"Southampton dodge administration (for now)..."

[trousers]

Southampton dodge administration (for now) but dark clouds hover over football

 

Posted By: Sam Green at Mar 26, 2009 at 21:38:54 [General]

Great to see that the conspiracy theories did not become reality when Thursday's 5pm deadline passed without Southampton opting to go into administration in order to get the 10-point penalty out of the way before next season.

 

Under Football League rules, any clubs who go into administration between now and end of the season and get relegated, will have their 10-point deduction applied at the start of next term. If they finish above the relegation line, 10 points will be deducted immediately and they may well go down.

 

The rule was brought in to prevent the type of scams pulled by Leeds, who went into administration and accepted their 10-point deduction after realising they were doomed to demotion, thus starting the new season with a clean slate.

Then there was Boston, who made a move of such shameless audacity that it would cause a banker to blush - they went into a Company Voluntary Agreement at half-time on the final day of the season as they were losing at Wrexham and knew the drop was inevitable.

 

It had been suggested that Southampton, perhaps under pressure from their creditors or instruction from their bankers, might throw in the towel on this season, take the points hit, and start next season in a better financial position and on a level playing field.

 

It can only be good news that they will be fighting for their survival on the field of sport, not in boardrooms or courts.

Not that you will find many Saints fans jumping for joy at the moment. Many believe the club cannot progress under the present ownership and that administration at some point, plus relegation this season - and maybe even next - are inevitable.

 

But the reality is that they are just two points below the dreaded dotted line, with a game in hand and more than a month of the season to play.

And their striker, David McGoldrick, displayed a lovely show of confidence in the face of adversity this week, declaring that Southampton were "in the driving seat". Such youthful exuberance could prove crucial if the battered St Mary's bandwagon is not going to career off into oblivion.

And Southampton are not the only club who should be shuddering. Far from it. League chairman Lord Mawhinney has warned that the effects of the recession are not yet being felt by clubs, because their current commercial deals were negotiated in the good times.

 

Meanwhile, Wigan chairman Dave Whelan has predicted that a Premier League club will go under.

So at least Southampton are not alone. And maybe they can take some comfort from the financial difficulties, although more modest, that are bubbling under at Portsmouth.

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/samgreen/blog/2009/03/26/southampton_dodge_administration_for_now_but_dark_clouds_hover_over_football

 

(Thanks to BGF for spotting this one)

[SaintRobbie]

The effects of recession are not the problem with Saints - that comes from mismanagement, the effect of recent Club policy and subsequent results, association of Lowe with the club disuading investment and a remarkable series of payments over the years to major shareholders (from expenses to dividends).

 

Recession Lord Mawhinney has nothing to do with the clowns we have had since the plc was set up running, influencing and taking from this club.

[trousers]

Here's a wacky theory...

 

Perhaps, somewhat perversely, the 'credit crunch' has worked in SLH's favour?

 

[Trousers enters 'thinking out loud' mode]

 

Perhaps the likes of Barclays would have been more aggressive in calling in our debts in a more buoyant market but now there's a pressure on Banks (from the Government etc) to help keep companies on the brink afloat so that they (the banks) can be seen to be helping in repairing the foundations of the economy rather than undermining recovery?

 

Of course, the above theorem (got the spelling right this time BTF! ) would only hold water if SLH's financial plight is more down to mis-management and/or 'on the field' bad luck than the credit crunch per se.

 

So, here's raising a glass to Fred the Shred & co for saving SLH. In theory.

Edited 27 March, 2009 by trousers

[Weston Super Saint]

Maybe they're hoping that while we may not escape the drop, someone else - above us - might declare administration and then take the ten point hit, thus relegating them and saving us :smt102

 

That way we avoid the drop without having to play very well....

[CB Fry]

The effects of recession are not the problem with Saints - that comes from mismanagement, the effect of recent Club policy and subsequent results, association of Lowe with the club disuading investment and a remarkable series of payments over the years to major shareholders (from expenses to dividends).

 

Recession Lord Mawhinney has nothing to do with the clowns we have had since the plc was set up running, influencing and taking from this club.

 

 

What a load of drivel. You're off your head if you really think "expenses and dividends" are the one of the key sources of our problems.

 

You do understand how much professional footballers earn, don't you?

 

Andy Oldknow's company car allowance is the kind of money even the likes of BWP could lose down the back of the sofa.

[trousers]

the kind of money even the likes of BWP could lose down the back of the sofa.

 

So many witty retorts available to that one but, alas, too many lawyers

[Weston Saint]

I am afraid St Robbie is so bias, blinkered, uninformed and naive that his posts, I am sure meant in good faith, cannot be taken serious.

 

And Trousers, if you really knew the pressure Barclays are putting on SLH at present you would not have expounded your lighthearted theory.

 

We may have figeratively jumped out of the frying pan of admininstation threat yesterday but the fire may not be far away. Let's hope we "Southampton Football Club" can pull though without fatal third degree burns.

[trousers]

I am afraid St Robbie is so bias, blinkered, uninformed and naive that his posts, I am sure meant in good faith, cannot be taken serious.

 

And Trousers, if you really knew the pressure Barclays are putting on SLH at present you would not have expounded your lighthearted theory.

 

 

Therein lies my problem....I know nothing, hence the daft theories. Am happy to be enlightened though.....

Edited 27 March, 2009 by trousers

[John Smith]

I haven't commented on this for a while, as I didn't want to curse it, but I did feel as though we wouldn't go into admin before the end of the season and for many reasons. The main thought that I had was after the January sales that we all feared, didn't go as badly as the financial reports suggested, ie, we would have to sell to keep creditors happy. And, on top of not selling, we also recalled Saga and started to play Euell and Skacel more regularly.

 

I wonder, have the board at SLH convinced the bank that IF we stay up, we can continue paying the debts, as we'll have extra in the coffers from the TV deal next season AND that if we are relegated, they'll lose substantial amounts of money through our administration. In which case, the bank may have given us just enough rope to play the game but also to hang ourselves with IF we are relegated.

 

With still several games to play and such a small margin again, I feel, dare I say it, 'optimistic' that we can stay up. The kick up the a*se that Wotte dished out to the Reserves, shows me that he wants everyone at the club to be 'up for it' if called upon and that the slightest drop would possibly cause our relegation AND put us in administration.

 

A risky game if this is the case, but we will only know if it was a worthy risk on the last day of the season. If my feelings are correct, albeit more technical or financially controlled, is this a show of 'risk' from Lowe that many on here feel he should have taken with WGS after the Cup Final? Is this Lowe pushing the boat out one last time, a last throw of the dice to keep us afloat?

 

If my guesswork is correct and it is a sh*t or bust hand we are playing, fair play to Rupert, even if it is perceived that he is doing it to save his own skin and income. Survival is a must, and I think the end of this season could be as exciting as one of our famous escapes of the past! A nail biting ride to the end of the season ahead with many more unlikely scenario's to play out yet, I'm sure! Injuries, suspensions, rumors of take overs, plus aliens landing on SMS pitch and prevent a certain goal! Well, the soap opera we've seen of late, NOTHING would surprise me.

 

COYR, you can do it!

[Junior Mullet]

Here's a wacky theory...

 

Perhaps, somewhat perversely, the 'credit crunch' has worked in SLH's favour?

 

[Trousers enters 'thinking out loud' mode]

 

Perhaps the likes of Barclays would have been more aggressive in calling in our debts in a more buoyant market but now there's a pressure on Banks (from the Government etc) to help keep companies on the brink afloat so that they (the banks) can be seen to be helping in repairing the foundations of the economy rather than undermining recovery?

 

Of course, the above theorem (got the spelling right this time BTF! ) would only hold water if SLH's financial plight is more down to mis-management and/or 'on the field' bad luck than the credit crunch per se.

 

So, here's raising a glass to Fred the Shred & co for saving SLH. In theory.

 

Nice theory but that's not the case. Barclays of all of the banks have been very heavy handed since September last year - increasing business bank overdraft interest rates, calling in overdrafts, raising rates etc as they seek to avoid having to take a goverment handout.

 

More likely theory is that their security (the stadium) really is next to worthless without a football club playing in it. How much do you really think they would realise if they took the stadium and sold it with it's limited planning permission? Peanuts.

 

Barclays I am sure have approached this on a sensible basis and are looking at the long term vision of Lowe which is based on youth. Remember a lot of senior contracts are up at the end of this year and our wage bill will be reduced significantly. No doubt this would have been built in to the original business plan that Lowe and Wilde laid before Barclays at the beginning of the year ie. wages currently high but will be reduced over the next two years in which time we should make a profit on players bought/sold. The one thing both parties may have underestimated however is the effect the changes this year added with recession have had on gate receipts.

 

So to sum up, I would say that Barclays have little choice but to play the long term game whilst our borrowings from them remain high.

[saintjay77]

The effects of recession are not the problem with Saints - that comes from mismanagement, the effect of recent Club policy and subsequent results, association of Lowe with the club disuading investment and a remarkable series of payments over the years to major shareholders (from expenses to dividends).

 

Recession Lord Mawhinney has nothing to do with the clowns we have had since the plc was set up running, influencing and taking from this club.

 

So you read that and saw what you wanted to?

 

Lord whats his face said that the recession has not yet effected football clubs as there deals had been signed in the good times. So your right that our current problems are not caused by the recession. But no-one was saying they were.

 

The recession will compound our problems and could well help finish us off but cant be blamed for our downfall. There is a very long list of reasons that contributed to our downfall and yours are coming from the long list of ITK's and rumours as usual.

 

No-one wants to invest without getting something back so I doubt Rupes disuaded many people coming to give cash for nothing.

I also doubt Rupes agreed LM's expence account either. And what of the orange one that Wilde brougt?

 

How will things suddenly be so much better should Rupes be gone?

[trousers]

Barclays I am sure have approached this on a sensible basis and are looking at the long term vision of Lowe which is based on youth. Remember a lot of senior contracts are up at the end of this year and our wage bill will be reduced significantly.

 

This is probably a thought for a separate thread but given we will inevitably have to cut our cloth even thinner for next season, is there an ECONOMIC case for us playing in Division 1 next season where such an inexperienced team is more likely to win games than in the CCC which MAY attract more crowds than uus languishing at the foot of the CCC for yet another season?

 

I know people will come back with "how can a true fan advocate relegation" but that's not what I want in my heart. But my head is thinking that we stand more chance of having a 'buoyant' season in Division 1 which may give us a better long term springboard to recovery?

 

I just think we'd be better off being in a league that matches the level of cloth cutting.

 

Would we get bigger crowds at the top of League 1 than at the bottom of the CCC?

 

Just looking at it logically rather than emotionally.

[saintjay77]

What a load of drivel. You're off your head if you really think "expenses and dividends" are the one of the key sources of our problems.

 

You do understand how much professional footballers earn, don't you?

 

Andy Oldknow's company car allowance is the kind of money even the likes of BWP could lose down the back of the sofa.

 

Thing is, the expence accounts that many have moaned about were not given the green light by Lowe and his lot but by those that ousted him.

 

And as for divedends, They only get paid out when we do well as a company. It gets on my tits a bit that money in the club is leaving the club but thats the way the set up is and we have to put up with it. I doubt there are many investors in football clubs that havnt done it to get something out although not many actually come out on top.

[saintjay77]

I am afraid St Robbie is so bias, blinkered, uninformed and naive that his posts, I am sure meant in good faith, cannot be taken serious.

 

And Trousers, if you really knew the pressure Barclays are putting on SLH at present you would not have expounded your lighthearted theory.

 

We may have figeratively jumped out of the frying pan of admininstation threat yesterday but the fire may not be far away. Let's hope we "Southampton Football Club" can pull though without fatal third degree burns.

 

IMO I would rather us go out fighting than throwing in the towel.

 

I expect if we dont beat the drop then administration will surly follow and next season will be a bigger fight than this but 10 points down next season is not that far adrift and I think with the right team and set up a play off place should not be too great an ambition.

 

Remains to be seen if we would boe able to have that right team and set up but I dont think its beyond our capabilities

[SaintRobbie]

What a load of drivel. You're off your head if you really think "expenses and dividends" are the one of the key sources of our problems.

 

You do understand how much professional footballers earn, don't you?

 

Andy Oldknow's company car allowance is the kind of money even the likes of BWP could lose down the back of the sofa.

 

Read the whole CB, that is just a part. You dont mysteriously mismanage 27 years of first flight money away on just wages - especially for the low grade/mediocre ones we have been investing in since Lowe materialised on the scene.

[SaintRobbie]

So you read that and saw what you wanted to?

 

Lord whats his face said that the recession has not yet effected football clubs as there deals had been signed in the good times. So your right that our current problems are not caused by the recession. But no-one was saying they were.

 

The recession will compound our problems and could well help finish us off but cant be blamed for our downfall. There is a very long list of reasons that contributed to our downfall and yours are coming from the long list of ITK's and rumours as usual.

 

No-one wants to invest without getting something back so I doubt Rupes disuaded many people coming to give cash for nothing.

I also doubt Rupes agreed LM's expence account either. And what of the orange one that Wilde brougt?

 

How will things suddenly be so much better should Rupes be gone?

 

Agree with all that - just making the point that after 27 years of top flight football it has been a mystery as to how our finances have been so poorly managed in the last 12 years or so. Which mirrors MLTs statement on SSN 2 months ago. Thats the point. And I do not believe that being a plc has assisted in any way whatsoever in reinvestment in the club - partly through dividends in the profitable years, mostly through incompetence of the plc boardmembers.

 

One thing is sure - after 27 years of top flight football somehow we are now pennyless. That comes over time - yes compounded by recession perhaps but not if the club is winning and well run.

 

Sorry I stand by my key point - we have been managed by fools and a foolish system of running a football club and elite sports organisation for which we are now suffering the consequences.

 

It is not all Crouch's fault. Mismanagement of this club began when the decision to move to become a plc was made. And the resulting league positions thereafter is the only evidence required.

[SaintRobbie]

I am afraid St Robbie is so bias, blinkered, uninformed and naive that his posts, I am sure meant in good faith, cannot be taken serious.

 

And Trousers, if you really knew the pressure Barclays are putting on SLH at present you would not have expounded your lighthearted theory.

 

We may have figeratively jumped out of the frying pan of admininstation threat yesterday but the fire may not be far away. Let's hope we "Southampton Football Club" can pull though without fatal third degree burns.

 

Rubbish Weston absolute rubbish.

 

Firstly SFC doesnt exist except in a badge and a strip and in our hearts. We are Southampton Leisure Holdings plc. That is the issue being discussed - it is the plc that is near bankruptcy and has been continually mismanaged. So don't give me that rubbish - I always have examined Saints holistically. Blinkered? Maybe - but based on careful study of the situation at this club for many years now. I am clever enough to see big picture rights and wrongs.

 

So dont try and belittle my opinion. I am far from niave Weston, far from niave.

 

The simple point I am making is that since the plc has been in being we have gradually been eroded in terms of success and financially. The minor addition financially of the sickener of watching dividends being paid that could be invested into our club for success and players is on a par with watching bankers receive millions in dividends for creating the credit crunch... small in percentage terms, but significant in principle.

 

The WHOLE thus adds up to incompetent boardroom management, none of whom have everything committed to Saints but a vast array of business interests that mean they will live out their lives well whilst Saints continue to slide. The WHOLE picture involves bad decision-making, greed, self-interest and is why we need to remove this system of running the club (as per Sheffield Utd), sell it and move on AS SOUTHAMPTON FC again.

 

It (the plc) will never be successful unless the right people run it - we have never had the right people running it. Thats why I agree with Steve Grant - we need to remove the WHOLE of those involved in the incompetenvce that has led to this position.

Edited 27 March, 2009 by SaintRobbie

[Bossman]

But the reality is that they are just two points below the dreaded dotted line, with a game in hand and more than a month of the season to play.

 

QUOTE]

 

ummmm no it isn't, we're 3 points below the dotted line.

[sidthesquid]

Agree with all that - just making the point that after 27 years of top flight football it has been a mystery as to how our finances have been so poorly managed in the last 12 years or so. Which mirrors MLTs statement on SSN 2 months ago. Thats the point. And I do not believe that being a plc has assisted in any way whatsoever in reinvestment in the club - partly through dividends in the profitable years, mostly through incompetence of the plc boardmembers.

 

One thing is sure - after 27 years of top flight football somehow we are now pennyless. That comes over time - yes compounded by recession perhaps but not if the club is winning and well run.

 

Sorry I stand by my key point - we have been managed by fools and a foolish system of running a football club and elite sports organisation for which we are now suffering the consequences.

 

It is not all Crouch's fault. Mismanagement of this club began when the decision to move to become a plc was made. And the resulting league positions thereafter is the only evidence required.

 

Show me a club anywhere in this country that has money in the bank. Football clubs are not there to make money & they never were

[rallyboy]

don't underestimate the damage that can be done to finances by big dividends and director's expenses.

The one year I did study the figures, that amount was huge and unjustifiable.

 

 

Is there anyone out there who has studied the accounts over the last few years and knows what sort of amount has gone out via the boardroom?

[St Paul]

What people don't seem to be able to get their head round is the fact that Lowe will do what's best for Lowe.He does not care when the points will be deducted or the impact on the future of the Club. My opinion is when he feels the games up, the games up.He'll enter admin regardless of whether it's April, May, before the deadline or preseason.No one can seriously believe he will want to get involved or be allowed to get involved (by public opinion/wife) after taking us into admin, so unlike Bates, who played the system to the benefit of Leeds, knowing he'd more than likely be involved. Lowe will do what's best for his finances and reputation. Let's just hope what's best for him is what's best for the Club in the long run.

[sidthesquid]

Rubbish Weston absolute rubbish.

 

Firstly SFC doesnt exist except in a badge and a strip and in our hearts. We are Southampton Leisure Holdings plc. That is the issue being discussed - it is the plc that is near bankruptcy and has been continually mismanaged. So don't give me that rubbish - I always have examined Saints holistically. Blinkered? Maybe - but based on careful study of the situation at this club for many years now. I am clever enough to see big picture rights and wrongs.

 

So dont try and belittle my opinion. I am far from niave Weston, far from niave.

 

The simple point I am making is that since the plc has been in being we have gradually been eroded in terms of success and financially. The minor addition financially of the sickener of watching dividends being paid that could be invested into our club for success and players is on a par with watching bankers receive millions in dividends for creating the credit crunch... small in percentage terms, but significant in principle.

 

The WHOLE thus adds up to incompetent boardroom management, none of whom have everything committed to Saints but a vast array of business interests that mean they will live out their lives well whilst Saints continue to slide. The WHOLE picture involves bad decision-making, greed, self-interest and is why we need to remove this system of running the club (as per Sheffield Utd), sell it and move on AS SOUTHAMPTON FC again.

 

It (the plc) will never be successful unless the right people run it - we have never had the right people running it. Thats why I agree with Steve Grant - we need to remove the WHOLE of those involved in the incompetenvce that has led to this position.

 

For once I wholeheartedly agree with you, but.....

I, like you, want to see all those involved in running or owning the club ousted, but the bit that worries me is what do we replace it with? Unless a 'white knight' comes onto the scene, and they are so scarce he is likely to be riding a unicorn, who is going to own & run the club? Depressingly it will either be another opportunistic carpet-bagger looking to make a living from the club or a Fulthorpe-type consortium, enthusiastic but woefully underfunded & we will be on the sort of desperate merry-go-round that Bournemouth are currently trapped upon. Please don't take this as pro-Lowe - I can see all the problems like yourself, but it's hard to see where the solutions will come from in the real (as opposed to wish-list fantasy) world.

[saintjay77]

Agree with all that - just making the point that after 27 years of top flight football it has been a mystery as to how our finances have been so poorly managed in the last 12 years or so. Which mirrors MLTs statement on SSN 2 months ago. Thats the point. And I do not believe that being a plc has assisted in any way whatsoever in reinvestment in the club - partly through dividends in the profitable years, mostly through incompetence of the plc boardmembers.

 

One thing is sure - after 27 years of top flight football somehow we are now pennyless. That comes over time - yes compounded by recession perhaps but not if the club is winning and well run.

 

Sorry I stand by my key point - we have been managed by fools and a foolish system of running a football club and elite sports organisation for which we are now suffering the consequences.

 

It is not all Crouch's fault. Mismanagement of this club began when the decision to move to become a plc was made. And the resulting league positions thereafter is the only evidence required.

 

But there are no clubs anywhere in the world that can look back over 27 years and say they have made a nice pot of money and its all still in the bank. Real Madrid got bailed out by the king of spain or somit, Man U run there club based on a huige debt, Liverpool are the same, Chelsea and Man City inherited there money but are currently running at a loss yet all of these clubs are run by hugly succesful businessmen that have the funds available to ride debt and live with it. We have moderatly succesful businessmen that dont have the cash to get us out of this mess so hard decissions get made.

 

Running the club as a PLC was a decission that was made years ago and at the time probably had enough arguments Pro the idea to make it happen. Current climate enough people suggest it is more of a noose round our neck. But the same can be said of those clubs running on a huge debt. Right now with interest rates low its not a bad thing to be doing. But when the financial climate revovers the interest rates will surly go up and these big clubs will be hurting. So what might work now will not necisarrily work later. We are simply caught at a point where our system is not helping us right now.

[SaintRobbie]

Show me a club anywhere in this country that has money in the bank. Football clubs are not there to make money & they never were

 

So what are you saying? Mismanagement is irrelevant?

 

I kind of agree with your sentiment, but there are degrees of having little money and there are decisions made over where to channel money. It is those decisions and their decision-makers I have issues with.

 

Crouch's attempt to go to Football First nearly paid off - we nearly promoted back to the Premiership, but we are suffering now because of it. But at least it was a decision based on passion for success instead of consolidation to create a profitable plc.

 

There is a big issue here, one I have been warning and going on about for many years on this forum and it predecessor. Unless you have the right people, pulling in the same direction managing Saints as a plc it is nothing but destructive for any football club. Sheffield Utd realised that and delisted it.

 

60-90% of our problems relate to our plc status IMHO, the remainder are due to bad managerial appointments.

 

I am genuinely getting sick of predicting the next rung down on the ladder of erosion this club has faced year in and year out. Genuinely bored of telling everyone why and where will be be season after season and then genuinely frustrated at being proven correct... I mean it... I am genuinely frustrated at being shown to be right... this year more than ever.

 

The only hope of rebuilding the club is to remove the shareholders, boardroom that supports the plc and the plc and find a buyer OR a consortium of shareholders prepared to pull in the same direction - FOR THE BENEFIT OF SFC and not themselves.

 

No chance at the moment. No chance unless we sell the club and bring in new strategic leadership.

 

The plc has destroyed the club, it has divided, it has stripped it bare financially through mismangement and on a lesser scale dividend and baordmember payments. All decisions currently being made are with regards to the plc's survival, not for the benefit of SFC.

 

This is what frustrates me and always has. When I examined Sheffield Utd's recent delisting and their motives for doing so, I saw hope and realised that boardmembers who were true supporters had realised that running a club as a plc was no in the benefits of the club. But we continue to try and make a failed project work, continue to flog the dieing horse and continue to apoint a chairman who has failed to make it work. It kills optimism, kills success, kills investment, kills support, reduces finances and drives us down further.

 

One day I hope we follow Sheffield Utd's example - you know the club pushing for a play off place and getting stronger. The club that wear red and white stripes and invest directly into those shirts and not into a business distraction. A club searching for success not consolidation. A club with footballing not business ambition. But not my club.

[SaintRobbie]

For once I wholeheartedly agree with you, but.....

I, like you, want to see all those involved in running or owning the club ousted, but the bit that worries me is what do we replace it with? Unless a 'white knight' comes onto the scene, and they are so scarce he is likely to be riding a unicorn, who is going to own & run the club? Depressingly it will either be another opportunistic carpet-bagger looking to make a living from the club or a Fulthorpe-type consortium, enthusiastic but woefully underfunded & we will be on the sort of desperate merry-go-round that Bournemouth are currently trapped upon. Please don't take this as pro-Lowe - I can see all the problems like yourself, but it's hard to see where the solutions will come from in the real (as opposed to wish-list fantasy) world.

 

I agree completely with that Sid. But it frustrates me that firstly we havent even declared the Club as for sale (as our boardmembers and shareholders continue to consolidate their positions in a long game yet to be fully played out - they still selfishly seek power and influence and the pettiness of their rhetoric is so embarrassing, 'Its all Crouch's fault..' etc etc). If we declared ourselves for sale we could at least make some knights look.

 

If we got off our arses thereafter and visited the knights and sold the Club for what it can be, they might even take us seriously.

 

What are we currently doing? Consolidating on failure after failure.

 

Can't we at least try? Can't we at least go and attempt to FIND a buyer? I know Lowe doesnt attract investment - Mary Corbett has told us of at least one example recently of this - but we simply have to find a new direction, with new leadership with SFC in their hearts as well as their minds. That would give us unity.

[SaintRobbie]

 

Running the club as a PLC was a decission that was made years ago and at the time probably had enough arguments Pro the idea to make it happen. Current climate enough people suggest it is more of a noose round our neck. But the same can be said of those clubs running on a huge debt. Right now with interest rates low its not a bad thing to be doing. But when the financial climate revovers the interest rates will surly go up and these big clubs will be hurting. So what might work now will not necisarrily work later. We are simply caught at a point where our system is not helping us right now.

 

 

I think you make some good points there Jay. The plc CONTRIBUTED to giving us one of our most valuable and saleable commodities - INFRASTRUCTURE. It has served that purpose (wasnt the sole contributor to infrastructure development mind but a very useful one). But, fails to serve any other, except stoke up division at every level and dilute effort from the footballing side.

 

As I say - we must examine the honorable motivation of those at Sheffield Utd who on taking personal losses from shareholdings, have made a sacrifice that has removed the noose you refer to from their necks.

 

It is time to change. And with the removal of the plc we remove those who have led us into this position too. It's time. Enough is enough. Football first please.

[SaintRobbie]

Anyway - got to go... super debate, thanks everyone. Apologies if I have been direct with some, I dont mean to be... just reasoned this one through now for many years, whilst caring passionately about the pride of Southampton.

[CB Fry]

Read the whole CB, that is just a part. You dont mysteriously mismanage 27 years of first flight money away on just wages - especially for the low grade/mediocre ones we have been investing in since Lowe materialised on the scene.

 

Actually, yes you do. This idea that millions and millions have been frittered away on non wages is just stuff in the heads of the likes of you. That is where the money has "gone". And transfer fees and the stadium. And paying off managers. Proportionately, not on "dividends and expenses" and "being a PLC" all the other "evil" things you think about.

 

So just to confirm, what you're saying is we should have saved up lots and lots of money in the prem years just incase we find ourselves at the bottom of the CCC?

 

But maybe we shouldn't spend that money then either, just in case we find ourselves at the bottom of L1.

 

Do you see?

 

As someone else has said, name a club that has been storing up money for 27 years in fact name some that make consistent profits season in, season out (Spurs did this season, but they won't every season).

 

Go on, I dare you, name Man United - they made massive profits for years as....a PLC. Oh dear.

 

Your problem is you just bundle absolutely everything you can think of up and rant rant rant.

 

No-one has said there is no mismanagement obviously there has been. But why not just stick to that, instead of scattergunning and blathering on about "27 years of top flight money" and "expenses and dividends".

 

How many millions of pounds worth of profit did we make in 1988, anyway? Maybe Rupert found it all in a chest buried behind the old community building at the Dell in 1999 and spent it all on gold plated clay pigeons?

 

Edited 27 March, 2009 by CB Fry

[alpine_saint]

 

We may have figeratively jumped out of the frying pan of admininstation threat yesterday but the fire may not be far away. Let's hope we "Southampton Football Club" can pull though without fatal third degree burns.

 

If you feel that, why were you not calling for Administration before yesterdays deadline ?

 

Here's a though for everyone : if we do manage to stay up, we might STILL go into administration.

 

As far as I am concerned, Lowe and Wilde have simply underlined what selfish bastards they are with this decision.

[Gemmel]

As far as I am concerned, Lowe and Wilde have simply underlined what selfish bastards they are with this decision.

 

Alpine, .....actually i can be bothered

[SaintRobbie]

Actually, yes you do. This idea that millions and millions have been frittered away on non wages is just stuff in the heads of the likes of you. That is where the money has "gone". And transfer fees and the stadium. And paying off managers. Proportionately, not on "dividends and expenses" and "being a PLC" all the other "evil" things you think about.

 

So just to confirm, what you're saying is we should have saved up lots and lots of money in the prem years just incase we find ourselves at the bottom of the CCC?

 

But maybe we shouldn't spend that money then either, just in case we find ourselves at the bottom of L1.

 

Do you see?

 

As someone else has said, name a club that has been storing up money for 27 years in fact name some that make consistent profits season in, season out (Spurs did this season, but they won't every season).

 

Go on, I dare you, name Man United - they made massive profits for years as....a PLC. Oh dear.

 

Your problem is you just bundle absolutely everything you can think of up and rant rant rant.

 

No-one has said there is no mismanagement obviously there has been. But why not just stick to that, instead of scattergunning and blathering on about "27 years of top flight money" and "expenses and dividends".

 

How many millions of pounds worth of profit did we make in 1988, anyway? Maybe Rupert found it all in a chest buried behind the old community building at the Dell in 1999 and spent it all on gold plated clay pigeons?

 

 

Not what I've been saying at all - again read the whole. I agree with your sentiments completely. I have been saying that a continuous drain has occured mostly due to poor decision-making , which comes from the members of the plc boardroom and time's up...or it should be.

 

Every club has suffered but not every club is heading for League 2 and Administration. Yes - accept your point on Manure, but it is not the fact that it is a plc it is the fact that those running it have pulled in the right direction for the good of the CLUB... we don't have that, and unless we can generate it never will.

 

Read what I am really saying. Look bigger picture and the whole - picking at the detail of examples is as easily replied to with yet more picking at detail CB - I am making big picture points.

Edited 27 March, 2009 by SaintRobbie

[GreenTreeFrog]

This is probably a thought for a separate thread but given we will inevitably have to cut our cloth even thinner for next season, is there an ECONOMIC case for us playing in Division 1 next season where such an inexperienced team is more likely to win games than in the CCC which MAY attract more crowds than uus languishing at the foot of the CCC for yet another season?

 

I know people will come back with "how can a true fan advocate relegation" but that's not what I want in my heart. But my head is thinking that we stand more chance of having a 'buoyant' season in Division 1 which may give us a better long term springboard to recovery?

 

I just think we'd be better off being in a league that matches the level of cloth cutting.

 

Would we get bigger crowds at the top of League 1 than at the bottom of the CCC?

 

Just looking at it logically rather than emotionally.

 

 

Trousers,

 

I have just checked a couple of examples of how relegation/promotion affects attendances and it does not look good.

 

How did relegation affect Leicester City’s average home attendances? In the Championship last season the average home crowd was 23,509; this season they have topped L1 virtually all season yet the home attendance is down to 18,639 – only 79% of what it was and despite going from a struggling team to the best team in the division by far.

 

The next example I thought would be useful is Nottingham Forest – how did their promotion affect their home crowds? Home attendance figures for last year averaged 19,956 and this year it is 21,662 – so an increase of around 1700 despite the drastic drop in actually winning matches.

 

It does seem you are better off struggling in the championship rather than being a successful club in League One.

 

So I think your hope of our crowds actually increasing as a successful L1 team is wishful thinking (though I do believe we would do well in L1). As to whether we would be better off financially that is harder to say as that is more about the quality of player you need and the cheaper cost and wages of surviving/competing in a lower division and that is all rather vague.

 

Nottingham Forest have many young players and yet were clearly one of the best teams in L1 last year; yet those same players are now struggling and Billy Davies says he has far too many ‘babies’ in his team and needs more experience. Similarly some posters on here have applauded Pearson for playing many of his young players in L1 - but I would like to see if he continues that policy in the Championship next season. I think there is a danger of setting up a team that is suited to L1 and not to the greater pressures of the Championship. I know Swansea have shown it can be done but they did benefit from a storming start with 5 wins in their first 6 games, recent results are far less impressive with only one win in the last 6 games and 7 wins in their last 24 games (as a comparison saints have won 5 games of the last 24.

 

Life sucks, get used to it!

[Weston Saint]

And with the "escape" from Administration for now has prompted the stock in SLH shares to drop to a new low of 12p

 

Our market capitalisation is now £3.37m

[alpine_saint]

And with the "escape" from Administration for now has prompted the stock in SLH shares to drop to a new low of 12p

 

Our market capitalisation is now £3.37m

 

Hard to imagine there isnt a buyer out there..

 

Of course, in Roopey's little mind it is probably still 65p, with three years' inflation-adjustment..

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

What would happen if SLH sold Southampton FC, the stadium etc to a 'newly established' business for a nominal fee, for example, Southampton Duck Holding or something like that, that all the shareholders create (with the same holdings as before). Would Lowe be done for allowing a company go into liquidation with no assets?

[SFKA South Woodford]

If you feel that, why were you not calling for Administration before yesterdays deadline ?

 

Here's a though for everyone : if we do manage to stay up, we might STILL go into administration.

 

As far as I am concerned, Lowe and Wilde have simply underlined what selfish bastards they are with this decision.

 

Firstly, just what would Barclays be achieving by forcing us into administration, if we have avoided the drop?

 

We all know that the club will be getting a 2.1 million pound windfall from the new tv deal, so I doubt very much, Barclays or Aviva, would want to miss out on their shares of that money. It's not as if they'll get anywhere near that amount back from us being a division one club.

 

Secondly, according to the echo the other day, Barclays do not own the mortgage on the ground, Aviva AKA Norwich Union do.

[SaintRobbie]

Hard to imagine there isnt a buyer out there..

 

Of course, in Roopey's little mind it is probably still 65p, with three years' inflation-adjustment..

 

True - although they inherit the mortgage too. But, it is peanuts for a club with such potential. But we're not on the market. Why is that? It certainly isnt in the interests of the club.

[Gemmel]

What would happen if SLH sold Southampton FC, the stadium etc to a 'newly established' business for a nominal fee, for example, Southampton Duck Holding or something like that, that all the shareholders create (with the same holdings as before). Would Lowe be done for allowing a company go into liquidation with no assets?

 

There are laws to prevent that happening

[itchen]

True - although they inherit the mortgage too. But, it is peanuts for a club with such potential. But we're not on the market. Why is that? It certainly isnt in the interests of the club.

 

How do you know we are not on the market? The board is on record as saying they will listen to any serious offers.

[SaintRobbie]

How do you know we are not on the market? The board is on record as saying they will listen to any serious offers.

 

Have they ever formerly stated as a group of shareholders that we are FOR SALE? No. That rhetoric is meaningless when you look at the evidence such as the SISU deal.

 

The thing that is the real question is why haven't we? 'Why?' as it implies shareholders have something to gain by not selling, and indeed turned down the SISU deal. Either those in our plc boardroom are still fighting for control or they have another motive in keeping hold of their dwindling assets...consolidation upon administration perhaps?

 

Either way it is not good enough. We need an unambiguous statement (a la Pompey) that says WE ARE FOR SALE before I will believe we actually are prepared to look at offers.

[wireframebox]

More facts and figures...

 

http://www.sharecrazy.com/share2607share/share.php?disp=share&epic=SOO

[SaintRobbie]

More facts and figures...

 

http://www.sharecrazy.com/share2607share/share.php?disp=share&epic=SOO

 

'Southampton Leisure Holdings plc's principal activities are the operation of a professional Football Club, property development and investment.'

 

mmmmmmm... interesting bit that don't you think? Not noticed that description of the plc before.

[dubai_phil]

Have they ever formerly stated as a group of shareholders that we are FOR SALE? No. That rhetoric is meaningless when you look at the evidence such as the SISU deal.

 

The thing that is the real question is why haven't we? 'Why?' as it implies shareholders have something to gain by not selling, and indeed turned down the SISU deal. Either those in our plc boardroom are still fighting for control or they have another motive in keeping hold of their dwindling assets...consolidation upon administration perhaps?

 

Either way it is not good enough. We need an unambiguous statement (a la Pompey) that says WE ARE FOR SALE before I will believe we actually are prepared to look at offers.

 

Uh yep they did...

 

Darned if I'm going to trawl back through all of it, but in the press statements in the Echo and on the official site there was a very clear and specific statement when Wilde & Lowe came back in stating something along the lines that they were willing to engage in conversation with any party that had the funds available.

Sure it can be argued that nobody has found anyone with funds available, but the answer to your question is yes they did say it in corprate legalese and it was printed a number of times

[trousers]

Trousers,

 

I have just checked a couple of examples of how relegation/promotion affects attendances and it does not look good.

 

How did relegation affect Leicester City’s average home attendances? In the Championship last season the average home crowd was 23,509; this season they have topped L1 virtually all season yet the home attendance is down to 18,639 – only 79% of what it was and despite going from a struggling team to the best team in the division by far.

 

The next example I thought would be useful is Nottingham Forest – how did their promotion affect their home crowds? Home attendance figures for last year averaged 19,956 and this year it is 21,662 – so an increase of around 1700 despite the drastic drop in actually winning matches.

 

It does seem you are better off struggling in the championship rather than being a successful club in League One.

 

So I think your hope of our crowds actually increasing as a successful L1 team is wishful thinking (though I do believe we would do well in L1). As to whether we would be better off financially that is harder to say as that is more about the quality of player you need and the cheaper cost and wages of surviving/competing in a lower division and that is all rather vague.

 

Nottingham Forest have many young players and yet were clearly one of the best teams in L1 last year; yet those same players are now struggling and Billy Davies says he has far too many ‘babies’ in his team and needs more experience. Similarly some posters on here have applauded Pearson for playing many of his young players in L1 - but I would like to see if he continues that policy in the Championship next season. I think there is a danger of setting up a team that is suited to L1 and not to the greater pressures of the Championship. I know Swansea have shown it can be done but they did benefit from a storming start with 5 wins in their first 6 games, recent results are far less impressive with only one win in the last 6 games and 7 wins in their last 24 games (as a comparison saints have won 5 games of the last 24.

 

Life sucks, get used to it!

 

Cheers for that research - interesting reading. As always, I'm more than happy for my "devil's advocate" theories to be proven wrong

[saintjay77]

Not what I've been saying at all - again read the whole. I agree with your sentiments completely. I have been saying that a continuous drain has occured mostly due to poor decision-making , which comes from the members of the plc boardroom and time's up...or it should be.

 

Every club has suffered but not every club is heading for League 2 and Administration. Yes - accept your point on Manure, but it is not the fact that it is a plc it is the fact that those running it have pulled in the right direction for the good of the CLUB... we don't have that, and unless we can generate it never will.

 

Read what I am really saying. Look bigger picture and the whole - picking at the detail of examples is as easily replied to with yet more picking at detail CB - I am making big picture points.

 

For the 1st time in a very long time we have actually got a majority of the shareholding pulling in the same direction. 2 of the 3 main shareholders and those that proxy there shares too them agree that this direction is the best chance we have either to stay afloat or the way they may be looking at it, to protect there investment. Either way its the same thing IMO.

 

Crouch is no longer arguing about the direction we are taking and has gone on record to say that he would be going in the same direction while there is no external funds available.

 

Crouchs only other plan is to find a buyer. So far all he has found has not been able to get over the 1st hurdle of providing proof on funds.

 

At the end of the season if all 3 sit down and agree to work together pushing in the same direction where will you stand then? IMO not allot will have changed as I will still want a buyer that clears the lot out but in the mean time would you accept that the whole board are at least trying to do what they think is rigiht for the club even if it doesnt fit in eith what you think is right?

 

Its all well and good saying that Lowe is the divisive figure, but Wilde got rid before and quickly became the current divisive figure as he couldnt deliver. Crouch got golden treatment by many because he was more fan friendly but had his decissifons taken us into Admin and had we not recovered then his decissions would have cost much more than anyone elses. Its hard tmo say how close we were to admin with him here as different storys say different things but the above theory could have happened and we could all now be on the RIP Saints web Forum.

 

Current lot are knobs but however badly they may do things IMO they are still trying to save our club either for the clubs benifit or there own. I dont really care whos benifit it is really as long as our club survives.

[itchen]

Have they ever formerly stated as a group of shareholders that we are FOR SALE? No. That rhetoric is meaningless when you look at the evidence such as the SISU deal.

 

The thing that is the real question is why haven't we? 'Why?' as it implies shareholders have something to gain by not selling, and indeed turned down the SISU deal. Either those in our plc boardroom are still fighting for control or they have another motive in keeping hold of their dwindling assets...consolidation upon administration perhaps?

 

Either way it is not good enough. We need an unambiguous statement (a la Pompey) that says WE ARE FOR SALE before I will believe we actually are prepared to look at offers.

 

We are as much for sale as any other plc. Indeed, as pointed out above, this is in official documents. It really does your argument that Lowe should go (which is valid) no good to simply make stuff up. I'm sure that he would gladly walk away from the mess if only somebody else would take it on who has the funds to get us out of it.

[Charlie Wayman]

If a bit of creative accounting is goin gon then we need tio thank the author, if somebody has injected some cash without the ballyhoo! then whoever 'they' are need our thanks.

 

Something is going on that's for sure. Of course the interest on our stadium payments will/should be 0% under present circumstances so meeting the capital payments only could be a temporary doddle. So long as the club is saving the payment reductions for when interest rates start rising again, then I agree it could be very fortuitous indeed that the credit crunch struck when it did.

[dubai_phil]

If a bit of creative accounting is goin gon then we need tio thank the author, if somebody has injected some cash without the ballyhoo! then whoever 'they' are need our thanks.

 

Something is going on that's for sure. Of course the interest on our stadium payments will/should be 0% under present circumstances so meeting the capital payments only could be a temporary doddle. So long as the club is saving the payment reductions for when interest rates start rising again, then I agree it could be very fortuitous indeed that the credit crunch struck when it did.

 

As an FYI it was posted on here a few times before that the Stadium is on a fixed rate.

 

But as you point out, IMHO nothing is ever as black and white as we try and paint it here and I'm sure people are burning up the midnight oil trying to keep us going and finding rabbits to pull out of hats.

[trousers]

As an FYI it was posted on here a few times before that the Stadium is on a fixed rate.

 

c.8%

[SaintRobbie]

We are as much for sale as any other plc. Indeed, as pointed out above, this is in official documents. It really does your argument that Lowe should go (which is valid) no good to simply make stuff up. I'm sure that he would gladly walk away from the mess if only somebody else would take it on who has the funds to get us out of it.

 

Alot of good points made here and in others replies on whether the club is for sale or not. I am certainly not making anything up though Itchen, we have not had a policy of actively searching for a buyer since the SISU deal was refused and the execs, charged with delivering exactly that indeed delivered.

 

Official documents or not I do not see any evidence of a sales campaign. If we are publishing our intent to open negotiations with interested parties it is frankly not worth the paper it is written on until there is an interested party.

 

So if we were honestly serious about selling the club surely we'd have formed a sales team by now?

 

The answer is we havent, sitting back and waiting for a buyer is not a strategy of a boardroom intent on selling this club for the good of this club. There is not the combined will or intent to sell this club. Read and believe what you like on plc paper - the evidence simply does not exist that this boardroom are looking for a buyer. Crouch may well be on an individual mission to find one, but the boardroom is not being proactive.

 

At best it is laziness, at worst it indicates the poor leadership we have is intent on staying.

 

Whether it is published or not that the club is interested in offers a buyer IS NOT being sought out (openly in any case, which provides the most chance of success). We are not telling the world (in the same fashion as our fishy friends down the road) that we are for sale. Until we do it is safe to assume that those in power wish to retain that power and continue to make the type of decisions that 15 odd years of recent history ably demonstrate will result in continued failure on the pitch and continued failure financially.

Edited 27 March, 2009 by SaintRobbie