Not Looking Good For Southend...

My niece's ex is a SUFC shareholder and tells me things are even worse that the media would have us believe. He alleges that Martin has no intention of selling the club unless he retains the ownership of Roots Hall now that he's lost his deal with Sainsbury's at Fossets Farm.
The buyers have no intention of buying the club (and paying off it's debts) unless they own Roots Hall without caveats. Both situations are mutually exclusive. The way is now clear for Martin to kill off SUFC whilst blaming others (notably the local council) for their demise and leaving him to redevelop Roots Hall. The would-be owners have already thrown money at the deal on the understanding they will own the club and the ground - they feel Martin's last-minute caveats on the transfer of the ground make a deal impossible.
I hope he's wrong but he's a smart guy and he probably has it right.

We nearly never existed due to our owner! I know you were a massive fan of his, and defended him to the hilt, but he very nearly destroyed this club how you can still defend him is beyond comprehension.

I have no problem with you saying what you say, it's your right to freedom of speech and your right to exercise it.

I was on that board when you were going off on one again and again, you were defending the indefensible to the enth degree and you got yourself so entrenched you found that you couldn't backtrack without making yourself sound foolish.

He got rid or made the best manager we had had since Bloomfield leave by his behaviour. He spent ridiculous sums of money on players which ruined what was a good dressing with everyone pulling in the same direction. Doseana on £29k a week an example in league 1. He more or less sacked a club legend in Coxy because he wanted to stay at the place he loved rather than be sold. He ruined a decent youth system. He employed more managers in 2 years than we had had in the past 50 or more years. He's tried to destroy the fan base. He assaulted a manager on the pitch in front of fans and staff. When the fans turned he did his utmost to destroy our club, whilst he acted like a little child who had his ball taken away.

Yes he did put his money in, but from rumours he got back about £4m (not verified) from T&T.

So forgive me if I don't agree with the actions he took then or reflect positively on them now. The man was dangerous and these men or women for that matter need to be driven from football for good. He wasn't a good owner and it appears from his actions a good man either.

I defended Becchetti too, far longer than l should have, I couldn't believe such a wealthy man could turn out to be little more than a child who grew tired of his latest toy. The millions he invested (and mostly lost) led me to believe he would ultimately get the job done. It was a painful experience to finally accept he was leading us to disaster. I don't blame Dohnut for falling into the same trap.
One lesson l did learn:- There are a number of billionaire half-wits out there. So much for the talents of the rest of us.

Oh behave FFS. Becchetti was in it for himself. Period. All he had was mummy’s money, until she pulled. No one in possession of any sanity could possibly defend this cretin. Of course I had high hopes at the beginning.

If you were around in his early day he didn’t fool me at all.  My posting name was mafioso as a pee take to his style of rule. Pretty clear from day 1 my assessment of what was to come.  A person easy to dislike, and I did.

But I have stated a number of what was considered facts at the time.  Feel free to disagree.  

He was generous of his time and money. He was incompetent.  The basis of my position.  Feel free to make intelligent comments.  👍

Absolutely spot on. These are some of the reasons I, along with many others marched down the high street with Blackpool supporters, protesting about club owners etc.
I only hope the guy who spat at us from the supporters clubs balcony is reading this and regretting his actions. I felt then my choice to demonstrate was right, and I still feel that way. To spit on someone is deplorable, but to spit on peaceful protesters who have the club at heart and to this day, I believe were right is absolutely disgusting. Shame on the guy.
Also, I may be wrong, but didn't T&T take on the debt of the club i.e. all the "funding" that Bulls****y put in, along with a fee to purchase? But still people say that the Italian clown invested, bought players etc. All he done was waste LOFC money and drive the club/business into the ground, stop paying loyal staff and let the business run into the ground.

Raking over the past is never a good idea and can easily make this into a version of the dark side.  But I will make one final observation. What an owner gets when he moves on does not detract from their investments during their time in charge.  Money put in comes with no guarantees of a ROI. I doubt many owners profit out of ownership. Business people wanting to profit can do it in more secure ways than buying into football.

I sincerely hope that when T and T hand over the reigns, as they will at some point, they too will be in a position to recoup some of the vast sums of money they have invested. Should they recoup some of their money it doesn’t for one second devalue their investment during their tenure nor give rise to comments like they were only in it for the money or themselves.

I honestly believe, but don’t know, that Becchetti was the type of man who would have allowed the club to fold out of spite. Written off any losses. He had buyers who were not prepared for that to happen. In negotiating terms he held all the cards. That Travis and Teague stuck to it and guided us to where we are today is a testament to both. But negotiations must have been tough.

Both Becchetti and Travis/Teague invested heavily in the club without any guarantees of success or ROI. That fact needs to be understood and respected. The difference between the two sets is chalk nd cheese and the outcomes reflect that.

But I say again. Investment into our club on such a large scale needs to be respected and acknowledged. As despicable as FB was his efforts are deserving of positive recognition but his methods definitely not. If I’m making a distinction that is too subtle, I’ll live with it. If people think I’m defending him then I can’t and won’t change the erroneous feeling.  

What I see over the decades is ;
Hearn propping up lofc with what he may call an investment but I think in reality it was converted to a loan thus in my head it was a lofc debt

Then we get the Italian and he does precisely the same the difference was Hearn is very intelligent and street wise and ensured it was calculated and or manipulated to give him a return eventually by either the purchase price received from the Italian and or the lease / flat saga/ revenue in a player sold before the contract had completed.
The Italian must of been on an acid trip because of the outrageous expenditure which was both illogical and stupid.

However, Nigel and Kent who saved the club were forced to reimburse a substantial if not all the Italian wastage classified as a lofc debt to get him to agree to sell.
I heard Nigel in an early interview confirming that in one sentence.

There is a big difference to an investment funds that has no payback or an investment funds that is actually a loan. People use the words economically to suit the narrative they are projecting.