• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Phillips is a shrimper

In what way is "not paying a children's charity the money they're owed" good publicity?

Where was that reported nationally though? The first i have heard of that was on here. I meant that all the talk of protests and such like meant that Southend were mentioned more then they usually are.

I don't think its as big as your portraying it to be mate, i don't know of any fans boycotting the club due to the stories about the club ripping off charities spread across the back of all the national newspapers.

Would you not rather someone asked questions that the official site won't? That may mean that the odd mistake is made but you will learn far more then listening to what the club wants you to know
 
Nice to see the usual over the top reactions on here. This time last week RM and GK were being laid into. This week its CP.

In reality the only difference between this week and last week is that RM finally paid Little Havens what was owed, thanks in part to CPs articles last week.

And does anyone honestly disagree with this statement:

"But the role of a newspaper is to report both the good and the bad and for the Echo to suggest that everything was fine right now with the Seasiders would just be wrong."
 
Last edited:
Nice to see the usual over the top reactions on here. This time last week RM and GK were being laid into. This week its CP.

In reality the only difference between this week and last week is that RM finally paid Little Havens what was owed, thanks in part to CPs articles last week.

And does anyone honestly disagree with this statement:

"But the role of a newspaper is to report both the good and the bad and for the Echo to suggest that everything was fine right now with the Seasiders would just be wrong."

yes I do, the general sentiment is correct... however they're to back themselves with facts, not just to 'suggest'.

You're right about the Little Havens money, SUFC still haven't given a straight answer on why Spinner wasn't paid, and if it was Spinners agreement with LH then I don't understand why we didn't give the money owed to Spinner and let him settle up with LH.
 
If I misplaced a zero in my job, I'd probably find myself in the dole queue... Along with many others on here I'm sure. Deadlines and pressure can lead to mistakes, but I'm with ESB that I seems pretty staggering that an apparently agreed figure somehow found an extra nought. Even so if it's a genuine mistake then both a public and private apology would go a long way to reparing relations with both the echo readers and the club. Instead CP comes over as a bit of a nob, hiding behind the fact that he has a season ticket. However Ron isn't out of the woods either, I'm personally still not impressed that Spinner hasn't been paid

Agree with this Pubey and, OBL I think you are wrong and a bit naive. The fact the club 'supposedly' owed 40K, was a very big part of the story.

My take on it (And I have to stress I do not know the ins and outs and this may or may not have happened, who knows what goes on etc...) is that CP went to his editor and said he wanted to run the story, hoping for front page coverage which, let's face, it is the highlight of his career.

He later found out that only 4K was owing. (No excuse - the club still should have paid it).

Now, we know it was late on in the evening when he realised his mistake and CP either went to the editor to explain, or decided not to say anything.

'Oh my God! What can we do? We've held this story for both the front and back pages and owing 4K doesn't sound very exciting. Perhaps we could change the front page to the story about the kid hurting his knee in the school playground' (needed 2 big plasters) or 'let's just run it and print a tiny apology the next day'.

I could be completely wrong, this is only my opinion, terms and conditions apply etc etc...
 
What RM and his followers just dont seem to grasp is that this is OUR club and we take the running (or any surmised miss running) of it very seriously and want to know some answers - not spin. Property developement is notoriously cloaked in secrecy and that is the big problem here. RM is a property developer first and Football exec second and sees no reason why he should tell us(and the papers) anymore than he wants to. Loosen up Mr Martin, see and feel the difference!
 
They did Paul, but I think that in itself was criticised for being a small paragraph inside the back page. Nit picking I think, it was on the page with all the letters and in a coloured box to make it reasonably clear, so you couldn't really not see it.

A lot of people would have only seen the headlines and the big boards outside their local newsagents. Not many people actually read the Echo, but will tell their mates down the pub and at work etc. how SUFC / Ron has screwed Little Havens and that SUFC are 'going down the Swany'.

Unfortunately the following days headline and the billboards didn't say SORRY WE GOT IT WRONG, IT WAS 4K, NOT 40K. AND IT WAS A DEAL BETWEEN LITTLE HAVENS AND SPINNER AND RON GENEROUSLY PAID THEM 10K FROM HIS OWN POCKET, EVEN THOUGH THE TAKINGS ON THE NIGHT WERE ONLY 4K!

(Quite snappy that, I would make a great journalist).
 
What RM and his followers just dont seem to grasp is that this is OUR club and we take the running (or any surmised miss running) of it very seriously and want to know some answers - not spin. Property developement is notoriously cloaked in secrecy and that is the big problem here. RM is a property developer first and Football exec second and sees no reason why he should tell us(and the papers) anymore than he wants to. Loosen up Mr Martin, see and feel the difference!

Prediction - Chris Phillips will be supporting Southend Utd in 15 years time and Ron Martin will not!
 
grassroots said:
What RM and his followers just dont seem to grasp is that this is OUR club
Unfortunately, you have fallen into the trap that a lot of others have fallen into. It's not our club, it's Ron's. He owns the lot basically, so he can do what he wants with it. Now that may be hard to take for a few people on here, but that's the bottom line. And the sooner some people on here realise that, the better.
 
Prediction - Chris Phillips will be supporting Southend Utd in 15 years time and Ron Martin will not!

They said that about John Madejski when he took over Reading in 1990. (obviously CP wasn't mentioned).

My mate is a big Reading fan (23 stone in fact) and a lot of their fans are moaning that Madejski has lost interest in the club.

This is the Man who, among other things, has overseen the building of a new 24K seater stadium, and taken them from 3rd and 4th Div obscurity to the Premier league.

15 years is a long time and you are hedging your bets somewhat, but at least he is trying to help the club progress. Otherwise, for the next 30 years (I made that number up) we are guaranteed League 1 or 2 football, with the odd Championship season if we're lucky, and the odd conference season if we're not,
 
CP in my eyes has done nothing wrong,Martin on the other hand seems hellbent on the demise of the football club.When our leader stated pre season a further 2 million loss before a ball has been kicked in anger..I was astonished!!The season lasts for 10 months so the huge loss equates to 200k per month..It does not make any sense to me at all.

What doesn't make sense? We spent far more than we recieved.
 
What RM and his followers just dont seem to grasp is that this is OUR club and we take the running (or any surmised miss running) of it very seriously and want to know some answers - not spin. Property developement is notoriously cloaked in secrecy and that is the big problem here. RM is a property developer first and Football exec second and sees no reason why he should tell us(and the papers) anymore than he wants to. Loosen up Mr Martin, see and feel the difference!

I have always suffered from the delusion that most of us are followers of SUFC not RM or CP.
The problem I have with the conspiracy theories about RM is the answers to the following questions :

Q. Was SUFC in serious financial difficulites before RM got involved?
A Yes

Q. If RM had not got involved when he did, would there still be a SUFC today?
A. No

Q. If RM ceased his involvement with the club now, would anyone else come in and save it from extinction
A. No

We all know the club is again in financial difficulties and part of the reason for that may be due to current financial managment though that seems largely down to paying players wages our gates can't sustain. Presumably the critics of the current situation - who never suggest any solutions - were those have been saying for the past few seasons "don't spend money on players" but that has passed me by.

The Echo did not break the story about the current problems though I agree they are right to report it. My problem is that the way they report seems to be sensationalised, misleading, incorrect ie destructive rather than constructive

But to be fair, as far as i know, (regarding your 2nd point) the club DID owe money, and only after the story was published did PR Ron get his cheque book out. CP doesn't deserve criticism for that IMO.
Disagree - it seems to me that Spencer Prior had promised the charity a sum of 'up to 10k' not the club.

Point 3, i haven't seen Prior refute the story anywhere else? Surely if CP had blown the story out of context etc, then Prior would have got wind of it and not been happy.
Where would Prior refute this? Can't see The Echo running this. I don't blame Spencer for going to The Echo but maybe he feels he has got his fingers burnt in the way they reported it.

Point 4, It wasn't just CP that was reporting the unrest with fans and the board, Soccer AM mentioned it, Football League Show mentioned it, we were even in the Racing Post! CP was just doing his job. He wasn't glorifying the protests, merely reporting it.
As mentioned above, I have no problem with The Echo reporting it, it's the way they report. Also I think we are hearing too much about CP's own role - 'My Shout', 'Always A Shrimper', etc.
 
I have always suffered from the delusion that most of us are followers of SUFC not RM or CP.
The problem I have with the conspiracy theories about RM is the answers to the following questions :

Q. Was SUFC in serious financial difficulites before RM got involved?
A Yes

Q. If RM had not got involved when he did, would there still be a SUFC today?
A. No

Q. If RM ceased his involvement with the club now, would anyone else come in and save it from extinction
A. No

Q1 - reword - is it still in serious financial difficulty?
Yes

Q2 - don't know. No evidence to suggest otherwise

Q3 - don't know. No evidence to suggest otherwise
 
Q1 - reword - is it still in serious financial difficulty?
Yes

Q2 - don't know. No evidence to suggest otherwise

Q3 - don't know. No evidence to suggest otherwise

Q1 Agreed but seems to confirm SUFC is not a sustainable business rather than anything else.

Q2 & Q3 I'm not sure whether your answers are agreeing with me or diasgreeing.

On Q2 my understanding is that we were very close to going out of business at the start of the decade and that RM and his associated companies have subsidised the club by writing off debts and not charging rent for Roots Hall.

Q3 Given that the club is running at a loss now, if RM pulls out, someone with a large pot of money needs to replace him. Not aware of such a person.
 

ShrimperZone Sponsors

FFM MSPFX Foreign Exchange Services
Estuary MFF2
Zone Advertisers Zone Advertisers

ShrimperZone - SUFC Player Sponsorship

Southend United Away Travel


All At Sea Fanzine


Back
Top