hutch

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2010/feb/03/portsmouth-mark-jacob-premier-league "The Hong Kong businessman Balram Chainrai, who has links with the Israeli businessmen connected to Faraj, has loaned what the club said amounted to £20m and has two mortgages over the club. One, registered on 6 October, gives Chainrai's company Portpin, which is registered in the British Virgin Islands tax haven, security over Fratton Park. The other, registered on 7 January, secures for Portpin "the whole of [Portmouth's] undertaking and all its property and assets"."

The first reference I saw to the registered charges was in a David Conn article in the Grauniad. He definately stated that the fixed charge over the stadium was registered in Oct/Nov, before the WUP. The floating charge was definately registered in January, after the WUP.

There are a couple of references in those articles (Grauniad 4 Feb. & BVI) that Portpin made the loan(s) to Al-Mirage (i.e. not to PCFC), although they refer to the stadium (which PCFC owned, not Al-Mirage) as security. Probably just untidy journalism. If not, then maybe Baloo is not a creditor of PCFC, secured or unsecured, at all, but needs to find the absent Sheikh.

Chalet, Is that PCFC Ltd.? or PCFC (in administration) Ltd.? or PCFC (maybe in administration, we're not sure) Ltd.?

Around 2 days after, IIRC. On the same day they lost in injury time to 10 man Stoke, and we beat Norwich. I think I remeber that being a good day, but my memory's not what it used to be.

How about this: 1. Baloo has 2 registered charges, one of which (the stadium) pre-dates the WUP, but the other ("floating charge") post-dates the WUP and can be set-aside 2. 10 days ago there were numerous reports that Baloo had taken the freehold of the stadium, thereby discharging that part of the debt which was secured on it 3. If that's all true, then Baloo is (probably) not a secured creditor 4. It was a surprise (to me anyway) when Android said on Friday that the stadium was still on PCFC balance sheet - a bit of back-tracking or fiddling with the books gone wrong? 5. Gayda's debt is not secured against PCFC assets - it's secured against the land next door which he thinks they want - so he's not a secured creditor 6. Post WUP, only a secured creditor can appoint an administrator, absent Court consent 7. Are there, in fact, any secured creditors? Discuss. Edit: With credit to GM, who is already ahead of me on a similar theory

Keith, any objection if I use that as an avatar for a few days?

Should have said - Yes?

Let's hope you haven't got any Saints supporting colleagues who are tempted to do a John Terry then.

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=594801&postcount=6

Before I waste my time, does anybody know if you can put YouTube stuff on an i-pod? I'd like to have that with me wherever I go, for those moments when all seems dark and despair sets in.

It could be the PL FAPPT at fault. After all, PCFC have their own FAPPT, as part of their internal due diligence process: 1. Have you ever been accused, charged or convicted of Fraud? Yes. Good 2. Are there any outstanding arrest warrants for you in your home Country? Yes. Good 3. Have you got any experience of owning or running a football club? No. Even better 4. Have you got any money? No. Excellent 5. Do you have plans to invest in the club's infrastructure? No. Getting better all the time 6. Are you, in fact, a person? Well, I am part of an offshore Company in the British Virgin Islands. Does that count? Perfect Welcome to Fratton Park, Mr. ..........

That's not 2 means. That's 1 means, but you have to satisfy both tests to win. No chance.

That's administration. Pre-pack is where the deal of what will be sold off, to whom and for how much (and who will be stitched up) is already agreed between the owners/directors and the (soon to be) administrator before the Company is even placed into administration. Sharp practice, but apparently legal.

Nobody's got any money to buy players (well, almost nobody). Look at the dearth of activity in the January window across the leagues. And that was before everybody got a HUGE wake up call from the Pompey saga, not forgetting Palace, Cardiff and many others. I don't expect it to be any different in the summer. I genuinely can't see us losing anybody we want to keep. Remember the Pardew interview a month or so ago, where he said that around 10 (I think it was) players would be out of contract at the end of the season, and would be going. That'll create a bit of headroom in the wage bill.

Phil, the first question was whether the PL would lend them money, or whether it would stand as guarantor to others to lend them money. I'm fairly clear in my mind that it's the latter. The follow up comment was that the banks aren't prepared to lend to Pompey. We know that PCFC (in administration) Ltd. is a completely different animal from the old PCFC Ltd. So what does today hold in store? My guess is that Storrie will be summarily shown the door. Statements that: ■ The administrators have asked me to work with them ■ I will work with the administrators to find a buyer ■ I'll stand down after a new buyer has been found ■ I'm prepared to take a pay cut have all come from Storrie. I've only seen or heard five words from the android on the subject: "Peter Storrie's position is untenable" Bye, Pete.

Alan, I considered the same conundrum a few pages ago, where I said that I think the parachute payments are out of reach for the administrator unless he could guarantee that they could compete next season. Of course, the PL would have to give an absolute guarantee to pay back the loan, irrespective of whether they are liquidated or not. Otherwise no lender will touch them. I think it comes down to the status of the parachute payments, and I don't know the answer to that. If they are "enhanced" tv rights payments, then I still think they are out of reach. But if they are some sort of "guaranteed compensation" for being relegated, paid in installments for cash flow purposes (Sky's, the PL's or the club's), then I think it could happen. Having read the recent statements, I think the latter is the most likely, particularly as it appears that the parachute payments are made by the PL, even though the club would be competing in the FL. If they were enhanced tv rights payments, they would be more likely paid by the FL.

Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I meant, for example, a bank. The administrator could go to a bank and get a loan for, say, £5m, with a guarantee from the PL to the bank that the PL would pay that money, plus interest, back to the bank in, say, August this year. So the bank isn't taking any extraordinary risk. The interesting thing there would be, on what terms would the PL give such a guarantee?

I think what is being touted is that the PL have agreed to allow the administrator to borrow some money now, using the future parachutes as collateral. They're buying time, in the hope of finding a buyer, and at the expense of their future.

Maybe it's me being thick, but isn't that a 4 year plan to get to the PL? And we're creating shït because we're not beating it. I think AP is doing a pretty good job in the circumstances. Yes, he could have done a bit better, but it's still good enough for this fan. And so it should be, he gets paid more than the kit man at Fratton Park, but only just. I am entitled to feel critical after the Wycombe game, but don't you think AP knows that that degree of inconsistency is a worry? He doesn't need us to tell him what the problems are. I doubt very much that his so-called "attitude" during the interview was in any way whatsoever connected with his relationship with Cortese. Cortese's a pro. You don't have those types of conversations that are being suggested on here at the ground 10 minutes after the end of a game where you thumped a team above you in the league 5-1.

CB, the only part of that which is "entirely possible" is the "get bought avoiding paying the tax man" bit. The points will be deducted and they will be relegated. I'm looking forward to Grant's reaction when the Android starts selling the first team, if he's allowed to, or sending back the loanees if he's not. That will start next week. There are allegedly 8 Parties interested in buying the club, 2 of whom have been "outed". Victor Cattermole is just another fraudster with a criminal record, so he fits the bill admirably And Baloo is on the record that he has no interest in owning Portsmouth Football Club, but wants his money back. So he fits the bill too Either of those will do. They need somebody to chuck a lot of millions down the drain, with no hope of seeing it back again, to get them out of the hole to play in the CCC next year without a points deduction. All we are seeing at the moment are various "schemes" to borrow more to keep them going in the short term. If there was anybody out there who was willing to chuck a lot of millions down the drain, without any hope of seeing it back, they would have done it in time to have a chance of keeping them in the PL. There is no successful way out for them. They are bankrupt, and will descend through several leagues. Quite how is the only question to be answered.

Anybody know if you can cache the Saints Player video feed. It took me about 15 minutes to watch the 2 minute interview. I've never been able to watch highlights since they dropped the old system where you could download them.

Nothing wrong with his "Gaffer ecstatic" report on the OS. Mountains & molehills.

Wot he said.

He's serving a great apprenticeship. If he's got what it takes, his time will come. I hope he's still a Saint when it does.