The missing £2m investment from Mike Wilde

[Mole]

At the start of the season, and as part of Mike Wildes PR camapign, he agreed with the Daily Echo to take part in an "Ask The Chairman" exercise.

 

One of the questions was:

 

Q: I would like to know where the £2m you promised to invest into the club is?

 

Stuart Chadler

 

And here is Mike Wildes reply:

 

A: It is correct that in early 2006 I discussed with the Board the possibility of making an interest free loan to Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC.

 

This loan was offered subject to two conditions.

 

Firstly, that in the event of a subsequent Rights Issue this money would become repayable making it available for the purchase of new shares in the Company, and secondly, that the funds should be ring fenced and used only for squad strengthening in the event of the Club failing to secure promotion to the Premiership at the end of the 2006/7 season.

 

Certain members of the Board rejected these conditions and shortly afterwards I resigned my position as Chairman of Southampton Football Club and as a Director of Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC.

 

Despite this loan offer, my position has always been that we need to find a comprehensive funding solution that guarantees the club’s long-term stability and security.

 

Unfortunately, I believe that the piecemeal investment of the kind proposed at that time, would not in any way have helped the club to achieve this objective.

 

So why isn't Wilde honouring his commitment now he's part of a "friendly" board? Surely there would be no objection now.

[benjii]

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=3869

 

It's an interesting question isn't it?

[Snowballs2]

At the start of the season, and as part of Mike Wildes PR camapign, he agreed with the Daily Echo to take part in an "Ask The Chairman" exercise.

 

One of the questions was:

 

Q: I would like to know where the £2m you promised to invest into the club is?

 

Stuart Chadler

 

And here is Mike Wildes reply:

 

A: It is correct that in early 2006 I discussed with the Board the possibility of making an interest free loan to Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC.

 

This loan was offered subject to two conditions.

 

Firstly, that in the event of a subsequent Rights Issue this money would become repayable making it available for the purchase of new shares in the Company, and secondly, that the funds should be ring fenced and used only for squad strengthening in the event of the Club failing to secure promotion to the Premiership at the end of the 2006/7 season.

 

Certain members of the Board rejected these conditions and shortly afterwards I resigned my position as Chairman of Southampton Football Club and as a Director of Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC.

 

Despite this loan offer, my position has always been that we need to find a comprehensive funding solution that guarantees the club’s long-term stability and security.

 

Unfortunately, I believe that the piecemeal investment of the kind proposed at that time, would not in any way have helped the club to achieve this objective.

 

So why isn't Wilde honouring his commitment now he's part of a "friendly" board? Surely there would be no objection now.

 

Probably because his businesses are not doing any better than SLH and he needs the money to keep them going

[Tamesaint]

At the start of the season, and as part of Mike Wildes PR camapign, he agreed with the Daily Echo to take part in an "Ask The Chairman" exercise.

 

One of the questions was:

 

Q: I would like to know where the £2m you promised to invest into the club is?

 

Stuart Chadler

 

And here is Mike Wildes reply:

 

A: It is correct that in early 2006 I discussed with the Board the possibility of making an interest free loan to Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC.

 

This loan was offered subject to two conditions.

 

Firstly, that in the event of a subsequent Rights Issue this money would become repayable making it available for the purchase of new shares in the Company, and secondly, that the funds should be ring fenced and used only for squad strengthening in the event of the Club failing to secure promotion to the Premiership at the end of the 2006/7 season.

 

Certain members of the Board rejected these conditions and shortly afterwards I resigned my position as Chairman of Southampton Football Club and as a Director of Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC.

 

Despite this loan offer, my position has always been that we need to find a comprehensive funding solution that guarantees the club’s long-term stability and security.

 

Unfortunately, I believe that the piecemeal investment of the kind proposed at that time, would not in any way have helped the club to achieve this objective.

 

So why isn't Wilde honouring his commitment now he's part of a "friendly" board? Surely there would be no objection now.

 

 

 

That is a very good question . We are in dire need of the money that he previously offered and I cannot see anybody objecting.

 

Mike Wilde ohas posted on here before under his own name. Perhaps he would like to do so again and answer this question ....

[Tamesaint]

That is a very good question . We are in dire need of the money that he previously offered and I cannot see anybody objecting.

 

Mike Wilde has posted on here before under his own name. Perhaps he would like to do so again and answer this question ....

 

A day later and we haven't heard. Come on Mike. You like to post on here. Why not answer this question?

[Window Cleaner]

Probably because his businesses are not doing any better than SLH and he needs the money to keep them going

 

Correct, he's already as good as lost £2 million,

There would be no security for a such loan so he's not going to chuck another 2 million in good money after what has already gone down the pan is he.

 

Anyway see plenty of posts here saying

 

"I'm not going to give them £24 whilst those "**** are here,he's probably saying "I'm not going to waste another £2 million whilst those **** don't turn up"

 

I'm not defending anybody or taking sides(before anyone starts)

The board and the "fans" deserve each other.

 

Bad board=Fickle fans=Bad board=°