derry Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 "Barclays has been working alongside Southampton Leisure Holdings' directors, shareholders and advisors to find solutions to a range of significant and well publicised issues the company has faced in recent months. While the bank's position in this instance is only one of providing an overdraft facility, not equity investment, the key issue now facing Southampton Leisure Holdings is one of requiring substantial further investment. However and despite ongoing efforts by Barclays to find a suitable solution and urge various existing investors to the table, sufficient investment to support the company in it's present structure has not yet been secured. Barclays will continue to work closely with company management to find the best outcome possible". It seems the existing investors weren't prepared to invest. What a surprise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 Cheers Derry. Got a link to the website that appeared on? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 "Barclays has been working alongside Southampton Leisure Holdings' directors, shareholders and advisors to find solutions to a range of significant and well publicised issues the company has faced in recent months. While the bank's position in this instance is only one of providing an overdraft facility, not equity investment, the key issue now facing Southampton Leisure Holdings is one of requiring substantial further investment. However and despite ongoing efforts by Barclays to find a suitable solution and urge various existing investors to the table, sufficient investment to support the company in it's present structure has not yet been secured. Barclays will continue to work closely with company management to find the best outcome possible". It seems the existing investors weren't prepared to invest. What a surprise! Urge various existing investors doesnt say those already invested. just the names that have been floating about saying they will invest yet havent, Still havent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 Urge various existing investors doesnt say those already invested. just the names that have been floating about saying they will invest yet havent, Still havent! Doesn't "existing" suggest they have "already invested" - unless I'm reading your reply wrongly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmysaint7 Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 Cheers Derry. Got a link to the website that appeared on? Thanks its in the echo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrollman no2 Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 I wonder if the banks would have been a bit more helpful if Crouch had still been in charge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 its in the echo cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 2 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 2 April, 2009 Cheers Derry. Got a link to the website that appeared on? Thanks The statement is printed in the Echo above Wilde's statement therefore no link, I didn't see it on their site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Landrew Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 I would debate the well publicised view. Well rumoured more like. This is a club where every single publicised word has been open to question because people simply haven't believed it. I heard a caller to Radio Hampshire tonight, and he said that the cancer has been removed, and we have our club back. And he's right. Weak and desperate it may be, but it's back, and there's still time to be positive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 The statement is printed in the Echo above Wilde's statement therefore no link, I didn't see it on their site. Is the Wilde piece been put up here anywhere??? If not I was up for typing it up and/or the Crouch piece as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 2 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 2 April, 2009 Is the Wilde piece been put up here anywhere??? If not I was up for typing it up and/or the Crouch piece as well No only printed in the Echo, it's not on the website, fill your boots I've got cramp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 No only printed in the Echo, it's not on the website, fill your boots I've got cramp. Ok off I go then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 I wonder if the banks would have been a bit more helpful if Crouch had still been in charge? Who knows, and frankly, who cares? It makes not a jot of difference now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 I wonder if the banks would have been a bit more helpful if Crouch had still been in charge? No - that was why he had to go last summer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morph Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 I wonder if the banks would have been a bit more helpful if Crouch had still been in charge? I think they will be far more helpful with Salz and his team in charge. All IMHO of course. Morph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 2 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 2 April, 2009 I think they will be far more helpful with Salz and his team in charge. All IMHO of course. Morph I take it he is talking to the administrator, If he is serious, with serious backing then we don't have to try and go through the trauma of trying to raise the funds through the fans. It would be helpful for guidance before we go too far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 I take it he is talking to the administrator, If he is serious, with serious backing then we don't have to try and go through the trauma of trying to raise the funds through the fans. It would be helpful for guidance before we go too far. Maybe it would still be a good idea as perhaps any monies raised by supporters could be invested in the Club in return for a stake alongside these "big" hitters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 2 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 2 April, 2009 Maybe it would still be a good idea as perhaps any monies raised by supporters could be invested in the Club in return for a stake alongside these "big" hitters. The only problem with that from my point of view joining the fan with the corporate would only work one way. The fan would be on the outside looking in unless the shareholding was a majority, allowing a proper say in the election of directors and the ability to remove potential 6% dictators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 "However and despite ongoing efforts by Barclays to find a suitable solution and urge various existing investors to the table, sufficient investment to support the company in it's present structure has not yet been secured. It seems the existing investors weren't prepared to invest. What a surprise! Woah, no shiit.... Wilde and Lowe had no money to invest, Crouch wasnt willing whilst Wilde and Lowe had control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 The only problem with that from my point of view joining the fan with the corporate would only work one way. The fan would be on the outside looking in unless the shareholding was a majority, allowing a proper say in the election of directors and the ability to remove potential 6% dictators. But if the money raised by supporters was an amount which meant the whole deal could be arranged, then wouldn't that be good enough, in that it would at least get us out of our current predicament???? Many other clubs nave used a mix and match approach and IMHO considering how deep in the sht we are I wouldn't be too worried how the ownership ultimately stacked up. I always feared we would one day be doing bucket collections outside SMS, and like you I think we should ensure we get something in return for our dosh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 2 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 2 April, 2009 But if the money raised by supporters was an amount which meant the whole deal could be arranged, then wouldn't that be good enough, in that it would at least get us out of our current predicament???? Many other clubs nave used a mix and match approach and IMHO considering how deep in the sht we are I wouldn't be too worried how the ownership ultimately stacked up. I always feared we would one day be doing bucket collections outside SMS, and like you I think we should ensure we get something in return for our dosh. I'm happy for anything that saves the club, however I can't forget the 20% of shareholders that were never organised and ignored by the previous combatants in the boardroom. I don't want to see that happen. I must admit I'm more for one or the other, however if Salz set up a bid with substantial investment from the likes of Gavyn Davies etc and bought the club that would be a result for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Summers Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 I'm happy for anything that saves the club, however I can't forget the 20% of shareholders that were never organised and ignored by the previous combatants in the boardroom. I don't want to see that happen. I must admit I'm more for one or the other, however if Salz set up a bid with substantial investment from the likes of Gavyn Davies etc and bought the club that would be a result for me. I doubt that'll happen, they've had the chance many a time to get involed and never before, whats difference now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krissyboy31 Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 I doubt that'll happen, they've had the chance many a time to get involed and never before, whats difference now... There is a major difference in that they do not have to buy out existing shareholders. Just whatever price the administrators set and undertaking the club's debts (which if the Times report is correct, will not include the stadium debt and therefore be around £6Million, I guess)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustapha Fag Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 Woah, no shiit.... Wilde and Lowe had no money to invest, Crouch wasnt willing whilst Wilde and Lowe had control. Not strictly true as Crouch had offered to invest £2 million if Lowe and Wilde would commit to do the same, for some reason they wouldnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 2 April, 2009 Share Posted 2 April, 2009 Doesn't "existing" suggest they have "already invested" - unless I'm reading your reply wrongly? suppose it could be read both ways but I read it as Barcleys have been trying to get those that have been promising to invest for years to stump up. Not that anyone would want to invest without getting anything out of it though. If it was a dig at the current shareholders then maybe they were right to keep there money in there wallets as Barcleys pulled the plug for being just over the OD. Had the main goons stuck 500K in each and then Barcleys pulled the plug at the end of the season the goons would have just been half a mil worse off than they are now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Kint Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I think they will be far more helpful with Salz and his team in charge. All IMHO of course. Morph Morph, do you think Rupert enjoyed making that phone call when he returned last summer...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 Barclays are trying to deflect the fact that they wouldnt lend a bit more and keep customer relations going. They need us or someone to take over as they are 4m out of pocket at present and the 100k they wouldnt stump up will be a fraction of what they wil lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I think they will be far more helpful with Salz and his team in charge. All IMHO of course. Morph I still cannot comprehend how so called Saints fans let us basically get relegated before they would do a deal.I will be happy for them to take over but I will be sceptical that they have real feeling for the club to let us get to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Kint Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I still cannot comprehend how so called Saints fans let us basically get relegated before they would do a deal. I agree, it's outrageous Rupert hasn't been prepared to do a deal. But then he's never claimed to be a saints fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint in Paradise Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 Perhaps, Nickh, your hero made it too awkward for both sides to work together ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonah Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I still cannot comprehend how so called Saints fans let us basically get relegated before they would do a deal.I will be happy for them to take over but I will be sceptical that they have real feeling for the club to let us get to this. I think it would be appalling that they wait for administration and (probably) relegation just to save some money. Wasn't that always the beef with Lowe, he was only in it for the money? The same goes for the whole lot of them - from Crouch, Wilde and Trant all claiming they would invest but never doing so for one excuse after another, to Wiseman, Hunt, Gordon and McMenemy who cashed in their shares and have pocketed the cash whilst watching us sink. The same goes for Barclays too, the cheek of them expecting everyone else to put the cash in when they withdraw their own support! I think the most important thing of all now is that somebody completely NEW comes in to take over. If we end up with some half-baked pre-pack type arrangement with the old faces hanging on again we'll just be going round in circles. They've all had their chance and can now all bugger off, from the current board right down to Corbett and McMenemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Kint Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I think it would be appalling that they wait for administration and (probably) relegation just to save some money. Wasn't that always the beef with Lowe, he was only in it for the money? The same goes for the whole lot of them - from Crouch, Wilde and Trant all claiming they would invest but never doing so for one excuse after another, to Wiseman, Hunt, Gordon and McMenemy who cashed in their shares and have pocketed the cash whilst watching us sink. The same goes for Barclays too, the cheek of them expecting everyone else to put the cash in when they withdraw their own support! I think the most important thing of all now is that somebody completely NEW comes in to take over. If we end up with some half-baked pre-pack type arrangement with the old faces hanging on again we'll just be going round in circles. They've all had their chance and can now all bugger off, from the current board right down to Corbett and McMenemy. But yet you miss Rupert's name off that list. Quelle surprise. You luvvies are finished, Lowe has gone and it's about time you all stopped spewing your pro Lowe rubbish. History will show Lowe as being a disaster from every aspect possible. A disgrace to the city of Southampton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 3 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I think the perception with potential investors was the over value put on their shares by the Lowe/Wilde axis and their ability to block any deal. The position now is that the value of the club is purely what is on offer. There are interested parties and whether that will become an acceptable offer only time will tell. The likes of Salz, Davies or anybody else now looking to buy the club can deal with the administrators with a clean slate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I agree, it's outrageous Rupert hasn't been prepared to do a deal. But then he's never claimed to be a saints fan. That has always been my grouse with Lowe .... he would NOT contemplate anything coming in the way of HIS Dictatorship Now that he (hopefully) has gone, it will be interesting to see if their is any change in Barclays stance, and, indeed if, now that the road is clear, potential Investors come forward If they DON'T ..... then Lowe will have successfully completed his hatchet job on us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonah Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 But yet you miss Rupert's name off that list. Quelle surprise. You luvvies are finished, Lowe has gone and it's about time you all stopped spewing your pro Lowe rubbish. I do wonder sometimes whether you could be any thicker - what do you think "the current board" means? Do you think Lowe might be included in that? I was grouping those who have made promises of putting in money, followed by those who sold their free shares, followed by the whole lot of them including Lowe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Kint Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I think it would be appalling that they wait for administration and (probably) relegation just to save some money. Wasn't that always the beef with Lowe, he was only in it for the money? I do wonder sometimes whether you could be any thicker Are you too thick to understand why Lowe has been unable to find investment for the last decade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 But yet you miss Rupert's name off that list. Quelle surprise. You luvvies are finished, Lowe has gone and it's about time you all stopped spewing your pro Lowe rubbish. History will show Lowe as being a disaster from every aspect possible. A disgrace to the city of Southampton. I wont leave RL's name off the list, i want the figures released what he took on in the summer.It has been alluded to on here that the overdraft was over 6m in the summer and he cut it to 4m. Some fans have been baying for administration in the somewhat mad way so that he loses his money.How about us that may lose the club.The tyrekickers are circling but now they really can buy the club with no apparent obstacles lets see what they do. Im a Saints Luvvie and have spent my life supporting them and defending them from idiots who want to hurt it. I hold my hand up as i was very vocal in not wanting GH back, if he had returned without a doubt we would not be where we are now.I have played my little part in the demise but only because i care and see things from my standpoint and will put my position forward. I myself do not believe its pro Lowe but just a reasonable position on the finances. LC was very bold in admitting his part in all this, I hope RL does take his share of the blame as he was part of the whole.Are you prepared to also accept that Askham through to Mc also played a part. They were all in the decision making process over the last 2 decades and more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 Are you too thick to understand why Lowe has been unable to find investment for the last decade?To be fair did any of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Kint Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I wont leave RL's name off the list, i want the figures released what he took on in the summer.It has been alluded to on here that the overdraft was over 6m in the summer and he cut it to 4m. Some fans have been baying for administration in the somewhat mad way so that he loses his money.How about us that may lose the club.The tyrekickers are circling but now they really can buy the club with no apparent obstacles lets see what they do. Im a Saints Luvvie and have spent my life supporting them and defending them from idiots who want to hurt it. I hold my hand up as i was very vocal in not wanting GH back, if he had returned without a doubt we would not be where we are now.I have played my little part in the demise but only because i care and see things from my standpoint and will put my position forward. I myself do not believe its pro Lowe but just a reasonable position on the finances. LC was very bold in admitting his part in all this, I hope RL does take his share of the blame as he was part of the whole.Are you prepared to also accept that Askham through to Mc also played a part. They were all in the decision making process over the last 2 decades and more? My post wasn't aimed at you Nick, it was aimed a jonah. But to answer anyway, Askham is complete scum and is the man who set us on this path all those years ago. He is nothing more than a leech. Who is Mc?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 My post wasn't aimed at you Nick, it was aimed a jonah. But to answer anyway, Askham is complete scum and is the man who set us on this path all those years ago. He is nothing more than a leech. Who is Mc??Corbett is MC, although she is only very minor part of our woes as she was helpful in bringing Wilde to the table, but perhaps the most disasterous decision. Askham was the catlyst to all this now and only a small % of fans seem to grasp the fact. LC is the closest thing to being decent although his heart ruled his head too much add a little vanity, Cowan im told is a decent man and Richards gave a good evaluation from his standpoint wehen he tried to argue against Wildes bunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 3 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 3 April, 2009 Barclays are trying to deflect the fact that they wouldnt lend a bit more and keep customer relations going. They need us or someone to take over as they are 4m out of pocket at present and the 100k they wouldnt stump up will be a fraction of what they wil lose. I was told there was a meeting between the bank and Lowe/wilde where the bank asked them what they were prepared to put in and I understand the answer was nothing. That was the week Crouch met Lowe/Wilde and made his offer, whilst Lowe/Wilde intimated they would resign if he came up with £6m. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I was told there was a meeting between the bank and Lowe/wilde where the bank asked them what they were prepared to put in and I understand the answer was nothing. That was the week Crouch met Lowe/Wilde and made his offer, whilst Lowe/Wilde intimated they would resign if he came up with £6m.That doesnt surprise me, would any CEO put money in? If it is a family businness then you put your own money in. Surely LC could have stumped up 100k to keep the company going if he was prepared to put 2m in.I do not expect him to have done so, why should he as it is basically giving evey7 shareholder a few bob each. We now have a clean slate for all the investors who are said to be lined up to buy the club cheaply and i hope they do so. I will support them in the same way i did the last regime as i understand it is a business and so the priority is stable finances first then spend wisely on the squad. You cant put the cart before the horse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larrylove Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 The wole thing is just a sad mess,myself I think the rot started with Askham,sacking Nicholl thinking Branfoot was a SFC manager,allowing Ball to walk,the list goes on,the whole reverse takeover hurried our demise with Lowe and his madness and meddling.I mean surely only RL would have set up a revolutionary dutch coaching team when he was privvy to our finances,******s one and all,with the exception of LC as he had the interests of the club at heart,goodnight and thank you!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a1ex2001 Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 That was the week Crouch met Lowe/Wilde and made his offer, whilst Lowe/Wilde intimated they would resign if he came up with £6m. There resignation would have been a total waste of time as they would still have been lurking with the shares that they ridiculously over valued. I bet you Lowe wishes he'd sold the lot after Wilde came to power the first time, the joy of 20-20 hindsight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonah Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 Are you too thick to understand why Lowe has been unable to find investment for the last decade? Chortle, good to see you still can't see simple facts through your red mist. Lowe at least raised the £30m for the stadium including finding people to underwrite the £3m Open Offer (at least 3 of whom were down to him - Lowe, Withers and Marland). Meanwhile, how much did Wilde find after ousting Lowe amidst claims that would clear the way for investment? Zero. How much did Crouch put into the club? Zero. Even when he was chairman and in charge? Zero. Finding investment is not easy, as Wilde found out. He couldn't even keep the much simpler claim that he had people ready to buy Lowe's shares... at least you'd have had to change the record if he'd managed that simple task eh. What concerns me now is that we seem to have so many stupid fans amongst the vocal minority who still can't be objective about any of this that we are in danger of recreating the same mess again when someone does make an offer - a few platitudes, a bit of fan-friendly rhetoric and it'll be "Let's Go Wilde" all over again. God help us if it's any of the previous suspects, but what price some crappy "consortium" with Crouch and a few others who bring back in the perennial hangers-on like Wiseman, McMenemy and Corbett and we then get Illingsworth & his usual suspects trying to wheedle their way in under the guise of being the Saints "Trust". Just when you think things can't get worse you realise actually very little might change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Kint Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 Chortle, good to see you still can't see simple facts through your red mist. Lowe at least raised the £30m for the stadium including finding people to underwrite the £3m Open Offer (at least 3 of whom were down to him - Lowe, Withers and Marland). Meanwhile, how much did Wilde find after ousting Lowe amidst claims that would clear the way for investment? Zero. How much did Crouch put into the club? Zero. Even when he was chairman and in charge? Zero. Finding investment is not easy, as Wilde found out. He couldn't even keep the much simpler claim that he had people ready to buy Lowe's shares... at least you'd have had to change the record if he'd managed that simple task eh. What concerns me now is that we seem to have so many stupid fans amongst the vocal minority who still can't be objective about any of this that we are in danger of recreating the same mess again when someone does make an offer - a few platitudes, a bit of fan-friendly rhetoric and it'll be "Let's Go Wilde" all over again. God help us if it's any of the previous suspects, but what price some crappy "consortium" with Crouch and a few others who bring back in the perennial hangers-on like Wiseman, McMenemy and Corbett and we then get Illingsworth & his usual suspects trying to wheedle their way in under the guise of being the Saints "Trust". Just when you think things can't get worse you realise actually very little might change. More of the same anti-crouch ****** from the pro Lowe fans that has no substance to it whatsoever. And it also includes a lie. I guess you have somthing in common with Wilde. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 Since Barclays are experts in setting up companies so that they can evade paying taxes to the country within which they (used to) make vast profits, saving themselves billions each year whilst at the same time taking handouts from the government of that country, surely they could have invested in SLH as a loss-making business and still fiddled it so that came out better off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 I still cannot comprehend how so called Saints fans let us basically get relegated before they would do a deal.I will be happy for them to take over but I will be sceptical that they have real feeling for the club to let us get to this. This was one of the......'not while Lowe is there' nickh, who's to say if by waiting, they have done the right thing, accepting that they make a bid of course!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 Since Barclays are experts in setting up companies so that they can evade paying taxes to the country within which they (used to) make vast profits, saving themselves billions each year whilst at the same time taking handouts from the government of that country, surely they could have invested in SLH as a loss-making business and still fiddled it so that came out better off. Perhaps we could relocate to the IOW and become an off-shore company Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 3 April, 2009 Share Posted 3 April, 2009 Are you too thick to understand why Lowe has been unable to find investment for the last decade? Its easy to go banding about the Luvvie tag at anyone who trys to look at the whole picture. At least we are now at a stage where come the end of the season all these people that tried to do a deal that Lowe blocked can now easily come in and invest to save our club without Lowe getting in the way. Personally I hope there is someone as without we wont have a club next season. But I would be surprised if that someone is anyone that has been blocked in the past. Doesnt prove anything either way but then the so called Luvvies arnt the ones jumping up and down celebrating while we go into admin and possibly down the pan. If Lowe is gone for good then great. If there is someone suitable enough to take us on then even better. Does it really matter who has what tag now? 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