Saints AGM - the questions and answers

Here is a list of the questions, in order, that were asked.

Q Michael Wilde, can you put a timeline on when you want new investment in place?

A (Wilde): As I have already said, I cannot be definite about long-term solutions. We have to know what the requirements will be. In the short term, we're uncertain as to the requirements regarding the January transfer window until we have spoken to George nearer the time.

Q: In the accounts I see the depreciation of assets has fallen from £49m to £39m - that's a big reduction in fixed assets. Also, parts of the stadium are said to depreciate between five and 50 years - that's a big difference.

A (David Jones, finance director): There are two kinds of assets - tangible assets like the stadium and intangible assets like the playing staff. The reduction was mainly due to off-loading so many players during the financial year. The value of our squad has gone down in paper terms.

Jim Hone, chief executive): I would like to add that just because the paper value of our squad is £3m, that is not their market value. That's a misleading thing about football club balance sheets. £3m is a book value, not a real world value.

Q When can the club receive the next payment from Arsenal re the Theo Walcott transfer deal?

A (Hone): It's probably better to ask Arsene Wenger that question than us. I think Arsene was asked last week if he could see Theo making more starts and he talked down the chance.

In deference to our predecessors, the Walcott transfer deal was a pretty good one for us. It's got good prospects for the club in terms of future income.

Q: Was their a time delay on the Walcott payments (ie, did he have to play x amount of games by a certain time otherwise Saints didn't get all their money?) A (Lee Hoos, operations manager): No

Q: Have Arsenal taken out insurance against Walcott getting an injury which ends his career and, therefore, stops Saints receiving any more money?

A (Hoos): No. To take out an insurance premium on something like that would be prohibitively expensive.

Hone: I'm more concerned about the players we have got now rather than the ones who used to play for us. Theo's been here, now he's gone, our predecessors did a good deal, now there's nothing we can do about it. I'm more concerned about what players George has coming through the academy.

Q: I'm concerned about the club's finances should we not go up? Since relegation turnover fell 43 per cent in the first financial year. What levels of income are being predicted should we not go up?

A (Dulieu, non executive chairman of the PLC board) The difficulty I have answering that question is that we a listed company and we are not allowed to make financial forecasts. Legally, we can't do that. We can't make forward financial statements, I'm afraid.

Q: George, what are your plans for the January transfer window?

A: I will tell you after tomorrow night!

There's been massive changes since I've been here - I think 23 players have left and 13 have come in. And with everything when you are building something, you need a period to stabilise things.

We've had some good results, some bad results - but we have just recently started to get a bit of consistency. An consistency is what you need.

I've got a good squad, a good mixture of youth and experience. The key is now to get everyone bonded together.

We'll look at it nearer January. By then I might have two or three centre halves out injured or one or two strikers injured.

I don't want a situation where you have so many players there's no room for the youngsters coming through. And you don't want four or five always kicking their heels.

I need to get some consistency in team selection - and let's see how far that takes us.

Q (from David Windsor-Clive, former director, though he didn't offer his name - unlike some speakers from the floor) Back on June 23 there was a statement where Michael Wilde and Patrick Trant both said they would put in considerable investment if they won the EGM. What is the latest with that, given it was a major selling point of their pre EGM campaign?

A (Wilde) I disagree with the view that it was a major selling point.

My own personal decisions financially are just that - personal.

But I have said I am happy to put more of my own money into the club - as long as it is consistent with the long term refinancing of the club.

Q (from Mike Richards, former director, who did state his name before speaking) The following quote is a paraphrased version of Richards' comments.

I have a two-part question. I would put it to the board that most of the £3.3m loss incurred during the last financial year was incurred during the additional month the new board added on (June 2006). Also, the money spent during the summer was around £1m over the cash flow forecast the previous board had drawn up. If resources are now stretched, is there enough money to see the club through to the end of the season?

A (Dave Jones) I can confirm that Mike is right with his comments regarding the £3.3m loss. The month of June so no real income and obviously money went out.

Among the money that was spent in June was £563,000 in termination payments to Lowe, Cowen, Richards, Windsor Clive and Askham - thought it is believed the lion's share of that went to the first two named directors. Another £200,000 was spent on fighting the EGM, which never took place.

Jones: While it is difficult for me to give a forecast on our income for the rest of the season, everyone was happy to sign the accounts off as a going concern.

Q Richards: In the event of no fund raising coming in in the shape of new investment, are the board comfortable with the cash flow without the need to sell players in January?

Hone: The simple answer is yes', we are comfortable.

Were we not, we would not have been able to say - as we have - that we are under no pressure to sell any players to make ends meet.

We have many creditors - Barclays are a main one, though that doesn't include the stadium debt - but in our dialogue with them none are about to hit the panic button.

They take the view, as we do, that it was wise for us to try and strengthen George's squad, though I accept that was the previous board's intention as well.

The price of promotion to the Premiership has never been greater. I would say it's worth around £35 as a starting point. And even if we went up and come straight back down again, you're looking at two seasons worth of parachute payments with the new media deal of £10m a season.

So I would say that if the play-off final at Cardiff next May went down to the last penalty, it would be worth a minimum of £55m to the club if their player scored it.

Who would want to take that penalty? Not me!

But that's the nature of the business we are in. One is always vulnerable to the kicking of a ball.

I'm not saying to George you have to get us up' - that's not been said. What has been said is that this is the last season of the parachute payment and everyone at the club is doing all they can to win promotion.

Sorry to heap all the pressure on you, George, but it IS bloody important we go up!

If we don't go up, we will have to put in place plans that shall be met with limited popularity.

But I see no reason for any scaremongering.

We DO have confidence in you, George!

Q (Ted Sainty, long-time fan) I class Saints as a motorcar which has had a bad accident. For nine years we had a careless driver who did not listen and we had a bad crash. And with any accident, it costs money to put things right.

I am very comfortable with the new board. I will still back them if we go down another division.

A (Dulieu) You will be pleased to know I've got no convictions for careless driving.

Q (Karen Barrett, long-time fan): Can I ask the board that the new ticket prices for younger fans and concessionary prices for OAPs regardless of where they sit in the ground will be in place next season?

A (Hone) Yes.

Q Barrett: I get the feeling you want to make the club more responsive to the fans. I would like an assurance that whoever gets involved with investing in the club makes sure it stays a family club. If any of the wealthy people you are talking to - at least I hope they are wealthy! - get involved, is there an assurance that policy making will be decided by people who have the club at heart?

A (Dulieu) We are trying to put round pegs into round holes. The board recognise that we are here to act as stewards for the future of Southampton FC. We want to be in a position to hand over the club in a better position than we took over it.

Q Lawrie, can you tell us about the ambassadors club?

A (McMenemy)I purposely keep my nose out the football side of things, I let George get on with that - I've had my day doing what he does.

I am just trying to rekindle what the club should be all about. It used to be a respected club, very friendly.

The ambassadors club is a fantastic club - the people we get in enjoy mixing with the former players.

Now we have people on the board who have put their own money in to try and bring the club back to what I mentioned before.

Q (Brian Bennett, Saints Trust) You did a 60-day audit of the finances. Did you find anything you can tell us?

A (Dulieu) I wish you hadn't asked me that question, because I can't answer it. There's certain things I can't disclose for legal reasons. It's an underlying fact that there were extraordinary costs this year which, God willing, won't happen again - unless you wish to vote us out! This isn't me being defensive, it's because I legally can't answer the question.

Q: (From a fan sitting almost directly behind Rupert Lowe) I didn't vote for Michael Wilde because of the new investment he mentioned. I voted for him because I wanted change. I'd have voted for anyone new to come in. I just wanted to see some change.

Q Can the board tell me what, if any, new shares the directors have bought recently? Also, I was concerned that two of the board (Wiseman and Hunt) sold shares earlier this year.

A (Jones) Patrick Trant has bought 185,000 shares, we released that news to the Stock Exchange four to six weeks ago.

Keith Wiseman and Brian Hunt sold their shares to Michael Wilde, which helped enable him to get his significant sahreholding. That was their reason for selling.

Q (Perry McMillan, Saints Independent Supporters Association) I would like to thank Wilde and Crouch for giving us back a feelgood factor. I would also like to thank Wiseman, Hunt and Gordon for helping to facilitate that.

Can I also applaud the wisdom of bringing Lawrie Mac back?

Hopefully now we have got rid of some nasty capitalists and got some nice ones!

It was nice to hear from Mr Richards - he's said more today than I've ever heard him say at the annual meeting!

We desperately need stability. I say to George Burley, I hope I see you here next year - you'll have done better than most of the managers before you.

I'm glad to hear the assurances about not selling Gareth Bale. I have no doubt that if the previous board were still in control he would be sold in January.

Anyway, we think the way forward for the football club is to just have the one board.

I firmly believe the club is in better hands now, but I ask the question - how is being a PLC beneficial to the club?

When the previous board were here they said they had blue chip companies interested in investing prior to the move to St Mary's. Well, they never materialised.

A (Dulieu) We have to look for a balance here. There are advantages to being a PLC and disadvantages.

One of the advantages is what you see here - the fact you are here asking us questions. As a public company, you have the right to ask us questions.

There is a also a better degree of transparency than with a private company and there is also a better chance of raising funds. It's nice that supporters have the chance to own a slug of their football club.

Among the disadvantages is that there is a lot of hard work involved. I am working on Southampton business almost every day - exchanging emails, things like that.

There's an onerous cost to the club from being a public company.

Hone: There are differing views among the board regarding this topic.

In an ideal world you would have just the one board - it would make decision making easier, making decisions a lot easier to arrive at.

There are so many regulations in the city you have to adhere to.

It's all very well if a company went private if the one person or persons were running it the way supporters would like to see it.

But if the club is later taken over by a different party or parties, then they might not run it the way the supporters would like.

In terms of raising finance in the city, I don't think football clubs have worked very well overall - there has been a failure since the first wave of clubs were floated in the 1990s.

In the real world there are people out there who are wealthy and who have a desire to take control of football clubs. It's difficult to resist these individuals. I don't know how we would react to such an approach.

The board are well qualified in terms of experience and capabilities to consider the question (of whether Saints should stay a public company or go private).

It's a matter for a long, detailed debate at some time in the future.

Q McMillan: In my opinion the club cannot really go forward in terms of trying to attract new investors as long as the former chairman and his supporters still hold so many shares.

Dulieu: We are not for looking back, we are only for looking forward. It's no good for any business to have hostile shareholders and we will be doing our best to resolve that issue Q In the manifesto there was a section regarding commnity engagement. The community fund has always stood at £10,000 and it provides chances for children wo have never been out of the city to visit the New Forest and send the elderly on trips to London. Can I have the assurance that £10,000 level of funding will stay?

A (Hoos) The community fund is something that has been mentioned in meetings with the Stadium Monitoring Group.

The level of funding will be £5,000 rather than £10,000 and that is due solely to the cost of relegation.

We can't keep funding everything to the level we had when the club was in the Premier League.

Funding in other community related areas has expanded - you can't take one item in isolation.

We feel very strongly about engaging with the local community. We don't just want to take, we want to give something back. I think we are very good at doing it.

Hone (talking individually to the questioner, who has local council links): As chief executive of this club I will guarantee the level of funding to that group will be £10,000.

But this raises my concerns about the astronomical level of rates this football club has to pay the local council.

Our rateable value is £1.6m per annum.

Portsmouth's is 25 per cent of that figure.

I've asked the council to tell me how they spend that £1.6m. I have heard various comments back that amount to something like we don't know' but I am told part of it is spent on community issues.

I think Southampton FC does an enormous amount of work - a growing amount of work - in the local community, but I'm not at all sure that the government does a great deal for Southampton FC.

You can tell your boss that I'm heading in his direction!

Delieu: That's Jim being a typical Scot. He's telling you you can have your £10,000 a year if he can have his £1m in rates back!

Q (Andrew Cowen, former director, who didn't say his name before speaking) Asked about the state of the season ticket sales. Also made mention of the fact the manifesto said non executive directors would not be remunerated for their roles. Can the board confirm that is still the case?

A (Hone) When the new board came in we inherited and maintained the budget that had been set for ticket sales by our predecessors. I am pleased to say the current figures are just above the budgets set.

When we came in only 7,500 season tickets had been sold and it was remarkable that we managed to get the final figure over 11,000.

If we had stayed at 7,500 that would not have given us anywhere near enough funds with which to support George.

As for remuneration to the non execs, it begs the question - what is exec work and what is non exec work?

In the case of Ken, he is contracted to us and is remunerated for his work. That has been a matter of some discussion within the board and we took legal advice on that matter.

We were told the role of chairman of a PLC in real terms was a job that needed to be a paid one if it was to be done properly. In practice it was an executive job.

As for Lawrie, he does not have a contract but he is remunerated for all the media, corporate and hospitality work he does for the club. Lawrie does a whole variety of things for the football club - he's accountable to me and he also has a reporting role to commercial director Andy Oldknow.

Lawrie is extremely valuable to us. By a million miles, he is our best salesman. If Lawrie phones you up asking you to come and support the club, you are going to say yes. Lawrie earns every penny he gets.

Q: What are the levels of investment the club is looking to attract? And, George, what level would you like to see?

A (Hone) I'll get in first - if you ask George he'll say he wants to buy Ronaldinho!

The best answer I can give is to direct the questioner to our manifesto. We made it very clear we want to establish a stylish team that can evoke pride and passion and is capable of finishing regularly in the top 10 of the Premiership and capable of regularly reaching the latter stages of the domestic cups. That's where we want to be.

One can have expectations that can be beyond what is reasonably expected to achieve. I don't think it's worth us saying we are looking to qualify for Europe every season.

Where we want to be is only where the club has been before. That's a level the club has been comfortable with.

It's a level that's sustainable and can provide a very profitable entity.

We can get back to that level, but believe me there's a lot of hard work to come before we do get back there.

Burley: It's not all about money. We have one of the best academies in the country and it's important we use that. The best blend is one of experience and youth - we have to give kids the chance to develop their careers with us.

We obviously need funds to compete, but I have been lucky that both boards I have worked with have supported me.

Q: Can the directors break down into exact amounts the monies paid in termination payments to the former directors?

A (Dulieu) We cannot reveal that due to the compromise agreement that was signed. We cannot break it down for you.

Q Each game I come to I see so many empty spaces. Do you think you will get the fans back? Also, you said you would reduce prices when you came in. Is that still the case?

A (Oldknow) The empty seats are a concern - it's an ambition of ours to see a full stadium.

We were hampered by the fact the previous board set this season's ticket prices, which are too expensive. But next season the aim is to be as competitive as we can be.

We have to try and reach as broad and diverse a group of people as possible and try to attract them.

Q Leon Crouch and Mary Corbett haven't spoken yet. What are their thoughts?

A (Crouch) I do believe we have every chance of going up this season.

Corbett: Like Leon, I'm also confident. The board gel together very well, we all want promotion more than anything else in the world.

Q: (Basingstoke Saints representative) The previous board set up quarterly meetings with regional fans groups. Will these be brought back?

A (Oldknow) At the moment we are busy trying to find a mechanic to get a supporter on the football board. We will be looking at ways of making meetings more engaging for you.