Barclays and Aviva: Something we can all agree with Rupert Lowe on

[trousers]

Barclays 'misled customers into gambling their money on risky investment'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1174624/Barclays-misled-customers-gambling-money-risky-investment.html

 

So, let me get this right...Barclays and/or Aviva force Southampton (Leisure Holdings) into administration because of 'financial mismanagement' but it's OK for them to 'financially mismanage' their customers? (according to reports in the Daily Mail)

 

I think Mr Lowe had a good point or two when he laid into Barclays upon his departure.

Edited 29 April, 2009 by trousers

[RedAndWhite91]

Although the banks are partly to blame, you can't ignore the mismanagement of SLH and Lowe's apparent poor running of the club.

 

And as far as Lowe's track record goes, he has a knack of pinning the blame on someone else, so I wouldn't be surprised, even if he did have a good point of two, if this is just another one of his attempted scapegoats imo.

[RobM]

Banks will only lend you money if you ask for it.

 

They don't send companies large cheques for millions of pounds just in case you fancy a spending spree.

[solentstars]

the mismangement of finances bigtime began the last 2 seasons if you read the company accounts thats why the likes of walcott,bale deals were rushed and kenweyne jones was sold,we even had george burley at with meetings with bankers to see how bad it was.

[ottery st mary]

the mismangement of finances bigtime began the last 2 seasons if you read the company accounts thats why the likes of walcott,bale deals were rushed and kenweyne jones was sold,we even had george burley at with meetings with bankers to see how bad it was.

 

 

MISMANAGEMENT of finances = Rupert BLOODY LOWE......and you know it matey.[-X

[alpine_saint]

Barclays 'misled customers into gambling their money on risky investment'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1174624/Barclays-misled-customers-gambling-money-risky-investment.html

 

So, let me get this right...Barclays and/or Aviva force Southampton (Leisure Holdings) into administration because of 'financial mismanagement' but it's OK for them to 'financially mismanage' their customers? (according to reports in the Daily Mail)

 

I think Mr Lowe had a good point or two when he laid into Barclays upon his departure.

 

I dont agree at all with this.

 

I was brought up to believe "two wrongs dont make a right"

[Frank's cousin]

I and nor do many7 on here know what was well and poorly managed in the last 18 months - yet we seem happy to make sweeping claims?

 

When in the prem, we were an example to other clubs as to HOW to mange inancially within ones means - what we are talking about now is a club trying to reduce costs in line with income - simple - where we failed was in that process primarily due to teh contractual obligations of players being unbreakable - These were entered into initially by Lowe then exacerbated by Wilde and Crouch - yet ultimately to some extent the major cause is the almost criminal disproportion between revenues in te prem and CCC/FL due to Sky. The players demanding unrealistic contracts - that cant be sustained in the CCC - and thats not just those who were signed in the prem either....

[Horley CTFC Saint]

MISMANAGEMENT of finances = Rupert BLOODY LOWE......and you know it matey.[-X

 

Only in the that he never released enough funds into the business! The guys a skinflint - don't like him glad he's gone but he is not the reason why SFC is where it is financially.

 

If and when we get new owners I hope that they dont pursue the strategy of the regime immediately prior to Woopert II - that was plainly **** or bust and is no way to run a football club

[Horley CTFC Saint]

I and nor do many7 on here know what was well and poorly managed in the last 18 months - yet we seem happy to make sweeping claims?

 

When in the prem, we were an example to other clubs as to HOW to mange inancially within ones means - what we are talking about now is a club trying to reduce costs in line with income - simple - where we failed was in that process primarily due to teh contractual obligations of players being unbreakable - These were entered into initially by Lowe then exacerbated by Wilde and Crouch - yet ultimately to some extent the major cause is the almost criminal disproportion between revenues in te prem and CCC/FL due to Sky. The players demanding unrealistic contracts - that cant be sustained in the CCC - and thats not just those who were signed in the prem either....

 

 

....and how at fault were the likes of Dulieu and those other guys involved in the SISU bid?

[ottery st mary]

Here we go again in that big circle..... Thought the Luvvies were going to look forwards.

 

Lets move on guys and gals.

 

HOPEFULLY RUPERT WILL NEVER BE SEEN AGAIN IN SUNNY SOUTHAMPTON.

[Frank's cousin]

....and how at fault were the likes of Dulieu and those other guys involved in the SISU bid?

 

From the rumours pieced together, I think these guys actually got a bit of a bad deal why? because

 

1. They are rumoured to have only ratified the big spend under BUrley on teh promise of Wildes investors - when these were not fiorthcoming it made Wildes position untenable - hense teh falling out with CRouch and his removal from the board - does not excuse their naivty or that of CRouch if they did not put a hold on this or veto it without written proof of funds....

 

2. SISU - when this fitst came in, 90% of fans were against a hedgefund ownig teh club - teh execs were criticised for wanting teh deal to go ahead because it was rumoured they were ona nice commission. It was teh one and only time Lowe, CRouch and Wilde actually said the same thing in knocking back teh offer for which tehy were applauded at teh time by teh vast majority - especially with CRouch saying better offers were on 3, soryy 6 er sorry 9 months away....

[Frank's cousin]

Here we go again in that big circle..... Thought the Luvvies were going to look forwards.

 

Lets move on guys and gals.

 

HOPEFULLY RUPERT WILL NEVER BE SEEN AGAIN IN SUNNY SOUTHAMPTON.

 

What the feck? what ahs any of this to do with 'luvviedom' its about the truth FFS and its absolutely shocking taht some of you are so feckin blinkered as to not give a flying feck about what actually occured...

[ottery st mary]

What the feck? what ahs any of this to do with 'luvviedom' its about the truth FFS and its absolutely shocking taht some of you are so feckin blinkered as to not give a flying feck about what actually occured...

 

We all know full well that two sides of an argument will never be resolved..especially in this case..you luvvies are just continuing your same old rubbish for Ruperts damage limitation purposes....You just go on and on with the same old pathetic and lame excuses for a man with no financial or football sense....What really occured is that the man with a few cronies has

done this to the mighty Saints and now you try to get him a knighthood.[-X

[Andyb1]

Banks will only lend you money if you ask for it.

 

They don't send companies large cheques for millions of pounds just in case you fancy a spending spree.

 

To be fair it doesnt quite work like that does it. Banks up until now have invited borrowing. Only today i recieved a lovely letter from Barclays telling me I had been pre approved for a 10k loan. Excellent news.... If i wanted one.

[Frank's cousin]

We all know full well that two sides of an argument will never be resolved..especially in this case..you luvvies are just continuing your same old rubbish for Ruperts damage limitation purposes....You just go on and on with the same old pathetic and lame excuses for a man with no financial or football sense....What really occured is that the man with a few cronies has

done this to the mighty Saints and now you try to get him a knighthood.[-X

 

That is total feckin ****** and you know it... The only FACTS we have to date in all this are that when in the prem we were well run financially and in the last4 years its got tits up. The reasons for this are what is argued about depending on what side you are and what ******, rumour and gossip you chose to believe. I just want to know the truth - I dont give a feck WHO did what that led to this mess but WHAT was done - the real reasons why we could not avoid gettingto a realistic cost base - If that means ultimately that LOowe is teh biggest c8ck and made even more mistakes than is speculated, sobeit, he will get what he deserves, same goes for teh rest of tehm Wilde or CRouch, and I dont give a rats fart about any of them, what I want to understand is what we need to new board to avoid doing in future and hope that IF fans need to understyand the limitations and time frame they learn from the past and learn how to communicate this effectively - Seriously if you still believe this is some kind of luvvie bollx then I am siorry but there is no otehr way of putting it - you must be stupid - I dont mean to be insulting, but how anyone can interpret this as some sort of defense of him just proves ignorance and nothing more.

[solentstars]

That is total feckin ****** and you know it... The only FACTS we have to date in all this are that when in the prem we were well run financially and in the last4 years its got tits up. The reasons for this are what is argued about depending on what side you are and what ******' date=' rumour and gossip you chose to believe. I just want to know the truth - I dont give a feck WHO did what that led to this mess but WHAT was done - the real reasons why we could not avoid gettingto a realistic cost base - If that means ultimately that LOowe is teh biggest c8ck and made even more mistakes than is speculated, sobeit, he will get what he deserves, same goes for teh rest of tehm Wilde or CRouch, and I dont give a rats fart about any of them, what I want to understand is what we need to new board to avoid doing in future and hope that IF fans need to understyand the limitations and time frame they learn from the past and learn how to communicate this effectively - Seriously if you still believe this is some kind of luvvie bollx then I am siorry but there is no otehr way of putting it - you must be stupid - I dont mean to be insulting, but how anyone can interpret this as some sort of defense of him just proves ignorance and nothing more.[/quote']

 

i agree with you but some posters are simple minded and chose to close their minds to reality and why we are in the crap.

[solentstars]

From the rumours pieced together, I think these guys actually got a bit of a bad deal why? because

 

1. They are rumoured to have only ratified the big spend under BUrley on teh promise of Wildes investors - when these were not fiorthcoming it made Wildes position untenable - hense teh falling out with CRouch and his removal from the board - does not excuse their naivty or that of CRouch if they did not put a hold on this or veto it without written proof of funds....

 

2. SISU - when this fitst came in, 90% of fans were against a hedgefund ownig teh club - teh execs were criticised for wanting teh deal to go ahead because it was rumoured they were ona nice commission. It was teh one and only time Lowe, CRouch and Wilde actually said the same thing in knocking back teh offer for which tehy were applauded at teh time by teh vast majority - especially with CRouch saying better offers were on 3, soryy 6 er sorry 9 months away....

 

that was the start of the finicial trouble when we gambled on promotion and it left us in the S**t

[SaintDonkey]

Although the banks are partly to blame, you can't ignore the mismanagement of SLH and Lowe's apparent poor running of the club.

 

And as far as Lowe's track record goes, he has a knack of pinning the blame on someone else, so I wouldn't be surprised, even if he did have a good point of two, if this is just another one of his attempted scapegoats imo.

 

Dare I mention the fact that the overdraft appeared during Lowe's time away from the club and that he reduced it by around 2 million quid over the season when he returned?

 

Please note I'm not saying that one of the reasons the overdraft grew wasn't the structures he left behind. There are many sticks to beat Lowe with but this isn't one of them.

[saint1977]

that was the start of the finicial trouble when we gambled on promotion and it left us in the S**t

 

It didn't help certainly and Hone and chums (inc Wilde) brought players in on some stupid contracts that they were just not worth - Euell, Safri, II. This significantly increased the overdraft when the parachute payments ran out after taking a gamble 06/07. Remember though that our overheads were significantly increased by the Dome development and large off-the-field wages being paid in the wasted first parachute season of 05/06. Tony Husband on the BBC Sport piece on our demise says "The Woodward experiment might have been worthwhile in they were in the Premiership but at a time of tightening belts, it was a staggering decision".

 

Not having a pop at anyone on this thread but showing that EVERYONE who has been involved with running the club since 2004 has made effing useless decisions and has been a total waste of space. Let's hope someone takes us over this time that uses their brain and not their unjustified ego/s. Frankly we all need to move on if the club can stay afloat. Derby, Bolton and Man City re-emerged from this level back to the PL but it will take not only our support this time but some genuine investment from future boards as well. This seems to be part of Fry's criteria so that the creditors have some chance of scraping back some assets and it should have been part of Askham's in 1996. That way, we wouldn't even be having these boring debates about Lowe where neither side is particularly objective.

Edited 29 April, 2009 by saint1977

[ottery st mary]

That is total feckin ****** and you know it... The only FACTS we have to date in all this are that when in the prem we were well run financially and in the last4 years its got tits up. The reasons for this are what is argued about depending on what side you are and what ******' date=' rumour and gossip you chose to believe. I just want to know the truth - I dont give a feck WHO did what that led to this mess but WHAT was done - the real reasons why we could not avoid gettingto a realistic cost base - If that means ultimately that LOowe is teh biggest c8ck and made even more mistakes than is speculated, sobeit, he will get what he deserves, same goes for teh rest of tehm Wilde or CRouch, and I dont give a rats fart about any of them, what I want to understand is what we need to new board to avoid doing in future and hope that IF fans need to understyand the limitations and time frame they learn from the past and learn how to communicate this effectively - Seriously if you still believe this is some kind of luvvie bollx then I am siorry but there is no otehr way of putting it - you must be stupid - I dont mean to be insulting, but how anyone can interpret this as some sort of defense of him just proves ignorance and nothing more.[/quote']

 

 

Mr Angry[-X What has Rupert done to you:rolleyes:

[krissyboy31]

It didn't help certainly and Hone and chums (inc Wilde) brought players in on some stupid contracts that they were just not worth - Euell, Safri, II. This significantly increased the overdraft when the parachute payments ran out after taking a gamble 06/07. Remember though that our overheads were significantly increased by the Dome development and large off-the-field wages being paid in the wasted first parachute season of 05/06. Tony Husband on the BBC Sport piece on our demise says "The Woodward experiment might have been worthwhile in they were in the Premiership but at a time of tightening belts, it was a staggering decision".

 

Not having a pop at anyone on this thread but showing that EVERYONE who has been involved with running the club since 2004 has made effing useless decisions and has been a total waste of space. Let's hope someone takes us over this time that uses their brain and not their unjustified ego/s. Frankly we all need to move on if the club can stay afloat. Derby, Bolton and Man City re-emerged from this level back to the PL but it will take not only our support this time but some genuine investment from future boards as well. This seems to be part of Fry's criteria so that the creditors have some chance of scraping back some assets and it should have been part of Askham's in 1996. That way, we wouldn't even be having these boring debates about Lowe where neither side is particularly objective.

 

Good post! Can't disagree with any of that.

[ottery st mary]

i agree with you but some posters are simple minded and chose to close their minds to reality and why we are in the crap.

 

You are so naughty. Your usual agreement with anything Rupes...Everyone else to blame.

[solentstars]

You are so naughty. Your usual agreement with anything Rupes...Everyone else to blame.

 

you lowe luvvies make me laugh, the guy got us relegated and he is to blame for that and sacking pearson this season.

but at least i am open minded to realise that the guilty men started with wilde etc mismanaged the finances big time over the last 2 years and we were in the **** .

its all in the company accounts if you bother to look at it rather then going on about your love hate relationship with lowe.

i am glad to see the back of lowe but realise their are other guilty people who destroyed this great club.:smt018

[ottery st mary]

you lowe luvvies make me laugh, the guy got us relegated and he is to blame for that and sacking pearson this season.

but at least i am open minded to realise that the guilty men started with wilde etc mismanaged the finances big time over the last 2 years and we were in the **** .

its all in the company accounts if you bother to look at it rather then going on about your love hate relationship with lowe.

i am glad to see the back of lowe but realise their are other guilty people who destroyed this great club.:smt018

 

stars steady on:smt117

[lordswoodsaints]

in the last few weeks i have opened a business account with barclays and they have been about as helpful to me as bailing out the titanic with a tennis racket.....i have lost patience with them and will be changing accounts,they promised me the world when i took out the account but have done nothing but take money off of me for no return.

[Frank's cousin]

Mr Angry[-X What has Rupert done to you:rolleyes:

 

No, angry with those who simply just wcant grasp the difference between the little fact we have and speculation or how the desire to know the truth BEFORE making generalisations is somehow showing bias....

[ottery st mary]

No' date=' angry with those who simply just wcant grasp the difference between the little fact we have and speculation or how the desire to know the truth BEFORE making generalisations is somehow showing bias....[/quote']

 

Your bad language and calling peeps names does not become your old style Frank...What has he done to you...Take it easy and come on board the train as we are about to leave..Rupert will be at the station;)

 

It may well be that he will be on the train alone except for a few luvvies....The picture of the train going back on the wall.....

Empty stadium I fear.

Edited 29 April, 2009 by ottery st mary

[Frank's cousin]

....no fags for 3 days.... ;-(

[SaintDonkey]

you lowe luvvies make me laugh, the guy got us relegated and he is to blame for that and sacking pearson this season.

but at least i am open minded to realise that the guilty men started with wilde etc mismanaged the finances big time over the last 2 years and we were in the **** .

its all in the company accounts if you bother to look at it rather then going on about your love hate relationship with lowe.

i am glad to see the back of lowe but realise their are other guilty people who destroyed this great club.:smt018

 

You rabid fringe make me laugh, Lowe got us relegated and he is to blame for that and sacking Pearson this season.

But at least I am open minded enough to realise the guilty men started with Wilde etc mismanaging finances big time over the last two years, and that we were in the **** at the start of the season. It's all on the company accounts if you bother to look at it rather than going on about your hate / love relationship with Lowe.

I am glad to see the back of Lowe but realise there are other guilty people who destroyed this great club

[ottery st mary]

You rabid fringe make me laugh, Lowe got us relegated and he is to blame for that and sacking Pearson this season.

But at least I am open minded enough to realise the guilty men started with Wilde etc mismanaging finances big time over the last two years, and that we were in the **** at the start of the season. It's all on the company accounts if you bother to look at it rather than going on about your hate / love relationship with Lowe.

I am glad to see the back of Lowe but realise there are other guilty people who destroyed this great club

 

 

Rupert was not totally to blame..surely Michael Wilde takes a little of the blame:smt117

[teamsaint]

Look, its all very simple.

The club gambled on getting promotion in the playoff season.

Mistake 1 was not having a good enough exit strategy for if the gamble failed.

Mistake 2. Once we had lost the playoffs (and the parachute) everything sellable should have been sold.or given away if it was a player on a big contract that rendered them unsellable, like Skacel.

 

Those in charge in the summer of 2006 and 2007 made massive financial errors.

Lowe has compounded them, not least by his own effect on attendamces at SMS.

[SW11_Saint]

Barclays 'misled customers into gambling their money on risky investment'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1174624/Barclays-misled-customers-gambling-money-risky-investment.html

 

So, let me get this right...Barclays and/or Aviva force Southampton (Leisure Holdings) into administration because of 'financial mismanagement' but it's OK for them to 'financially mismanage' their customers? (according to reports in the Daily Mail)

 

I think Mr Lowe had a good point or two when he laid into Barclays upon his departure.

But ultimately there is no one to blame more than him...

[Verbal]

Barclays 'misled customers into gambling their money on risky investment'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1174624/Barclays-misled-customers-gambling-money-risky-investment.html

 

So, let me get this right...Barclays and/or Aviva force Southampton (Leisure Holdings) into administration because of 'financial mismanagement' but it's OK for them to 'financially mismanage' their customers? (according to reports in the Daily Mail)

 

I think Mr Lowe had a good point or two when he laid into Barclays upon his departure.

 

Barclays have a long and undistinguished history of being rubbish. Lowe laying into Fry (the bank manager, not the administrator) personally was probably unfair though. I doubt he took the decision off his own bat. At the very least, it would have HAD to have been 'referred up' because of Barclays' substantial sponsorship in football, and for the invariably negative publicity that would go with a decision that, when it's played out, could yet destroy a major football club.

 

I suspect there is much more to Barclays' decision than a local bank manager panicking, and the real reason may dribble out in time. I personally wonder whether Southampton have been set up as an 'example' - a shot across the bows to other football clubs. Southampton were an easy target (on this line of thinking) because we had a deeply unpopular, demonstrably useless chairman, a split fanbase some of whom were already half-begging for admin, an infrastructure more in line with a Prem club than League One hustlers (PLC status, the academy, Staplewood, etc), and an impending financial crunch after relegation.

 

If any of this is true, the warning was presumably: downsize or else. Lowe was never going to axe his sacred cow of a youth academy, and would have carried on defending its costs to the detriment of the first team for years to come. Nor could the costly (£250,000 pa) running costs of PLC status ever be sustained by League One economics. So the bank, realising there was nothing really to lose, brought down the axe.

 

Again, I emphasise, this is speculation. But the whole affair does raise some pressing questions...

 

By the way, while watching Lowe being bowled puffballs by Jeff Randall (of all people), I just wished Randall was well enough informed to counter Lowe's accusation that all the financial trouble started after he was toppled in the 'going Wilde' revolution. Randall really should have asked rosy cheeks how on earth he therefore chose to ally himself with the architect of the club's ruinous finances.

[georgeg]

you lowe luvvies make me laugh, the guy got us relegated and he is to blame for that and sacking pearson this season.

but at least i am open minded to realise that the guilty men started with wilde etc mismanaged the finances big time over the last 2 years and we were in the **** .

its all in the company accounts if you bother to look at it rather then going on about your love hate relationship with lowe.

i am glad to see the back of lowe but realise their are other guilty people who destroyed this great club.:smt018

 

youre right solent - although lowe is miles ahead in the "guilty" stakes he is not entirely alone! ironic though that the financial mess of the last 2 -3 years was overseen by one Mr Dave Jones - now where is he now? - yes you've guessed it - still working for the club as finance director!!!!! WTF!!??!!

 

Mr Teflon man

[SW11_Saint]

you lowe luvvies make me laugh, the guy got us relegated and he is to blame for that and sacking pearson this season.

but at least i am open minded to realise that the guilty men started with wilde etc mismanaged the finances big time over the last 2 years and we were in the **** .

its all in the company accounts if you bother to look at it rather then going on about your love hate relationship with lowe.

i am glad to see the back of lowe but realise their are other guilty people who destroyed this great club.:smt018

Ah, the old start a post with "you lowe lovies make me laugh/sick blah blah blah" trick, before going on to point the finger of blame on anyone but his lordship. Well done, he'd be proud of you.

 

PS I can't be bothered going through the whole story of our decline, and you likely wouldn't listen anyway, but suffice to say that our financial problems did not start the minute Lord Lowe left the club, and you're just embarrassing yourself by intimating that they did.

[ottery st mary]

Your bad language and calling peeps names does not become your old style Frank...What has he done to you...Take it easy and come on board the train as we are about to leave..Rupert will be at the station;)

 

It may well be that he will be on the train alone except for a few luvvies....The picture of the train going back on the wall.....

Empty stadium I fear.

 

I will not be at the station or on his train.....If you come back Rupert...YOU can stick it.[-X

[solentstars]

Ah, the old start a post with "you lowe lovies make me laugh/sick blah blah blah" trick, before going on to point the finger of blame on anyone but his lordship. Well done, he'd be proud of you.

 

PS I can't be bothered going through the whole story of our decline, and you likely wouldn't listen anyway, but suffice to say that our financial problems did not start the minute Lord Lowe left the club, and you're just embarrassing yourself by intimating that they did.

i suggest you read the company accounts for the last 2 seasons to see why we are in the **** .

[solentstars]

Look, its all very simple.

The club gambled on getting promotion in the playoff season.

Mistake 1 was not having a good enough exit strategy for if the gamble failed.

Mistake 2. Once we had lost the playoffs (and the parachute) everything sellable should have been sold.or given away if it was a player on a big contract that rendered them unsellable, like Skacel.

 

Those in charge in the summer of 2006 and 2007 made massive financial errors.

Lowe has compounded them, not least by his own effect on attendamces at SMS.

amen someone who tells it like it is.

[solentstars]

youre right solent - although lowe is miles ahead in the "guilty" stakes he is not entirely alone! ironic though that the financial mess of the last 2 -3 years was overseen by one Mr Dave Jones - now where is he now? - yes you've guessed it - still working for the club as finance director!!!!! WTF!!??!!

 

Mr Teflon man

i would love to get answers from him,i bet he has some interesting storys to tell of the finicial mismangement which has sunk us.

[Mole]

amen someone who tells it like it is.

 

And someone who fails to mention season one after relegation when Rupert was playing mind games with Harry Redknapp to force him out.

 

That first season after relgation was wasted and all the realists will accept that the two seasons post relegation was the time to make a concerted effort to get back up.

 

Because of Lowes bungling approach to season 1 it made season 2 so much more difficult.

[Noodles34]

To be fair it doesnt quite work like that does it. Banks up until now have invited borrowing. Only today i recieved a lovely letter from Barclays telling me I had been pre approved for a 10k loan. Excellent news.... If i wanted one.

 

£21,500 for me, she even gave me a card at the counter, theres me thinking it was house insurance etc (Your postcode has been selected for an extra special deal...), but no, you can borrow ..... this! Now where's Nick's bucket.

[solentstars]

And someone who fails to mention season one after relegation when Rupert was playing mind games with Harry Redknapp to force him out.

 

That first season after relgation was wasted and all the realists will accept that the two seasons post relegation was the time to make a concerted effort to get back up.

 

Because of Lowes bungling approach to season 1 it made season 2 so much more difficult.

 

got to agree with you that rupert wanted harry out, but i agree about the concerted effort to get back up but not at the expense of bankrupting the club.

[ThorpG]

Barclays 'misled customers into gambling their money on risky investment'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1174624/Barclays-misled-customers-gambling-money-risky-investment.html

 

So, let me get this right...Barclays and/or Aviva force Southampton (Leisure Holdings) into administration because of 'financial mismanagement' but it's OK for them to 'financially mismanage' their customers? (according to reports in the Daily Mail)

 

I think Mr Lowe had a good point or two when he laid into Barclays upon his departure.

 

Ridiculous. How can Lowe blame the banks? Thats like a burglar blaming the police for not stopping him. If the club were in anyway financially viable the banks would not have gone down this route, what has happened is purely a result of financial mismanagement by Lowe et al...

 

Lowe's parting salvo at Barclays smacks of a man who cannot even acknowledge the truth when it is staring him in the face and that attitude would be one that has characterised his 10+ years at the club.

[kenneth_kenobi]

What confuses me is that Barclays sponsor football, so rather than forcing a club in to administration should they not have warned us, to give us a chance to get donations, bigger crowds, etc BEFORE they pulled the plug?

 

And if they DID warn us, why did the club not act on it???

[Saint in Paradise]

Perhaps they did warn Saints but the warning was treated as if Barclays were only bluffing.

I get the impression, I admit I could be wrong, that Mr Lowe always thought that he was correct

and everyone else was always wrong.

[SaintRobbie]

Barclays 'misled customers into gambling their money on risky investment'

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1174624/Barclays-misled-customers-gambling-money-risky-investment.html

 

So, let me get this right...Barclays and/or Aviva force Southampton (Leisure Holdings) into administration because of 'financial mismanagement' but it's OK for them to 'financially mismanage' their customers? (according to reports in the Daily Mail)

 

I think Mr Lowe had a good point or two when he laid into Barclays upon his departure.

 

Does this really have ANYTHING to do with Southampton FC? No. Doesnt even make a point about the banks with regards to financing Southampton Leisure Holdings plc (dead).

 

Sorry, but ...

 

Close it mods!

[trousers]

Does this really have ANYTHING to do with Southampton FC? No. Doesnt even make a point about the banks with regards to financing Southampton Leisure Holdings plc (dead).

 

Sorry, but ...

 

Close it mods!

 

Say 'please' and they may listen to you.

 

Yours politely,

Trousers

[SW11_Saint]

i suggest you read the company accounts for the last 2 seasons to see why we are in the **** .

I'm a shareholder, I've seen them - but it is far too blinkered to think that these two years are the sole root cause of our financial problems (and blieve me, I am not omitting Crouch, Hone, Hoos, Wilde etc. etc. from their share of blame - in my mind they are all culpable). Our financial problems are a result of a failed stratey(ies), bad management, poor managerial appointments - all leading to poor performance, lower gates, decreased income.

 

Like I say, I am not going to rehash all of this - there are plenty of threads on it, read them if you wish. You go on believing that Lowe has no responsibility whatsoever for our financial mess, up to you mate - but please don't come spouting on here about him being 'without sin'; credit the rest of us with some intellegence (and a more balanced view of what has gone on!).

[SaintRobbie]

Say 'please' and they may listen to you.

 

Yours politely,

Trousers

 

Please Ponty... spare us this Barclays rob old people fred!

 

BTW, LLoyds have done a similar thing too to a friend of mine.

[solentstars]

I'm a shareholder, I've seen them - but it is far too blinkered to think that these two years are the sole root cause of our financial problems (and blieve me, I am not omitting Crouch, Hone, Hoos, Wilde etc. etc. from their share of blame - in my mind they are all culpable). Our financial problems are a result of a failed stratey(ies), bad management, poor managerial appointments - all leading to poor performance, lower gates, decreased income.

 

Like I say, I am not going to rehash all of this - there are plenty of threads on it, read them if you wish. You go on believing that Lowe has no responsibility whatsoever for our financial mess, up to you mate - but please don't come spouting on here about him being 'without sin'; credit the rest of us with some intellegence (and a more balanced view of what has gone on!).

 

i have a shares as well and i have never said that Lowe has no responsibility for the clubs mess, all i mentioned is that the company accounts showed mismangement bigtime the last 2 years and that has been responsible why we are in the crap .

read the accounts its all there or get some answers from dave jones he,s been the finicial director has long as i can remember.