Thorpe-le-Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 I know that there is a thread about points deduction, but on SSN, it's just been said that as they have now come out of admin they will start the season on '0' rather than minus points... ...why is it one rule for them and one rule for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 They went into administration last season before the ''cut off point'' - so they had their 10 points deducted last season, rather than this. No one knows why Lowe put us in administration after the cut off point, that's another debate in it's self - but that's why we get it this season. Same with stockport too - they got hit last season and finished midtable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londonsaint1604 Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 No one knows why Lowe put us in administration after the cut off point Almost immediately after the cut off point as well. What a pr*ck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 They went into administration last season before the ''cut off point'' - so they had their 10 points deducted last season, rather than this. No one knows why Lowe put us in administration after the cut off point, that's another debate in it's self - but that's why we get it this season. Same with stockport too - they got hit last season and finished midtable. By a matter of days! This still p*sses me off. I have no idea who's call this was but a HUGE c*ck up by somebody. Probably becuase they thought the holding co structure would prevent the deduction. Entirely predictable that it didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikec Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 If I understood it right, I think the timing was down to Barclays rather than Lowe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Almost immediately after the cut off point as well. What a pr*ck. He did it because he thought him and his lawyer friends were right (as always), and that the League would not be able to enforce the penalty. He did not countenance on a the steadfast *****ness that is Mawhinneywanck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 By a matter of days! This still p*sses me off. I have no idea who's call this was but a HUGE c*ck up by somebody. Probably becuase they thought the holding co structure would prevent the deduction. Entirely predictable that it didn't. My guess is that they wanted to delay it as long as possible, whilst looking for alternatives - then when BT came in with their plan of putting SLH into admin and not the club...RL went along with the ''football club is not in admin – so won’t receive deduction’’ line. - so he probably felt it wouldn't matter when we went into admin – as he was ‘’sure’’ the club would not be affected. It was a huge gamble though - and only Lowe would be stupid enough to take on the FL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 If I understood it right, I think the timing was down to Barclays rather than Lowe. If had been up to lowe we wouldn't have gone into admin at all. He made many mistakes but I don't think this was one of them. EDIT: Because I don't think it was his call not becuase I don't think it was a huge b*lls up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Why do some people still believe that Lowe put the company into admin. You are all ****ing moron's, you really are. Just get all the facts, take a step back and think before posting. By putting the club in admin Lowe lost all his money. Why the hell would he do that? Tell me why and I will bow down to your knowledge. If you can't tell me why just get back to cleaning those toilets or whatever you low brows do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madsent Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 I know that there is a thread about points deduction, but on SSN, it's just been said that as they have now come out of admin they will start the season on '0' rather than minus points... ...why is it one rule for them and one rule for us? Darlington were in with a very good chance of making the playoffs when they went into administration. The 10 point deduction stopped those chances of promotion. How bizarre would it have been for them to get promoted and to start in the L1 on -10 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_bert Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Why do some people still believe that Lowe put the company into admin. You are all ****ing moron's, you really are. Just get all the facts, take a step back and think before posting. By putting the club in admin Lowe lost all his money. Why the hell would he do that? Tell me why and I will bow down to your knowledge. If you can't tell me why just get back to cleaning those toilets or whatever you low brows do. I kind of agree. In my opinion Lowe wouldn't have pit I'd onto admin. His ego would never allow it. I reckon he clambered and flustered around for too long due to him wanting toblool a hero by "saving" the day. As usual putting his own wants before the clubs. All IMO of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capel Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 I kind of agree. In my opinion Lowe wouldn't have pit I'd onto admin. His ego would never allow it. I reckon he clambered and flustered around for too long due to him wanting toblool a hero by "saving" the day. As usual putting his own wants before the clubs. All IMO of course I get the impression that Lowe thought the bank were bluffing when they must have warned the club that the loan needed significantly reducing. Otherwise they would have sold players during the January transfer window. Also someone from the club (can't remember who) said at the time that although they had had offers for some players but they didn't have to sell as they thought the offers were far too low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londonsaint1604 Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Why do some people still believe that Lowe put the company into admin. You are all ****ing moron's, you really are. Just get all the facts, take a step back and think before posting. By putting the club in admin Lowe lost all his money. Why the hell would he do that? Tell me why and I will bow down to your knowledge. If you can't tell me why just get back to cleaning those toilets or whatever you low brows do. I disagree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Let's put this all behind us, be thankful that the incompetent tosser and all his stooges are gone for ever and be grateful that we have somebody in charge of the club who is not only an astute businessman, but also wealthy enough and principled enough to put his own money into the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 I kind of agree. In my opinion Lowe wouldn't have pit I'd onto admin. His ego would never allow it. I reckon he clambered and flustered around for too long due to him wanting toblool a hero by "saving" the day. As usual putting his own wants before the clubs. All IMO of course But administration is not a choice, it's something that is forced upon you. You can't put a solvent company into administration for instance, just because you want to?! That is certainly my understanding of the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctoroncall Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 I know that there is a thread about points deduction, but on SSN, it's just been said that as they have now come out of admin they will start the season on '0' rather than minus points... ...why is it one rule for them and one rule for us? back on topic... As said they got -10 last season. However, if it's a stand alone club then a CVA needs to be agreed to exit administration. This seems to be achieved, unless like us there was a holding company structure which then folds after the creditors are paid with the sales of the assets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Why do some people still believe that Lowe put the company into admin. You are all ****ing moron's, you really are. Just get all the facts, take a step back and think before posting. By putting the club in admin Lowe lost all his money. Why the hell would he do that? Tell me why and I will bow down to your knowledge. If you can't tell me why just get back to cleaning those toilets or whatever you low brows do. Because he probably would have had a plan to buy the club back on the cheap and have full control of the train set. Don't tell me you didn't believe he wouldn't at least try. We still haven't got to the bottom of Pinnacle yet have we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 IMO there was some dirty work done, the timing of the banks withdrawal of support was always open to question.The bank manager (Fry of Barclays)who did so was a 'saints fan' he would have known what it entailed. It would have been a major surprise to RL, we all know he loves his money and so he'd have done anything to protect that and so would have not had a second thought in arranging pre transfer window sales or even jan sales. As for the assertion that he did it to buy it cheaply, well he had the chance and didnt when we were in admin. It is all in the past and we have to forget, the new owners decided not to go to law and get th3e points back so that has to be good enough for us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusicMan Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 I could be wrong but I thought that the Swiss did their DD while Lowe was in power. Hence Lowe hung on as long as he could hoping the Swiss would come forward with an offer. For whatever reason things went quiet (probably just studding the figures) so Lowe (with Barclays help) had no choice but to put us into administration. Unfortunately Pinacle beat the Swiss to exclusivity by an hour or two, but when the Pinacle bid fell through it didn’t take as long as it might have done for the Swiss to make an offer, because they have already done their DD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Why do some people still believe that Lowe put the company into admin. You are all ****ing moron's, you really are. Just get all the facts, take a step back and think before posting. By putting the club in admin Lowe lost all his money. Why the hell would he do that? Tell me why and I will bow down to your knowledge. If you can't tell me why just get back to cleaning those toilets or whatever you low brows do. You really are a thick ****, we all understand that Lowe didn't want admin, only you fail to understand that he could have put us in admin a week earlier and not written off this season. Blaming Barclays is nonsense, it's Lowe's failure to communicate with Barclays that was the problem. He figured he had nothing to lose by calling their bluff, yet SFC had everything to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 You really are a thick ****, we all understand that Lowe didn't want admin, only you fail to understand that he could have put us in admin a week earlier and not written off this season. Blaming Barclays is nonsense, it's Lowe's failure to communicate with Barclays that was the problem. He figured he had nothing to lose by calling their bluff, yet SFC had everything to lose. Wind your neck in son. We are ****ed this season due to the Football League. We all know they had no leg to stand on, and in theory we should have appealed against. Tell me, why haven't we appealed? Was it something that the football league stipulated to us or not. I am as glad as anyone that Lowe has gone, but I think people are bang out of order for blaming him for the timing of admin, considering he'd found a loophole. If this was anyone else but Lowe he would be hailed as a genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadhall Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Wind your neck in son. We are ****ed this season due to the Football League. We all know they had no leg to stand on, and in theory we should have appealed against. Tell me, why haven't we appealed? Was it something that the football league stipulated to us or not. I am as glad as anyone that Lowe has gone, but I think people are bang out of order for blaming him for the timing of admin, considering he'd found a loophole. If this was anyone else but Lowe he would be hailed as a genius. Were still on minus 10 - some loop hole that was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plumstead_Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 You are all ****ing moron's, you really are.... If you can't tell me why just get back to cleaning those toilets or whatever you low brows do. Wind your neck in son. ROTFLMAO. Pot calling kettle? Why not blame the person responsible for writing cheques that took us over the agreed overdraft limit? Or if administartaion was inevitable, as it now appears, then blame the people who put off making a decision until it was too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 ROTFLMAO. Pot calling kettle? Why not blame the person responsible for writing cheques that took us over the agreed overdraft limit? Or if administartaion was inevitable, as it now appears, then blame the people who put off making a decision until it was too late. But I was sure that Lowe didn't write checks to go over the overdraft. That all came about when Barclays moved the goal posts and decreased the overdraft past agreed levels. Is that not true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Were still on minus 10 - some loop hole that was. I agree, it did not go well, but not through lack of legal justification. I am sure that Lowe had a lot of legal advice before doing this, and was told he was on a sound legal footing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan The Flames Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Its because they are northern. There is a direct corrolation between the severity of FL punishment and a clubs latitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Why do some people still believe that Lowe put the company into admin. You are all ****ing moron's, I always enjoy it when someone makes a grammatical error whilst calling other people morons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 I always enjoy it when someone makes a grammatical error whilst calling other people morons. The question mark you mean? Yeah, I was going to change that when I proof read it, but due to being on the Blackberry it is very hard to click and change parts that are in the middle of sentences. I do agree though, it does not look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
up and away Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Originally Posted by Dibden Purlieu Saint Why do some people still believe that Lowe put the company into admin. You are all ****ing moron's , I always enjoy it when someone makes a grammatical error whilst calling other people morons. Before this gets edited, thought it best to make a copy for posterity! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Who shall we blame for the mistimed admin ?? Not the man at the top, surely not ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusicMan Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Who shall we blame for the mistimed admin ?? Not the man at the top, surely not ???? Just the sort of luck Saints seem to get all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Because he probably would have had a plan to buy the club back on the cheap and have full control of the train set. Don't tell me you didn't believe he wouldn't at least try. We still haven't got to the bottom of Pinnacle yet have we? Thats some paranoia based conspiracy theory - jeez looks like LOwe has been elevated to some sort of cunning evil mastermind... cue hammer horror wicked laugh with loads of reverb... MY GUESS IS (and FFS that all ANYOF US CAN DO) is that its quite simple. another week and we would ahve been into ST renewal territory which would have seen revenue come into the club which would have meant stability well into the new season. The summer would have opened the transfer window as well as the end of several expensive contracts, thus bringing expenditure back in line with revenue. Lowe did not anticipate Barclays pulling the plug when they did - Barclays will have known that this would trigger administration -s so I am still confused why they did so given that we were 3 weeks away from a good cash injection. It may have been the falling revenues from falling gates based on the on the field performances, but even with say only 5000 ST sales it would have been enough to get the club to the point where we finally stopped losing money. Some argue that had Lowe kept Pearson.... its a fair point but impossible to predict with any certainty.... but the admin Timing was not down to teh boards choice - and if those who promised investment and spent accordingly in the previous season and tied us thsoe contracts share in the blame.... but hey, if there is a better conspiracy theory out there that slings mud, so much the better hey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 The question mark you mean? Yeah, I was going to change that when I proof read it, but due to being on the Blackberry it is very hard to click and change parts that are in the middle of sentences. I do agree though, it does not look good. The question mark as well. But the plural of moron is not moron's. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1054453/KEITH-WATERHOUSE-Apostrophes--AAAA-fights-back.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 The question mark as well. But the plural of moron is not moron's. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1054453/KEITH-WATERHOUSE-Apostrophes--AAAA-fights-back.html Ah, touche (damn, no e acute thing on the 'berry). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 If I understood it right, I think the timing was down to Barclays rather than Lowe. Barclays were aware of the implications of going into Admin AFTER the League cut off date I think you'll find that Barclays advised Lowe of what they were planning to do WITHIN the Leagues cut off date .......... for reasons best known to himself, Lowe "stalled" until it was too late Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Barclays were aware of the implications of going into Admin AFTER the League cut off date I think you'll find that Barclays advised Lowe of what they were planning to do WITHIN the Leagues cut off date .......... for reasons best known to himself, Lowe "stalled" until it was too late And you know that for sure, do you? I'm not a Lowe luvvie, I'm just questioning it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Almost immediately after the cut off point as well. What a pr*ck. That's being rude to *****s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Barclays were aware of the implications of going into Admin AFTER the League cut off date I think you'll find that Barclays advised Lowe of what they were planning to do WITHIN the Leagues cut off date .......... for reasons best known to himself, Lowe "stalled" until it was too late His ego told him that they wouldn't dare do it to a man of his standing ! He got a lot of things wrong, but this was surely ' la piece de resistance ' !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 His ego told him that they wouldn't dare do it to a man of his standing ! He got a lot of things wrong, but this was surely ' la piece de resistance ' !!! Do you know that for sure though? Is there proof that this discussion was had? Don't forget Lowe came out and castigated Barclays for the way they ran the final few months, and as far as we know Barclays haven't taken legal action, so what he said was probably true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Do you know that for sure though? Is there proof that this discussion was had? Don't forget Lowe came out and castigated Barclays for the way they ran the final few months, and as far as we know Barclays haven't taken legal action, so what he said was probably true. Of course I don't know for sure, but what I do know is that as CEO of SLH he should have had a sufficiently good relationship with his banker to realise what the position was at that time ! Barclays pulled the plug a few days after the league deadline for points deduction and I refuse to believe that the whole scenario was never discussed beforehand ! Either he was in denial, incompetent or incapable of working with the very people who controlled our destiny. Whichever way you look at it, he was the man at the top and the buck stopped there ! Given his character and previous track record I think that there is a very strong possibility that his ego forced him to think that he was invincible ! All IMHO, Best rgds, Euro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Jason Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 If had been up to lowe we wouldn't have gone into admin at all. He made many mistakes but I don't think this was one of them. EDIT: Because I don't think it was his call not becuase I don't think it was a huge b*lls up. F%^&ing wake up you plumb. Lowe was chairman of the company, his signature was on the cheques. Rupert over saw everything, what sort of buisness man is Lowe if He knew the club couldn't honour said cheques, still signed them knowing failure to clear would result in admin! Barclays didn't put us in admin, SFC PLC did, Lowe could of done the best for the club and taken admin 4 days earlier, no Lowe no -10 this season! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hectors house Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Not that I really care anymore but for the record we would be on -10 regardless of when we went into admin beacuse we finished in the bottom 3. The 10 points would only have been taken off last season if we had finished outside the bottom 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krissyboy31 Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Not that I really care anymore but for the record we would be on -10 regardless of when we went into admin beacuse we finished in the bottom 3. The 10 points would only have been taken off last season if we had finished outside the bottom 3. Not before the deadline date it wouldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Jason Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 I kind of agree. In my opinion Lowe wouldn't have pit I'd onto admin. His ego would never allow it. I reckon he clambered and flustered around for too long due to him wanting toblool a hero by "saving" the day. As usual putting his own wants before the clubs. All IMO of course Right, Lowe put this company into administration because he was the CEO which over saw 2 relegations. He also over saw a turnover of £70m down to £8m. If his 'ego' had relented, and we'd taken admin when it was obvious we we're fooked, we'd now be starting on a level playing field. lOWE WAS A DISASTER FROM START TO FINISH, thankfully it has and he is finished! COYR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hectors house Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 On second thoughts I stand corrected - my mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Jason Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Not that I really care anymore but for the record we would be on -10 regardless of when we went into admin beacuse we finished in the bottom 3. The 10 points would only have been taken off last season if we had finished outside the bottom 3. Just for a bit of light relief, please read the last bit of the article, funny how that doesn't apply to the mighty red 7 white!!! http://www.pcw.co.uk/accountancyage/news/2033806/football-league-adopts-administration-rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 Just for a bit of light relief, please read the last bit of the article, funny how that doesn't apply to the mighty red 7 white!!! http://www.pcw.co.uk/accountancyage/news/2033806/football-league-adopts-administration-rules St Jason gives Hector's House light relief shocker!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 If I understood it right, I think the timing was down to Barclays rather than Lowe. I firmly believe that Lowe is the real villain here. He knew how bad the situation was and could so easily have got us into admin before the cut off point. He knew that his time was up and said stuff you lot. You all wanted me out so you can have what you want. I am going but when I say not you. He still lives in a nice house and earns a nice living. But for the arrival of Mr Marcus Leibher we were cooked to a tea and the remains consigned to the dustbin. He has proven himself to be a nasty small minded vindictive and blinkered little boy. Worse still, one who thought that he was god. All in my honest opinion of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Jason Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 I firmly believe that Lowe is the real villain here. He knew how bad the situation was and could so easily have got us into admin before the cut off point. He knew that his time was up and said stuff you lot. You all wanted me out so you can have what you want. I am going but when I say not you. He still lives in a nice house and earns a nice living. But for the arrival of Mr Marcus Leibher we were cooked to a tea and the remains consigned to the dustbin. He has proven himself to be a nasty small minded vindictive and blinkered little boy. Worse still, one who thought that he was god. All in my honest opinion of course. Here fu£4ing Here, mooooooosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 I firmly believe that Lowe is the real villain here. He knew how bad the situation was and could so easily have got us into admin before the cut off point. He knew that his time was up and said stuff you lot. You all wanted me out so you can have what you want. I am going but when I say not you. He still lives in a nice house and earns a nice living. But for the arrival of Mr Marcus Leibher we were cooked to a tea and the remains consigned to the dustbin. He has proven himself to be a nasty small minded vindictive and blinkered little boy. Worse still, one who thought that he was god. All in my honest opinion of course. Well said, these are my thoughts exactly. A final two fingers up to all those who stood up to say they wanted him out the last time around. 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