St Jim Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Well, at least they don't owe HMRC any PAYE or NI for January. Every cloud and all that. You know I'm just waiting for the first poor deluded pikey to come up with a similar comment......and actually believe it. It's unbelievable how thick they are, all of them wetting themselves with excitement because they lost only one player in teh window (a player who was probably on a minimal wage compared to others and the one good prospect for the future) for a whopping 400k (which I am assuming will be taxable). I do have to agree with them though, DL & MA pulled off a master stroke keeping the team together, excellent work guys!! .......... 19 days and counting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 400k eh? Well done. Now would young Williams have been stupid enough to have ASKED for a transfer? If he didn't then some 10% or so of that money will be his signing on fee. Curiouser & Curiouser. Obviously they will announce their new buyer later today................................................................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 @pn_neil_allen: Fantastic news about #Pompey players staying and committing themselves. Question remains, though, now how does the club meet £1.6m tax bill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 All figures to do with Skates are always shaded in mist but if Tax bill for Paye and NI is £800k for month , wage bill must be at least £3.2m per month Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 400k eh? Well done. Now would young Williams have been stupid enough to have ASKED for a transfer? If he didn't then some 10% or so of that money will be his signing on fee. Curiouser & Curiouser. Obviously they will announce their new buyer later today................................................................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sussexsaint Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 LOL at 'couldn't match wages' - these would be the wages that currently and in all likleyhood for the forseeable future cannot be paid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patred44 Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 I was talking to someone from Ipswich TFC last night, and he reckoned they are a nightmare to deal with at the moment. No one will make a decision, no one will return a phone call. Any question to them can't be answered without referring it several people, most of them solicitors or players agents. The poor manager must be pulling his hair out, if he had any. The club is been run into the ground and board members and club officials are in hiding. It's like they have decided that no effort they make would benefit them, so why bother saving the club. They are relying on the FL to do something, thinking they will be embarrassed into saving them to preserve the reputation of football. It's like they pulled the drawbridge up. Abandoned any pretense of responsibility to fans, players, staff, and creditors. They have left the players to fend for themselves, choosing whether to stay or go, and leaving their agents to sort out new clubs for them. The players themselves are sick to back teeth with it all and want away, but with no one willing to take responsibility for negotiations hardly any clubs will bother to go through the agents and solicitors. This club is unravelling fast, and there are serious doubts as to whether they will even finish their fixtures this season. The PFA are lobbying the Football League to take over the day to day running of the club, but it would set a dangerous precedent. Selling players won't work, there is not enough of them, and anyhow they can't be replaced by loans as the parent clubs will not allow their players to be involved with them ATM. You saw that yesterday when WBA would not consider sending their players back into the mess. But what can be done with a club that is run so badly that the manager has to go down to ASDA's to buy toilet rolls for the training ground because no one else will take the responsibilty... FFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Depressed of Shirley Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 I heard last night, third hand but actually a believeable source, that without the £400,000 last night, they could not fulfil the fixture on Saturday. Everyone from Stewards, turnstile opps, corp hospitality staff etc, saying pay up or we don't work. Would be a shame if they paid them and the game was postponed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Where did that £400k go though? Aren't their accounts frozen? Are Fulham waiting for the validation order to be granted before paying for Williams? Or did one of Al-Fayed's flunkies drive down from West London with a briefcase full of used notes? And Hutch - LOL at the silver lining comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 I was talking to someone from Ipswich TFC last night, and he reckoned they are a nightmare to deal with at the moment. No one will make a decision, no one will return a phone call. Any question to them can't be answered without referring it several people, most of them solicitors or players agents. The poor manager must be pulling his hair out, if he had any. The club is been run into the ground and board members and club officials are in hiding. It's like they have decided that no effort they make would benefit them, so why bother saving the club. They are relying on the FL to do something, thinking they will be embarrassed into saving them to preserve the reputation of football. It's like they pulled the drawbridge up. Abandoned any pretense of responsibility to fans, players, staff, and creditors. They have left the players to fend for themselves, choosing whether to stay or go, and leaving their agents to sort out new clubs for them. The players themselves are sick to back teeth with it all and want away, but with no one willing to take responsibility for negotiations hardly any clubs will bother to go through the agents and solicitors. This club is unravelling fast, and there are serious doubts as to whether they will even finish their fixtures this season. The PFA are lobbying the Football League to take over the day to day running of the club, but it would set a dangerous precedent. Selling players won't work, there is not enough of them, and anyhow they can't be replaced by loans as the parent clubs will not allow their players to be involved with them ATM. You saw that yesterday when WBA would not consider sending their players back into the mess. But what can be done with a club that is run so badly that the manager has to go down to ASDA's to buy toilet rolls for the training ground because no one else will take the responsibilty... FFS They actually have working toilets at the training ground? It's not all bad then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Where did that £400k go though? Aren't their accounts frozen? Are Fulham waiting for the validation order to be granted before paying for Williams? Or did one of Al-Fayed's flunkies drive down from West London with a briefcase full of used notes? Was just about to pose the same questions. Would the Football League need to know what account was being used to channel the money through? If, per chance, it was through AA's company account wouldn't that suggest that the club are being run by an....erm.... administrator? Nah, that can't be right. We'd have seen a points penalty by now if AA had anything to do with running the football club. Silly me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 They actually have working toilets at the training ground? It's not all bad then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Presumably HMRC will be present at the hearing for the validation order and will be given the opportunity to oppose it being granted? Surely then they will point out that unfreezing their accounts in the short term will simply allow PFC to continue trading whilst insolvent and continue to increase their debts? I don't see how it can be argued that they're not insolvent and even if PFC argue they need to pay staff to continue trading (ie actually fulfil the fixture on Saturday) then the positive impact on their cashflow from that game will be so minimal as to be insignificant. Does the court to whom they have appealed for the validation order have the powers to consider their solvency or otherwise? I work in a building full of lawyers, maybe I should go and ask one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 So, anyone know who's signed up to attend the CSI creditors' meeting tomorrow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Please tell me what you typed into the search engine to come up with that... :-)) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 I was talking to someone from Ipswich TFC last night, and he reckoned they are a nightmare to deal with at the moment............ But what can be done with a club that is run so badly that the manager has to go down to ASDA's to buy toilet rolls for the training ground because no one else will take the responsibilty... FFS Jesus. Is that really true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Was just about to pose the same questions. Would the Football League need to know what account was being used to channel the money through? If, per chance, it was through AA's company account wouldn't that suggest that the club are being run by an....erm.... administrator? Nah, that can't be right. We'd have seen a points penalty by now if AA had anything to do with running the football club. Silly me. That's actually a very good point trousers. I think somebody should contact the FL and ask for clarification on this and if it turns out to be the case then they should receive an immediate 10-point deduction regardless of what other punishments may still be imposed for other financial irregularities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Please tell me what you typed into the search engine to come up with that... :-)) P*rtsmouth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 That's actually a very good point trousers. I think somebody should contact the FL and ask for clarification on this and if it turns out to be the case then they should receive an immediate 10-point deduction regardless of what other punishments may still be imposed for other financial irregularities. Yeah, but AA said yesterday that he's only "advising" the board of PFC 2010 so it must all be above board.... :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Without any fact to back this up, I truly believe that Barclays had enough of Saints / lowe when we came out of the January transfer window without selling anyone adn infact added a junior player (It might have been forecast, but just can't remember)..... The next moment of any significance for Saints was ..............admin. Not sure that admin serves any purpose for pompey, but lampitt must have balls of steel, without being an expert, his actions appear to put him in the "Personally Liable" camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 They actually have working toilets at the training ground? It's not all bad then... Of course they do! They don't own it, so why would the toilets not be in perfect working order? I suspect though, that having the toilets serviced and stocked would be part of their rental agreement. One can only assume that if he who shall not be named is going to Asda to get bog roll, then they haven't paid their rent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Without any fact to back this up, I truly believe that Barclays had enough of Saints / lowe when we came out of the January transfer window without selling anyone adn infact added a junior player (It might have been forecast, but just can't remember)..... The next moment of any significance for Saints was ..............admin. Not sure that admin serves any purpose for pompey, but lampitt must have balls of steel, without being an expert, his actions appear to put him in the "Personally Liable" camp. I think the fact that AA yesterday chose to highlight the names of the PFC2010 directors during what appears to be a routine interview with the press speaks volumes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Majestic Channon Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 So Paul Jewell basically confirms that Ipswich couldn't match the wages Ward and Henderson were getting at Pompey. http://www.twtd.co.uk/news.php?storyid=20103 What he really meant to say was...I can't believe the fecking stupid wages they are paying players down there.....no wonder the DFCSB's are in the deep doggie doo. Watch the thick skates treat ward and henderson as loyal hero's, never mind that their greed could go a long way towards the cheats being wound up Here's hoping anyway, just die skates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Please tell me what you typed into the search engine to come up with that... :-)) Just a google image search on outside toilet. Actually I doubt they can afford the one in the picture and theirs is probably more like this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Actually, weirdly I think one interpretation of recent evetns shows the club is not being run by AA. I know he seems to have a different view of what an adminitrator does to just about everybody else in the business world, but surely to God, he wanted sell Ward and Pearce? The club's directors are the ones who are putting their heads in a bucket of sand and shouting LA LA LA (not easy to do!) I can't see any other reason behind the club's behaviour other than that they've decided that nothing will give them enough money to pay off their debts and trade normally, so they are planning to go into adminstration again just before the WU hearing. They're betting on losing only 10 points, keeping most of their players for now and somehow struggling through to the end of the season without being relegated. More innocent people will lose money of course, but what do they care? Then over the close season they hope to find a new owner, attracted by a further reduction in their debt through admin, still a championship club, and with more overpaid players leaving as their contracts come to an end. It's an immoral and risky strategy, (especially if they get a proper administrator this time) but with liquidation the only alternative...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Presumably HMRC will be present at the hearing for the validation order and will be given the opportunity to oppose it being granted? Surely then they will point out that unfreezing their accounts in the short term will simply allow PFC to continue trading whilst insolvent and continue to increase their debts? I don't see how it can be argued that they're not insolvent and even if PFC argue they need to pay staff to continue trading (ie actually fulfil the fixture on Saturday) then the positive impact on their cashflow from that game will be so minimal as to be insignificant. Does the court to whom they have appealed for the validation order have the powers to consider their solvency or otherwise? I work in a building full of lawyers, maybe I should go and ask one of them. I say unfreeze the bank accounts. Let them have their access, which they blame non payment on. After all, Admin Andy has been telling the world since before Xmas that they have a 'cash flow' problem until a new buyer is found. What are the chances that a club that has had a cash flow issue since November is actually going to have anything tucked away in a bank account, let alone 3 or 4 million quid! Having the bank accounts frozen is just giving them another excuse not to pay. If I were HMRC I'd go to the validation hearing and say 'no, your honour, no problem at all in allowing them to have access to their bank accounts, after all, they'll then be able to pay us what we're owed'. Call their bluff and stop giving the DFCSBs excuses! We all know they won't be able to pay, then HMRC will have even more ammunition for the WUP on the 20th - 'we let them have access to their bank accounts and they still couldn't pay the bill, insolvent m'lud'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 (edited) According to my tax calc app, 1,600,000 would result in deductions of 830,448 I know thats for one person but most of those wages are taxed at the 50% band If I do it for 1/10th ie £160,000 per month it is £81,648 per month for 10 players I recon thier pre tax wage bill is nearer £1,500,000 per month They have been paying the take home wage but keeping the tax. Edited 1 February, 2012 by tony13579 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brizzie Saints Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Actually, weirdly I think one interpretation of recent evetns shows the club is not being run by AA. I know he seems to have a different view of what an adminitrator does to just about everybody else in the business world, but surely to God, he wanted sell Ward and Pearce? The club's directors are the ones who are putting their heads in a bucket of sand and shouting LA LA LA (not easy to do!) I can't see any other reason behind the club's behaviour other than that they've decided that nothing will give them enough money to pay off their debts and trade normally, so they are planning to go into adminstration again just before the WU hearing. They're betting on losing only 10 points, keeping most of their players for now and somehow struggling through to the end of the season without being relegated. More innocent people will lose money of course, but what do they care? Then over the close season they hope to find a new owner, attracted by a further reduction in their debt through admin, still a championship club, and with more overpaid players leaving as their contracts come to an end. It's an immoral and risky strategy, (especially if they get a proper administrator this time) but with liquidation the only alternative...... If they enter Admin again within 2 years dont they get kicked out of the league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 (edited) http://payecalculator.hmrc.gov.uk/PAYE1.aspx Using this, a tax bill of £800k a month would mean total wages far short of £3.2m - I also suspect that the figure includes both employer and employee NIC for both players and everyone else. EDIT - does anyone know whether the quoted figures of £x thousand a week players get paid are generally net or gross? I somewhere heard that foreigners just want a final amount and can never be bothered about the tax so ask the club to sort all that out. Edited 1 February, 2012 by angelman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 If they enter Admin again within 2 years dont they get kicked out of the league? I think the hive mind consensus on that is that it was proposed as an option but not passed/agreed by the FL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 through a mix of ignoring the elephant and paying greedy players' ridiculous wages that can't be matched, they've retained enough players to overcome a minus 10, and possibly a minus 15ish, which is what will happen for a second administration - if they dodge the bigger more dangerous elephant that's waiting at court. The problem with that great plan will be the financing during adminstration - who can burn a mammoth £2M+ a month on a failed business? Chanrai fell in love with the club, but not that much, so the 12th Man group will have to run a lot of jumble sales. And the price of Lampitt's house which should soon go to creditors won't knock much off the debt. Don't know if I've mentioned it before but I'm not sure that the figures stack up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Anyone know what would be financially the most damaging scenario for Pompey this weekend? The game going ahead (i.e. having to pay all the costs of putting on a game) or the game getting postponed (the lack of match-day revenue adding to their cashflow woes)? Just want to know if I need to dust off my snow dance or not.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Section 127 IA 1986 makes any disposition of the company’s assets after commencement of winding up void ‘unless the court otherwise orders’. The practical effect is that as soon as banks become aware of the winding up petition they ‘freeze’ the company's bank accounts (if they do not, the liquidator could require them to make good any loss). This affects the company’s ability to continue trading; wages and salaries may be unpaid even when money is held to pay them. A company may have funds to pay a petitioning creditor, but cannot as the bank will not release funds. If the Court orders disposal of assets or release of funds for a particular purpose, the banks and company officers have protection from the voiding provisions. The Court usually hears an application under Section 127 (the term 'validation order' is not used in the Act) without notice (ex-parte). A petitioning creditor aware of the application may attend and make representations to the Court. The Revenue's response depends on the purpose for which the order is being sought and the trading history of the debtor company. Oppose an application if it would reduce the assets available for creditors. But if the application is to release funds to allow: Payment of wages - Ask the Court to order that payment of current PAYE/NIC is made on time. If this order is breached apply for the order to be varied. http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/insmanual/ins11790.htm Soooo, confirmation that the validation order is only likely to be granted if PFC also pay HMRC. And if they can't do that, it ain't lifted and that will recorded and no doubt presented to the Companies Registrar on Feb 20th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Actually, weirdly I think one interpretation of recent evetns shows the club is not being run by AA. I know he seems to have a different view of what an adminitrator does to just about everybody else in the business world, but surely to God, he wanted sell Ward and Pearce? The club's directors are the ones who are putting their heads in a bucket of sand and shouting LA LA LA (not easy to do!) I can't see any other reason behind the club's behaviour other than that they've decided that nothing will give them enough money to pay off their debts and trade normally, so they are planning to go into adminstration again just before the WU hearing. They're betting on losing only 10 points, keeping most of their players for now and somehow struggling through to the end of the season without being relegated. More innocent people will lose money of course, but what do they care? Then over the close season they hope to find a new owner, attracted by a further reduction in their debt through admin, still a championship club, and with more overpaid players leaving as their contracts come to an end. It's an immoral and risky strategy, (especially if they get a proper administrator this time) but with liquidation the only alternative...... Just a thought.....What's the cut-off date for the points penalty being carried over into next season? Third week in March rings a bell. Perhaps they are looking to head off administration until then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sussexsaint Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 According to my tax calc app, 1,600,000 would result in deductions of 830,448 Blimey, that really is quite a lot of points to lose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Anyone know what would be financially the most damaging scenario for Pompey this weekend? The game going ahead (i.e. having to pay all the costs of putting on a game) or the game getting postponed (the lack of match-day revenue adding to their cashflow woes)? Just want to know if I need to dust off my snow dance or not.... Last minute cancellation after they had paid all the staff up front would be my guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 So what cash do they actually need? Theres £1.8m for HMRC £1.2m for AA company due next month Ithink £5m 'ish due as part of the CVA next month as well That's not really what i'd call a cashflow problem..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 (edited) Last minute cancellation after they had paid all the staff up front would be my guess. I'll get my dancing boots on in that case. Will schedule a deluge of snow for 2pm.... Edited 1 February, 2012 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wurzel Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 I'll get my dancing boots on in that case. Will schedule a deluge of snow for 2pm.... Nooooo don't do it. You can just imagine the outpouring of sympathy from the rest of the not-ITK football world when they go out of business due to an act of god. The true story would never get a look in. I think there only chance raising any funds now is a lot of dodgy looking geezers going into a lot of back street bookies around the country with brown envelopes full of dirty cash betting on P*mp*y to lose their next game. And the next one. And the next one ... Although if the story runs true to form even that plan will probably fall at the first hurdle with a 1-0 victory following a last minute Hull own goal on saturday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevvy Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/547463025?-11209 A good read from a pompey point of view Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suewhistle Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Now would young Williams have been stupid enough to have ASKED for a transfer? If he didn't then some 10% or so of that money will be his signing on fee. To be honest, I think if he did ask for a transfer we should give him more credit for intelligence. With your professional career ahead of you would you really want to struggle in that morass any longer than actually necessary? I'm going to credit him with a bit of insight and foresight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Meanwhile, in a courtroom in London..... David Brown @DavidhBrown Milan #Mandaric made “modest profit” and recovered £17million loan when he sold Portsmouth FC to Alexandre Gaydamak, court told Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Jim Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Anyone know what would be financially the most damaging scenario for Pompey this weekend? The game going ahead (i.e. having to pay all the costs of putting on a game) or the game getting postponed (the lack of match-day revenue adding to their cashflow woes)? Just want to know if I need to dust off my snow dance or not.... The latter - better get them shoes on. Matchday revenue will cover the costs of the matchday expenses and some players wages.....that is as long as they get the minimum required crowd which should be no problem for the bestest fans...........oh, they're f***ed then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/547463025?-11209 A good read from a pompey point of view "There is no question that Pompey are insolvent and the only plan to become solvent is to find a new owner willing to inject the funds CSI are no longer around to do." There you go Football League...from the mouth of a Pompey fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 (edited) http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/547463025?-11209 A good read from a pompey point of view Worth a cut-and-paste into here for posterity.... Remember these words? "I am very concerned about the financial status of this company. It seems to me there's a very real risk that this company is undoubtedly trading while it is insolvent. "I'm obviously conscious that, by making a winding-up order, it would have very severe consequences not only for the company as a business but for the supporters themselves, but that's not a consideration that I strictly take into account." Of course, they're the words of Registrar Christine Derrett in February 2010 as the old Portsmouth City FC company struggled for its financial life. Fast forward two years and its deja vu, with a February 20 date set for the son of PCFC, Portsmouth Football Club (2010) Ltd, to have its day in court, fighting a rearguard action once again against a winding up petition by HMRC. The sums of money involved may be less astronomical - this time the club owes a mere £1.6m against telephone number VAT and PAYE & NI contributions in 2010 - but the question remains the same: can PFC prove it is solvent? If not, is there any imminent prospect of the company being sold to a new investor? By the skin of its teeth, Pompey got away with it two years' ago. Can they be so lucky again? Those who are concerned about administration probably don't need to worry about it. Following the issuing of the winding up order by HMRC, Pompey have to get the court's permission to go into administration. If you check out the quotes above, you will understand how lucky we were to get into administration last time. This time we have a major problem. Our debts are just getting bigger and there is no realistic plan to become solvent. An administrator cannot allow a business to run while insolvent so before the court allows a business to seek this protection from it's creditors it will expect to see the cavalry not just coming over the horizon, but charging into the battle. There is no question that Pompey are insolvent and the only plan to become solvent is to find a new owner willing to inject the funds CSI are no longer around to do. The court will ask the question of whether after four months without finding a buyer for Pompey there is a realistic chance of finding one. They are unlikely to accept the sort of dubious letters expressing an interest that they did last time. There is no-one around to even pay the administrator this time. Despite the rhetoric about Chainrai guaranteeing £10m to put us through administration we got through it last time by drawing down parachute payments, and in the High Court the administrators barrister quite clearly said this was done because there was no other source of funding available. Who will pick up the cost this time? Many fans have spoken of Chainrai and Kushnir stepping back in. There are many problems with that scenario, but it has to be a remote possibility anyway. Portpin are already rumoured to be ready to accept half of their previous price with no takers. For them to start putting in £4m between now and the end of the season in the hope of recouping £8m is just throwing good money after bad. Many people refer to their secured status but that is no longer relevant. If a bank lends you £1m to buy a house then discovers when they repossess it that it is in fact worth 50% of that the net result is that they have lost 50% of their money. There is no 'secured debt fairy' who compensates people for making bad investments. If Portpin were to undertake to keep the club running until the end of the season they would know that all the money they invest would be dead money. If after nearly three years Portpin have failed to find a new owner willing to give them back £17m then the chances of them finding someone willing to pay £21m is an LSD-inspired daydream. Pompey have probably left them at the point where it isn't worth chasing their losses any more. The prospect of winding up also explains the lack of significant movement outwards in the window. There is no point selling players unless the £2.4m needed to discharge the winding up order, (£1.6m already cited and once wages are paid another £800k apparently becomes due to HMRC), can be raised. As you tend to get 50% of any fee up front and the rest in instalments the chances of Pompey raising that kind of money are remote to say the least. Better to keep players who will attract a new owner and could potentially be sold for good fees in the summer to fund his squad rebuilding efforts. But this time the football club fairy godmother may well baulk at bailing out PFC once more. As things stand, it is a pretty good bet that Pompey will not survive the hearing, if it gets that far, in a little under three weeks' time. Lampitt and Andronikou are obviously not going to appear in The News telling us we are doomed, largely because it is their job to try and sell/save the club. They won't concede defeat to HMRC before even arriving at the courtroom steps. They will exhaust every legal avenue but it looks a doomed effort. Pompey, in its current guise has but 20 days left to live. Without a new owner we are going to be into Plan B country. Never ask for whom the bells chime; this time they chime for us. Edited 1 February, 2012 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latter day saint Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/547463025?-11209 A good read from a pompey point of view Blimey! an articulate & well reasoned article from one of the few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 Could have been written by one of us! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 David Brown @DavidhBrown #Redknapp trial:#Mandaric says“I took out of my pocket money to pay out the Inland Revenue….£100million over 12 yrs” Post by @timesnewsdesk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/547463025?-11209 A good read from a pompey point of view A few of the phew may be finally getting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 1 February, 2012 Share Posted 1 February, 2012 (edited) James Pearce @Pearcesport Prosecution to Mandaric: Monaco money was "partly in relation to sale of Peter Crouch, isn't that right?" Mandaric: "Absolutely not" Prosecution: "I'm saying Mr Mandaric that you paid a bung." Mandaric: "I don't understand where you are coming from" Pros: "Your friend Harry Redknapp knew perfectly well the money was connected to sale of Crouch." Mandaric: "You'll have to ask him that" I may be losing the plot, and/or will to live, here but I thought this was a case about whether Redknapp paid tax on the money, not where is came from per se. In other words, in the context of this prosecution, does it matter whether it was a "bung" or a "gift" from a tax evasion perspective? Edited 1 February, 2012 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts