Rupert Lowe's legacy

I disagree in that Lowe did deviate from his system when employing bagpus. He then gambled big by giving him the money to spend and wages on new players, without red**** having to sell before bringing them in.

 

Ultimately that gamble failed and tied his hands the following season as he desperately had to sell players to try and balance the books. He did a very good job of squeezing money out of Liverpool when the reality was we were in desperate trouble. By and large the summer was wasted getting players out rather than getting the right ones in, but saggychops still should have done better with the players we had left.

 

Pretty much every side that goes down struggles. Lowe would have ensured we at least could balance the books, however Wilde's gamble nearly killed us.

Redknapp spent £2.5 million on three permanent transfers (although two didn't last beyond the summer) and two loans in the January transfer window. Not exactly megabucks even with wages factored in, and even Lowe recognised that we had to buy to have any hope of staying up! That money would have been available to any manager. There's no disputing Redknapp's subsequent failures, though, and nobody would even try.

There's also no disputing that Lowe would have tried to balance the books - that's what he did. The point is that his methods of doing this offered no hope. Any decent player developed by the club would have been sold at the first opportunity (viz. Walcott) and the money would not have gone back into the team in any meaningful way (viz. Bridge). He had a wage structure in place that meant we developed a bloated squad of mediocre players - ask yourself whether you'd rather have six average players on £3,000 per week or two match winners on £9,000 per week. We didn't sign many of the latter who were proven under Lowe.

No disputing that Wilde rolled the dice and lost. Better penalties at Pride Park and it could have been different, but overall the fact that we finished six places higher and 17 points better off in his partial season at the helm suggests that we made a better fist at getting promoted in 06/07 than 05/06. Lowe in charge would have meant another season finishing 12th. After all, that's what the evidence points to.

That was a pretty long coma you were in around 2006 and 2007. Must have been tough for your family.

And 2008 to 2009?

In my view Lowe was responsible for us going bust (into administration) and nothing else is relevant. Once this had happened any investments he wqs responsible for or assets he had acquired were only scrap value. Anthing since then is irrelevant to any discussion about his achievements.

(It's probably best to avoid any mention of any member's family)

Redknapp spent £2.5 million on three permanent transfers (although two didn't last beyond the summer) and two loans in the January transfer window. Not exactly megabucks even with wages factored in, and even Lowe recognised that we had to buy to have any hope of staying up! That money would have been available to any manager. There's no disputing Redknapp's subsequent failures, though, and nobody would even try.

 

There's also no disputing that Lowe would have tried to balance the books - that's what he did. The point is that his methods of doing this offered no hope. Any decent player developed by the club would have been sold at the first opportunity (viz. Walcott) and the money would not have gone back into the team in any meaningful way (viz. Bridge). He had a wage structure in place that meant we developed a bloated squad of mediocre players - ask yourself whether you'd rather have six average players on £3,000 per week or two match winners on £9,000 per week. We didn't sign many of the latter who were proven under Lowe.

 

No disputing that Wilde rolled the dice and lost. Better penalties at Pride Park and it could have been different, but overall the fact that we finished six places higher and 17 points better off in his partial season at the helm suggests that we made a better fist at getting promoted in 06/07 than 05/06. Lowe in charge would have meant another season finishing 12th. After all, that's what the evidence points to.

I agree. Lowe gave it a go by making the funds available to Reknapp but that didn't work out and I won;t hold him to account for that. Perhaps we should lay some blame at his door for the timimg of the administration and the points penalty?

And 2008 to 2009?

 

In my view Lowe was responsible for us going bust (into administration) and nothing else is relevant. Once this had happened any investments he wqs responsible for or assets he had acquired were only scrap value. Anthing since then is irrelevant to any discussion about his achievements.

 

(It's probably best to avoid any mention of any member's family)

I'm no great fan of the man either but we went bust in the best possible way. With a stadium (i know some will say it was in spite of him), a training ground, an academy packed with talent, and yes morgan schneiderlin.

it was mismanagement but put us in a great position to be bought and turned around quickly.

And 2008 to 2009?

 

In my view Lowe was responsible for us going bust (into administration) and nothing else is relevant. Once this had happened any investments he wqs responsible for or assets he had acquired were only scrap value. Anthing since then is irrelevant to any discussion about his achievements.

 

(It's probably best to avoid any mention of any member's family)

You're wrong about pretty much everything you express an opinion on, so at least you're consistent here.

Clearly what the Leibherrs bought wasn't "scrap" and they didn't pay "scrap value" either. Presumably you slept through that too. Or maybe you just ain't that attentive.

its amazing how short memories fans have. I vividly recall fans singing his name and willing him to score in the Testimonial game he played at the Dell.

His big fault was that he played to the rules and did not go down Pompeys route. We budgetted for the Pl (the money was very low then of course) but could not survive with the players contracts and costs of running the club in the lower leagues.

RL mis calculated and many of us did also (including me)when he wanted to bring Hoddle back he listened to the fanbase. I was very anti Hoddle but i suspect he would have kept us up.

Thankfully he didnt as Lowe would still be at the club and we would not have had the Leibherrs

Is he still mates with Lynam? I get the impression that he still refuses to accept (at least, that the deal wasn't bogus to start with) and that he's pretty loyal to his mates.

I don't know, the Pinnacle debacle is not something I care to remind him about. He loves Saints as much as any of us and was only trying to help. Fry from Begbies also got fooled as did Leon Crouch to the tune of half a million.

Rupert Lowe's legacy was Wilde and that was forced on him by shareholders that believed the total bullsh !t that was being fed to them and many on the Saint Web. I posted this at the time:

Sat Jun 24, 2006 11:13 am

Post subject: Where is the investment coming from?

A couple days ago, I spent £3 downloading the latest accounts on Merlion plc., Wilde's source of income and wealth. I am not completely sure if it his sole source of wealth to be used in his investment in Southampton Leisure plc, but I am pretty confident it is. I was hesitant to post my opinion on the strength of the finances he is relying on, because of the abuse the Mods allow me to get, but I'm going to anyway. Everything in it the accounts confirms what I have guessed about the guy.

Lowe has picked up on the financial position as well and that is why his main question was, where will the investment in Saints come from? Unless Wilde has had a lottery win he's not telling us about, the balance sheet of the company he owns will definitely not be the source of the investment. He (I assume as he is the sole shareholder) has been bleeding the company of the majority of it's profits in 2003 and 2004 in the form of dividends so that, as Lowe has noticed, it has got only about £980,000 in net assets at the date of the last return (31st December, 2004). Merlion had total assets of approx. £10.7M against which they owe about £9.7M So, we have a guy with an appetite for borrowing, gearing a company to the hilt and bleeding it's profits in the form of dividends for the shareholders.

He has taken significant dividends out, presumably to avoid taking a UK salary, avoiding National Insurance deductions and availing himself of the more favourable tax structure in Jersey. He is in too deep to make peace with Lowe (was I wrong!), because, in my opinion, if he does and calls off the EGM, he will have to pay his advisors himself, rather than getting the Southampton Leisure plc to pay his costs, when he takes control.

Now, I could be wrong about his personal financial position, but I am suspicious. I don't think he will put significant money into Saints, because he doesn't have significant funds available. The question could be easily answered as I am sure he could post a response on this board. My problem is, I don't have access to more recent data (31st December, 2004) to accurately assess his companies' financial health (sound familiar?)

If his total wealth is largely based on the balance sheet I have seen, there is only one word I can use for anyone that supports him at the EGM.

Suckers.........

My reading of the accounts of Merlion plc, is that it has a high level of borrowing with a resultant high level of interest payments. Most of the profits the company makes, rather than being re-invested in the group, are taken out in the form of dividends for a minority shareholder (presumably Wilde) So, in 2004, out of a profit of about £1.1M, a dividend of over £800K was paid out. Amazingly, in 2003, although a profit of only about £500K was made, over £1M was taken out in a dividend to a minority shareholder. I haven't a clue what Wilde is personally worth, but it seems to have come mainly from bleeding the company he runs. What we are left with is a company, in my opinion, with high gearing, large debts and interest payments of over £500K a year. With the low level of net assets, due, for instance, to the withdrawal of £1.8M in dividends against £1.5M in net profits over the two years, 2003-2004, Merlion seems to be very susceptible to any increase in interest rates and downturn in the property market.

How does this affect Saints you may wonder? Well let's imagine Wilde has bled £5M from Merlion over 5 years. He punts a couple of million in Saints shares to satisfy his ego and very poor investment judgement. Interest rates go up a couple of percent, property sales dip and all of a sudden, Merlion can't service the £500K a year in interest to service their debt. The banks look to the shareholders or they will call in the loans and he either has to sell his Saints shares or let Merlion go to the wall. With potential personal guarantees, things are looking grim and the last thing him and people like Patrick Trant, also involved in building, want to do is invest further money in a Championship football club that is going nowhere. I'm not saying this will happen and I am sure Wilde understands the risks of running a company like Merlion plc. I am aslo sure that I would not like him running Southampton Leisure plc in the way he seems to be running Merlion plc.

For that reason, if he wins the EGM, I will be selling my shares PDQ and will certainly not be providing any more money in the form of a rights issue.

Thankfully everything you say is speculation. Gavyn Davies and Lawrie Mac and even Mary Corbett support him (Wilde) and this should be enough for any saints supporter (after all we know Mary and Lawrie will act in the best interests of the club as they have done in the past). I am not even going to bother rubbishing the various points made in your post as I feel you post looking for an argument (then having got one you moan to the mods). Besides which I do not give a toss if Wilde invests five pence or fifty million. Him and his team are better men for the job than Lowe and his cronies.

Wilde Replies:

I have received the following from Mike Wilde in regard to your points:

Quote:

Merlion Group’s turnover rose to approx STG 20m in 2005 and is expected (on current projections) to achieve in excess of STG 30m in 2006. This dramatic growth is due to the establishment of our speculative housing arm Infinity Homes Ltd. In respect of dividends there is a firm dividend policy in place at moment that prevents extraction of any more than 50% of taxable profit.

I can also confirm that Merlion Group is certainly not my only source of income. I have substantial financial interests in a number of overseas countries as well as other companies and I have an established Family Trust which looks after family matters.

I am not prepared to give information regarding my net worth as I am sure everyone can understand that it is not their business!!

Thank Mike for the information and I am glad to hear that the plc you control as (I am guessing) a minority shareholder, 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?
   

Then....

I received this PM from Keith Legg, who was "going Wilde" like so many at the time:

Your posts about Wilde's personal finances could be construed as possibly libellous. He has given you a response and won't talk further on the subject. I think you've tried to made a point and like many of yours, they are based on half arsed information and your own agenda.

My Reply:

So Mike Wilde has threatened to sue me and you for libel, has he Keith? Listen, you well know my post was pure conjecture regarding his personal finances. With regard to Merlion plc, my information was based on the returns he files with Companies' House, so that post was hardly libellous. By the way, I have no agenda but finding out as much as I can about someone who is about to control the football club I support. I expect the same transparency from Rupert Lowe. Look in the mirror and ask yourself what your agenda is.

By the way, if Mr Wilde is threatening to sue me for libel, my lawyers details are : Contact:

*** does all my corporate legal work and is a really nice guy. PS I don't really want my tenner back, just this site's impartiality.

"Saints Go Wilde":lol::lol: I wonder if anyone still has the tee shirt?

The system that took us to eighth and into Europe? That system?

 

Sorry, your scenario is just driven by "Lowe is the bogeyman" prejudice. Nothing in his behaviours or results suggest the doom scenario you've painted there.

 

If he had stayed at worst he would have run us, as ever, within our means. It may have meant a trip to L1 like Norwich, Forest, Leicester, Leeds but equally could have meant a return to the Premier League like the likes of Watford, Blackpool, Burnley managed with smaller budgets than Whiskey George had.

 

With a decent hit rate of perfectly competent managerial appointments - Strachan, Hoddle, Jones and (at the time a proven Championship pedigree) Burley, I would suggest that the balance of probability, we would have stabilised into mid table financially stable Championship mediocrity like, say, Derby County with a bit of play off/relegation flirting thrown in. Not quite the dreamland of today but more likely than your silly scenario.

The system that worked when you have £25 million being handed to you simply for being in a particular league, yes. As soon as that money disappeared, Lowe hadn't got the system in place to get us back up.

I don't carry prejudice - I'm all about logic. I know this is a hypothetical scenario, but in fact all of his behaviours and results point to a slow, managed decline without the Premier League money. There's every reason to believe that he would have followed a 'budget for relegation' approach in the Championship, the same one that eventually failed us in 2004/05. The playing budget would have got smaller and smaller as the income dwindled (parachute payments lasted only two years then) making it more difficult to attract decent managers and players. You point to Watford, Blackpool and Burnley as clubs that made it up, but none of these clubs were carrying the debt from a new stadium. We had to pay that money back and Lowe would (rightly) have made sure we did.

I don't think you're on stable ground with your managerial appointments argument. His hit rate included Gray, Wigley, Sturrock and Poortvliet as well! Even when he returned to the club with Wilde he didn't go looking for even modest investors - he was prepared to throw a gang of unproven teenagers and a wide-eyed rabbit in a tracksuit into one of the toughest leagues in Europe. This points clearly to him being willing to risk decline rather than think of a method outside his own.

i don't dispute that we would have been financially stable. But it would have been at the expense of the team and at the expense of hope of improvement. When the money ran out he didn't have any strategy other than protection of the bottom line - I think that the majority of fans were fed up with this approach (as it had demonstrably led to a decline) and wanted a reason to feel optimism. Still, I'm grateful for Schneiderlin - probably the only gamble he ever took. Perhaps he should have rolled the dice a bit more?

You're wrong about pretty much everything you express an opinion on, so at least you're consistent here.

 

Clearly what the Leibherrs bought wasn't "scrap" and they didn't pay "scrap value" either. Presumably you slept through that too. Or maybe you just ain't that attentive.

You really are a first class arsehole.

When a company is bust then all that is left is scrap and is sold for the best price can be obtained. If no buyer can be found then we are left with liquidation value, or 'scrap' as some like to call it.

Now go away and write about something that you actually know about, if anything.

I'm no great fan of the man either but we went bust in the best possible way. With a stadium (i know some will say it was in spite of him), a training ground, an academy packed with talent, and yes morgan schneiderlin.

 

it was mismanagement but put us in a great position to be bought and turned around quickly.

Yes indeed. Portsmouth (for example) went bust with an expensive team and no infrastructure whereas we were the opposite, which made us more attractive to possible purchasers.

You really are a first class arsehole.

 

When a company is bust then all that is left is scrap and is sold for the best price can be obtained. If no buyer can be found then we are left with liquidation value, or 'scrap' as some like to call it.

 

Now go away and write about something that you actually know about, if anything.

When did we go through liquidation?

Lowe was a idiot him and wilde wouldn't match Leon's offer so for me just a money grabbing machine at the time he was the second highest paid chairman in the league and stated its a results business ??

When did we go through liquidation?

Try reading before you post.

If no buyer can be found then we are left with liquidation value

Try reading before you post.

 

If no buyer can be found then we are left with liquidation value

The Leibherrs didn't buy scrap then, did they? If I remember rightly they purchased a football stadium, club and training ground with the intention of carrying on with their previous purpose, that of being a football stadium, club and training ground.

Scrap means something different. But you're awfully clever so you knew that, didn't you?

The Leibherrs didn't buy scrap then, did they? If I remember rightly they purchased a football stadium, club and training ground with the intention of carrying on with their previous purpose, that of being a football stadium, club and training ground.

 

Scrap means something different. But you're awfully clever so you knew that, didn't you?

It would be quicker to teach an ant.

Until there is a buyer there is little value in the company. Scrap gold, scrapped cars, they all have some value but this is not as much as a going concern.

Now go and read this and learn something: http://www.begbies-traynorgroup.com/articles/director-advice/difference-between-company-administration-and-liquidation

I have been patient with you beyond the call of duty. Now go and take your personal attacks and have a go at somebody else. You have got tedious beyond belief. Goodbye.

It would be quicker to teach an ant.

 

Until there is a buyer there is little value in the company. Scrap gold, scrapped cars, they all have some value but this is not as much as a going concern.

 

Now go and read this and learn something: http://www.begbies-traynorgroup.com/articles/director-advice/difference-between-company-administration-and-liquidation

 

I have been patient with you beyond the call of duty. Now go and take your personal attacks and have a go at somebody else. You have got tedious beyond belief. Goodbye.

I love it when you try and explain something to me that I understand and you patently and pitifully don't understand. We were in administration, not liquidation. Administration. Not. Liquidation.

If you still believe our administrators were trying to sell elements of the company for "scrap" before the Leibherrs turned up, then fine.

Just be a poppet and show me any quotes or reports from anyone involved in our administration process that demonstrates that was the case.

If you can't, try and find in yourself to admit you got it wrong, again.

You really are a first class arsehole.

 

When a company is bust then all that is left is scrap and is sold for the best price can be obtained. If no buyer can be found then we are left with liquidation value, or 'scrap' as some like to call it.

 

Now go away and write about something that you actually know about, if anything.

I think CB Fry is right there was no chance of SFC going out of business

Interesting

From the day Guy agreed to a reverse takeover we were doomed to administration if we ever fell out of the top flight and lost Sky Money, yes we had some good years, got a new stadium,but we also had a radio station and insurance business.

The Club Finances were built on Sand supplied by Sky and had owners who were financially poor compared to other clubs

But I do not blame Rupert he was just a businessman after a good living

I think CB Fry is right there was no chance of SFC going out of business

Yes, we were a good proposition for someone who was prepared to inject some serious money, but the value of the club was at rock bottom. Any value in the assets was offset by the debts and liabilities, which can never be ignored.

Still, I'm grateful for Schneiderlin - probably the only gamble he ever took. Perhaps he should have rolled the dice a bit more?

my memory isn't great, but I recall there being strong rumours on here that the fee was actually only £200,000 up front and the rest later. Whether that was to deflect the unhappiness about shelling out on a nipper rather than a senior pro I don't know, but that lower amount would certainly fit with the Lowe we all 'love'.

I love it when you try and explain something to me that I understand and you patently and pitifully don't understand. We were in administration, not liquidation. Administration. Not. Liquidation.

 

If you still believe our administrators were trying to sell elements of the company for "scrap" before the Leibherrs turned up, then fine.

 

Just be a poppet and show me any quotes or reports from anyone involved in our administration process that demonstrates that was the case.

 

If you can't, try and find in yourself to admit you got it wrong, again.

You've misrepresented what WG said and you know it.

Yes, we were a good proposition for someone who was prepared to inject some serious money, but the value of the club was at rock bottom. Any value in the assets was offset by the debts and liabilities, which can never be ignored.

But CB Fry is right, next to zero chance of liquidation.

You've misrepresented what WG said and you know it.

This is what he wrote:

And 2008 to 2009?

 

In my view Lowe was responsible for us going bust (into administration) and nothing else is relevant. Once this had happened any investments he wqs responsible for or assets he had acquired were only scrap value.

The assets of the club were not, repeat not, sold or even offered for "scrap". And the subsequent price agreed to lift us out of admin was far from "scrap value". So nonsense.

When a company is bust then all that is left is scrap and is sold for the best price can be obtained. If no buyer can be found then we are left with liquidation value, or 'scrap' as some like to call it.

 

The above bears no resemblance whatsoever with what happened to Southampton throughout the entire duration of our administration. None whatsoever. So nonsense again.

What exactly have I misinterpreted?

I think that a lot of people made their minds up about Lowe as soon as the reverse takeover was mooted. He wasn't a football man. He was in it to make himself a lot of money. He was called Rupert. He shot ducks. He had ruddy cheeks. He was a "city type." He was posh. He was arrogant. He liked hockey. He made some mistakes with the club's history when trying to ingratiate himself with the fans. I am sure there are other reasons. This was certainly the case on the Saints forum I used at the time anyway. He never managed to rid himself of the negativity that attached itself to him from day 1. I am sure there are people who will go to their graves sticking pins into a voodoo doll of Rupert Lowe.

Keep going soggy, keep fighting the good fight.

We were in administration, not liquidation. Administration. Not. Liquidation.

WG never said we were in liquidation, he stated "If no buyer can be found then we are left with liquidation value".

Whilst it didn't happen in our case (as ML took over), what WG stated isn't actually wrong.

But CB Fry is right, next to zero chance of liquidation.

Yes, extremely unlikely as we have seen from events down the road, but there was no value in the club or the existing shareholders would have received their share of it. We were fortunate that our benefactor Markus was persuaded to invest his money and take over the mess but he was shouldering the debts and picking up the scraps. I maintain that under Lowe's stewardship the club's value had effectively shrunk to zero.

Keep going soggy, keep fighting the good fight.

It keeps me off of the streets Batman! And I do love an underdog.

Yes, extremely unlikely as we have seen from events down the road, but there was no value in the club or the existing shareholders would have received their share of it. We were fortunate that our benefactor Markus was persuaded to invest his money and take over the mess but he was shouldering the debts and picking up the scraps. I maintain that under Lowe's stewardship the club's value had effectively shrunk to zero.

Except it cost Marcus £15mill

WG never said we were in liquidation, he stated "If no buyer can be found then we are left with liquidation value".

 

Whilst it didn't happen in our case (as ML took over), what WG stated isn't actually wrong.

If someone doused all the seats in petrol and set fire to it, the stadium would burn down or at least be significantly fire damaged.

That's true too but bears zero relevance whatsoever to what happened to us in our administration.

A lecture about "scrap value" and liquidation I am sure is riveting but bears no resemblance whatsoever to what happened to us.

As usual Whitey talks sh it, I call him out and then he resorts to ever more tenuous routes to avoid admitting he's wrong, usually culminating in a pointless link to a website. Has happened before and it will again.

Except it cost Marcus £15mill

Yes, he put in that much but how much of went to paying off debts? The relevant question is how much the shareholders received.

Yes, extremely unlikely as we have seen from events down the road, but there was no value in the club or the existing shareholders would have received their share of it. We were fortunate that our benefactor Markus was persuaded to invest his money and take over the mess but he was shouldering the debts and picking up the scraps. I maintain that under Lowe's stewardship the club's value had effectively shrunk to zero.

Your logic is a bit circular: you claim above that an asset only has value as much as there are buyers. That maybe true; but it doesn't change the fact that, on paper, the club was a very good commercial proposition, ripe for a turnaround, probably a better benchmark against which to judge Lowe's legacy.

After all, the main reason that there were few buyers or even tyre-kickers is that, through no fault of our own, we couldn't have gone into administration at a worst moment in history, with the global financial crisis in full effect. Risk aversion was at an all time high and credit had seized up. Any objective assessment can't possibly pin unfortunate timing on Lowe.

By the same token, if there was a moment in time when liquidation was a possibility, it was 2009. That said, it was still unlikely, though there is something perverse and myopic in claiming that as some kind of victory, when the likely alternative to Liebherr and Cortese was further decline bordering on death by a thousand cuts, a hardly more appealing prospect.

If someone doused all the seats in petrol and set fire to it, the stadium would burn down or at least be significantly fire damaged.

 

That's true too but bears zero relevance whatsoever to what happened to us in our administration.

 

A lecture about "scrap value" and liquidation I am sure is riveting but bears no resemblance whatsoever to what happened to us.

As usual Whitey talks sh it, I call him out and then he resorts to ever more tenuous routes to avoid admitting he's wrong,

The irony. .

Your logic is a bit circular: you claim above that an asset only has value as much as there are buyers. That maybe true; but it doesn't change the fact that, on paper, the club was a very good commercial proposition, ripe for a turnaround, probably a better benchmark against which to judge Lowe's legacy.

 

After all, the main reason that there were few buyers or even tyre-kickers is that, through no fault of our own, we couldn't have gone into administration at a worst moment in history, with the global financial crisis in full effect. Risk aversion was at an all time high and credit had seized up. Any objective assessment can't possibly pin unfortunate timing on Lowe.

 

By the same token, if there was a moment in time when liquidation was a possibility, it was 2009. That said, it was still unlikely, though there is something perverse and myopic in claiming that as some kind of victory, when the likely alternative to Liebherr and Cortese was further decline bordering on death by a thousand cuts, a hardly more appealing prospect.

Yes indeed, a very good commercial proposition, which is the main reason that Markus could be convinced to put in some money. I'm sure we could agree that the cost of doing this was much lower (Lowe-r?) than if we had been a going concern.

My main point was intended to be about the situation regarding Morgan, in that at the time we went bust he was worth very little and any increase in the 6 years or so since then are hardly any credit to Lowe.

No, as I understand it Lowe (and the club) got caught out by the sudden removal of an overdraft facility, something which has caught out many other companies. He was certainly a victim of unfortunate circumstances but I feel that with better stewardship we might have fared better. His vision was right even if his implementation wasn't.

Yes indeed, a very good commercial proposition, which is the main reason that Markus could be convinced to put in some money. I'm sure we could agree that the cost of doing this was much lower (Lowe-r?) than if we had been a going concern.

 

My main point was intended to be about the situation regarding Morgan, in that at the time we went bust he was worth very little and any increase in the 6 years or so since then are hardly any credit to Lowe.

 

No, as I understand it Lowe (and the club) got caught out by the sudden removal of an overdraft facility, something which has caught out many other companies. He was certainly a victim of unfortunate circumstances but I feel that with better stewardship we might have fared better. His vision was right even if his implementation wasn't.

Surely if Lowe decided to recruit Morgan all those years ago because of his potential he should be congratulated not sure about Tommy Forecast though

I did see him play

And 2008 to 2009?

 

In my view Lowe was responsible for us going bust (into administration) and nothing else is relevant. Once this had happened any investments he wqs responsible for or assets he had acquired were only scrap value. Anthing since then is irrelevant to any discussion about his achievements.

 

(It's probably best to avoid any mention of any member's family)

It was the failure to appoint Hoddle in 2004, after the antics of the vocal minority, that began our downfall.

Surely if Lowe decided to recruit Morgan all those years ago because of his potential he should be congratulated not sure about Tommy Forecast though

 

I did see him play

Of course he should get some credit, he was signed on Lowe's watch on the recommendation of someone Lowe brought to the club. Morgan went on his own journey but a major part of it was his joining Saints.

Of course he should get some credit, he was signed on Lowe's watch on the recommendation of someone Lowe brought to the club. Morgan went on his own journey but a major part of it was his joining Saints.

I think you'll find it was me that recommended him, I even posted about It along with a copy of the email I sent to the club all those years a go. Who'd have thought 'dorkish' would be scouting £25m players.

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/archive/index.php/t-47224.html

I think you'll find it was me that recommended him, I even posted about It along with a copy of the email I sent to the club all those years a go. Who'd have thought 'dorkish' would be scouting £25m players.

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/archive/index.php/t-47224.html

Nice bit of revisionism "dorkish" Not quite so fulsome in your praise in this one.

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?12867-Schneiderlin-Saints-Biggest-Waste-of-Cash-Ever/page3&highlight=Schneiderlin+Wotton#.UmLhzcu9KSM

Lowe was the worst thing to ever happen to the club. He should be left where he belongs, in the past.

This

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk

Nice bit of revisionism "dorkish" Not quite so fulsome in your praise in this one.

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?12867-Schneiderlin-Saints-Biggest-Waste-of-Cash-Ever/page3&highlight=Schneiderlin+Wotton#.UmLhzcu9KSM

Yes, my recommendation wasn't looking too good for a while was it, especially as none of us had any idea how serious of financial plight was at that time. it turned out for the best in the end rhoigh.

On 13/07/2015 at 09:36, OldNick said:

 

Lowe was many things but if you look at the current owners model it is just what Lowe was intending to do for us.

Sadly having a posh English accent and also the name of Rupert never helped his cause.

On 13/07/2015 at 10:03, Lord Duckhunter said:

 

Nor did not having a pot to **** in personally , having a massive ego , or employing a rugby coach 

Maybe Lowe was just ahead of his time...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-57698821

I bet Grealish has been in that eye-gym all afternoon.

#marginalgains

Rupert Lowe's true life legacy will be defunding the BBC, Southampton Football Club will be a mere footnote. You heard it here first.

Shit. The club is up for sale and a 5 year old thread about Lowe gets resurrected. That sort of thing can cause heart attacks ! 🤣

To be fair, never understood the Woodward criticism. He was brought in because he knew how to produce winners, not to talk tactics or team selection. Nice to see that approach is now being used succesfully at national level.

Ask Rupert.

The past is a foreign country they did things differently there. 

18 hours ago, Wurzel said:

Shit. The club is up for sale and a 5 year old thread about Lowe gets resurrected. That sort of thing can cause heart attacks ! 🤣

To be fair, never understood the Woodward criticism. He was brought in because he knew how to produce winners, not to talk tactics or team selection. Nice to see that approach is now being used succesfully at national level.

I totally agree with you. I remember endless arguments about how he shouldn’t be involved in recruitment as that was the manager’s job and how he should not be involved because he knew nothing about football. Now every club has people like him doing those jobs. I also remember peers outside of the club at the time saying that he was ahead of his time. For all of his faults I think he was often misjudged and it can’t have been easy keeping the club going on the restricted level of 15,000 at home games. Lowe himself was a hockey man so that was another reason that he shouldn’t be involved in the club but I seem to remember him being responsible for signing Killer and Niemi, they turned out to be not too shabby for us. I remember someone who hated him with a passion admitting that he did his best for the club. That is all we can ask of anyone. Who will forget his famous statement about Spurs claiming that he wouldn’t be pushed around by a bunch of North London yobbos?!

I don’t care for his politics and can see why he was disliked by so many, but I think in many ways he was much maligned.

On 09/07/2021 at 10:00, sadoldgit said:

I totally agree with you. I remember endless arguments about how he shouldn’t be involved in recruitment as that was the manager’s job and how he should not be involved because he knew nothing about football. Now every club has people like him doing those jobs. I also remember peers outside of the club at the time saying that he was ahead of his time. For all of his faults I think he was often misjudged and it can’t have been easy keeping the club going on the restricted level of 15,000 at home games. Lowe himself was a hockey man so that was another reason that he shouldn’t be involved in the club but I seem to remember him being responsible for signing Killer and Niemi, they turned out to be not too shabby for us. I remember someone who hated him with a passion admitting that he did his best for the club. That is all we can ask of anyone. Who will forget his famous statement about Spurs claiming that he wouldn’t be pushed around by a bunch of North London yobbos?!

I don’t care for his politics and can see why he was disliked by so many, but I think in many ways he was much maligned.

Don't think Lowe was all that bad tbh. Kept the club going with a small stadium in a very competitive league. Shit hit the fan when the loan was called in. But he gave us the academy and SMS, thought outside the box (ala woodward), and his tenureship saw some great players and managers over the years. I don't think we'd be the club we are today without him, and i doubt we'd have been taken over by ML/NC without the stadium and academy - but purely speculative.

He didn't saddle us with several multimillion pound championship level squad players on long contracts or ruin the academy - so his legacy maybe looks better with time? Maybe if he'd called Woodward the Bald Box he'd have been more popular? But also, i was too young to really follow all the fallout at the time so fully prepared to get shot down for the above 😊... I do seem to recall it wasn't his fault we didn't resign hoddle at least?