Master Bates Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 (edited) Double page spread: Administrator Mark Fry lifts the lid on Rupert Lowe & Pinnacle's failed takeover. He reveals how: He demanded Rupert Lowe to resign Decision to give Pinnacle exclusivity was one of "desperation" Club almost folded a number of times He believes his bill for admin represented value for money. Edited 11 July, 2009 by Master Bates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 tell us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 July, 2009 Author Share Posted 11 July, 2009 updated above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_stevo Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 spit it out MB. Isn't the echo more expensive on a Saturday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 updated above wow that's a great help for us johnny foreigners - thanks MB! No doubt we can read the 4 line precis online in an hour or so :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 Small snippet here: http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4487870.Lowe_had_to_go_____but_I_was_convinced_Saints_would_go_under/ but it's alot better in the flesh!!!!!!!! Have a long day at cricket today, so might type it all out for you as it makes good reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_stevo Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 Small snippet here: http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4487870.Lowe_had_to_go_____but_I_was_convinced_Saints_would_go_under/ but it's alot better in the flesh!!!!!!!! Have a long day at cricket today, so might type it all out for you as it makes good reading. Cricket? You realise we have a game in B'mouth today right.....? Pretty sure i owe you a pint or two...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 July, 2009 Author Share Posted 11 July, 2009 mmm...... nothing overly shocking tbf, doesn't go into much details due to confidentiality agreements etc Says a few of "I can't say" and "I can't speculate". The only thing that jumps out for me is that Michael Fialka was involved from the beginning RE Pinnacle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 Cricket? You realise we have a game in B'mouth today right.....? Pretty sure i owe you a pint or two...... The Ashes in full swing, Hampshire at Lords and most importantly the 'Font in a relegation battle with Winterslow today means football comes off a poor second best at the moment!!!! Anyway, why do you owe me a pint?? Was it the "Pulis to play 15 games" thingy?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 "Desparation"? Didn't he have consortia lining up to buy us? He seemed to be quite postive about Pinnacle at the time...had he not done his homework? I thought the wheels only fell off wel down the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker268 Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 mmm...... nothing overly shocking tbf, doesn't go into much details due to confidentiality agreements etc Says a few of "I can't say" and "I can't speculate". The only thing that jumps out for me is that Michael Fialka was involved from the beginning RE Pinnacle. Does it say anything about there being other backers behind the deal that pulled out or is that one of the things he can't speculate about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintbletch Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 So when Mark Fry says this.. 'We [begbies Traynor] are on the bank’s panel of advisors, and they phoned us and said ‘Would you be prepared to have a meeting with the board and see if you can come up with any innovative alternative strategies that could help save this football club?’ does that not suggest that Richard Fry was instrumental in selecting Begbies Traynor before he then went and accepted a position there? I must admit I thought I'd read that the board called in the administrators not the bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bushey Saint Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 Small snippet here: http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4487870.Lowe_had_to_go_____but_I_was_convinced_Saints_would_go_under/ but it's alot better in the flesh!!!!!!!! Have a long day at cricket today, so might type it all out for you as it makes good reading. That would be greatly appreciated as, with the best will in the world, I cannot see me being able to pick up a copy in the middle of the Kuwaiti desert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_stevo Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 The Ashes in full swing, Hampshire at Lords and most importantly the 'Font in a relegation battle with Winterslow today means football comes off a poor second best at the moment!!!! Anyway, why do you owe me a pint?? Was it the "Pulis to play 15 games" thingy?? er yeah thats the one..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 July, 2009 Author Share Posted 11 July, 2009 (edited) Does it say anything about there being other backers behind the deal that pulled out or is that one of the things he can't speculate about? RE Pinnacle, Fry says: We had a number of meetings with individuals as part of that consortium. They had convinced other credible people they were a group that were able to do it........ .....I saw evidence from them they had financial backing. There are a number of stories that you get around these situations that are just not appropriate for me to comment on in any respect. We had concerns probably midway through (exclusivity), but I didn't really make up my mind until very near the end. Edited 11 July, 2009 by Master Bates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 So - am I reading this right? 1. BT were called in as experts in business reconstruction (that's another skill they have). 2. They quickly saw that the recovery plan instigated by the club wasn't working (partly because the gates weren't holding up - that was part of the plan). 3. They also quickly realised that the gates were falling because of dislike of the board (i.e. RL) 4. So the solution was - get rid of the board. Also, as the company was insolvent, it HAD to be put into administration. In other words, if RL hadn't been at the helm, we probably wouldn't have gone into aministration. Or is that too simples? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 July, 2009 Author Share Posted 11 July, 2009 so might type it all out for you as it makes good reading. Would be appreciated, saves my fingers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 While I am sure it will all be fascinating to read, I don't think an administrator should be going to the papers and talking about this. Fry seems to love the limelight too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 While I am sure it will all be fascinating to read, I don't think an administrator should be going to the papers and talking about this. Fry seems to love the limelight too much. So long as he breaks no NDAs, I have no problem with, considering the shiit he's getting from the likes of Guided Missile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doggface Posted 11 July, 2009 Share Posted 11 July, 2009 The only thing that jumps out for me is that Michael Fialka was involved from the beginning RE Pinnacle. That is one of the most intersting things in the article, He was NOT listed by TL originally. Of that I am sure - The Fialka link stinks to high heaven IMO. I think this is one for Mulder & Scully. That said it's history now (thankfully) so really don't care so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 13 July, 2009 Author Share Posted 13 July, 2009 If you haven't seen it by the way, now in full: http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/4487870.Mark_Fry_reveals_all_about_the_Saints_takeover/?ref=rss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 We keep raking over old news and stories. Some may even be close to the truth, but at the end of the day I am more interested in what will happen next. Who will be our manager? When will he be appointed? Who will he be buying to improve our desperately weak side? When will we be buying them? Will we be ready for the big kick off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 We keep raking over old news and stories. Some may even be close to the truth, but at the end of the day I am more interested in what will happen next. Who will be our manager? When will he be appointed? Who will he be buying to improve our desperately weak side? When will we be buying them? Will we be ready for the big kick off? As am I but I am still interested in the rest of the stuff as well. You see the beauty of it is you can be interested in two things at once! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyb1 Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 As am I but I am still interested in the rest of the stuff as well. You see the beauty of it is you can be interested in two things at once! Agreed.. For those who can't get the Echo we will always be a few days behind when that is the only source... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 13 July, 2009 Author Share Posted 13 July, 2009 As am I but I am still interested in the rest of the stuff as well. You see the beauty of it is you can be interested in two things at once! 2 things at once, bet a woman wouldn't agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 Mark Fry: "The bank had been advised by a firm of accountants that had been looking after Southampton for about 18 months. It had got to a stage where the football club was insolvent." So why did Fry spend 3 months telling the world that the 'Football Club' wasn't insolvent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 We keep raking over old news and stories. Some may even be close to the truth, but at the end of the day I am more interested in what will happen next. Who will be our manager? When will he be appointed? Who will he be buying to improve our desperately weak side? When will we be buying them? Will we be ready for the big kick off? Science fiction versus factual history! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 Q. How many parties did you believe could seriously enter into an exclusivity period? THERE was about three at that time. "about" three....?! "About"? A bit of a vague understanding of the position from someone who should know exactly how many parties were seriously interested before entering exclusivity? Surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 Q. How confident were you Pinnacle could complete when they entered exclusivity? WE HAD a number of meetings with individuals as part of that consortium. They had convinced other credible people they were a group that were able to do it and we believed they were a group that were able to do it. We worked closely with them throughout the exclusivity period and we genuinely felt that they would complete on the transaction. So, Pinnacle didn't have to provide 'proof of funds' per se? Is he referring to MLT there? i.e. 'other credible people'? It seems amazing that all the administrator needs on the proof of funding front is a nod from someone credible who has an association with a bid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 (edited) give him a difficult question 'there are NDA's so I can't say' Lol. The fees are part of the payment for the whole lot and so it wont cost the clb now. The creditors are paying. Shame he didnt ask him about Richard Fry's part though Edited 13 July, 2009 by OldNick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 I'm really not sure I agree with everything that Phil sent me and you via PM nick. Not that Phil was wrong but I highly doubt Marc Jackson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 I'm really not sure I agree with everything that Phil sent me and you via PM nick. Not that Phil was wrong but I highly doubt Marc Jackson. Nobody will ever know if MJ could have gone through with it. Many are sceptical and rightly so.I dont cre now as we have got stability and that is what I want for the club.MJ put more into trying to save the club than most on here,we can doubt, take the pi## and just be abusive but MJ and friends took time trouble and lost money getting as far as they did. To get local celebrity/interviewed on tv? To me i cant see it, but it is a strange world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 Nobody will ever know if MJ could have gone through with it. Many are sceptical and rightly so.I dont cre now as we have got stability and that is what I want for the club.MJ put more into trying to save the club than most on here,we can doubt, take the pi## and just be abusive but MJ and friends took time trouble and lost money getting as far as they did. To get local celebrity/interviewed on tv? To me i cant see it, but it is a strange world. I think he was a bit deluded to tell you the truth. He did exactly the same thing at Bournemouth as well. I'm sure he meant well but I reckon he fancied himself as a bit of a savvy business type when he quite clearly is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fowllyd Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 Mark Fry: "The bank had been advised by a firm of accountants that had been looking after Southampton for about 18 months. It had got to a stage where the football club was insolvent." So why did Fry spend 3 months telling the world that the 'Football Club' wasn't insolvent? He didn't. He said that the football club wasn't in administration. It wasn't. Technicalities perhaps, but correct nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 As am I but I am still interested in the rest of the stuff as well. You see the beauty of it is you can be interested in two things at once! I agree but think we are spending more time hunting for villains than searching for players etc that we need to escape this league. Time is not on our side with regards strengthening our side. Time is aplenty when it comes to looking for side issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 I agree but think we are spending more time hunting for villains than searching for players etc that we need to escape this league. Time is not on our side with regards strengthening our side. Time is aplenty when it comes to looking for side issues. Who do you mean by we? If you mean we the people of this forum, we can't do anything about players so I'm not sure what you mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 Any mention of how he was pretending to try but not really bothering to sell the club because he had it all planned out with Lowe to sell it to him at a knock down price at the last minute? After all, that's what SaintRichmond was telling us and he's never known to be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 Didnt someone place a bet with saintrichmond? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Smith Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 Q. Was the money Begbies Traynor were paid part of the deal to buy the club? YES, it was all priced within the transaction. This has always been the bit that has worried me. A bit of a slap in the face for the Swiss, when they were apparently ready for exclusivity themselves, now having to pay for the 6 weeks they sat around twiddling their thumbs, whilst the pinnacle bid faltered. Surely, Big Tray aren't adding that 6 week period into the deal for the Swiss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 13 July, 2009 Share Posted 13 July, 2009 Quote: Originally Posted by SFC Forever I agree but think we are spending more time hunting for villains than searching for players etc that we need to escape this league. Time is not on our side with regards strengthening our side. Time is aplenty when it comes to looking for side issues. Who do you mean by we? If you mean we the people of this forum, we can't do anything about players so I'm not sure what you mean. I agree again that us on the forum can't do anything about the players. At the same time we can/ could do nothing about the goings on during our lengthy drawn administration. I simply meant that right now it would interest me more seeing the various names produced as possible targets. The events that have occured can wait till all is settled. They won't go away as they are now part of our history. Right now I want to know that my/our team will not get the same results as it did last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now