The League Paper - a verdict.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Worth getting this as there is 100% non Premiership news and transfer speculation involving the likes of Southampton. I bought today's edition and found some interesting reading about potential transfer targets, most of which have been picked up elsewhere on this forum. The write up of the Huddersfield game was also interesting. The Echo (Adam Leitch) gave Thomas the best mark for an outfield player (6) on Saturday's performance while TLP gave him the lowest mark (3).

 

How can two reporters differ so much? Just goes to show you can't trust what you read. I think Adam Leitch got it wrong incidentally.

 

Pardew's cooments in the TLP were concerning too - he said " I'm aware we need to bring in one or two new players to bolster the squad here, but to be honest I don't know whether that is possible".

 

I assume we are having trouble attracting players reluctant to drop down to our level?

 

Anyhow when all said and done - you learn a lot from this paper and it is a refreshing read compared to the national media's obsession with the Prem and the big 4.

[eurosaint]

Where can you buy it ??

[unionhotel]

Being "off-shore" and oop north I have constantly been frustrated at the lack of Saints news (particularly when the coverage over here mainly concerns Merseyside and Manchester teams) and to be quite honest it's a real p155er to have to confront my workmates in the 'brew-hut' because of the lack of coverage on Super Saints. I'll definately give it a go!!

[swannymere]

Where can you buy it ??

 

If you speak to your Newsagent they'll be able to order it in.

[CLOTH EARS]

Its sister paper for the non league is a good read too.

[eurosaint]

If you speak to your Newsagent they'll be able to order it in.

 

I will try that but will probably have to use my limited knowledge of Hindi !

[westofshannonsaint]

it is a pity that their website isn't better

 

http://www.theleaguepaper.com/

[Wilko]

it is a pity that their website isn't better

 

http://www.theleaguepaper.com/

 

If they put the reports there, you wouldn't buy the paper, would you?

[Pancake]

Great read. Ive got it for the last 2 weeks now (managed to find a local source) and I do enjoy it.

 

One small point to FF, its not 100% non Premiership - there is a round up near the back, but its only 1/2 page IIRC.

[westofshannonsaint]

If they put the reports there, you wouldn't buy the paper, would you?

 

I've never seen the paper on sale in Ireland unfortunately and I don't think it would massively effect sales of the paper if their site was updated during the week.

[Colinjb]

They have it my local Newsagents/Offie, only 5 doors down. Result! I shall enjoy reading this tonight over a nice cup of green te...... er, Stella, yeah, Stella.

[Pancake]

Anyone read the letter in this weeks from an orient fan moaning about Saints walking away from their debt and cheating the system?

[benjii]

Anyone read the letter in this weeks from an orient fan moaning about Saints walking away from their debt and cheating the system?

 

Really?

 

How odd.

 

We are the archetypal example of a useful application of the points penalty which looks as it may very well stop us making the play-offs this season.

[Pancake]

The majority of non-Saints fans out there still think that we only paid off a small percentage of our debts when we came out of Admin, and therefore ripped off other companies and the HMRC etc.

[Window Cleaner]

The majority of non-Saints fans out there still think that we only paid off a small percentage of our debts when we came out of Admin, and therefore ripped off other companies and the HMRC etc.

 

Didn't we ??

 

I've never seen a blow by blow account of the affair, never got the shareholders circular either.

As far as I know Markus bought the club out of administration and the administrator sorted out the creditors of SLH. I don't for one minute think the club acquitted all of it's debts.But as few really know what happened who could really say.I really really doubt that SLH paid all it's debts.

[Saints foreva]

Were our debt's paid in full?

 

I remember BBC South Today reporting that the deal was £30m to wipe the debt clear. Not sure if I heard it correctly though.

[Pancake]

Didn't we ??

 

I've never seen a blow by blow account of the affair, never got the shareholders circular either.

As far as I know Markus bought the club out of administration and the administrator sorted out the creditors. I don't for one minute think the club acquitted all of it's debts.But as few really know what happened who could really say.

 

Im just going by what NC said in the fans forum, and I see no reason for him to tell porkies so publicly when anyone of the companies that we owed money to could come out and declare him a liar.

[benjii]

The majority of non-Saints fans out there still think that we only paid off a small percentage of our debts when we came out of Admin, and therefore ripped off other companies and the HMRC etc.

 

Whether it did or didn't, the creditors agreed to accept a certain amount. A deal was reached.

 

We tried to sort our costs out which cost us relegation in the first place - we didn't try to deny our financial troubles like some do.

 

We got a points penalty which has IMO, probably cost us promotion this season.

 

So that's two years of punishment for what was ultimately a very small default on an overdraft facility.

 

No one personally benefitted from the admin. It wasn't done in order to pull a fast one. It wasn't initiated by unscrupulous directors. It didn't leave other clubs in the doo-doo. It didn't cheat the public purse. It was done because the laws of the country provide the process to companies in financial trouble becuase they recognise that a recovery process is better than winding-up, where possible.

 

I wonder if Leyton Oreint have an overdraft? I wonder what would happen if their bank withdrew it immediately?

[Window Cleaner]

Im just going by what NC said in the fans forum, and I see no reason for him to tell porkies so publicly when anyone of the companies that we owed money to could come out and declare him a liar.

 

No NC said the club was debt free now but that doesn't mean they paid up everything that was owed. SLH owed the creditors not the club. ML627 (or whatever it is) bought the Stadium and the Club from the administrators of SLH PLC, it was rumoured that they paid about 15 million (but it could have been less) With the player sales (which probably went to bolster the assets of the PLC) SLH PLC probably acquitted about half of it's debt.The whole affair is shrouded in mystery.

[benjii]

No NC said the club was debt free now but that doesn't mean they paid up everything that was owed. SLH owed the creditors not the club. ML627 (or whatever it is) bought the Stadium and the Club from the administrators of SLH PLC, it was rumoured that they paid about 15 million (but it could have been less) With the player sales (which probably went to bolster the assets of the PLC) SLH PLC probably acquitted about half of it's debt.The whole affair is shrouded in mystery.

 

I think that's a pretty poor choice of phrases. Implies to me that there's something not quite right.

 

I agree that the answers are not public at the moment but Fry has to file a report at some point soon I believe.

[jam]

Im just going by what NC said in the fans forum, and I see no reason for him to tell porkies so publicly when anyone of the companies that we owed money to could come out and declare him a liar.

 

He said we were debt-free. That doesn't mean that the debts were paid off in full - only settled.

[Window Cleaner]

I think that's a pretty poor choice of phrases. Implies to me that there's something not quite right.

 

I agree that the answers are not public at the moment but Fry has to file a report at some point soon I believe.

 

 

i think he had to do it a long time ago, I just supposed my postal forwarding system had failed and I didn't get my copy. Unimportant anyway as there was nothing for the shareholders.

[stevegrant]

I'm led to believe the full settlement was somewhere in the region of £14m.

 

HMRC were owed about £100k, which I presume was settled in full. An offer was made to Aviva on the mortgage (likely to be about £12.5m or so), leaving Barclays with the rest.

 

Aviva were always very supportive of the club and we never had a problem with them. Barclays, on the other hand, can go **** themselves.

[Pancake]

Sorry, I based it on this Guardian article, which was pointed out as being wrong on here before.

 

For three of them – Aldershot, Maidstone and, later, Scarborough – the histories of the original clubs did truly end, in liquidation before subsequently being re-established. For others, administration meant they could be bought by new owners, who paid a fraction of the debts that were owed – except at Southampton, where last year Markus Liebherr paid Saints' debts in full. Since 2002, when ITV Digital's collapse helped push 10 clubs over the edge, an estimated £200m due to creditors has been left unpaid, including sums owed to the police, local *councils, hospitals, universities and other public bodies, a Yellow Pages-worth of small businesses and, most unforgivably, St John Ambulance.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2010/feb/10/portsmouth-cardiff-hmrc-winding-up

[Tac-tics]

I buy it week in week out. £1.50, brilliant coverage of Saints, always.

[Window Cleaner]

Sorry, I based it on this Guardian article, which was pointed out as being wrong on here before.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2010/feb/10/portsmouth-cardiff-hmrc-winding-up

 

 

 

Well he certainly didn't pay me or any other shareholder as far as I know. I think we were classed as creditors.

[SFKA South Woodford]

Whether it did or didn't, the creditors agreed to accept a certain amount. A deal was reached.

 

We tried to sort our costs out which cost us relegation in the first place - we didn't try to deny our financial troubles like some do.

 

We got a points penalty which has IMO, probably cost us promotion this season.

 

So that's two years of punishment for what was ultimately a very small default on an overdraft facility.

 

No one personally benefitted from the admin. It wasn't done in order to pull a fast one. It wasn't initiated by unscrupulous directors. It didn't leave other clubs in the doo-doo. It didn't cheat the public purse. It was done because the laws of the country provide the process to companies in financial trouble becuase they recognise that a recovery process is better than winding-up, where possible.

 

I wonder if Leyton Oreint have an overdraft? I wonder what would happen if their bank withdrew it immediately?

 

Totally agree with Benji here, from the information that was around at the time, administration came about purely from the actions of Barclays.

 

HMRC was not owed money until the club entered administration, and then were paid in full out of the monies generated from the transfers, which made the club a much more attractive acquisition.

 

Likewise Rupert was wise enough to agree that the stadium mortgage was paid each year as a guaranteed lump sum from season ticket sales, which meant that the club were not in arrears on the mortgage. The only difficulty being that the club were unable to sell season tickets for this year whilst in admin, so we would of defaulted on this years payment.

 

So Barclays can take sole credit for shafting our club and Rupert, even though he had already done what they had asked and significantly reduced the overdraft. But for their actions the club could probably have survived for at least another season possibly longer with the money generated from player sales and season ticket purchases.

 

But hey i'm not complaining about the outcome, Markus and Nicola will do for me.

 

Although I am a little concerned about his comment in that latest interview in 'The Times' about saving money up for rainy days when we get back to the Premier League, I just hope that it's not done at the expense of us having a competitive team.

[Barry the Badger]

Really?

 

How odd.

 

We are the archetypal example of a useful application of the points penalty which looks as it may very well stop us making the play-offs this season.

 

Nonetheless, it could have been a lot lot worse.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

Well he certainly didn't pay me or any other shareholder as far as I know. I think we were classed as creditors.

 

Shareholders aren't classed as creditors, they are (former) owners.

[Window Cleaner]

Shareholders aren't classed as creditors, they are (former) owners.

 

Right

[up and away]

I'm led to believe the full settlement was somewhere in the region of £14m.

 

HMRC were owed about £100k, which I presume was settled in full. An offer was made to Aviva on the mortgage (likely to be about £12.5m or so), leaving Barclays with the rest.

 

Aviva were always very supportive of the club and we never had a problem with them. Barclays, on the other hand, can go **** themselves.

 

I thought the creditors got something like 40p in the pound. Normally all the creditors get the same rate, but I am not so sure on this one because of the stadium. Barclays had secured and non secured loans so would get paid in full for the secured loans. I cannot understand why Aviva would accept less when they are under no obligation, but that could easily be a separate deal with the remaining creditors paid in full? Either way, all our debts were cleared (not paid) with Liebherr owing nothing. We did in effect cheat in getting rid of our debts, but that is what the 10 point deduction is all about. We commited the crime, made partial financial restitution, done our bird and are now the only club in this league who are truly debt free.

[Frank's cousin]

I thought the creditors got something like 40p in the pound. Normally all the creditors get the same rate, but I am not so sure on this one because of the stadium. Barclays had secured and non secured loans so would get paid in full for the secured loans. I cannot understand why Aviva would accept less when they are under no obligation, but that could easily be a separate deal with the remaining creditors paid in full? Either way, all our debts were cleared (not paid) with Liebherr owing nothing. We did in effect cheat in getting rid of our debts, but that is what the 10 point deduction is all about. We commited the crime, made partial financial restitution, done our bird and are now the only club in this league who are truly debt free.

 

Whatever we blame Lowe for one thing he did VERY right was ensure that HMRC was always paid - we have seen what can happen if you dont with our neighbours. Given that Aviva were supportive, and we were servicing the mortgage, it was really down to Barclays and the pressure they put on us which was effecting cash flow. Isuspect that Aviva were quite happy with 40-50p in teh pound given the state of the financial markets and loan defaults that were everywhere at the time - dont forget that in they had a reasonable interest payment over the length of their loan so would have factored this in when agreeing the CVA.

 

And that is the main issue - we DID get a CVA negotiated by the administrator, which in effect set the price for the club. Cheating the system? NO

 

We followed all the rules, and agreed the CVAs and have been punished with a points deduction... had we not been lucky and found a buyer we may well have been wound up.... but here is the main argument why I feel we can hold some moral high ground. We tookout these loans when we were in the prem NOT on short term fixes for players to try and win something or maintain prem status etc, but on the stadium which was badly needed...unlike pompey who went for glory .... The only time we were perhaps NOT over did it was that championship season where we blew 7mil to try and get promoted - that was exactly the type of thing teh rules are there to discourage so we could say we are guilty there.

 

The thing is it was only ecver reported that saints were 30 mil in debt... and there is a difference at least morally between taking a mortage on a new stadium when in the prem, and going for broke on players to try and win things with money you dont have like Leeds or more recently pompey... and that is what is often not reported.

[Window Cleaner]

.... The only time we were perhaps NOT over did it was that championship season where we blew 7mil to try and get promoted - that was exactly the type of thing teh rules are there to discourage so we could say we are guilty there.

 

The thing is it was only ecver reported that saints were 30 mil in debt... and there is a difference at least morally between taking a mortage on a new stadium when in the prem, and going for broke on players to try and win things with money you dont have like Leeds or more recently pompey... and that is what is often not reported.

 

 

But even then we sold players for vastly more than that sum at the inter-season after our play-off bid. Baird and Bale covered that sum and there were other sales as well. Those 7 million were not the cause of our demise. The real reason was the ridiculous contracts offered by Burley, refused by the execs and sanctioned by the non-execs. But then as a Runnymede attendee you'd already know that. Burley put us in the crapper,aided and abetted by Crouch,Wiseman et al.