Negative Words about the Club

[slickmick]

and that you're smug double glazing salesman with no orders.

 

 

Take it your not to busy either. :smt081

[Gordon Mockles]

The said spending spree occurring under Judas Wilde and the Execs he appointed.

 

Yes, history denotes that a fact (although some on here struggle to interpret meanings…)

 

i.e.

Facts or assumptions or interpretations ?

 

I think the word I clearly used was “facts”. Assumptions” and “interpretations”, as you well know, have entirely different meanings!

[Mole]

Take it your not to busy either. :smt081

 

No not atm. I have two days left of work for 2008 then i'm leaving the country for warmer climes.

 

Enjoy the recession.

[wild-saint]

Can't believe apparently sensible people continue to write such crap. So it was preordained that we would be relegated in 2005, really that takes the biscuit. Unless you are Glenn Hoddle you cannot expect anyone to take such comments seriously. Your pov suggests that managers, player, the board had nothing to do with our relegation, it was just our turn. So when is it Everton's turn? When will Arsenal take their turn or Liverpool (at least Manure did take a turn in 1974 with us). Really don't see how it was our turn in 1974 either, was it preordained that the league would change the rules to relegate 3 teams from that season just so Saints could have their turn?

 

FFS start to see that Lowe and his mates were and still are the main reason not only for our relegation but our continuing financial woes. We have a poor businessman running a football club, with no ideas how to generate investment or additional revenue from existing revenue streams. but can only see the worn-out principle of cutting costs so beloved by many CEOs around the world. The truly successful and morally good businessmen are those who can be positive and see good things that can be done to turn around the business without necessarily getting rid of staff or ****ing off customers. The failures are those who see only the negative way forward of improving the bottom line, and Lowe has demonstrated again by his reaction to the article in the Echo that he is financially and morally bereft of good ideas.

 

Whilst I agree a top businessman would look for new and inivitive ways of creating new revenue streams they would also be realistic enough that a business has to be in a good financial state in order to survive in the short term. if that means reducing costs allowing thier business model to stack up in the short term then so be it. Medium term goals should be around increasing the revenue streams whilst managing overall costs.

 

In the case of the saints (short of investment) the short term goal of the incumbant management team is to make the business financially stable / viable. Without this goal there is potentially no business to work on in the medium term.

 

So IMO the steps currently being employed are credible sensible business decisions. Clearly most would like a change to the C level management team but my question is what would a new team d so differently without a larger cash investor backing them? IMO Not alot.

[Alain Perrin]

Can't believe apparently sensible people continue to write such crap. So it was preordained that we would be relegated in 2005, really that takes the biscuit. Unless you are Glenn Hoddle you cannot expect anyone to take such comments seriously. Your pov suggests that managers, player, the board had nothing to do with our relegation, it was just our turn. So when is it Everton's turn? When will Arsenal take their turn or Liverpool (at least Manure did take a turn in 1974 with us). Really don't see how it was our turn in 1974 either, was it preordained that the league would change the rules to relegate 3 teams from that season just so Saints could have their turn?

 

FFS start to see that Lowe and his mates were and still are the main reason not only for our relegation but our continuing financial woes. We have a poor businessman running a football club, with no ideas how to generate investment or additional revenue from existing revenue streams. but can only see the worn-out principle of cutting costs so beloved by many CEOs around the world. The truly successful and morally good businessmen are those who can be positive and see good things that can be done to turn around the business without necessarily getting rid of staff or ****ing off customers. The failures are those who see only the negative way forward of improving the bottom line, and Lowe has demonstrated again by his reaction to the article in the Echo that he is financially and morally bereft of good ideas.

 

Both sides on this increasingly tiresome debate are prone to hyperbole. Both your post and the John B post are in my opinion good examples of this. I consider myself to be a reasonable person, but I have opinions too, whether or not you consider them to be biased or blinkered is your decision. In my opinion....

 

Lowe was PARTIALLY responsible for relegation but there were other factors too (managerial disruption, bad luck, unmotivated players plus a host of others - some of which are resulting from Lowe, others not.). You can argue than if you are "hanging on in there" (as we did for so many years) then eventually your time will come, but that is a result of the other factors, rather than time itself.

 

I agree that good ideas can help save a business (free buses and corners), but you also need to make hard, unpopular decisions. Saints are feeling the brunt of these decisions now (player sales etc.). It is like when Gordon Ramsey cuts a menu back to basics, some customers are going to be disappointed that Patagonian Lamb Fricasse is no longer on the menu - others will see it as a response to allow a menu to exist at all.

 

In my opinion, the fact that we seek out one person to blame for our woes says more about society than it does about Lowe's ability as a businessman.

 

The problem with this and so many threads is that the anti-Lowe and pro-Lowe factions are so wounded they react by defending or attacking his decisions to the extreme. That doesn't help the debate, it just stokes the fires of resentment.

 

The article itself is harmless enough, he's saying we're still in do-do, the Man Utd time won't help enough. All true and nothing we didn't know (although some post did seem to suggest that we now wouldn't have to sell which I think is over egging it).

 

Eitherway it is really not worth getting so upset about.

[Thedelldays]

i think it would have been easier for some peoples blood pressure if we drew barrow away in the cup..

[Gordon Mockles]

So can someone please explain the logic behind the opinion that he is simply out to ruin us....?

 

Revenge! (and/or a distinct possibility to buy us on the cheap [if not through himself, through one of his insidious business colleagues] post administration…strangers things have happened!)

 

Let’s not forget, in recent years, the club has merely been run as a business playground for egotistical, petty men with no respect for the true supporters of SFC. The sport and spirit of the club are bottom of the agenda and have been swept under the carpets as a result!

[slickmick]

No not atm. I have two days left of work for 2008 then i'm leaving the country for warmer climes.

 

Enjoy the recession.

 

 

For Good ? [-o

Edited 2 December, 2008 by slickmick

[Guan 2.0]

Perhaps he's just addressing the dozens of posts on here that think the FA cup game receipts will stave off the sale of players. It wouldn't be the first time that points raised on here have been addressed by the club in the local media.

 

+1

 

It seems that addressing a fact of life in respect to our financial situation is seen by some on this forum for 'Aggh, I hate him I hate him, Slagging the club off, burn the witch' kneejerk hysteria. Every Bloody time.

[Pat from Poole]

If Crouch was still in charge, and Pearson still manager, I don't believe that crowds would have dipped below 20,000.

 

Cuts would still have had to be made, but with more matchday revenue perhaps not so savage.

 

And if an unknown manager is a contributory factor for our poor attendances then who do you blame for that?

 

 

I completely agree.

[Chez]

45% of revenue goes to Manure. Of course this game is not going to clear the £5m overdraft so Lowe is spot on. A reply would make a massive difference though.

[Viking Warrior]

......................

Edited 7 December, 2008 by Viking Warrior

[DaveyR]

i think it would have been easier for some peoples blood pressure if we drew barrow away in the cup..

 

That would just falsely raise hopes that we might beat someone in the cup; looking at our history in the cup (bar 2003) against lower league opposition it's very poor!!

[slickmick]

Should we all club together and by Stanley a leaving present.

 

I take it your off to Join Alpine in his cosy retreat Stanley.

 

Ideas for Present for him how about "A tour round Ftarron Park" The Movie :cool:

 

 

Thought it would be better to get something he hasn't got.

What about some blinker removers.

[Viking Warrior]

..................

Edited 7 December, 2008 by Viking Warrior

[mightysaints]

Lowe got us into this mess when he would not fund WGS.

[saintjay77]

If Crouch was still in charge, and Pearson still manager, I don't believe that crowds would have dipped below 20,000.

 

Cuts would still have had to be made, but with more matchday revenue perhaps not so savage.

 

And if an unknown manager is a contributory factor for our poor attendances then who do you blame for that?

 

Attendances have been declining year on year since we got relegated and the only way we could have hit 20,000 this season would have been to be challenging for the top 2 spots. the only way we hit it last year was the final push to stay in the league. If crouch had stayed and made the required cuts we would still be short of half a team and considering Pearson struggled with the team we had I wouldnt fancy having the job this season. We can only guess what could have been or what might have been though. I would have liked Pearson to get the job to see what he could do with a pre-season. Only thing I think would have been better would be the defence. Ability to score with the strikers available would still be out of the window so overall I would guess we would be on around the same amount of points.

 

Had Crouch still been here no doubt he would have made an agreement with the bank on the coming season and if he went to them saying we will get gates of over 20,000 each week then maybe they would have supported him. But if the gates dropped to under 14k he would be under more pressure than the current lot to get the revenue and the firesale would completly destroy us come january.

 

Ive not said that Rupes is not to blame for anything, its only Rupes himself that says that. Crouch got similar stick for bringing pearson in as he wasnt a big name.

 

The club seem to have gone this route with people that will utalize the system the club want and within the budget set. If things get better and we push for the top 2 spots will anyone come on and sya how right Rupes was for going in this direction?

[ottery st mary]

Until, Lowey, brings Woggy and Ethel the tea lady and oh! Yes, our corner flags back..No Surrender

[The Godfather]

This is one of the first things I've ever partly agreed with Lowe. It makes sense because alot people will assume we making milllions from this match and we're not. It all helps but if things don't improve in January interms of reducing the overdraft and the wage bill again ( returning loaness on high wages) then we've only one option but to sell players.

[alpine_saint]

It's clear as night follows day that the aim of Lowe's sudden outburst today was grooming the fans for a Janurary Car Boot Sale of players and to stomp on any hopes of a reprieve for any certain decent youngsters because of the cup draw.

 

He'd still flog them even if he suddenly were offered 20M in investment. Much less painful for him to wreck the team again in the name of financial prudence then allow his power base to be diluted.

[70's Mike]

45% of revenue goes to Manure. Of course this game is not going to clear the £5m overdraft so Lowe is spot on. A reply would make a massive difference though.

 

why do we have to clear the whole overdraft?

[Wopper]

If utd play us off the park the crowd will turn on Lowe bigtime.

[ALWAYS_SFC]

It's clear as night follows day that the aim of Lowe's sudden outburst today was grooming the fans for a Janurary Car Boot Sale of players and to stomp on any hopes of a reprieve for any certain decent youngsters because of the cup draw.

 

He'd still flog them even if he suddenly were offered 20M in investment. Much less painful for him to wreck the team again in the name of financial prudence then allow his power base to be diluted.

 

Spot on=D>

[John B]

Spot on=D>

 

Ridiculous I would have thought

[Mole]

Ridiculous I would have thought

 

Well the likes of you would.

[Sundance Beast]

Top post. Our John B is so far up Lowes arse he's lost the plot.

 

........and you stanley don't even have a plot to lose.

 

Surely, Lowe is just managing the overblown expectations of the minority of our fanbase who don't believe that the confines of their own domestic finances don't compute to a football club or for any other business for that matter. Debt finance is finite and I'd rather have Lowe's honest and realistic assessments than the false promises and overblown rhetoric of Crouch.

 

Tell it as it is and not what you think we'd like to here.

 

Interesting you quote Churchill, undoubtedly a great orater and certainly seized his opportunity in WWII but eitherside of that the man was deemed a failure and actually was bought back to save us after Chamerlain. Draw your own parallels.

[Weston Super Saint]

Perhaps he's just addressing the dozens of posts on here that think the FA cup game receipts will stave off the sale of players. It wouldn't be the first time that points raised on here have been addressed by the club in the local media.

 

Dozens of posts eh?

 

I'd have thought he'd have more to do than read the dozens of posts on here

[Sundance Beast]

It's clear as night follows day that the aim of Lowe's sudden outburst today was grooming the fans for a Janurary Car Boot Sale of players and to stomp on any hopes of a reprieve for any certain decent youngsters because of the cup draw.

 

He'd still flog them even if he suddenly were offered 20M in investment. Much less painful for him to wreck the team again in the name of financial prudence then allow his power base to be diluted.

 

Your first paragraph is probably very close to the truth and a pity Crouch wasn't quite as open last year when he said there would be no need to sell players as the finances are fine, or words to that effect. Of course, he didn't mention loaning out players at the 11th hour of the transfer window or that our finanaces were so healthy we didn't have to resort to using an in house elastoplast when the Scottish FA made the most bizarre decision in football history.

 

Your second paragraph, well what can I say Alpine, you're better than that and it is complete rubbish and conjecture, to be more pathetic than amusing.

Put yourself in Lowe's shoes and I don't think he has done that bad a job since May and given the opportunity apart from serial some serial idiots the rest of us wouldn't have done things much differently operating in the same confines as the current board. Of course, Stanley displays the money management skills of a 5 year old, given his first £1 for his weekly pocket money and telling everyone he is going to buy a Wii tomorrow.

[Sundance Beast]

Dozens of posts eh?

 

I'd have thought he'd have more to do than read the dozens of posts on here

 

He does, but I don't.

[Weston Super Saint]

He does, but I don't.

 

Do you send him the links?

[derry]

Do you really think i care about whether you, or anyone else agrees with me?

 

I know i'm right and when you know you are right about something you must stand by your convictions

 

"The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is."

 

Winston Churchill.

 

"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life."

 

Winston Churchill.

 

"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!"

 

Winston Churchill.

 

He ran bloody hard, away from the Boers.

[NickG]

And therin lies the problem. As a PLC we are constrained because the minute we start making money the likes of Lowe syphon it off.

 

and private companies don't take money out? PLC would want a club to be as succesful as a private owner. The only advantages for private ownership are the ease for takeover/investment talks and if the owner wants to throw money at the club.

Edited 2 December, 2008 by NickG
child like spelling

[NickG]

Do you really think i care about whether you, or anyone else agrees with me?

 

I know i'm right and when you know you are right about something you must stand by your convictions

 

"The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is."

 

Winston Churchill.

 

"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life."

 

Winston Churchill.

 

"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!"

 

Winston Churchill.

 

clearly not:)

[TopGun]

I do believe we have new top forum loon in the form of Stanley. Sundance Beast has been far too unobjectionable recently.

[70's Mike]

and private companies don't take money out? PLC would want a club to be as succesful as a private owner. The only advantages for private ownership are the ease for takeover/investment talks and if the owner wants to through money at the club.

 

Agreed but the issue with SLH is that we are only a PLC in name because it is run like a private company because of the large proportion of shares in a few peoples hands

[sadoldgit]

Which demonstrates what a liability and what a divisive figurehead Lowe is.

 

You have lost me here. If someone is damned if they do and damned if they don't, how is that their fault?

 

Be honest, what else could Lowe say. If you have a section of fans wetting themselves because they think the receipts from one game of football are going to change our financial situation overnight, isn't it the right thing to do to put this game into perspective?

 

No doubt if he had said nothing and players had been sold in January you would be slating him for not telling us we were still in the poo. That is not Lowe being divisive it is someone with a mega agenda twisting any situation to have a pop at someone.

 

 

No doubt now you will dig up a Churchillian quote to the effect of people who don't go to football games every week have no right to have an opinion now...

 

Lowe is running things right now whether you like it or not. If you chose to pick on everything he does that doesn't suite you that is your choice. To call someone divisive when it is you and people like you who are making the situation so is a bit rich.

 

You know who I am but will not reveal your identity to me, again your choice, but a bit cowardly wouldn't you say?

 

If you are who I think you are, you have been a Saints fan long enough to know that Saints fans, in fact all football fans, are divided over a multitude of things that go on at their football clubs.

 

If it is true that Lowe is actullay a divisive figure, doesn't that mean that he has supporters as well as detractors. If he has supporters that means there are people out there who think that he is doing things right does it not?

 

If he was such a bad thing for the club, surely there would be no "divisiveness" as everybody would be against him.

 

However, because you and others have decided amongst yourselves that you know best, you get to set the agenda and carry on this negative vibe which is doing nothing but harm to SFC.

 

What the club needs now is for everyone to get behind it. You seem to have a lot of time for Churchill therefore I am sure that you will remember that Churchill joined forces with Stalin, despite loathing Communism, just to defeat Hitler.

 

If someone were to suggest to you that you start going to matches again and getting behind the whole club, and by doing that it would help us out of this mess, somehow I don't think you would do that would you? I think you would much rather see us struggle so that you can aim more barbs at the bloke who happens to be running the show right now.

 

You have to ask yourself this question, why is it your hatred of one man prevents you from getting behind your club?

 

Lowe is not SFC, never has been, never will be. There are plenty of people who don't even give him a second thought when they go to football matches, and that is the way it should be.

 

It is all about the players on the pitch. If you have lost sight of that and your enjoyment of the game, then I feel very sorry for you. But I would also say that it has nothing to do with Lowe and more to do with your own prejudices and mindsets.

[Mole]

You have lost me here. If someone is damned if they do and damned if they don't, how is that their fault?

 

Be honest, what else could Lowe say. If you have a section of fans wetting themselves because they think the receipts from one game of football are going to change our financial situation overnight, isn't it the right thing to do to put this game into perspective?

 

No doubt if he had said nothing and players had been sold in January you would be slating him for not telling us we were still in the poo. That is not Lowe being divisive it is someone with a mega agenda twisting any situation to have a pop at someone.

 

 

No doubt now you will dig up a Churchillian quote to the effect of people who don't go to football games every week have no right to have an opinion now...

 

Lowe is running things right now whether you like it or not. If you chose to pick on everything he does that doesn't suite you that is your choice. To call someone divisive when it is you and people like you who are making the situation so is a bit rich.

 

You know who I am but will not reveal your identity to me, again your choice, but a bit cowardly wouldn't you say?

 

If you are who I think you are, you have been a Saints fan long enough to know that Saints fans, in fact all football fans, are divided over a multitude of things that go on at their football clubs.

 

If it is true that Lowe is actullay a divisive figure, doesn't that mean that he has supporters as well as detractors. If he has supporters that means there are people out there who think that he is doing things right does it not?

 

If he was such a bad thing for the club, surely there would be no "divisiveness" as everybody would be against him.

 

However, because you and others have decided amongst yourselves that you know best, you get to set the agenda and carry on this negative vibe which is doing nothing but harm to SFC.

 

What the club needs now is for everyone to get behind it. You seem to have a lot of time for Churchill therefore I am sure that you will remember that Churchill joined forces with Stalin, despite loathing Communism, just to defeat Hitler.

 

If someone were to suggest to you that you start going to matches again and getting behind the whole club, and by doing that it would help us out of this mess, somehow I don't think you would do that would you? I think you would much rather see us struggle so that you can aim more barbs at the bloke who happens to be running the show right now.

 

You have to ask yourself this question, why is it your hatred of one man prevents you from getting behind your club?

 

Lowe is not SFC, never has been, never will be. There are plenty of people who don't even give him a second thought when they go to football matches, and that is the way it should be.

 

It is all about the players on the pitch. If you have lost sight of that and your enjoyment of the game, then I feel very sorry for you. But I would also say that it has nothing to do with Lowe and more to do with your own prejudices and mindsets.

 

It's about principles. I loathe Lowe for his take take take attitude towards the club and his sneering regard for supporters. While he's at the club the club is a souless relic of it's former self and i cannot and will not spend any of my money to help his greedy aspirations.

[NickG]

he would love the importance you put in him, and the fact that you view him as bigger than the club.

 

To most of us the club is bigger and that is why we go -to watch the pitch not obsess about someone sat in the stand

[saintwarwick]

Ridiculous I would have thought

 

Spot on =D>

[saintwarwick]

"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!"

 

Winston Churchill.

 

You should of thought about that quote before you ran away from your threatened danger(Lowe) by not attending SMS.

[sadoldgit]

It's about principles. I loathe Lowe for his take take take attitude towards the club and his sneering regard for supporters. While he's at the club the club is a souless relic of it's former self and i cannot and will not spend any of my money to help his greedy aspirations.

 

That is your right of course. For me, I cannot see how anyone who professes to love the club would let one man affect that. I guess we shall just have to agree to disgree.

 

I really don't get your point about "take take". What does he take exactly other than flak? If things had been so awful for all his time here maybe I could understand where you were coming from, but it simply has not been.

 

If he had no regard for the supporters why would he even bother? He and his Boards have tried various avenues to provide success for this club. Some worked, some did not. If he was simply out to make money out of the club why would he have employed people like Strachan, Burley , Hoddle and Redknapp - none of them cheap options?

 

Okay, so he is not Mr Nice Guy. We were very lucky in having someone like Ted Bates at the helm for so long, but times have changed. Most clubs have hard nosed businessmen at the helm, and for a reason.

 

If Lowe was not here we would need someone very much like him. We went down the avenue of "fans" running the club and it made things even worse.

 

If you truly care about this club you must learn to put your personal feelings aside and get behind the team.

 

You look down on me because I only go to a few games a season. But at least I am consistant and will go to a few games a season no matter what. For someone who used to go regularly and now does not just because they don't like the bloke who runs things, I am sorry but I just don't get it.

 

I have never once given a second thought to the CEO, Board or Chairman whilst at a match. Perhaps there is something wrong with me Stanley but I just do not understand where you are coming from.

[Delmary]

Nice to read another boring repetitive anti/pro Lowe thread. Keep up the good work fanatics:smt084