derry Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Are you saying that AA won't be administrator then....? ;-) No but it may well be that there will be objections to his appointment from HMRC and other creditors who also were shafted last time and have joined up with HMRC.
sussexsaint Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Who the **** is laughing now? Always them until there is any semblance of justice
derry Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Reeeet, WTF is Breville.....!!!!!!???????? Near Caen?
trousers Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Can you be administrator of 2 different companies at the same time? Not sure about that, but was more alluding to Derry's ascertain that the administrative process would need to be run efficiently or not at all...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Lampitt just admitted that Chanrai hasn't paid the money in that he said... £2M in the bank (including the money received from PL)...
Spudders Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Can you be administrator of 2 different companies at the same time? So long at they are totally unrelated I'm sure it'll be fine
trousers Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 No but it may well be that there will be objections to his appointment from HMRC and other creditors who also were shafted last time and have joined up with HMRC. Yep, that's what I was alluding to
Gemmel Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Can you be administrator of 2 different companies at the same time? Yep, no problem with that, but might cause some issues when the admin of A is the same admin of B, When B is a creditor of A and the administrator owns 100% of shares in company A.
Matthew Le God Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Source? Lampitt just confirmed it on Express FM.
trousers Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Lampitt just admitted that Chanrai hasn't paid the money in that he said... £2M in the bank (including the money received from PL)... Which bank account? Their's is frozen. Rosie47 maybe...?
Lets B Avenue Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Lumpitt has just said "Theres about £2 million in the bank, including the money we got from th pp last week. But that is in the frozen account." That dosent add up? Also, Chinny hasnt paid anything.
martyg1950 Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Source? http://www.expressfm.com/player/
trousers Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Yep, no problem with that, but might cause some issues when the admin of A is the same admin of B, When B is a creditor of A and the administrator owns 100% of shares in company A. Where's Ted Rogers when you need him? My brain hurts reading that!
dvaughanwilliams Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 SaintBobby: 1. What and who can stop Portsmouth entering administration? HMRC or any other substantial creditor. If it can be proven that by going into admin creditors will be disadvantaged, the court can refuse. In my view, this is unlikely because the sale value of the players' registrations would become 0, to the disadvantage of the creditors. 2. Is it in anyone's interests to stop them going into admin - and if so, through what mechanism? Not that I can think of, but am prepared to be corrected by more knowledgeable people 3. If, for whatever reason, they do go into admin, does this permanently suspend the WUP? Admin provides protection from creditors, so the winding up petition will not be heard on Monday. It doesn't remove the debt though and a plan has to be conceived to settle the debts. HMRC will never vote for a CVA, but if they represent less than 25% of the debt again, they can be out voted. 4. Isn't it completely obvious that the club are insolvent? Their income simply doesn't match their expenditure - let alone start to clear their debts. What are the legal ramifications for being in admin while insolvent? Solvency for football clubs is very difficult to ascertain, in terms of whether assets are more than liabilities. The liabilities are well known, but the value of the assets, particularly player registrations, are very difficult to value. 5. If they are prevented from going into admin, does the WUP order go ahead? And, if so, what could possibly prevent it succeeding? not likely, see above 6. If the WUP order succeeds (now or later) do Portsmouth go out of business immediately? not likely, but if it was heard on Monday and a winding up order was issued, all of the club's assets would be sold under supervision of the court.
Channon's Sideburns Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Lampitt - UHY Hacker Young - their choice of Admin... Hahahahahahaaha
Matthew Le God Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Lampitt just confirmed UHY will be administrators!
SaintBobby Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 SaintBobby: 1. What and who can stop Portsmouth entering administration? HMRC or any other substantial creditor. If it can be proven that by going into admin creditors will be disadvantaged, the court can refuse. In my view, this is unlikely because the sale value of the players' registrations would become 0, to the disadvantage of the creditors. 2. Is it in anyone's interests to stop them going into admin - and if so, through what mechanism? Not that I can think of, but am prepared to be corrected by more knowledgeable people 3. If, for whatever reason, they do go into admin, does this permanently suspend the WUP? Admin provides protection from creditors, so the winding up petition will not be heard on Monday. It doesn't remove the debt though and a plan has to be conceived to settle the debts. HMRC will never vote for a CVA, but if they represent less than 25% of the debt again, they can be out voted. 4. Isn't it completely obvious that the club are insolvent? Their income simply doesn't match their expenditure - let alone start to clear their debts. What are the legal ramifications for being in admin while insolvent? Solvency for football clubs is very difficult to ascertain, in terms of whether assets are more than liabilities. The liabilities are well known, but the value of the assets, particularly player registrations, are very difficult to value. 5. If they are prevented from going into admin, does the WUP order go ahead? And, if so, what could possibly prevent it succeeding? not likely, see above 6. If the WUP order succeeds (now or later) do Portsmouth go out of business immediately? not likely, but if it was heard on Monday and a winding up order was issued, all of the club's assets would be sold under supervision of the court. Thanks. V helpful.
bridge too far Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Android gets the job again :) Can any of the creditors object to this? And if so would another administrator be appointed? And by whom?
derry Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Yep, that's what I was alluding to[/quote Administration has to be fully funded. It cannot trade at a loss. Unless there is an injection of sufficient funds or costs are cut to allow solvency it can't happen. Liquidation then is the only option, which HMRC will most likely be pushing for.
hypochondriac Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Lampitt - UHY Hacker Young - their choice of Admin... Hahahahahahaaha Not sure what is so funny. They saved them last time.
Crab Lungs Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 13 February 2012 at 05:48 PM breville Not sure how big a problem this is. We just got  £2.5m from PL and if we pack the park tomorrow we will be able to pay our bills and maybe get an emergency loan or two in? Surely we should be allowed to do that as we are in an emergency! Maybe we can get the parent club to pay too? Simeon Jackson would be good , or a Jamie Pollok type player .....
ART Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/feb/13/portsmouth-administration?newsfeed=true
BigShadow Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Can any of the creditors object to this? And if so would another administrator be appointed? And by whom? I'd be amazed if HMRC didn't object.
dvaughanwilliams Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 What a doughnut I don't think you paid enough attention to the poster's user name.... It's pure comedy gold.
gaz Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Lumpitt has just said "Theres about £2 million in the bank, including the money we got from th pp last week. But that is in the frozen account." That dosent add up? Also, Chinny hasnt paid anything. So they got the parachute payment last week, but it went into the frozen account that they can't touch? If true, how on Earth are they going to fund the Admin when they can't run day-to-day?
S-Clarke Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Surely they'll be docked more than 10 points? Bournemouth were hit with a 17pt deduction because it was their 2nd administration.
trousers Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Yep, that's what I was alluding to Administration has to be fully funded. It cannot trade at a loss. Unless there is an injection of sufficient funds or costs are cut to allow solvency it can't happen. Liquidation then is the only option, which HMRC will most likely be pushing for. So, there's no chance of a certain administrator pulling the wool over the authorities eyes to give the impression that the administration is being run solvently....if you get my drift?
trousers Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Lampitt just confirmed UHY will be administrators! Did he justify why they chose them again?
70's Mike Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Lampitt just confirmed UHY will be administrators! did not mention his resignation then?
trousers Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Can someone draw me a venn diagram showing the companies and CVAs that AA now has control over, highlighting the creditors of each? Thanks
dvaughanwilliams Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Surely they'll be docked more than 10 points? Bournemouth were hit with a 17pt deduction because it was their 2nd administration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_%28British_football%29#Clubs_in_England_.26_Wales_that_have_entered_administration The -17 was for starting a second season in administration, not because it was their second.
Saints foreva Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Moaning about the Fit and Proper persons test yet again, didn't hear too many people moaning when Russian blood money helped them win the cup....
gaz Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Can someone draw me a venn diagram showing the companies and CVAs that AA now has control over? All of them, by the sounds of it. He's got his fingers in so many pies, that he can't lose no matter what outcome.
derry Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 So, there's no chance of a certain administrator pulling the wool over the authorities eyes to give the impression that the administration is being run solvently....if you get my drift? Possibly but will HMRC prove that they can't fund administration with current income.
Under Weststand Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Oh F**k off with the thread bare squad ******. Still talking bout bringing in players in on emergency loans for god sake.
Depressed of Shirley Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Mods, can we have a poll on here to vote for our favourite P*****pey administration? My favourite was 2010, with Storrie and the guy in the car park at Fratton. However, with all the admins to choose from, I'm sure others have their own personal best memories. On a separate note, did any one else see that Rangers signed a player, Cousin, this morning, and went into Admin at lunchtime. Has Storrie got a new job in Scotland?
trousers Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Possibly but will HMRC prove that they can't fund administration with current income. HMRC couldn't prove a batch of bread dough from what I've seen the last couple of years...
Danish Saint Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 May I offer a toast to Pompey and all the fun they've given us over the years?!
Under Weststand Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Secured debt. Debt to portpin debt to CSI trade debt & debt to pay off the CVA so Lampit quoted 16mil + 17-mill + 10.8-mil trade debt 2.4 tax + players wages. so so upwards of 35-40 mil then!
Glasgow_Saint Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 Moaning about the Fit and Proper persons test yet again, didn't hear too many people moaning when Russian blood money helped them win the cup.... If the FA were stricter Pompey would already be dead....... Who else would buy that **** club?
Gemmel Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 You just know that they intend to rip up the previous CVA. Lumpitt.................. didn't want to comment on that Where's Clapham when you need him
Micky Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 If the FA were stricter Pompey would already be dead....... Who else would buy that **** club? I would imagine there was a whole queue of upstanding billionairre businessmen standing behind the russian at the time - honest....
Micky Posted 13 February, 2012 Posted 13 February, 2012 The travelling blue army showed the world.....
Recommended Posts