hutch

I think, for the purpose of the present appeal, the intricacies of what is or isn't reasonable for foreign image rights is secondary. If HMRC issued an assessment before the vote, then that was the debt until it had been properly resolved in the proper place at the proper time. Not by the Chairman unilaterally discounting the debt. The taxman operates a "pay now argue later" policy. They should have been allowed to vote.

Or that Mathew Upson would be England's top goalscorer at the tournament. Well, joint top, anyway.

With news of Chainrai in London today for "talks", I had a vision of an entirely unrelated meeting taking place in London between 2 unconnected people: Mr.Chunderup So, Mr.Astrological, I remember 3 months ago you promised me that you could sell some of my assets for £15 million, and that the money was as good as in the bank. 3 months later, you've got me, how much is it again, about £400k? Mr.Astrological Yes, I'm sorry, MrChunderup. It appears we were let down by the poor advice from one of our Consultants. But don't worry yet, I've had a couple of phone calls, and I'm expecting an e-mail any day now to confirm that the rest is in the bank. Honest. Mr.Chunderup I hope so, Mr.Astrological, because what you raised so far only paid the wage bill for nearly a week. Remind me again, Mr.Astrological, how much cash do you need every week just to keep my company going? Mr.Astrological About £500k. Mr.Chunderup Now Mr.Astrological, about the VAT scam ... Mr.Astrological CVA, Mr.Chunderup, its a CVA. And it's not a scam. Honest... Mr.Chunderup Whatever. I remember that you told me you were confident that the bogeyman would agree to it ... Mr.Astrological ...Well I thought he would ... Mr.Chunderup ...Then you told me after he objected that you were confident that he wouldn't appeal... Mr.Astrological ...Well I thought he wouldn't ... Mr.Chunderup ...And now that he has appealed you tell me that you're confident that his appeal will fail. Mr.Astrological That's right. I'm very, very confident that his appeal will fail. Mr.Chunderup Mr.Astrological, I fear that my confidence in you was as misplaced as yours has been. Mr.Astrological I absolutely assure you that it wasn't, Mr.Chunderup Mr.Chunderup Time is running out, Mr.Astrological. Very, very quickly.

Rickie Lambert-Again

Yep. If the football creditors rule was scrapped, football creditors would be reduced at a stroke to the odd share of gate takings from an away game, and maybe a couple of weeks wages, instead of gazillions in add-ons for installment payments, appearances and sell-ons.

I don't think they can bring in any, unless the FL agree that it is "exceptional circumstances". I hope the FL would agree with me, that "unavoidable" forms part of "exceptional". We'll see.

If it's our fault as parents for not bringing the brats up properly, then I blame our parents.

About the same as Schneiderlin, TBF

TBH, the name's irrelevant, as long as they're goudanough

I see now Andy is blaming "football" for trying to rip him off over the valuation of Boateng. Pompey, advised by their player sales consultant who has 20 years experience in football, value Boateng at over £6m. "Football", a collective term for every other club in the world, value him at less than £3m. Hang in there, Andy. Something will turn up. And it'll be Rob Lloyds problem after Monday, anyway, not yours.

Ollie Lancashire. Not funny, I know.

Because it is only journalism. Read the link to the SA Law article posted about the same time if you want to know the situation. And, despite what it says in the "News" aticle, I don't see any way in the world that Andy will try to get this to Court quickly. It is potentially the knock-out punch. He will need as much time as Chainrai is prepared to give him to come up with an alternative way out before risking HMRC in Court.

In the cold light of day: http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/frattonlatest/Pompey-upbeat-in-battle-with.6424045.jp No real problem then. They're going to win, and it'll all be sorted before the end of July

Did you put on that much weight in SA?

This one, yes, but it would no doubt be replaced by others. It would be open to any creditor who lost out to take civil action against AA. But it would only be about money. I doubt if he would face any criminal charges. Another thought occurred to me. In the appeal HMRC will no doubt fight hard to prove that they are owed what they say they are, not the lesser amount accepted by AA. But I would also expect them to argue that other creditors (the ones who voted in favour) are owed less than AA accepted for voting purposes. AA admitted as much himself at the time. So, with his professional duty hat on, does he fight to prove the smaller debts owed to the others, to save the club money, or the larger ones he has already accepted, but admitted they are too high. Difficult one, that.

A couple of thoughts this morning. The concensus seems to be that the transfer embargo would be lifted if they exit administration, either with a points deduction if there is no CVA or without if there is a CVA. I doubt that. I would expect the embargo to stay until all the football creditors have been paid in full, which by my reckoning, using the full parachute payments, is at least eighteen months away. and Andy's threat to sue the Government for millions. There is abslutely no chance that he will win a consequential loss or damages claim against HMRC. Their right to challenge the CVA is enshrined in the law of the land. They, like anybody else, will not be faulted for simply excercising that right. Conversely, if HMRC win, and Andy is found to have been negligent, that same claim could be made against him, personally.

Of course not. According to Pompeyscott on one of the phew boards: Lots more fun to be had while we wait for the season proper to kick off.

The voice of reason. Welcome back Mero

The ONLY reason all the "dubious characters" are remotely interested in football at the moment is because it is a cash business. In the current global market, cash is King. If you can secure a cash flow in the future, you can borrow against that now, and buy assets at very depressed prices. It's how the rich get richer. Unless, of course, you can't secure that future cash flow. And instead have a future cash flow deficit. In which case your lenders start to look very closely at your assets, and ask you to reduce your overdraft. We've been there before.

Fair point, but I expect the league will hold the money "in escrow", rather than send it to Hong Kong.

I see what you did there.

I spent a lot of time earlier this year trying to find an adversarial motive between Chainrai and Gaydamak, based on the events, but couldn't find one. Every avenue led to collusion. I agree that anybody connected with Pompey at the moment can't lose any more "face". It's all about the money. And if he "cuts and runs" then it's liquidation for the Company (but not necessarily for the football club). The club will (and should) survive. And if they end up down here, I'll hunt them down.

IMO (and it's only that) it was, in conjunction with a "dubious" maleable administrator, the prospect of shedding the debt, shafting the creditors for a pittance and having a chance of quick promotion back to the PL with the benefit of the bulk of the parachutes to fund the squad, and cashing in. And if that failed, getting his money back by liquidating the company and getting it (or most of it) back through his secured ownership of FP, either by selling it or renting it to a "newco" club. I doubt very much that he was given all the facts, and I don't think he is a very happy man tonight. Or maybe he just really likes Andy's quiff.

Ignoring your speculative afterthought, Chainrai is between a rock and a hard place. The pup he bought was based on the inflated value of the squad, as immediate cash. He was expecting to have a large part of that in the bank by now, not spunking huge amounts of cash to mercenaries sitting on the beach. In the real world, the administrators need big cash injections to keep going. The parachutes are going to football creditors. We don't know the actual numbers, but the logic is just common sense. What would you do?

Just finished trolling through the comments on the skate news website. When you pierce the veil of anger & disappointment, there's quite a lot of resignation and acceptance. They seem to be slowly getting there (apart for the ones who blame it on a Tory conspiracy, think AA is doing a great job for them or that Chainrai - who is on the record as saying he has no interest in owning the club and just wants his money back - would be a great new owner). Good job, Chin, by the way. But a lot of them think they'll win the appeal, because the "image rights" tax is disputed by AA. As I understand the tax situation, the bill is made up as follows (in round figures). They owed £12m in PAYE, VAT & NI at the time of the WUP. That then increased to £17m for some reason (I guess that is "image rights") - then it went to £34m - this I think is the 100% surcharge for non-payment. AA accepted £24m, which I guess is the original £12m + the surcharge, and threw out the "image rights" + surcharge. Now I don't know the ins & outs of the current UK tax system, but my experience in other places is that if the taxman issues you with an assessment, it is due and payable. You can then dispute it, and if you win, you get your money back. So if HMRC issued AA with an assessment for "image rights" and surcharge, it was due and payable unless and until AA successfully overturned it in Court or otherwise. On that basis, at the time of the CVA vote, it was a debt owed and they were entitled to vote. Who commissioned Griffin to prepare the "alternative" CVA? Expect UHY to be replaced before this is all over. It'll be interesting to see what Chainrai does next. I think he was sold a pup (no pun intended). His return is disappearing into the distance, with no player sales worth talking about, the wage bill still through the roof, and a second successive relegation now probably nailed on. He, as a secured creditor, has first bite at the assets in a liquidation, and that might just be more appealing. Depends on how seriously he takes HMRC's earlier threat to challenge his position as a secured creditor.