SaintRobbie Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Serious question. No agenda this time, just interested in your views. I posted a similar idea back in the summer as it struck me that Lowe was a dead cert for failure then, given the certainty of a poor season ahead and his previous history. It made sense to me then that a scapegoat/fall guy needed to be put into place by the principal shareholders to take the blame for failure. Given Lowe's recent election result (95% of the vote to stay in), despite leading arguably the least successful plc in the leisure industry and the criticism already underway from fans, media and legends, seems rather strange to me. I wonder if those Lowe views as allies are not just using him? Perhaps thats why Mrs Lowe was also anti his appointment? Is Lowe being used as a fall guy by his 'friends'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Serious question. No agenda this time, just interested in your views. I posted a similar idea back in the summer as it struck me that Lowe was a dead cert for failure then, given the certainty of a poor season ahead and his previous history. It made sense to me then that a scapegoat/fall guy needed to be put into place by the principal shareholders to take the blame for failure. Given Lowe's recent election result (95% of the vote to stay in), despite leading arguably the least successful plc in the leisure industry and the criticism already underway from fans, media and legends, seems rather strange to me. I wonder if those Lowe views as allies are not just using him? Perhaps thats why Mrs Lowe was also anti his appointment? Is Lowe being used as a fall guy by his 'friends'? Yes the other shareholders wanted out of SFC, but didnt want to pay the £12.95 transaction charge to sell their shares at Barclays. They hit on this cunning idea of bringing back Rupert with the deliberate intention of getting him to bankrupt the club - thereby dispensing with the need to sell their shares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 3 January, 2009 Author Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Just to clarify...My assumption was that the Club was destined for a difficult season. Not that Lowe would guarantee bankrupting the club by bringing him back to do Dutch 'Total' Football with youth. They may have believed he could save the club. I just find that a little difficult to believe. If so, did they set him up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulwantsapint Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 It is very possible that Lowe has been set up as a scape goat. I think that he plays the role of figure head & also shield for the rest of board excellently as he gives us a single person to hate Lets allow Wilde to receive some hatred too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Just to clarify...My assumption was that the Club was destined for a difficult season. Not that Lowe would guarantee bankrupting the club by bringing him back to do Dutch 'Total' Football with youth. They may have believed he could save the club. I just find that a little difficult to believe. If so, did they set him up? I think Wilde realised that between them the new management team he had brought in and Crouch had practically bankrupted the club. Bringing back Lowe was a desperate last throw of the dice to try to avert financial meltdown. IMO of course it is a marriage of convenience, but Lowe isnt being set to fail by his group nor Wilde. The cat fighting at the moment (AGM) is to do with what happens in the future - ie either who gets the blame when things go pop or who gets to control the club when it recovers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 I think Wilde realised that between them the new management team he had brought in and Crouch had practically bankrupted the club. Methinks you may have missed the huge (and by far the biggest) part Lowe played in the demise of this Club's finances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Methinks you may have missed the huge (and by far the biggest) part Lowe played in the demise of this Club's finances. Try and stay on topic. The thread was about the motivation for bringing Lowe back, not who bears the most blame /credit for the situation prior to him coming back, thats been done to death endlessly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Try and stay on topic. The thread was about the motivation for bringing Lowe back, not who bears the most blame /credit for the situation prior to him coming back, thats been done to death endlessly. Try and be more balanced in your posts then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Try and be more balanced in your posts then. Which year would you like to start listing potted histories of the club in order to ensure every post is balanced. Perhaps we could start with 1898 and work backwards according to demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 I think Wilde realised that between them the new management team he had brought in and Crouch had practically bankrupted the club. Bringing back Lowe was a desperate last throw of the dice to try to avert financial meltdown. IMO of course it is a marriage of convenience, but Lowe isnt being set to fail by his group nor Wilde. The cat fighting at the moment (AGM) is to do with what happens in the future - ie either who gets the blame when things go pop or who gets to control the club when it recovers. It was Wilde's execs that screwed the club up, all Crouch did was take over after their mess. Crouch actually did a good job by keeping us up while also making some tough cost cutting descisions like loaning out Skacel and Rasiak. Pearson has proved a shrewd appointment and allow him to bring in loans like Perry and Wright saved the club from relegation and administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Which year would you like to start listing potted histories of the club in order to ensure every post is balanced. Perhaps we could start with 1898 and work backwards according to demand. Up to you, although I would have thought blaming Crouch and Wilde for "practically bankruoting the Club" and yet not mentioning any part Lowe played is somewhat rewriting/distorting history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 It was Wilde's execs that screwed the club up, all Crouch did was take over after their mess. Crouch actually did a good job by keeping us up while also made some tough cost cutting descisions like loaning out Skacel and Rasiak. Pearson has proved a shrewd appointment and allow him to bring in loans lik Perry and Wright saved the club from relegation and administration. I'm not primarily blaming Crouch, though arguably he should have done more to sort out the mess he inherited. Wilde's execs spent money in anticipation of investment which never materialised. Probably only Wilde knows the full story behind that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Up to you, although I would have thought blaming Crouch and Wilde for "practically bankruoting the Club" and yet not mentioning any part Lowe played is somewhat rewriting/distorting history. Have a look at the thread title. There are some clues there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 It is very possible that Lowe has been set up as a scape goat. I think that he plays the role of figure head & also shield for the rest of board excellently as he gives us a single person to hate Lets allow Wilde to receive some hatred too Long distance relationships never work out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 3 January, 2009 Author Share Posted 3 January, 2009 MLT summed up the blame game 5 mins ago on SSN. He was right - it was the fault of each of the boards. What intrigued me though was how he hinted that the mismanagement of funds is all a bit of a mystery. Think the shareholders may be being visited by Hampshire Police sometime to explain themselves? Perhaps its all linked?? Anyway. All I wanted to know was whether people thought Lowe had been stitched up by possibly the Askham's of the world... those shareholders who stay in the background but vote him in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Have a look at the thread title. There are some clues there. the thread title makes no mention of the part Lowe played in our demise, only whether he is being set up for a fall some time in the future. It was your post that glossed over Lowe's role in our demise, laying the blame at others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 the thread title makes no mention of the part Lowe played in our demise, only whether he is being set up for a fall some time in the future. It was your post that glossed over Lowe's role in our demise, laying the blame at others. Jesus, I'm not surprised Meridian felt they had to leave home to get away from you. Did you ask ask about management of the Great Western Railway every time someone wanted to claim a train ticket on expenses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delmary Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 It was Wilde's execs that screwed the club up, all Crouch did was take over after their mess. Crouch actually did a good job by keeping us up while also making some tough cost cutting descisions like loaning out Skacel and Rasiak. Pearson has proved a shrewd appointment and allow him to bring in loans like Perry and Wright saved the club from relegation and administration.They are all equally to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Jesus, I'm not surprised Meridian felt they had to leave home to get away from you. Did you ask ask about management of the Great Western Railway every time someone wanted to claim a train ticket on expenses? Nice riposte, now try and stay on topic or try not to gloss over Lowe's role in our demise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 I'm not primarily blaming Crouch, though arguably he should have done more to sort out the mess he inherited. Wilde's execs spent money in anticipation of investment which never materialised. Probably only Wilde knows the full story behind that. What else could Crouch have done? He took over in January, loaned out some high earners to save money and kept us up - you cannot argue that he did not achieve what was needed. You could be sure if Lowe had took over that January there is no way he would have sanctioned the loan of Wright, he would have saved a few quid on wages, put Poke in goal and we would have got relegated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 3 January, 2009 Author Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Chaps.... was Rupert set up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Lowe put us in the mess and Wildes execs compounded the mess. That said if you were to read Wildes multiple personality posts - when he was disguised as Saintmarc he paints himself as completely faultless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 What else could Crouch have done? He took over in January, loaned out some high earners to save money and kept us up - you cannot argue that he did not achieve what was needed. You could be sure if Lowe had took over that January there is no way he would have sanctioned the loan of Wright, he would have saved a few quid on wages, put Poke in goal and we would have got relegated. Fair enough. My point was based on the appalling financials at the year end. As he was Chairman for only three months of that, then sure Dulieu bears the greater weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW11_Saint Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Serious question. No agenda this time, just interested in your views. I posted a similar idea back in the summer as it struck me that Lowe was a dead cert for failure then, given the certainty of a poor season ahead and his previous history. It made sense to me then that a scapegoat/fall guy needed to be put into place by the principal shareholders to take the blame for failure. Given Lowe's recent election result (95% of the vote to stay in), despite leading arguably the least successful plc in the leisure industry and the criticism already underway from fans, media and legends, seems rather strange to me. I wonder if those Lowe views as allies are not just using him? Perhaps thats why Mrs Lowe was also anti his appointment? Is Lowe being used as a fall guy by his 'friends'? Lowe came back of his own volition to protect his investment. He wouldn't, likely couldn't, accept any other position than head honcho - his ego wouldn't allow anything else - and typically likes to surround himself with yes men and lackeys (and invertebrates like Wilde) so I think him being set-up as some sort of fall guy is highly unrealistic. Without going too far off topic, I'd also suggest that his wholesale changes to the coaching setup before the season only added to the "certainty of a poor season". *Please note the 95% of the vote does not count abstentions (Crouch etc.), so is a false view of his true mandate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Chaps.... was Rupert set up? Nah. Wilde spat his dummy out and betrayed us all out of spite against Crouch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Chaps.... was Rupert set up? Nope. I don't think the remaining shareholders would have the ability.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Chaps.... was Rupert set up? No, doesn't make any sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 3 January, 2009 Author Share Posted 3 January, 2009 No, doesn't make any sense. LOL does anything at this Club? I think he may have been set up. Possibly not deliberately but certainly Lowe provides the fall guy if the Dutch Plan fails... which it has. So how do we get rid of these silent ones after Lowe gets booted out very shortly? MLT even now says the lot must go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Serious question. No agenda this time, just interested in your views. I posted a similar idea back in the summer as it struck me that Lowe was a dead cert for failure then, given the certainty of a poor season ahead and his previous history. It made sense to me then that a scapegoat/fall guy needed to be put into place by the principal shareholders to take the blame for failure. Given Lowe's recent election result (95% of the vote to stay in), despite leading arguably the least successful plc in the leisure industry and the criticism already underway from fans, media and legends, seems rather strange to me. I wonder if those Lowe views as allies are not just using him? Perhaps thats why Mrs Lowe was also anti his appointment? Is Lowe being used as a fall guy by his 'friends'? Interesting point, forgetting the history for a moment, the club was in a mess and the coming season was looking horrific even before it started. So the idea of one person taking the brunt and hoping that it gave the rest of the club & playing staff time to sort out the mess is not a bad one. But in reality? No I don't think he was set up by the shareholders, and I think the possibility of his deliberately shouldering all the hatred and divisions to shield the club is one concept too far for me. But I think he probably knew coming back would be bad, just probably never realised HOW bad, both in terms of what he found when he came back in and how some of the decisions have worked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Interesting point, forgetting the history for a moment, the club was in a mess and the coming season was looking horrific even before it started. Such a short memory :shock: We avoided relegation, the club had a manager that most of the fans were behind, and a Chairman that wasn't quite so devisive. Things seemed to be looking up a bit for most of the fans before Wilde changed his mind.......again..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW11_Saint Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 I think he may have been set up. Possibly not deliberately but certainly Lowe provides the fall guy if the Dutch Plan fails... which it has. So how do we get rid of these silent ones after Lowe gets booted out very shortly? MLT even now says the lot must go! I am no fan of Lowe, and do think he must live or die by the success of otherwise of the Dutch experiment. But it does does beg the question - what on earth does Wilde do? He is after all the SFC Chairman, and you would expect therefore be responsible for team management decisions. Yet he is clearly not, and has never professed to be as far as I am aware (Lowe introducing JP etc. in the press conference as I remember). I do find it astounding that someone who presumably has a certain amount of business acumen, given the fortune he's amassed, can so blatantly play the part of lap-dog to Lowe. Strange indeed and hints a very signficant personality flaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint1977 Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 I am no fan of Lowe, and do think he must live or die by the success of otherwise of the Dutch experiment. But it does does beg the question - what on earth does Wilde do? He is after all the SFC Chairman, and you would expect therefore be responsible for team management decisions. Yet he is clearly not, and has never professed to be as far as I am aware (Lowe introducing JP etc. in the press conference as I remember). I do find it astounding that someone who presumably has a certain amount of business acumen, given the fortune he's amassed, can so blatantly play the part of lap-dog to Lowe. Strange indeed and hints a very signficant personality flaw. Couldn't agree more. Still, as Mike has a log-on here perhaps he'd like to climb off of Rupert's lap and explain? COYR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 I am no fan of Lowe, and do think he must live or die by the success of otherwise of the Dutch experiment. But it does does beg the question - what on earth does Wilde do? He is after all the SFC Chairman, and you would expect therefore be responsible for team management decisions. Yet he is clearly not, and has never professed to be as far as I am aware (Lowe introducing JP etc. in the press conference as I remember). I do find it astounding that someone who presumably has a certain amount of business acumen, given the fortune he's amassed, can so blatantly play the part of lap-dog to Lowe. Strange indeed and hints a very signficant personality flaw. IMHO Wilde's role as Chairman of the Football Club Board is purely a ceremonial/ambassadorial position with little or no power (in the short term anyway). With Lowe having two close allies on the PLC board, the PLC Chairmanship and the day to day job as CEO, for me there can be no coubt that he's running the show. I have heard that a couple of Lowe's group are having second thoughts about this arrangement and would be interested to hear Wilde's current views (his honest ones as opposed to the platitudes in the matchday programme). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Such a short memory :shock: We avoided relegation, the club had a manager that most of the fans were behind, and a Chairman that wasn't quite so devisive. Things seemed to be looking up a bit for most of the fans before Wilde changed his mind.......again..... Sorry will re-phrase if it helps The club was in a mess financially..... Was NOT commenting on history though, just that the minute he sat down at his desk, the club was in a mess.. Either of which I think covers it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSaint75 Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 The only reason I can see for Lowe to return is to sort out the mess financially (who caused it is irrelevant) and to possibly cover up any little scams he had going on before his departure where all the clubs cash disappeared too, he will then gladly go should he get a good offer for his shares IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowballs2 Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Try and stay on topic. The thread was about the motivation for bringing Lowe back, not who bears the most blame /credit for the situation prior to him coming back, thats been done to death endlessly. Are you now a seld appointed Mod? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenridge Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 .... and Crouch had practically bankrupted the club. ... Are you trying to selectively re-write history again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 I think Wilde realised that between them the new management team he had brought in and Crouch had practically bankrupted the club. Bringing back Lowe was a desperate last throw of the dice to try to avert financial meltdown. IMO of course it is a marriage of convenience, but Lowe isnt being set to fail by his group nor Wilde. The cat fighting at the moment (AGM) is to do with what happens in the future - ie either who gets the blame when things go pop or who gets to control the club when it recovers. Agree with everything except the Crouch accusation. But I do think Lowe needs to watch his back - I reckon Wilde could soon change sides or fall out with him again at the drop of a hat as bad results continue to come in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamesaint Posted 3 January, 2009 Share Posted 3 January, 2009 Agree with everything except the Crouch accusation. But I do think Lowe needs to watch his back - I reckon Wilde could soon change sides or fall out with him again at the drop of a hat as bad results continue to come in. I would like to think that you were right. But your scenario would require Wilde to grow a pair of bullucks.... & that isn't very likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 4 January, 2009 Author Share Posted 4 January, 2009 (edited) The only reason I can see for Lowe to return is to sort out the mess financially (who caused it is irrelevant) and to possibly cover up any little scams he had going on before his departure where all the clubs cash disappeared too, he will then gladly go should he get a good offer for his shares IMO I wonder. With MLTs hints yesterday on SSN... I wonder. I tell you why I also think (probably inadvertently) Lowe is being used by the other shareholders as a fall guy... why does everyone believe only Lowe can sort out the financial mess?????? Strange selection for me that. Very strange. To be honest once a bank is watching you like a hawk, the same limitations are on whoever is in charge. Personally I think whoever was put in as plc chairman would be doing the same job now that Lowe is. Why put in a man who was a cert to divide the fans on such a long-shot idea about kids playing Cloggy Football under a coach that doesnt know English football - let alone the CCC? And why did he and Wilde not accept the challenge from Crouch to match Crouch's £2million to remove alot of the problem? If it's because he hasnt got £2million - why not.... if he's such a wonderful businessman who understands money so well?! Sorry ... something stinks. I'd like to see the Police take a look at our accounting over the last 14 years or so of this plc. Edited 4 January, 2009 by SaintRobbie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 4 January, 2009 Share Posted 4 January, 2009 I wonder. With MLTs hints yesterday on SSN... I wonder. I tell you why I also think (probably inadvertently) Lowe is being used by the other shareholders as a fall guy... why does everyone believe only Lowe can sort out the financial mess?????? Strange selection for me that. Very strange. To be honest once a bank is watching you like a hawk, the same limitations are on whoever is in charge. Personally I think whoever was put in as plc chairman would be doing the same job now that Lowe is. Why put in a man who was a cert to divide the fans on such a long-shot idea about kids playing Cloggy Football under a coach that doesnt know English football - let alone the CCC? And why did he and Wilde not accept the challenge from Crouch to match Crouch's £2million to remove alot of the problem? If it's because he hasnt got £2million - why not.... if he's such a wonderful businessman who understands money so well?! Sorry ... something stinks. I'd like to see the Police take a look at our accounting over the last 14 years or so of this plc. Lowe (and others) may have been guilty of some poor footballing decisions and they may also be differences of opinions over salaries, dividend & share buy back policies over the years, but IMHO that is a world of difference to some of the stuff you think may have gone on. Lowe (and others) may be guilty of many things, but fraud, siphoning off funds, misuse of funds for personal gain (in the criminal sense) is definitely not one of them. Tree wrong up you're the barking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 4 January, 2009 Author Share Posted 4 January, 2009 (edited) Lowe (and others) may have been guilty of some poor footballing decisions and they may also be differences of opinions over salaries, dividend & share buy back policies over the years, but IMHO that is a world of difference to some of the stuff you think may have gone on. Lowe (and others) may be guilty of many things, but fraud, siphoning off funds, misuse of funds for personal gain (in the criminal sense) is definitely not one of them. Tree wrong up you're the barking. You are probably quite right, but not quite barking up the wrong tree. Let's examine the fallout from this consideration. I am sure that it is indeed the case that fraud etc would be disproved by an independent investigation and I personally would say that I do not suspect illegal dealings, but others will. However, an independent investigation would without doubt show that the boardroom over the last 14 years have been almost 'criminally' negligent in the way they have handled the transfer money, parachute payments et al. Most of that time was under Lowe's management... perhaps that's why he's appears almost panicked at the moment with his attempts to blame everyone else for the 18 month or so period of his absence...for everything!! Including Lawrie Mac?! How? I am sure, and really hope, an independent investigation would clear things up as being legal. But what it will show is that mismanagement of these finances was down to extremely inept boardroom members rather than financial swindling... perhaps that's not the Police's job. Strange that the one advantage of a plc is supposed to be that it is transparent financially... but we're all confused about where all the money has gone dont you think?? Independent inquiry needed? ... to be honest yes, if it shuts up the current clowns bickering (assuming we're stuck with them for much longer). If we're takenover... no. Time to move on and rebuild with optimism. Edited 4 January, 2009 by SaintRobbie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSaint75 Posted 4 January, 2009 Share Posted 4 January, 2009 Lowe (and others) may have been guilty of some poor footballing decisions and they may also be differences of opinions over salaries, dividend & share buy back policies over the years, but IMHO that is a world of difference to some of the stuff you think may have gone on. Lowe (and others) may be guilty of many things, but fraud, siphoning off funds, misuse of funds for personal gain (in the criminal sense) is definitely not one of them. Tree wrong up you're the barking. Lets hope your right.........but you may not be?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgiesaint Posted 4 January, 2009 Share Posted 4 January, 2009 You are probably quite right, but not quite barking up the wrong tree. Let's examine the fallout from this consideration. I am sure that it is indeed the case that fraud etc would be disproved by an independent investigation and I personally would say that I do not suspect illegal dealings, but others will. However, an independent investigation would without doubt show that the boardroom over the last 14 years have been almost 'criminally' negligent in the way they have handled the transfer money, parachute payments et al. Most of that time was under Lowe's management... perhaps that's why he's appears almost panicked at the moment with his attempts to blame everyone else for the 18 month or so period of his absence...for everything!! Including Lawrie Mac?! How? I am sure, and really hope, an independent investigation would clear things up as being legal. But what it will show is that mismanagement of these finances was down to extremely inept boardroom members rather than financial swindling... perhaps that's not the Police's job. Strange that the one advantage of a plc is supposed to be that it is transparent financially... but we're all confused about where all the money has gone dont you think?? Independent inquiry needed? ... to be honest yes, if it shuts up the current clowns bickering (assuming we're stuck with them for much longer). If we're takenover... no. Time to move on and rebuild with optimism. You're right - a police enquiry would not look into mis-management that was just inept - they are only interested in those who broke the law. However if a takeover happened then this would give the incoming party a chance to inspect the books properly - this potentially would give expose where the 'missing' funds have gone. It would also give a chance to verify that David Jones has acted in accordance with his position as Finance Director. Of course, you get the feeling that any sale from Lowe would require a confidentiality clause signed before the deal gets done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 4 January, 2009 Share Posted 4 January, 2009 You're right - a police enquiry would not look into mis-management that was just inept - they are only interested in those who broke the law. However if a takeover happened then this would give the incoming party a chance to inspect the books properly - this potentially would give expose where the 'missing' funds have gone. It would also give a chance to verify that David Jones has acted in accordance with his position as Finance Director. Of course, you get the feeling that any sale from Lowe would require a confidentiality clause signed before the deal gets done. I want RL gone as much as anyone else does. However, having looked at the latest accounts, I see that the auditors have passed the accounts. BDO Stoy Hayward are reputable auditors and it would be more than their job's worth to pass dodgy accounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgiesaint Posted 4 January, 2009 Share Posted 4 January, 2009 I want RL gone as much as anyone else does. However, having looked at the latest accounts, I see that the auditors have passed the accounts. BDO Stoy Hayward are reputable auditors and it would be more than their job's worth to pass dodgy accounts. Hadn't realised that had now happened BTF, I checked the OS this morning and couldn't see the audited accounts. Where are they showing as I would be interested in any comments that they make? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 4 January, 2009 Share Posted 4 January, 2009 Hadn't realised that had now happened BTF, I checked the OS this morning and couldn't see the audited accounts. Where are they showing as I would be interested in any comments that they make? Here's the link: http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/uploads/documents/nov_08/sfc_1227479896_Southampton_Leisure_Holdings_p.doc Last two pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 4 January, 2009 Share Posted 4 January, 2009 I think Lowe was chosen because hard decisions had to be made which would be unpopular to the fans. As he was unpupular anyway he was used to the abuse which the fans were likely to give to the chairman so he took the job. I dont think anyone else fancied sorting out the mess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Posted 4 January, 2009 Share Posted 4 January, 2009 IMHO Wilde's role as Chairman of the Football Club Board is purely a ceremonial/ambassadorial position with little or no power (in the short term anyway). With Lowe having two close allies on the PLC board, the PLC Chairmanship and the day to day job as CEO, for me there can be no coubt that he's running the show. I have heard that a couple of Lowe's group are having second thoughts about this arrangement and would be interested to hear Wilde's current views (his honest ones as opposed to the platitudes in the matchday programme). cant they all just f*ck off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Posted 4 January, 2009 Share Posted 4 January, 2009 You're right - a police enquiry would not look into mis-management that was just inept - they are only interested in those who broke the law. However if a takeover happened then this would give the incoming party a chance to inspect the books properly - this potentially would give expose where the 'missing' funds have gone. It would also give a chance to verify that David Jones has acted in accordance with his position as Finance Director. Of course, you get the feeling that any sale from Lowe would require a confidentiality clause signed before the deal gets done. Wilde got Ken Dulieu's company to do this - it was the whole point of him being Chairman - that's what his company do - forensic accounting, investigate fraud etc thing is they found nothing Lowe and Co took a lot of money out of SFC but it was all legal - high salaries for directors (exec and no-exec), large dividends for shareholders, lots of expenses and bonus payments for directors based upon financial performance, lucrative contracts for other companies owned by them (rebuilding the training ground anyone) you could argue that Hone, Hoos and Oldknow managed the club negligently - and against the shareholders wishes - but Wilde let them do this spending £7 million we didn't have, not sacking Burley, overpaying for and then overpaying palyers, not too mention their own over inflated salaries - but mainly running the club in the hope it would be bought rather than running it within its means 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