Guided Missile

...seem to come in two flavours on this site. Last of the Summer Wine Usually post in glowing terms about days gone by, trying hard to recapture the glory days, back in the mother country. About as entertaining to read as the TV show of the same name, and also about as relevant, to the fans streaming into St. Marys nowadays. Keep it up guys, I think you know who you are, but don't blame me if I think of Compo, when I read your posts. Let's face it, nostalgia is not what it used to be. Last of the Scummer Whine Usually post in negative terms about anything related to the club, city or the country. In the early stages of going native, so not reached that grumpy charm that Compo has. More the expression that the club, city or country they left behind didn't quite fit their ideals, those that served them so badly when they lived here. Zero entertainment value in their posts at the moment and the only relevance to the fan of today is the possiblity that more impressionable section of our fanbase may detect a slight lowering of their moral, when reading them. I think of Lord Haw Haw when reading the uninformed dirge they post. He was hanged for treason, but I think the penalty for them, when Saints are back in the premiership will be the sight of their gradual decline into a sad exile, never quite belonging to their new country and unable to return to God's country to see their team play...

I can't say the thought of Daniel Azougy suing me for posting that he is a convicted fraudster fills me with any great fear, nor the prospect of Marc Jacob issuing a writ because we have speculated that he was fired by his law firm for improper conduct.

I'm assuming that solicitors are afforded more protection under our libel laws than the rest of us peasants?

Corp, I'd read the following two quotes and learn. I know you might think you have developed some degree of intellect, posting on your Pompey site, but mate, you've come from "Are You Smarter Than a 10 Year Old" to "University Challenge". Keep posting, though. Your posts have that window-licking quality you only get from years of inbreeding, on Portsea Island...

This is what you "pointed out" to me and it does make you look like a bit of a tw @t now, doesn't it? Just for the people interested in what the clueless bunch you have on your site, here's a sample of their thinking, prior to the court hearing: 22-02-2010, 11:39 AM ..and finally from the banned list: GuidedMissile - purely for being a scummer on a wind up. :smt022

Sam Hammam is, IMO an odious piece of work. For those interested in the history of Wimbledon FC and a study on how to screw a football club, this article by David Conn is a good read: In 1988, Hammam applied for, and was granted, outline planning permission by the London Borough of Merton to move Wimbledon from their Plough Lane ground to a new stadium in the Wandle Valley. But Hammam did not proceed with a planning agreement which required him to make improvements to the area, and the plan died. Plough Lane was subject to a restriction imposed by the council that it should always be used for sport or recreation. In 1990, Hammam bought out this covenant, leaving Plough Lane free for development, reportedly for between £300,000 and £800,000. The following year the club moved to share Selhurst Park with Crystal Palace and have been stuck there, homeless, ever since. Hammam himself, rather than the club, owned Plough Lane, via his holding company, Rudgwick Limited, which charged Wimbledon rent. Rudgwick, which is registered at the London offices of Kennedys solicitors, is wholly owned by Sam Hammam; he and his brother Nijad are the sole directors. In 1998, he sold Plough Lane to Safeway for a price reported to be £8m – the Rudgwick accounts for that year show a £5m profit on the sale of a property. Then, in 1997, Hammam sold 80 per cent of the club shares – which he held via a company registered in the British Virgin Islands, for a reported £28m to the Norwegians Kjell Rokke and Bjorn Gjelsten. He sold the rest for a reported £1.2m three years later. His fortune from the former Fourth Division club: around £36m.

...and not, not nont, you nonce...

See above...

The failure of Chanrai/Portpin to appoint Vantis, says everything you need to know about the administration...

The game they are trying to play, is their game, not the one HMRC are playing. It's not really about who is the administrator but whether Chanrai/Portpin are secured creditors and rank ahead of HMRC, IMO. Any play by PCFC to avoid that question being answered by letting the administrator to fall on his sword, will fail. That question and the general ownership, creditor and movement of funds "mysteries" need solving in court...

If the appointment of the administrators is invalid, it is because Chanrai/Portpin are not creditors. So....as soon as the court appointed receiver takes a look at the situation, he will ask, "Is there enough funds for PCFC to continue as a going concern?" The £15M that Chanrai is supposed to be putting into the pot will do a Lord Lucan. What shareholder, in there right mind, would spunk £15M, knowing that they are not a secured creditor and stand little prospect of getting any of it back, unless a total mug buyer is found for a club, with an unknown points deduction coming to it? The only possible deal for PCFC is one that is good for the money launderers and that ain't going to happen. HMRC is on their case...

I think it's worth remembering who has taken PCFC to court. There were two complainants, HMRC and Grosvenor, I believe. I don't think PCFC can decide they don't want to play this particular game, nor try and impose some form of alternative administration on the two other parties. The court has been asked to consider winding the company up, end of... The main purpose of the hearing is to "lift the shadow" over the current administration and the only thing that PCFC can do is provide the evidence asked for by the court. HMRC will be presenting their findings based on the Fuglers client account and then it's over to the judge. PCFC have run out of room to maneouvre, IMO and it is out of there hands. If they are telling the truth and the evidence supports them, they will have no problem. If there is a suggestion that their owners have sought to gain an unfair advantage over the creditors by falsifying a charge with Companies House, then it will be a case of liquidate and persue the guilty...

This is where you and I differ. I don't think Chanrai lent any money to PCFC and he is not about to start, now. The only way a newly appointed receveiver will allow PCFC to continue trading, is if there is cash in the bank to allow it to, without making the existing creditors positions worse. The only way that will happen is via a cash advance from the EPL, the sale of assets, i.e. players, or the injection of equity (not a loan) from the shareholders or a new investor. Apart from those three options, I'm struggling to figure out other ways of keeping this circus going. I think that the suggestion of impropriety, particularly when the HMRC get to review the activity in the Fuglers client account, with regard to the administration, may mean that the whole money laundering suspicion surrounding this rotting corpse may push the judge in a completely new direction. I don't think there is a "poor little guy" in this case. It's more like "big rich crooks" that are the major creditors and I would love it if the judge winds the club up and allows these gun running crooks to dangle in the wind.

Daily Torygraph Andrew Andronikou, the Portsmouth administrator, has admitted that he cannot yet confirm whether the £15 million that has been promised by owner Balram Chainrai will be given to the club or would place even further debt on the company.

Remind me what Mark Fry got for Southampton FC? £13-15M including an as new 32,000 seater stadium. He'll be lucky to get £5M...

Casting my mind back to February, I recall that Daniel Azougy, the crooked lawyer that was negotiating the transfer deals that Pompey were able to complete during the window, is a close associate of Chanrai's. He was found guilty of FOUR counts of embezzling client funds in Israel in 2002 Pondering where the money went, it appears possible that far from lending money to PCFC, HMRC are suggesting that money went in the other direction, from Fuglers client account directly to Chanrai/Portpin. The fact that no additional money was lent to PCFC was apparent from the statement of affairs that was lodged with HMRC on the 17th February. So, the Premier League held on to more than £2 million from Portsmouth's player sales in January to cover money owed to other clubs. Chelsea and Watford received cash owed from when Pompey signed Glen Johnson and Tommy Smith respectively. And, once the players' wages have been covered, the £4 million remainder from the £8 million Portsmouth earned from selling defender Younes Kaboul and keeper Asmir Begovic could have been used to pay off creditors. My guess is that the £4M went into Fuglers PCFC client account, stayed there for about 5 minutes and then went straight to Chanrai/Portpin, on or about 2nd February. Once that happened, Azougy was publicly removed from his post. Since then he has been praying for the club: When asked what role he played in the transfers of Younes Kaboul and Asmir Begovic, Azougy said: 'I didn't have much to do with it. 'I just attended one meeting. In order to save the club I said we should sell some players. 'If not there would be no club. 'At this stage no bank is financing the club. No bank is willing to supply any funds. I have not been involved (in the transfers) I just attended one meeting. 'It was obvious the club must do something to stop the petition of the revenue. 'People at the club are working 24/7 to stop this petition.' Azougy said he understood the anxiety of fans but said the decision to sell Kaboul and Begovic was the right one. 'Every day I am praying that the club survives, for the 600 employees, I pray for the club,' he said. 'It is very, very hard. It was a very hard decision to sell both players (Kaboul and Begovic) but sometimes you have to make a hard decision to save the club"

I think the phrase that might explain this is sub judice...

When a charge is registered against a Company at Companies House, you have 21 days to lodge a certified copy of the loan instrument with Companies House. I think it is likely that an official receiver will shortly be appointed to lift the shadow that hangs over the administration procedure. This could be followed very quickly by the official liquidator...

Never tire of reading this one:

This part of the story is the most interesting to me: HMRC, now believed to be owed up to £18m in total by Portsmouth, is expected to challenge the validity of that mortgage and challenge the club to provide documentation. Because the club has not had its own bank account for several months, instead using a client account at the solicitors Fuglers, the Premier League has not had full oversight of all incoming and outgoing payments. I wonder who had control of the Portsmouth City Football Club's client account? Surely not Marc Jacob, the well known Spurs fan and formally a partner at Fuglers, before they parted company. My imagination is working overtime. Spurs....transfers....payments...incoming....outgoing...Redknapp...Storrie...Monaco...Offshore...Taxfree....

Is this what you saw?: Mark Jacob Mark graduated in government and politics from Essex university, he then proceeded to study for his common professional examination and law finals. Having qualified in 1994 Mark has specialised in commercial property and acts for property companies, high net worth individuals and foreign investors. Mark also specialises in secured lending and has acted for several major banking institutions. Away from the office, Mark is a keen footballer and keeps himself in shape by frequenting the gym at least twice a week. Mark is also a keen watcher of all sports including of course football and in particular his beloved Spurs. Indeed in 1999 Mark had a book about Spurs published which made The Sunday Times bestseller sports publications list for several weeks.

A what if.... ...IF some mug had offered Chanrai £25M for 90% of Portsmouth City Football Club, he would have taken it. He would hardly have claimed an additional £10M for the charge he had on Fratton....so, while they were in negotiation, the shares he was offering for sale, he was saying, were worth more than the £17M he was owed. As Storrie said on the 5th February, "Any purchaser of Pompey would be acquiring a bargain. "It's certainly good value. The club will go for nothing. The new owner would, though, have to take on the debt, and excluding the money owed to Sacha Gaydamak, the debts are down to £25m, and most of those are normal footballing debts." Just because the shares you took as security for the £17M loan are now worth f*** all because you placed the company in administration is your fault. You should have got a better lawyer than Marc Jacob to negotiate the security...

The points here, I think, are as follows: Falcondrone borrows £17M from Portpin which is secured by the shares, Falcondrone own, representing 90% of the share capital of Portsmouth City Football Club. Additionally, Portpin registers a charge on Fratton Park, owned by Portsmouth City Football Club. Falcondrone fails to repay Portpin so Portpin takes ownership of the shares in Portsmouth City Football Club. Portpin charge is satisfied by share transfer. Fratton still owned by Portsmouth City Football Club because Falcondrone borrowed the money from Portpin, not PCFC which is not in default for the original £17M. It was Falcondrone. Chanrai/Portpin is thus not a creditor of PCFC, but the majority shareholder. The additional charge on every asset, current and future of PCFC was registered by Marc Jacobs on the 6th January, when he realised that Chanrai/Portpin were exposed. Fuglers realise that Marc Jacobs has done something that is dodgy, whilst under a court order, following the WUO and they fire him. HMRC want to see the loan instruments that were deposited with Companies House that make Chanrai/Portpin think he/they can march into the sweetshop and empty the till... All pure conjecture...

There was an additional charge on Fratton Park, TBF...

Even the club itself has screwed up the Chanrai deal, by posting this. The security arrangement with Falcondrone Ltd is based on documents drawn up by Fuglers law firm as part of the original draw down of the loan, depositing with Mr Chainrai the original share certificate and a signed but undated share transfer in favour of Mr Chainrai, which could be dated and exercised in the event of default on the terms of the loan agreement. Muppets...