Send pictures to us
Send us your pictures and video by text, email or by uploading. Click here to find out how. »
|
|
|
|
Saints to slash player salary budget if no new investment is found
6:19am Thursday 25th October 2007
Comments (53)
By Gareth Lewis »
SAINTS could be forced to slash their player wage budget in half in January if new investment is not found for the club, the Daily Echo can reveal.
Despite selling almost £20m worth of players since May, the bid for the Premiership is still generating losses of £1m a month.
The club is set to hit the financial buffers in April if no new money is found.
To fend off the threat of administration, club bosses face having to sell star assets such as England Under 21 player Andrew Surman and dismantle its costly Premiership infrastructure just to stay afloat.
The nightmare scenario would torpedo the club's bid for promotion back to the riches of the Premiership at the most pivotal stage of the season.
Saints' dire financial straits are the impetus behind bosses' moves to sell control of the club to an investment company who have promised to invest £10m in the team if it can secure a 55 per cent stake in the club.
As revealed in yesterday's Echo, the investment consortium is London based hedge fund Sisu Capital, which is understood to be offering shareholders 40p a share, well below the recent market value.
Sisu are the only remaining potential investor with an interest in Saints.
Full story: see today's Daily Echo.
Your Say YourEcho
Saints Fan, Hannover Germany says...
8:00am Thu 25 Oct 07
as much as i hate to agree, it sounds like were sinking fast both on and off the pitch. were dying slowly.
Simon Templar, Southampton says...
8:00am Thu 25 Oct 07
Slash the wage bill by 50%? Why not start with Licka, Powell, Vignal, Makin, Ostlund, Wright, Hammill, McGoldrick, Gillett and Bennett.
Saints Fan, Hannover Germany says...
8:02am Thu 25 Oct 07
as much as i hate to agree, it sounds like were sinking fast both on and off the pitch. were dying slowly.
Paul, says...
8:05am Thu 25 Oct 07
Simon Templar wrote:we pay peanuts anyway, slashing it by half will probably only save £400 per annum. Wasn't that why everyone left over the summer 700% pay rises offered by other clubs.
Slash the wage bill by 50%? Why not start with Licka, Powell, Vignal, Makin, Ostlund, Wright, Hammill, McGoldrick, Gillett and Bennett.
But i agree get rid of these wasters and stabalise with some of the youth from the academy (if theres any left).
We're never going to get out of this division.
Rickie, says...
8:10am Thu 25 Oct 07
Saints Fan wrote:fast or slow? make your mind up?? What about "dying around about the national average in terms of speed"?
as much as i hate to agree, it sounds like were sinking fast both on and off the pitch. were dying slowly.
John B, bitterne says...
8:14am Thu 25 Oct 07
Paul wrote:Yes we are going to get out by being relegated.
Simon Templar wrote: Slash the wage bill by 50%? Why not start with Licka, Powell, Vignal, Makin, Ostlund, Wright, Hammill, McGoldrick, Gillett and Bennett.we pay peanuts anyway, slashing it by half will probably only save £400 per annum. Wasn\'t that why everyone left over the summer 700% pay rises offered by other clubs. But i agree get rid of these wasters and stabalise with some of the youth from the academy (if theres any left). We\'re never going to get out of this division.
Back where we were when I first started supporting the Saints in 1957.
The EXECs may be spreading scare stories to get their large fat disgusting bonuses if we are taken over.
I have constantly supported Rupert Lowe why was I wrong,
Paul, says...
8:25am Thu 25 Oct 07
John B wrote:Because wearing tweed at football is wrong.
Paul wrote:Yes we are going to get out by being relegated. Back where we were when I first started supporting the Saints in 1957. The EXECs may be spreading scare stories to get their large fat disgusting bonuses if we are taken over. I have constantly supported Rupert Lowe why was I wrong,Simon Templar wrote: Slash the wage bill by 50%? Why not start with Licka, Powell, Vignal, Makin, Ostlund, Wright, Hammill, McGoldrick, Gillett and Bennett.we pay peanuts anyway, slashing it by half will probably only save £400 per annum. Wasn\\\'t that why everyone left over the summer 700% pay rises offered by other clubs. But i agree get rid of these wasters and stabalise with some of the youth from the academy (if theres any left). We\\\'re never going to get out of this division.
John B, bitterne says...
8:31am Thu 25 Oct 07
Paul wrote:Thought so
John B wrote:Because wearing tweed at football is wrong.Paul wrote:Yes we are going to get out by being relegated. Back where we were when I first started supporting the Saints in 1957. The EXECs may be spreading scare stories to get their large fat disgusting bonuses if we are taken over. I have constantly supported Rupert Lowe why was I wrong,Simon Templar wrote: Slash the wage bill by 50%? Why not start with Licka, Powell, Vignal, Makin, Ostlund, Wright, Hammill, McGoldrick, Gillett and Bennett.we pay peanuts anyway, slashing it by half will probably only save £400 per annum. Wasn\\\'t that why everyone left over the summer 700% pay rises offered by other clubs. But i agree get rid of these wasters and stabalise with some of the youth from the academy (if theres any left). We\\\'re never going to get out of this division.
What a biggoted bunch some of the Saints Supporters are.
The RELEGATOR, 5th in the PREM says...
8:39am Thu 25 Oct 07
Well that all makes great reading , relegated to Div 1 , 15 points deducted for going into Admin , it dont get any beter than that.
Rambler, says...
8:55am Thu 25 Oct 07
The PR offensive starts to try to make shareholders feel this offer is the ONLY hope for the club. What is really best for the club? Sell our soul to a bunch of chancers who are trying to get a club on the cheap. OR ride out the rough times and perhaps shed a few highly paid execs and flush out who the real fans of the club are.
Anyway, how the likes of Gavyn Davies, who says he is a lifelong fan, can watch all this go on without helping out the club, for me, shows he and some of his rich chums are not the Saints fans they pretend to be.
Why doesn't the echo contact the likes of Davies, Goodenough & Salz, three people who said they would invest in the club once Lowe had gone, and ask them why they haven't.
Anyway, how the likes of Gavyn Davies, who says he is a lifelong fan, can watch all this go on without helping out the club, for me, shows he and some of his rich chums are not the Saints fans they pretend to be.
Why doesn't the echo contact the likes of Davies, Goodenough & Salz, three people who said they would invest in the club once Lowe had gone, and ask them why they haven't.
Bryan, Up North says...
8:55am Thu 25 Oct 07
Has anyone at the Echo gone through the clubs accounts, to confirm this report. Sounds like the shareholders and fans are being held to "Ranson".
In the clarts if we don't except this offer.
Something smells fishy, and for once it isn't the skates on this forum.
In the clarts if we don't except this offer.
Something smells fishy, and for once it isn't the skates on this forum.
Worried, Southampton says...
9:06am Thu 25 Oct 07
Bryan wrote:You dont have to go through the accounts. The year we sold Crouch, Theo etc and still had parachute payments we made a £3m loss. The last 6 months accounts showed a loss of £3m with net debt up £2m. So Im dreading see the EOY results for this year. The thing this £10m investment is short term and get us know where! We could be i nthe same position next year but this time with out assets such as Staplewood, Jacksons Farm etc
Has anyone at the Echo gone through the clubs accounts, to confirm this report. Sounds like the shareholders and fans are being held to "Ranson". In the clarts if we don't except this offer. Something smells fishy, and for once it isn't the skates on this forum.
Supporter since 1953, Somerset says...
9:22am Thu 25 Oct 07
There's no way the proposed buyer wants long-term involvement - I doubt whether £10M invested by January would guarantee promotion anyway. The only good thing about the arrangement is that there would be one major shareholder and future takeovers would be far simpler. The board are only recommending the offer because they will have their palms greased if it materialises. Wish I could get a job where I was given a bonus for losing £12M per year. This whole affair stinks and whatever people think about Rupert he was the one that took a 50% pay cut on relegation and made sure the players' contracts didn't bankrupt the club when we first went down.
John B, bitterne says...
9:41am Thu 25 Oct 07
Supporter since 1953 wrote:Very True
There's no way the proposed buyer wants long-term involvement - I doubt whether £10M invested by January would guarantee promotion anyway. The only good thing about the arrangement is that there would be one major shareholder and future takeovers would be far simpler. The board are only recommending the offer because they will have their palms greased if it materialises. Wish I could get a job where I was given a bonus for losing £12M per year. This whole affair stinks and whatever people think about Rupert he was the one that took a 50% pay cut on relegation and made sure the players' contracts didn't bankrupt the club when we first went down.
Rowley Birkn QC, says...
9:49am Thu 25 Oct 07
Has anyone noticed that the Echo tends to release this kind of statement after a loss, as if they are trying to add fuel to the discontent.
StPete, Heaven says...
10:34am Thu 25 Oct 07
John B wrote:Rupert Lowe put in place a structure that would mean the club could survivie relegation, but this wasn't good enough for the anti-lowe brigade. The Lowe out rubbish they spouted will set the club back 20 years (if we manage to survive) unless new investment is found. The Hedge Fund may now be our only choice.
Paul wrote:Thought so What a biggoted bunch some of the Saints Supporters are.John B wrote:Because wearing tweed at football is wrong.Paul wrote:Yes we are going to get out by being relegated. Back where we were when I first started supporting the Saints in 1957. The EXECs may be spreading scare stories to get their large fat disgusting bonuses if we are taken over. I have constantly supported Rupert Lowe why was I wrong,Simon Templar wrote: Slash the wage bill by 50%? Why not start with Licka, Powell, Vignal, Makin, Ostlund, Wright, Hammill, McGoldrick, Gillett and Bennett.we pay peanuts anyway, slashing it by half will probably only save £400 per annum. Wasn\\\'t that why everyone left over the summer 700% pay rises offered by other clubs. But i agree get rid of these wasters and stabalise with some of the youth from the academy (if theres any left). We\\\'re never going to get out of this division.
Well done anti-lowe brigade. We're in this position because of you.
... but hey, at least we're rid of that financially prudent, sensible businessman. What a devil he was
Angry at being, Lowe-down says...
10:59am Thu 25 Oct 07
StPete wrote:Errr. We got relegated due to a lack of investment at the right time and not when things had gone so wrong that desperation set in i.e. when Harry was spunkin' the motherload.
John B wrote:Rupert Lowe put in place a structure that would mean the club could survivie relegation, but this wasn\'t good enough for the anti-lowe brigade. The Lowe out rubbish they spouted will set the club back 20 years (if we manage to survive) unless new investment is found. The Hedge Fund may now be our only choice. Well done anti-lowe brigade. We\'re in this position because of you. ... but hey, at least we\'re rid of that financially prudent, sensible businessman. What a devil he wasPaul wrote:Thought so What a biggoted bunch some of the Saints Supporters are.John B wrote:Because wearing tweed at football is wrong.Paul wrote:Yes we are going to get out by being relegated. Back where we were when I first started supporting the Saints in 1957. The EXECs may be spreading scare stories to get their large fat disgusting bonuses if we are taken over. I have constantly supported Rupert Lowe why was I wrong,Simon Templar wrote: Slash the wage bill by 50%? Why not start with Licka, Powell, Vignal, Makin, Ostlund, Wright, Hammill, McGoldrick, Gillett and Bennett.we pay peanuts anyway, slashing it by half will probably only save £400 per annum. Wasn\\\\\\\'t that why everyone left over the summer 700% pay rises offered by other clubs. But i agree get rid of these wasters and stabalise with some of the youth from the academy (if theres any left). We\\\\\\\'re never going to get out of this division.
And the so called financial prudence is what began the rot. How were we to get out of a division we didn't have the future income to survive in without an aggressive stategy? We had a weak one instead and look where it is sending us?
I think you will also remember in being reported that Rupert would quit if we were not up within two years, which would have been the case.
Lowe needed to go. Sadly, we have not ended up with a decent alternative. Perhaps, if Rupert, wilde and Crouch actually care about the club, maybe they will sell their shares for less than they are worth. Especially Rupert as he got all his from club money!
Saintly, says...
12:02pm Thu 25 Oct 07
We got related because for poor managers and putting all the investment into the youth and training facilities.
This so called new investment by Sisu is a worry, its sounds all good to save the club. But with the bonuses they want for reaching certain goals i.e promotion! This could potentially clear out the money we get on promotion. Then we're relagated again. Seems an easy earner to me.
This so called new investment by Sisu is a worry, its sounds all good to save the club. But with the bonuses they want for reaching certain goals i.e promotion! This could potentially clear out the money we get on promotion. Then we're relagated again. Seems an easy earner to me.
Dodgy Exec, Fat Cat board room says...
12:19pm Thu 25 Oct 07
This article - quite simply - smacks of a PR initiative by the people who would gain the most from the so called investment by SISU - i.e. SISU and our 'wonderful' Exec's who clearly have the club's best interest at their very heart (ahem).
linda, east wellow says...
12:45pm Thu 25 Oct 07
OK THIS IS GREAT READING WITH REAL SAINTS SUPPORTERS ON HERE .WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS , ARE SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WORRIED ABOUT THEIR PAY ? WHAT DO THEY EARN PER WEEK FROM US THE REAL HEART OF THE CLUB .CAN ANYONE SUPPLY THE ANSWER .
Jesus, Bevious Valley says...
1:05pm Thu 25 Oct 07
I am sick of hearing about how we are going to go into administration.
We are one of the best supported clubs in the championships.
We pay rubbish wages.(to players!)
It doesnt add up. We only here this stuff just before something that we dont want is going to happen.
Like for example we sell half the club to an INVESTMENT COMPANY. Next we will be on the phone to ocean finance. Whats that we can borrow £500k per board member? That will sort out Christmas then
We are one of the best supported clubs in the championships.
We pay rubbish wages.(to players!)
It doesnt add up. We only here this stuff just before something that we dont want is going to happen.
Like for example we sell half the club to an INVESTMENT COMPANY. Next we will be on the phone to ocean finance. Whats that we can borrow £500k per board member? That will sort out Christmas then
La Caillere Saint, France says...
1:11pm Thu 25 Oct 07
I see the second word of this article is "could". Why dont newspaper journalists write news stories, speculation is down to the readers.
One other point is it a fact that izusu are the only remaining "potential investor"??
One other point is it a fact that izusu are the only remaining "potential investor"??
David Brown, Lee on Solent says...
1:14pm Thu 25 Oct 07
What a wonderfull guy Rupert Lowe was for SFC.
Was he not the man who surrounded himself with the likes Clive Woodward paying him an absolute fortune for achieving nothing, did not Rupert purchase a centre forward for in excess of 4million pounds who never really kicked a ball for SFC.Is this the same Rupert Lowe who refuse Gordon Strachan a measely 5million to strengthen the team after achieving the highest placing in the Premiership and playing in a cup final.What a wonderfull man he was.
Ask many of previous players or a couple of ex Managers and they will tell why the club is in the mess it is two words Rupert Lowe.
Was he not the man who surrounded himself with the likes Clive Woodward paying him an absolute fortune for achieving nothing, did not Rupert purchase a centre forward for in excess of 4million pounds who never really kicked a ball for SFC.Is this the same Rupert Lowe who refuse Gordon Strachan a measely 5million to strengthen the team after achieving the highest placing in the Premiership and playing in a cup final.What a wonderfull man he was.
Ask many of previous players or a couple of ex Managers and they will tell why the club is in the mess it is two words Rupert Lowe.
Chris, Canterbury says...
1:18pm Thu 25 Oct 07
Don't believe the hype. I agree with Bryan and Rambler, above. This is nothing more than propaganda to force through the proposed sale.
On the point of the "investor", how can a hedge fund be in it for the long term? It defies their very existence. There are only two possible outcomes: promotion and selling on for a profit, but this requires a future buyer; and asset stripping.
If the club is bought by ahedge fund, it will be incorporated within a fund. It must, therefore, yield a profit for investors.
Given the current mess of the markets due to the sub-prime crisis, who on earth would invest in a troubled football club when the financial gamble rests on promotion?
This is awful news. If the copy/paste from the Evening Standard yesterday was true and Paul Allen was told to take a hike and/or left due to bickering then we really are in trouble.
I, for one, think this proposed sale and press release from St Mary's is just a joke.
On the point of the "investor", how can a hedge fund be in it for the long term? It defies their very existence. There are only two possible outcomes: promotion and selling on for a profit, but this requires a future buyer; and asset stripping.
If the club is bought by ahedge fund, it will be incorporated within a fund. It must, therefore, yield a profit for investors.
Given the current mess of the markets due to the sub-prime crisis, who on earth would invest in a troubled football club when the financial gamble rests on promotion?
This is awful news. If the copy/paste from the Evening Standard yesterday was true and Paul Allen was told to take a hike and/or left due to bickering then we really are in trouble.
I, for one, think this proposed sale and press release from St Mary's is just a joke.
Supporter since 1953, Somerset says...
1:19pm Thu 25 Oct 07
Wait for the accounts East Wellow Linda - but don't hold your breath as they won't be published until the board are forced to. We'll know then the total directors' fees which will be a little higher than in Rupert's time (£0.5M). Shall we say twice or maybe four times higher? The **** will hit the fan when this number's made public.
Board room blitz, SFC says...
1:32pm Thu 25 Oct 07
Leak wrecks hedge funds £40m bid for Southampton FC
http://www.cityam.co
m/images/covers/City
AM.pdf
http://www.cityam.co
m/images/covers/City
AM.pdf
Captain Swing, Southampton says...
1:44pm Thu 25 Oct 07
Board room blitz wrote:AGAIN: a reader scoops the ECHO!
Leak wrecks hedge funds £40m bid for Southampton FC http://www.cityam.co m/images/covers/City AM.pdf
Is it true though, are SISU pulling out? And if so, which director leaked the details of the offer, and why did he/she leak to the Standard rather than a local news outlet?
We deserve an answer.
Saints Chic, Holbury says...
1:53pm Thu 25 Oct 07
They didn't leak to local news cos they knew the fans would find out before the local paper!! Is this not good news though?? This lot isn't the sort of investment we want!
Saintly, says...
2:17pm Thu 25 Oct 07
This so called investment had been window dressed to look good and to get the fans excited. There is no investment!
What has ousting RL really acheived? we are no better off.
There is something iffy going on back stage!
What has ousting RL really acheived? we are no better off.
There is something iffy going on back stage!
Smarmy, London says...
2:29pm Thu 25 Oct 07
I actually think that a hedge-fund or other profit-orientated investor wouldn't be SUCH a bad thing now. The financial interest and the sporting interest actually coincide. The only way you're going to make money out of Saints is to get us promoted, and it would cost less to get us promoted than you would get in a single year of Prem TV money, so it makes sense to put that money in. The whole bonuses for the board thing stinks, though. Anyway, I'd rather have a company who are at least honest enough to say they are in it for the money than another "saviour". I hope the "we got our club back" brigade are happy now, eh?
We'll only have our club back when we are a community-owned club that pays its own way, and we can send Crouch, Lowe, Wilde and the rest of the bickering megalomaniacs on their way. COYR!
We'll only have our club back when we are a community-owned club that pays its own way, and we can send Crouch, Lowe, Wilde and the rest of the bickering megalomaniacs on their way. COYR!
kev keegan, in a car park in my range rover says...
2:31pm Thu 25 Oct 07
You got rid of Lowe.
No you did not he is still a driving force behind the club and still driving it down to get his dosh back.
Until he is gone the club is doomed. When your next batch of quality has been sold you will only be fit for the lower leagues.
Sorry but that is fact
No you did not he is still a driving force behind the club and still driving it down to get his dosh back.
Until he is gone the club is doomed. When your next batch of quality has been sold you will only be fit for the lower leagues.
Sorry but that is fact
Smarmy, London says...
2:37pm Thu 25 Oct 07
I'm no fan of Lowe, but I think everyone should remember that one man got us relegated, who I will NEVER forgive, and that is Harry Redknapp. He gets off FAR too lightly with Saints fans. What a *&!!
Sorry, off-topic I know. COYR!
Sorry, off-topic I know. COYR!
Wazza, says...
2:50pm Thu 25 Oct 07
I don't know much about hedge funds etc so I won't comment on that.
As far as the Lowe debate goes, IMO, we are where we are because of his extreme budgeting (aka 'business sense') if we hadn't shelled out garbage transfer fees and wages on garbage players we might have had a fighting chance to stay in the league. Blame also has to go on the managers he employed (since Strachan) and their buying policy.
As far as the Lowe debate goes, IMO, we are where we are because of his extreme budgeting (aka 'business sense') if we hadn't shelled out garbage transfer fees and wages on garbage players we might have had a fighting chance to stay in the league. Blame also has to go on the managers he employed (since Strachan) and their buying policy.
Bryan, u says...
2:58pm Thu 25 Oct 07
Smarmy wrote:The worry is that the Hedge Fund would sell the Stadium, Staplewood the players and anything else, all with lease back deals (I believe that leasing players is one of Ranson's businesses), using this money to get us into the Prem, then flogging us on.
I actually think that a hedge-fund or other profit-orientated investor wouldn't be SUCH a bad thing now. The financial interest and the sporting interest actually coincide. The only way you're going to make money out of Saints is to get us promoted, and it would cost less to get us promoted than you would get in a single year of Prem TV money, so it makes sense to put that money in. The whole bonuses for the board thing stinks, though. Anyway, I'd rather have a company who are at least honest enough to say they are in it for the money than another "saviour". I hope the "we got our club back" brigade are happy now, eh? We'll only have our club back when we are a community-owned club that pays its own way, and we can send Crouch, Lowe, Wilde and the rest of the bickering megalomaniacs on their way. COYR!
Oh and I agree. Harry Redknapp eat s**t and D*e
Jason, Salisbury says...
3:07pm Thu 25 Oct 07
The only positive thing I can think of regards these SISU guys is that they are obviously very serious and astute about finances.
I don't think they'd see the point of asset stripping us or trying to reduce the cost base via the playing staff, but what they would want to do is buy us cheap and sell us for a profit in a few years.
That means getting us in the Premier League or, at the very least, actively finding a buyer with money to burn.
At least it might mean we'd be run by serious business people rather than small time muppets who think they're big time, as has been the case since Lowe took charge.
And they would at least have a clue when it comes to attracting investors and knowing how to do business with them, which it is clear the current board do not.
Let's face it, they can't even negotiate a cheap loan signing without a six-month window.
I don't think they'd see the point of asset stripping us or trying to reduce the cost base via the playing staff, but what they would want to do is buy us cheap and sell us for a profit in a few years.
That means getting us in the Premier League or, at the very least, actively finding a buyer with money to burn.
At least it might mean we'd be run by serious business people rather than small time muppets who think they're big time, as has been the case since Lowe took charge.
And they would at least have a clue when it comes to attracting investors and knowing how to do business with them, which it is clear the current board do not.
Let's face it, they can't even negotiate a cheap loan signing without a six-month window.
Fan first, Shareholder second says...
3:36pm Thu 25 Oct 07
Initially I welcomed this initiative with some reservations wanting to know the how/when/where of the funding. Then it became obvious - issuing new shares. Does this mean that no actual cash comes forth diluting the value of existing shares? Sale and Leasback of Fixed Assets? Liquidation of other assets i.e. sell players? Reduce the wages bill by employing cheap foreign/east european players? I suspect so, this looks like classic private equity predation. Three years and they're out! Bugger the consequences.
My modest shareholding is staying right here - the certificates are framed and on the wall with my '76 Wembley and last match at The Dell souvenirs.
My modest shareholding is staying right here - the certificates are framed and on the wall with my '76 Wembley and last match at The Dell souvenirs.
Pompey are sh1t, says...
4:42pm Thu 25 Oct 07
I'm the same. I'm keeping my shares I don't want them devalued buy a bunch quick profit asset strippers!
Why has they're two previous attempts to buy clubs failed? cos they're dodgy!
If Lowe is just after the money. We'll sort find out if he votes in favour!?
Why has they're two previous attempts to buy clubs failed? cos they're dodgy!
If Lowe is just after the money. We'll sort find out if he votes in favour!?
BOBBY MCLAREN, SOUTHAMPTON says...
4:45pm Thu 25 Oct 07
RUPERT LOWE KILLED OUR CLUB , HE BOUGHT CHAMPIONSHIP PLAYERS WHEN WE WERE STILL IN THE PREM , WHEN WE GOT RELEGATED HE CUT THE WAGES SO ALL JUMPED SHIP INSTEAD OF MAKING A CONCERTED EFFORT TO GO STRAIGHT BACK UP WHILE THE CUSHION PAYMENTS WERE STILL THERE .BUSINESS MAN ? YES BUT TO LINE HIS OWN POCKETS AND THAT OF HIS CRONIES , I WILL NEVER FORGIVE HIM , W G S WAS THE BEST THING EVER AND HE GOT NOUGHT , BAD HIP , YES HE SAW GLEN WAITING IN THE CAR PARK ! AND OH LETS NOT FORGET WIGLEY WHAT A DISASTER CHEAP AND ? OH LOOK AT PLYMOUTH MANAGER STURROCK ? OH DEAR SO MANY I COULD GO ON ALL DAY .DOOMED UNTIL LOWE IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH OUR CLUB
Gutted Saint, Getting concerned says...
4:47pm Thu 25 Oct 07
Deal is off
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/dna/606/A28355817
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/dna/606/A28355817
Jason, Salisbury says...
5:43pm Thu 25 Oct 07
Says it all for me that the story about SISU's proposed takeover on the BBC website has linked stories to football corruption and dodgy player investment.
As Ranson is involved with player leasing, doesn't this set Saints up as a prime target in this whole transfer/ownership issue in years to come. Especially if we start magically bringing in big players in in a similar way to Tevez at West Ham. This whole deal strikes me as being a bit murky.
Reminds me in a funny way of those Rogue Trader programmes, with the Saints board playing the dopey old woman getting ripped off.
Although come to think of it, maybe we're in that role the current board are also laughing all the way to the bank.
As Ranson is involved with player leasing, doesn't this set Saints up as a prime target in this whole transfer/ownership issue in years to come. Especially if we start magically bringing in big players in in a similar way to Tevez at West Ham. This whole deal strikes me as being a bit murky.
Reminds me in a funny way of those Rogue Trader programmes, with the Saints board playing the dopey old woman getting ripped off.
Although come to think of it, maybe we're in that role the current board are also laughing all the way to the bank.
Mr T, Waterside says...
6:02pm Thu 25 Oct 07
Who gives a toss anyway?
Shareholder, Totton says...
6:45pm Thu 25 Oct 07
As I said when this story broke the deal is not up to scratch. Reports on the BBc site suggest Rupert Lowe will support the takeover which is enough to give me cause for concern. I don't necessarily think that dealing with a Hedge Fund is in itself a bad idea. Indeed their biggest pay-day wouldn't come from the sale of land but from the sale of a successful Premiership Football Club. Assets such as those at Staplewood would be far more profitable in that scenario as part of a football club set-up rather than as housing land. My problem is with the way this has been managed and the fact that back-handers appear to be in play. That makes it unethical in my eyes and thus not worthy of support. If reports in the London Evening Standard are to be believed and Paul Allen DID make a bid then I suggest an EGM is called, the current Board sacked and Mr. Allen invited to join. I suspect neither will be possible. In the meantime my shares are staying in my bank!
Fan first, Shareholder second says...
8:21pm Thu 25 Oct 07
When the SLH backed Saints Trust first became apparent, they harrassed me and many other shareholders to pledge our shares to their cause. I was dubious about them then and still are. If they 'control' as many shares as they claim and speak on behalf of fan shareholders - why have they been so quiet on this matter? Is it because they don't want to lose any priveleges they may have with the Board or is there other self interest? In the pocket of the Board?
There is something very wrong with this Sisu approach. Failed at AV, failed at Man City, failed at Derby. Why Saints? Coventry are in a far worse financial quandary than Saints so why aren't Sisu stalking them?
There is something very wrong with this Sisu approach. Failed at AV, failed at Man City, failed at Derby. Why Saints? Coventry are in a far worse financial quandary than Saints so why aren't Sisu stalking them?
Mystery Investor, Freemantle says...
9:01pm Thu 25 Oct 07
Who are the board?
Greg, Auckland, New Zealand says...
9:19pm Thu 25 Oct 07
EVERYONE CALM DOWN JUST A TAD
This is journalism at its extreme. A loss (3 points), take over bid, massive cash losses. Whoever, has the strings are playing the Echo like a puppet. These reports are in the paper for a reason. Someone will gain financially, even at the detriment of the club.
So us supporters shouldnt bite (just yet). Bide our time first, let the wolf show his/her face then we can make up our minds.
Mind you could be too late then.
Like every single stupid Echo article, you have to read between the lines, to why the story is run in the first place.
This is journalism at its extreme. A loss (3 points), take over bid, massive cash losses. Whoever, has the strings are playing the Echo like a puppet. These reports are in the paper for a reason. Someone will gain financially, even at the detriment of the club.
So us supporters shouldnt bite (just yet). Bide our time first, let the wolf show his/her face then we can make up our minds.
Mind you could be too late then.
Like every single stupid Echo article, you have to read between the lines, to why the story is run in the first place.
Gavin Egan, Botley says...
9:25pm Thu 25 Oct 07
This is a shocking indictment of the current board. They failed to invest in new players in January and cost us promotion. Now they are claiming the money raised from transfers in the summer; not exactly an unsubstantial sum, will only last us until April!? They then have the audacity to suggest that they should be rewarded financially as a result of securing outside investment at only 40pence per share. I truly hope the first act on any new majority shareholder will be to call an EGM for their immediate removal. Then let's see a new board appointed with the skills, financial connections and vision to take this great club forward.
Smarmy, London says...
9:41am Fri 26 Oct 07
I'm sure nobody's reading this any more but:
The new share issue is the good bit! That's the only way money actually gets spent on the club. Otherwise it just goes to line the pockets of existing shareholders (as happened with the Wilde takeover - not a penny of his money actually got spent on the club). From a fan perspective a low offer price AND a new share issue are EXACTLY what we want, then the new money can go on players. Obviously, the shareholders won't want that, as it dilutes their holdings but f 'em, I say. That may explain all this talk of "bonuses".
Bobby - Redknapp got fewer points per game than either Wigley or Sturrock in our relegation season, I believe. I do blame Lowe, but mostly for appointing Redknapp, who is a self-serving swine who only came to the club to get at Mandaric and Pompey anyway. HE SENT US DOWN. Lowe's worst decision ever, and I said that at the time, too.
The new share issue is the good bit! That's the only way money actually gets spent on the club. Otherwise it just goes to line the pockets of existing shareholders (as happened with the Wilde takeover - not a penny of his money actually got spent on the club). From a fan perspective a low offer price AND a new share issue are EXACTLY what we want, then the new money can go on players. Obviously, the shareholders won't want that, as it dilutes their holdings but f 'em, I say. That may explain all this talk of "bonuses".
Bobby - Redknapp got fewer points per game than either Wigley or Sturrock in our relegation season, I believe. I do blame Lowe, but mostly for appointing Redknapp, who is a self-serving swine who only came to the club to get at Mandaric and Pompey anyway. HE SENT US DOWN. Lowe's worst decision ever, and I said that at the time, too.
Jason, Salisbury says...
11:25am Fri 26 Oct 07
While I agree Redknapp was a massive mistake, I don't actually blame him for our relegation.
Why bring in a manager that excels at wheeling and dealing with under-performing experienced players and give him peanuts to spend in the transfer window?
As a result he ended up bringing in players that were cut-price even by his standards and never looked even half committed to the club.
All of that has to go down to Lowe.
Having said that, it has to be remembered that, if Lowe had actually gotten his first choice months before, Hoddle would have returned, and, like him or loath him, he would not have relegated us or got us into financial trouble due to over spending, I virtually guarantee it.
Why bring in a manager that excels at wheeling and dealing with under-performing experienced players and give him peanuts to spend in the transfer window?
As a result he ended up bringing in players that were cut-price even by his standards and never looked even half committed to the club.
All of that has to go down to Lowe.
Having said that, it has to be remembered that, if Lowe had actually gotten his first choice months before, Hoddle would have returned, and, like him or loath him, he would not have relegated us or got us into financial trouble due to over spending, I virtually guarantee it.
Supporter since 1953, Somerset says...
12:33pm Fri 26 Oct 07
Off on a bit of a tangent I confess - but with the company being in a bid situation for many weeks perhaps the board may have thought it sensible to rush through the preparation of the accounts (to 30 June) by now. On second thoughts, perhaps it might not be in their interests. Every week that goes by without these accounts makes the whole board stink even more.
Saintly, Heaven says...
3:15pm Fri 26 Oct 07
John B wrote:Oh and being called Rupert!! Whoever heard of anyone in football called Rupert?????
Paul wrote:Thought so What a biggoted bunch some of the Saints Supporters are.John B wrote:Because wearing tweed at football is wrong.Paul wrote:Yes we are going to get out by being relegated. Back where we were when I first started supporting the Saints in 1957. The EXECs may be spreading scare stories to get their large fat disgusting bonuses if we are taken over. I have constantly supported Rupert Lowe why was I wrong,Simon Templar wrote: Slash the wage bill by 50%? Why not start with Licka, Powell, Vignal, Makin, Ostlund, Wright, Hammill, McGoldrick, Gillett and Bennett.we pay peanuts anyway, slashing it by half will probably only save £400 per annum. Wasn\\\\\\\'t that why everyone left over the summer 700% pay rises offered by other clubs. But i agree get rid of these wasters and stabalise with some of the youth from the academy (if theres any left). We\\\\\\\'re never going to get out of this division.
Fan first, Shareholder second says...
5:30pm Fri 26 Oct 07
Smarmy wrote:Smarmy: Not all shareholders are rich capitalist parasites - some of us have very modest holdings. (You can buy a framed presentation gift of one share on eBay for around £20) The 813 members of Saints Trust own 20,000 shares and have proxy voting rights over another 550,00 or so. The only ones promised bonuses if this goes through are the Exec Directors none of whom own substantial share holdings anyway. Lowe, Wilde & Crouch, etc. are the prominent shareholders who will make the decision - the hundreds of fans who own small numbers are the ones who really care about their club and have very little say.
I'm sure nobody's reading this any more but: The new share issue is the good bit! That's the only way money actually gets spent on the club. Otherwise it just goes to line the pockets of existing shareholders (as happened with the Wilde takeover - not a penny of his money actually got spent on the club). From a fan perspective a low offer price AND a new share issue are EXACTLY what we want, then the new money can go on players. Obviously, the shareholders won't want that, as it dilutes their holdings but f 'em, I say. That may explain all this talk of "bonuses". Bobby - Redknapp got fewer points per game than either Wigley or Sturrock in our relegation season, I believe. I do blame Lowe, but mostly for appointing Redknapp, who is a self-serving swine who only came to the club to get at Mandaric and Pompey anyway. HE SENT US DOWN. Lowe's worst decision ever, and I said that at the time, too.
Agree with you about Redkrapp though - he only came to SFC (on £400k pa) to p*ss off Mandaric. He spent £750k on agent's fees and couldn't put a winning side together. The only positives with his reign were watching Crouch and Walcott blossom.
Trahsis, Down says...
2:15am Sat 27 Oct 07
Come back Rupert, all is forgiven
Robbie, Portsmouth says...
7:54am Thu 25 Oct 07