egg Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 (edited) ... Edited 14 May, 2013 by egg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Are you Peter Ridsdale in disguise? I don't much like the uncertainty raised by this issue at this time, I don't suppose many of us do, but if Cortese does go then I'll get over it - after the sudden assassination of our last manager this is a lesson that ironically he has helped install in me. Lets face it, this grand scheme of his to transform this middle sized regional club into a top 5 force in the Premier League was always insanely overambitious anyway. So if the Don does get the boot then as long as the Liebherr's can find a capable new Chairman who is happy to steer the club onto a more realistic and sustainable pathway then that might not be a bad thing in the long run. Our model should be to emulate the success of clubs such as Swansea - not to be another Leeds or Pompey *shudders* In any case this matter needs to be concluded ASAP. That sir, is the voice of reason. Completely agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Indeed and 'the Trustees' would/should be carrying out his wishes. (Hence the suggestion that the goal of the Trust (on behalf of Markus) might not be to maximise return on investment. I guess we'll never know what Markus sought to get out of buying Saints. Was it philanthropy or simply a money making exercise? Or maybe it was a bit of both.) The problem is that trustees have an obligation to look after, and safely invest, trust money. Pumping money into a football club is not an investment. Whilst Markus wish may have been one thing, the obligations of trustees is very different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 That sir, is the voice of reason. Completely agree. Disagree. Cortese is the driving force behind the club. We have a chance to do something decent for a change. Letting him leave is an admission we lack ambition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 The problem is that trustees have an obligation to look after, and safely invest, trust money. Pumping money into a football club is not an investment. Whilst Markus wish may have been one thing, the obligations of trustees is very different. I know little about how trusts work but I would have thought that the whole point of a 'trust' is to protect the wishes of the benefactor, in this case Markus. Isn't a trust fund simply an extension of someone's will? If I had, say, £300m that I wanted to leave 'in trust' to Southampton Football Club, are you saying that I can't have any say in how MY money is spent? As I say, I've no idea how trusts work but find it strange the wishes of the 'Trustor' aren't taken into account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St_Tel49 Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 So, if Cortese gets a good reception at the Stoke game then it is likely to persuade the Liebherrs to keep him on and/or persuade Cortese himself that he is wanted by the fans.... Seems simple enough... Didn't work for Adkins! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
100%Red&White Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 The problem is that trustees have an obligation to look after, and safely invest, trust money. Pumping money into a football club is not an investment. Whilst Markus wish may have been one thing, the obligations of trustees is very different. If we believe everything we've heard then the Markus Liebherr investment wasn't just about the football club but also the eventual development of the riverside area. Maybe this is the overiding interest now for the Liebherrs while Cortese has the football club as his priority? I'd keep the 'Don', he's certainly not had trouble getting things done up to now, and just hope it's smoothed out with the family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Indeed and 'the Trustees' would/should be carrying out his wishes. (Hence the suggestion that the goal of the Trust (on behalf of Markus) might not be to maximise return on investment. I guess we'll never know what Markus sought to get out of buying Saints. Was it philanthropy or simply a money making exercise? Or maybe it was a bit of both.) I doubt his wishes in his will were "keep my hobby going, come what may, forever". It may have been "keep my hobby going until a particular target/level is reached". Like, established in the Premier League. Like, now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 I doubt his wishes in his will were "keep my hobby going, come what may, forever". It may have been "keep my hobby going until a particular target/level is reached". Like, established in the Premier League. Like, now. Yep, could be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 I know little about how trusts work but I would have thought that the whole point of a 'trust' is to protect the wishes of the benefactor, in this case Markus. Isn't a trust fund simply an extension of someone's will? If I had, say, £300m that I wanted to leave 'in trust' to Southampton Football Club, are you saying that I can't have any say in how MY money is spent? As I say, I've no idea how trusts work but find it strange the wishes of the 'Trustor' aren't taken into account. Trusts contain assets which can work in varying ways. Ordinarily, the assets within them become the property of other people, the beneficiaries. They, or other beneficiaries, could also receive an income from the trust assets. The trusts are managed by trustees. Their obligation, always, is to the beneficiaries. Common sense says that no trustee would want to pump money into a football club forever more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 People don't invest in football clubs to make money....so you can understand why they would potentially want to sell up when they can make a fortune on what they paid. Whats the benefit to the Liebherrs to pump millions more in this summer and next summer, for a potential European place. It's pretty unlikely we're going to get in the Champions League and does it really make us worth much more us playing in the Europa? From a business decision you could see why they would want to sell up, however from a very selfish point of view, I want them to carry on bankrolling us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Trusts contain assets which can work in varying ways. Ordinarily, the assets within them become the property of other people, the beneficiaries. They, or other beneficiaries, could also receive an income from the trust assets. The trusts are managed by trustees. Their obligation, always, is to the beneficiaries. Common sense says that no trustee would want to pump money into a football club forever more. Sorry to labour the point but isn't Southampton Football Club the main (only?) beneficiary of the trust fund set up in Markus's name? Perhaps it makes a difference if the trust fund is set up by the person before they die or whether its set up by the trustees of his overall estate after he dies? As I said at the start of this thread, I 'm not sure where I'm going with this but I can't help feeling this 'dispute' has only arisen because either the Liebherrs or Cortese now want to deviate from Markus's wishes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 People don't invest in football clubs to make money....so you can understand why they would potentially want to sell up when they can make a fortune on what they paid. Whats the benefit to the Liebherrs to pump millions more in this summer and next summer, for a potential European place. It's pretty unlikely we're going to get in the Champions League and does it really make us worth much more us playing in the Europa? From a business decision you could see why they would want to sell up, however from a very selfish point of view, I want them to carry on bankrolling us The sources have said they aren't looking to sell. It's an issue with cortese that's the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Sounds from the reports like some of the Liebherr heirs think they could run the club better than Cortese. It doesnt seem like it is money related specifically from any of the reports, its about control and there arent many Chairman that have 100% control of PL clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Sorry to labour the point but isn't Southampton Football Club the main (only?) beneficiary of the trust fund set up in Markus's name? Perhaps it makes a difference if the trust fund is set up by the person before they die or whether its set up by the trustees of his overall estate after he dies? As I said at the start of this thread, I 'm not sure where I'm going with this but I can't help feeling this 'dispute' has only arisen because either the Liebherrs or Cortese now want to deviate from Markus's wishes. Could be an issue of deviation from a plan, or just as likely it's interpretation of what has been previously agreed/planned. Whatever the original agreement was, I can't imagine it would have said 'continue bank-rolling SFC for ever and ever'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgeweahscousin Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 My reaction..... http://wp.me/p1mFFL-yF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 So many ITKs on this forum and what's so amusing so many are poking each others eyes out . I haven't got a clue whats going on . But one thing I do know is the cortesse keeps his own council and would keep his cards close to his chest . Too much speculation by the normal posters is amusing . When I believe none of them have a clue . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Sorry to labour the point but isn't Southampton Football Club the main (only?) beneficiary of the trust fund set up in Markus's name? Perhaps it makes a difference if the trust fund is set up by the person before they die or whether its set up by the trustees of his overall estate after he dies? As I said at the start of this thread, I 'm not sure where I'm going with this but I can't help feeling this 'dispute' has only arisen because either the Liebherrs or Cortese now want to deviate from Markus's wishes. I have no idea of the trust arrangements. The club may he hived off from the other assets, or part of a pot. My gut feel is that the trustees are concerned, or are being advised,that throwing money at the club is not a sound or proper use of trust monies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 My reaction..... http://wp.me/p1mFFL-yF Excellent blog, as per usual from you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 It's contract renewal time and he is doing what players do and use the press to force someone's arm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skintsaint Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 It's contract renewal time and he is doing what players do and use the press to force someone's arm I think thats what it is also looking between the lines. I've never heard of the type of contract he has at the moment allowing him to walk and them allowed to get rid of him after 3 years...that standard practice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 So many ITKs on this forum and what's so amusing so many are poking each others eyes out . I haven't got a clue whats going on . But one thing I do know is the cortesse keeps his own council and would keep his cards close to his chest . Too much speculation by the normal posters is amusing . When I believe none of them have a clue . Only 1 or 2 people have claimed to actually know anything, the rest are just discussing whats going on. To be fair, this thread has got to 13 pages, and there hasn't been any squabbling yet! Lets hope it continues that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olallana Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 I think thats what it is also looking between the lines. I've never heard of the type of contract he has at the moment allowing him to walk and them allowed to get rid of him after 3 years...that standard practice? And the only journos really trying to make it sound big is the ones that broke the story....not that any journo ever would have their own interest in mind..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 My reaction..... http://wp.me/p1mFFL-yF Have Saints fans reaction to this really been "grief"? Bit strong that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Under Weststand Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 I voted keep NC, better the devil you know. It's disappointing having this uncertainty once again, as we seemed to be in great position to consolidate & move forward. Which we still are, but some may have to lower expectations to a more sensible level. There is no reason we can't evolve and become a solid top ten team, occasional euro jaunt & hopefully some good cup runs. Seems we have a difference of opinions on the way forward here. Sounds as though the trustee's maybe want some control/garantee's over any money spent. While NC wants carte Blanche. To me that indicates there is money to spend, just a difference of opinion on how it is used. Or they are asking NC to actual start to implement Saints living within our means, which has always been his & Markus stated goal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Depressed of Shirley Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 I know little about how trusts work but I would have thought that the whole point of a 'trust' is to protect the wishes of the benefactor, in this case Markus. Isn't a trust fund simply an extension of someone's will? If I had, say, £300m that I wanted to leave 'in trust' to Southampton Football Club, are you saying that I can't have any say in how MY money is spent? As I say, I've no idea how trusts work but find it strange the wishes of the 'Trustor' aren't taken into account. In English law it is the duty of the Trustees to act in the interests of the beneficiaries, and to invest the trust funds accordingly. Once the assets are in trust, they are owned by the Trustees, not the original settlor of the trust. I doubt that a trust based on Swiss law is any different to the above. However, without knowing exactly what the trust document says we don't know. It may be that the beneficiaries of the trust include Southampton Football Club, or maybe it doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 My reaction..... http://wp.me/p1mFFL-yF Nice article but you might want to change the Cortese/Liebherr takeover year from 2010 to 2009 (and if I was being really pedantic it's 'fazed' not 'phased') Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Norty.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warsash saint Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 People don't invest in football clubs to make money Seriously? Why the influx of foreign owners then ? To make money out of the Premiership riches! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toomer Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 I don't like the man at all, but I would rather he stayed for the stability of the club, but from what I was told around the turn of the year he was/is looking to move on at the end of next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 In English law it is the duty of the Trustees to act in the interests of the beneficiaries, and to invest the trust funds accordingly. Once the assets are in trust, they are owned by the Trustees, not the original settlor of the trust. I doubt that a trust based on Swiss law is any different to the above. However, without knowing exactly what the trust document says we don't know. It may be that the beneficiaries of the trust include Southampton Football Club, or maybe it doesn't. Cheers, makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 lol @ merovingian. Bless! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Norty.. Since when was posting public domain information "norty"...? The mods set it up as a public poll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 My reaction..... http://wp.me/p1mFFL-yF Yep, agree with Alpine above. As always a good summation of events. Can't for the life of me understand people that want him out. Surely his predecessors demonstrate what a step up NC is. AC Milan were sniffing around him when we were L1. But obviously the wombles on here no more than the football people, as always. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Oh look! Guided Missile voted for Cortese to go. What a surprise that is. Especially after his pompous lectures about loyalty too. What an example to set his son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suomi Saint Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 I usually dislike men of NC's profile - vertically challenged, smug, a control-freak, foreign - but I cannot ignore his fantastic achievements at Saints; therefore I voted YES. The alternative would have been bumbling around in the Championship with the likes of Phil Brown at the helm. Perma-tanned cheesy smiles, back-slapping, the old mates network - and failure. I can't imagine that NC has leaked this news himself - it's not his style. If he did then he is taking a bit of a gamble. I don't believe the dispute centres on the way he runs the club or the way he treated Nigel, Benali, MLT, or even the spoons; hard-nosed German business people wouldn't give a hoot about such things. My personal opinion, for what it's worth, is that our owners don't want to spend what is required this summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirleysfc Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Bazza wants him to stay? Now I'm confused!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
verlaine1979 Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Largely unrelated as I absolutely want him to stay, but I do object to the grovelling insistence of calling him 'Mr. Cortese' whenever some posters write about him. Unless of course this heralds a wider return of good manners and we start talking about having Messrs Lambert and Rodriguez up front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avenue Saint Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 The single most important figure to Southampton Football Club: Nicola Cortese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 The single most important figure to Southampton Football Club: Nicola Cortese. Yes, and the most important figure in SFC history since MLT. Sorry, thats not sycophancy, its a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Lol nice to see one of our pet skates voting for NC to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Saint Garret beg to disagree its more than one or two who are squabling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Seriously? Why the influx of foreign owners then ? To make money out of the Premiership riches! There is much easier ways of making money than investing in a football club. Huge risk and likely to not be good return. Rich people buy football clubs because they don't want a hobby and its a good toy for them. I would like to think we were a bit more to Markus than that but it's an awful way of investing money. How much money has Abramovic got out of his Chelsea investment and the QPR owners? and the Man City owners? Blackburn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintalan Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Yes, and the most important figure in SFC history since MLT. Sorry, thats not sycophancy, its a fact. Don't think it needs a T at the end! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Don't panic, the Liebhhr family aren't going to sell. Just want a new person running the club. The club is in safe hands. Lets be honest, at times he's been a pr disaster. Fully expecting him to leave in next 2 weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Don't panic, the Liebhhr family aren't going to sell. Just want a new person running the club. The club is in safe hands. Lets be honest, at times he's been a pr disaster. Fully expecting him to leave in next 2 weeks. And what if that person wants his own manager in. Think we should cash in on player worth big money in order to be more prudent.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 And what if that person wants his own manager in. Think we should cash in on player worth big money in order to be more prudent.? To be fair, with our current cost base, we don't need to cash in on anyone, especially with an extra c.£20m in broadcasting revenue next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 In English law it is the duty of the Trustees to act in the interests of the beneficiaries, and to invest the trust funds accordingly. Once the assets are in trust, they are owned by the Trustees, not the original settlor of the trust. But does English law state that "the interests of the beneficiaries" are limited to maximum profit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 14 May, 2013 Share Posted 14 May, 2013 Close call for me, but I voted no, purely because if it comes down to having the Liebherrs' money or a new CEO I'd go with a new CEO. If it's just a matter of renegotiating Cortese's deal with a bit more Family involvement, I have no problem with him staying on - especially if they decide to rein in his more megalomaniacal tendencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts