must be presented and prepared in a form consistent with that which will be adopted in the AIM company’s annual accounts having regard to the accounting standards applicable to such annual accounts.

For half year? Is there a legal reqirement?

Wold normally expect them in the first week of March but these are not normal times. Not sure there is any legal obligation for them to publish. Anyone know?

I have been waiting for FloridaMarlin to post and was not disappointed with his input. Thanks for the information.

I know the bank are putting on pressure to reduce the overdraft but I am not sure of the present position on this. I am unaware of any problems with the loan note holders. I was not referring to those two. It would serve no purpose saying any more. I just wanted to remove any thought that it might be referring to Shareholders investment. As far as I know it was not.

You all read too much into the statement on internal sources. I am pretty sure I know what it meant and it was not Lowe, Wilde, Crouch or any other shareholder. Sorry but it is dead in the water. It did not come to pass and not though any fault on the boards part.

Let's make it clear, at present we cannot afford all the players wages. We loaned out Rasiak for the season, Saganowski for half a season, John to Bristol City and told the other high earners they could go and would unlikely feature. What has changed, in my opinion is two fold. First Lowe's experiment with youth only has failed. Secondly despite the pressures on the high earners some are still here with the window closed until the end of the season so we have to pay them, we cannot force them away from the club. That is the reason. It damages our prospects of financial survival but it seems the club have finally realised that the experience is needed and just maybe a few wins will bring the paying supporters back to the break even level. This may be the last throw of the dice. Let us all hope it is successful and I speak as a supporter of the football club not the individuals within that structure.

It was said to me in a private message at the time Hone was in charge.

OK but why draw attention to it by a new and clearly prevocative thread. Why not deal with it on the thread that contained the comments. You have every right to challenge the comments but it is the way you did it that I found distastful. Incidently, the same allegations were made of Hone when he was in charge and Mary confronted him according to one poster (not Duncan). I assume it is just that Mary Corbett is intimidated by people with a strong determined will to succeed. I do not condone it. Just my thoughts.

OK but why draw attention to it by a new and clearly prevocative thread. Why not deal with it on the thread that contained the comments. You have every right to challenge the comments but it is the way you did it that I found distastful. Incidently, the same allegations were made of Hone when he was in charge and Mary confronted him according to one poster (not Duncan). I assume it is just that Mary Corbett is intimidated by people with a strong determined will to succeed. I do not condone it. Just my thoughts.

Sorry Mark but I think this was below the belt and an unnecessary attack on Duncan. Or may be you think you can draw the sting. I for one hope Duncan does not reply to this thread. PS. I would have preferred Duncan had not made the comment in the first place but it is done. Let's move on

Sorry Mark but I think this was below the belt and an unnecessary attack on Duncan. Or may be you think you can draw the sting. I for one hope Duncan does not reply to this thread. PS. I would have preferred Duncan had not made the comment in the first place but it is done. Let's move on

Providing no injuries I see the same team that started on Saturday with perhaps 1 change and that is Schneiderlin replacing Lallana with the latter on the bench.

Providing no injuries I see the same team that started on Saturday with perhaps 1 change and that is Schneiderlin replacing Lallana with the latter on the bench.

Just to set the record straight I have not heard any of the players are against Wotte although they say he is a hard task master and that was not in a critical way. I was not at the Sheff Utd game as I had a meeting and dinner appointment but against Swansea and Preston we showed individual and team determination missing previously. As for Thomas, I believe his contract was for 2 years and is up at the end of the season.