Pompey Takeover Saga

[badgerx16]

.... -10 won't get them near relegated with their squad.

 

I think we should wait and see how the new admin cuts costs - in 3 weeks time their squad may be based on a much lower salary cap.

[Hockey_saint]

That must have been posted by someone from here.

 

 

Surely.

 

 

Don't you think?

 

 

They can't be that thick and deceitful.

 

 

Can they?

 

 

Oh...

 

IF it IS someone from here, there appear to be a lot of us on the News board tonight and that the awful truth nudge nudge wink wink.

[Waterside.saint]

I think we should wait and see how the new admin cuts costs - in 3 weeks time their squad may be based on a much lower salary cap.

 

Hard to see how they could live within their means & afford their current squad

Happy days

[Brizzie Saints]

We're on our way to a Saints Promotion,

While the Skates head into administration,

If we're lucky it will be Liquidation,

The Saints are off to the Premier League.....

SHALALALALALA

SHALALALALALA

SHALALALALALA....

WHO THE F**K IS LAUGHING NOW!!!!

 

Really like this but think it needs to be snappier

[Saint in Paradise]

If/when they sign loan players, we'll know it's another dodgy administrator. No professional would go into that club to help the creditors and allow them to sign yet more players.

 

I don't understand where this request for loans has come from. Is it thick or corrupt? They do realise it's the opposite that should happen now? i.e. most their players are loaned out elsewhere?? Has anyone mentioned that to them? What world of administration do they think keeps all the high earners and senior pros and decides to sign a few more?

Also, what is the current situation with the CVA? They tried to pay 10p in the pound illegally right? But is it still stated as 20p in the pound? That was criminal enough, surely it can't be reduced further can it? If it can then I hope every other club starts operating the same way as that's the only 'level playing field' we'll be seeing.

 

 

Well they have been under AAs influence for quite a while now, wonder if that has anything to do with it??

[Huffton]

Possibly a daft question, but assuming this administrator does his job and slashes costs, surely that has to start with players, its obvious their wage structure is utterly unsustainable. But can they actually afford to get rid of any players? Or will the league grant them special disposition to sell players outside the window to raise running capital?

[stevegrant]

Possibly a daft question, but assuming this administrator does his job and slashes costs, surely that has to start with players, its obvious their wage structure is utterly unsustainable. But can they actually afford to get rid of any players? Or will the league grant them special disposition to sell players outside the window to raise running capital?

They almost certainly won't be able to sell players. However, the "emergency" loan window is open until mid-to-late March, so there's the option for players to go out on loan for up to 93 days, and clubs may or may not be willing to pay a loan fee as well as cover all or part of the wages. The other option for them would be to ask the players to take wage deferrals. This would enable the administrator to run the club as "normally" (by your and my standards, not Pompey's usual) as possible with a much-reduced wage bill, bearing in mind that the administrator is liable for any additional losses incurred during the administration period.

[Gigersaint]

Here's hoping the new Administrator goes in there to do a proper job and doesn't get sucked into fawning over the hard done by plucky Pompey crap and bestest fans™ in the world rubbish that every other person that's stepped foot in that place gets sucked into.

 

It would make a refreshing change for someone to get in there and be honest about them and their situation for once, no matter how much it hurts with the truth of the shambles of what they are, what they've become and how they got themselves there.

[Chez]

They almost certainly won't be able to sell players. However, the "emergency" loan window is open until mid-to-late March, so there's the option for players to go out on loan for up to 93 days, and clubs may or may not be willing to pay a loan fee as well as cover all or part of the wages. The other option for them would be to ask the players to take wage deferrals. This would enable the administrator to run the club as "normally" (by your and my standards, not Pompey's usual) as possible with a much-reduced wage bill, bearing in mind that the administrator is liable for any additional losses incurred during the administration period.

First things first though, get Thorne back in on loan from WBA. Edited 18 February, 2012 by Chez

[pfc123]

What makes me giggle is that for the last two years we have been trying and trying and trying to tell Corp Ho ho ho that the CVA is yet to be serviced and his comeback has always been that it IS being serviced because the first payment was not due yet. Here we are just a few weeks before the first payment was due and, lo and behold - Skates back in admin and no hope of the first payment being made as agreed.

 

Is this your idea of servicing a CVA then Mr Ho? Default on it before the first payment is made in the hope of negotiating another one?

 

Excuse me? Where do you get the idea that there is "no hope of the first payment being made as agreed"? It's not due until April FFS

[Pugwash]

Excuse me? Where do you get the idea that there is "no hope of the first payment being made as agreed"? It's not due until April FFS

 

Six weeks and two paydays to go. Remind me - how much is that first payment? £3.2m or something?

[Gigersaint]

Excuse me? Where do you get the idea that there is "no hope of the first payment being made as agreed"? It's not due until April FFS

 

But are PFC in any position to make the payment now even if they could have found a way before going back into Admin?

 

With the Administrators now in control of the finances at PFC does that not mean that any payments toward that CVA that were due to be paid may now be restructured again and the creditors also have to wait again to be paid?

 

It isn't as if April is far away, just a matter of a few weeks, do you honestly think that a new administration is going to be able to make enough cut backs and drum up the funds to service the existing CVA and continue to maintain PFC's current weekly expenditure in such a small time scale?

[pfc123]

But are PFC in any position to make the payment now even if they could have found a way before going back into Admin?

 

With the Administrators now in control of the finances at PFC does that not mean that any payments toward that CVA that were due to be paid may now be restructured again and the creditors also have to wait again to be paid?

 

It isn't as if April is far away, just a matter of a few weeks, do you honestly think that a new administration is going to be able to make enough cut backs and drum up the funds to service the existing CVA and continue to maintain PFC's current weekly expenditure in such a small time scale?

 

Well, maybe. We'll have to wait and see. My point is that it's a bit premature to suggest that it's nailed on that we won't be making the first payment. A lot can happen in six weeks. I suspect we'll start getting some feedback from TB from Tuesday onwards. We'll have a better idea then what the situation is I guess....

[TopGun]

Well, maybe. We'll have to wait and see. My point is that it's a bit premature to suggest that it's nailed on that we won't be making the first payment. A lot can happen in six weeks. I suspect we'll start getting some feedback from TB from Tuesday onwards. We'll have a better idea then what the situation is I guess....

 

I'd guess that the presence of TB may cause some of the creditors who are threatening to cut off vital goods and services PFC needs to operate to hold off a little longer. But he's a true magician if he manages to find an investor before the existing cash runs out.

[hutch]

What makes me giggle is that for the last two years we have been trying and trying and trying to tell Corp Ho ho ho that the CVA is yet to be serviced and his comeback has always been that it IS being serviced because the first payment was not due yet. Here we are just a few weeks before the first payment was due and, lo and behold - Skates back in admin and no hope of the first payment being made as agreed.

 

Is this your idea of servicing a CVA then Mr Ho? Default on it before the first payment is made in the hope of negotiating another one?

That's not the way I see it. The new admin either must pay the first installment when it is due, or liquidate them, unless the CVA creditor's representative agrees to postpone it. He cannot add anything to the list of creditors. So if Baker Tilley (HMRC) demand their money in April, they must pay it.

 

Significantly, yesterday's result puts HMRC in complete control of their fate. That's what AA was trying to tell the skate. They will get their pound of flesh or PFC will be gone. Their pound of flesh is what they are owed under the old CVA c.£5m plus 100% of the current debt. And all their tax will be paid in the meantime.

[Saint in Paradise]

Well if they only have to worry about HMRC they should be ok as HMRC appear pretty weak

when it comes to pimpey.

[Dark Munster]

With there being no immediate decision on the amount of points to be deducted and the FL saying this will be discussed at a meeting to which a date will be set... just a thought (and one more than likely completely wide of the mark) do you think this meeting may be planned a little while down the line intentionally to see how Pompey fair over the next few weeks (possibly months) on the pitch?

 

Pompey timed their administration last time so that they were already relegated and the -10 made no difference to this, effectively making it no real penalty at all (cheating the system some may say). We tried as hard as we could to prolong going into administration in the hope we could amass enough points to avoid the drop even with the point penalty which actually ended up hindering us because we passed the cut off date for points to be deducted that season and consequently we started the new season with -10 which set us back. We could have taken the easy route and gone into admin sooner thus cementing our relegation and starting the new season a fresh but chose not to (my understanding).

 

Could the FL be ensuring that any points deduction is made after said cut off period (anyone know when this is?) so that if they are seemingly doomed for relegation anyway without a points deduction, they would have to start the new season next year with minus points like us, making it more of a punishment?

 

Just a thought and as I said, probably wide of the mark!

 

Don't forget the FL can (and have) make up rules as they see fit. So if the FL wants to do a Mawhinney on the Cheats, it perhaps would be simpler to just hit them with a massive point penalty (-50 for example), with an additional penalty that any negative points remaining at the end of the season would be carried over to next year in L1.

 

This would not only guarantee that the cesspit of a club goes down, but the negative point carry-over threat would also nip in the bud any vindictive attempt to threaten the integrity of the competition by capitulating all their remaining games this season.

[Waterside.saint]

Don't forget the FL can (and have) make up rules as they see fit. So if the FL wants to do a Mawhinney on the Cheats, it perhaps would be simpler to just hit them with a massive point penalty (-50 for example), with an additional penalty that any negative points remaining at the end of the season would be carried over to next year in L1.

 

This would not only guarantee that the cesspit of a club goes down, but the negative point carry-over threat would also nip in the bud any vindictive attempt to threaten the integrity of the competition by capitulating all their remaining games this season.

 

If only. With Mawhinney gone, there seems to be no-one left with a reputation for toughness who might wish to make an example of them

[Faz]

That's not the way I see it. The new admin either must pay the first installment when it is due, or liquidate them, unless the CVA creditor's representative agrees to postpone it. He cannot add anything to the list of creditors. So if Baker Tilley (HMRC) demand their money in April, they must pay it.

 

Significantly, yesterday's result puts HMRC in complete control of their fate. That's what AA was trying to tell the skate. They will get their pound of flesh or PFC will be gone. Their pound of flesh is what they are owed under the old CVA c.£5m plus 100% of the current debt. And all their tax will be paid in the meantime.

 

I agree (I think! It's all very convoluted) that HMRC are in complete control. PFC 2010 are liable for the old CVA. The terms of the old CVA can only be changed by agreement of the creditors, of which HMRC must now be the biggest as the football related debts have been cleared. If the first installments is missed, the old CVA collapses - and it's a mess. There is also then an arguement for saying that, effectively, they didn't exit via a CVA, and there should be an additional points deduction IMO.

[Dr Who?]

So when do the points come off?

 

I cannot see anyone wanting to buy them, what happens and how long can a football club stay in administration?

[Gingeletiss]

They almost certainly won't be able to sell players. However, the "emergency" loan window is open until mid-to-late March, so there's the option for players to go out on loan for up to 93 days, and clubs may or may not be willing to pay a loan fee as well as cover all or part of the wages. The other option for them would be to ask the players to take wage deferrals. This would enable the administrator to run the club as "normally" (by your and my standards, not Pompey's usual) as possible with a much-reduced wage bill, bearing in mind that the administrator is liable for any additional losses incurred during the administration period.

 

I was under the impression, that the administrator has the power, to just cancel the contracts of any staff, players included! I may be wrong.

[Gingeletiss]

Well, maybe. We'll have to wait and see. My point is that it's a bit premature to suggest that it's nailed on that we won't be making the first payment. A lot can happen in six weeks. I suspect we'll start getting some feedback from TB from Tuesday onwards. We'll have a better idea then what the situation is I guess....

 

Happy to bite here! It's a bit premature, to think he will let your club live another six weeks, you all think you are saved down in cloud cuckoo land, but if your finances are anywhere near what is being reported, then you may still be wound up in quick time. So before you come on here blowing bubble rings through your gills, I suggest you heed your own advice.

[Katalinic]

Happy to bite here! It's a bit premature, to think he will let your club live another six weeks, you all think you are saved down in cloud cuckoo land, but if your finances are anywhere near what is being reported, then you may still be wound up in quick time. So before you come on here blowing bubble rings through your gills, I suggest you heed your own advice.

 

The only fans I have ever known who are celebrating administration as if they have won the league - an indication of their intellect. Car crashes always look more spectacular in slow motion.

[sidthesquid]

I was under the impression, that the administrator has the power, to just cancel the contracts of any staff, players included! I may be wrong.

 

Legally he does, but the club have to pay off any 'football' debt in full, so as to continue in the Football League.

[Clapham Saint]

The administrator doesn't have to pay the cva.

 

The sale of the club to a new company means that the new company just have a liability to the old one which is equivalent to the cva payments.

 

As of yesterday the new co is protected from all creditors which already existed prior to the administration order - including the balance due to the old company.

 

The football league might take a different view when considering points deductions but the administrator won't be paying anything towards the cva (now a liquidation of old co).

[hutch]

I agree (I think! It's all very convoluted) that HMRC are in complete control. PFC 2010 are liable for the old CVA. The terms of the old CVA can only be changed by agreement of the creditors, of which HMRC must now be the biggest as the football related debts have been cleared. If the first installments is missed, the old CVA collapses - and it's a mess. There is also then an arguement for saying that, effectively, they didn't exit via a CVA, and there should be an additional points deduction IMO.

In a convoluted way, as you say. If the first installment is missed, without the prior agreement of BT, I don't think the original CVA will collapse at that time, but Birch will personally be liable for that installment. He won't let that happen, so the effect is the same.

 

I'm not sure if that's clear.

[sidthesquid]

It does seem to me that the phew somehow think they are free of Chainrai, but they are far from it. His and Gaydamak's tentacles are still wrapped right around the club; the only difference now is that he no longer has a vested interest in keeping it going, if he can't control the next high-interest earning money-launderer/joker to buy into the club. He can make Mr Birch's job even more difficult than it already is. Conclusion - the fun continues.

[dvaughanwilliams]

1. All this talk of a new CVA is very premature. I don't think that they could get 75% of the debtors by value to agree. I don't know who is allowed to vote, specifically whether Baker Tilly as a representative of the Old Co CVA gets a vote. If it had been AA, there may have been another *unorthodox* interpretation of the rules, forcing it through, but now, I don't think that's likely.

 

2. I think we've all seen the future of Poopey, it's in the opposite direction. Bournemouth had an even smaller squad, which was mainly made up of their youth team and the Football League were incredibly harsh in enforcing the transfer embargo. The Goal Keeping coach had to come out of retirement to sit on the bench and even then they didn't have a full complement of substitutes.

 

3. All this talk of players coming in is a fantasy. I expect some home truths are getting told to MA. The squad will be reduced, the youth team must be played. When a business goes into administration, the administrators become liable for any debts that are accrued during the administration. Birch will not allow them to operate at a loss, beyond the capabilities of the cash in the bank. Welcome to Austerity.

[Sheaf Saint]

I agree (I think! It's all very convoluted) that HMRC are in complete control. PFC 2010 are liable for the old CVA. The terms of the old CVA can only be changed by agreement of the creditors, of which HMRC must now be the biggest as the football related debts have been cleared. If the first installments is missed, the old CVA collapses - and it's a mess. There is also then an arguement for saying that, effectively, they didn't exit via a CVA, and there should be an additional points deduction IMO.

 

Yeah that's my reading of it as well. They avoided a further points deduction first time round by manipulating the creditors into agreeing a CVA, but if they fail to meet the agreed payments on that CVA then they should receive the same points deduction that they would have received if it was not agreed in the first place - IMO anyway.

[Whitey Grandad]

Well they won't have exited from the CVA with all creditors paid so according to the FL rules they are due a further points deduction, by my reckoning.

[trousers]

@TonyHusbandBBC: #pompey Birch told me he was impressed with the spirit on show when he met staff yesterday afternoon. Plans a fans forum in next week or so.

[Verbal Kint]

Except due to avoiding tax and having debts reduced by 80% or more and repeatedly ignoring creditors and going shopping, they will again be fielding a fairly good side tomorrow and probably win. -10 won't get them near relegated with their squad.

 

Let's see how Birch goes about this. His responsibility is to cut costs now. He should be coming up with a list of their players (all of them including the kids) and starting with the highest paid and working down it trying to offload as many as he can. If he can't get rid of the likes of Kitson and Lawrence then he'll have to get rid of Pearce, Ward and Henderson etc... If he does his job properly, within a month they'll have by far the weakest squad in the division in terms of quality and quantity and they'll therefore be relegated which will take some pressure off the football league after the pathetic punishment dished out.

 

The most important thing from a football perspective is that they are punished accordingly, and that means relegation. I have faith Birch will see that justice comes

[badgerx16]

Well they won't have exited from the CVA with all creditors paid so according to the FL rules they are due a further points deduction, by my reckoning.

I think its' failing to exit administration with a CVA', which they did, therefore they followed the rules. However, the twist here is that if nothing is PAID towards the CVA that leaves the FL an open goal - and they do like making new rules up as they go along, as Saints know to their cost.

[Katalinic]

@TonyHusbandBBC: #pompey Birch told me he was impressed with the spirit on show when he met staff yesterday afternoon. Plans a fans forum in next week or so.

 

Wonder if they will show the same spirit when the finances require a number of them will have to be shown the door.

[Sheaf Saint]

Wonder if they will show the same spirit when the finances require a number of them will have to be shown the door.

 

Having twice been involved in redundancy consultation situations in my working life I can safely say, without fear of contradiction, that staff morale will fall through the floor over the coming days/weeks.

[Katalinic]

Having twice been involved in redundancy consultation situations in my working life I can safely say, without fear of contradiction, that staff morale will fall through the floor over the coming days/weeks.

 

Indeed, and for clarity I take no delight in the "ordinary" staff bearing the burden of years of mis-management. I would like to think that the high wage earners i.e. the playing staff will be first to be shipped out on loan in order to reduce costs.

[alehouseboys]

I'm a massive Southampton fan but I really do feel sorry

for the boys in blue going into administration.

 

You are a massive club with a wonderful history full of great players,

managers and fans alike. I would hate to see you fold.

 

So lets all get behind them!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C'mon Rangers!!!

[Faz]

The administrator doesn't have to pay the cva.

 

The sale of the club to a new company means that the new company just have a liability to the old one which is equivalent to the cva payments.

 

As of yesterday the new co is protected from all creditors which already existed prior to the administration order - including the balance due to the old company.

 

The football league might take a different view when considering points deductions but the administrator won't be paying anything towards the cva (now a liquidation of old co).

 

OK, butas ever, there are more questions than answers:

* What happens to the debts under the CVA? Do the outstanding debts go back to their original pre-CVA level?

* Will Baker Tilly have a voice in deciding the outcome of a CVA if a buyer willing to settle all debts is not found?

[trousers]

I think its' failing to exit administration with a CVA', which they did, therefore they followed the rules. However, the twist here is that if nothing is PAID towards the CVA that leaves the FL an open goal - and they do like making new rules up as they go along, as Saints know to their cost.

 

^This

 

I'm pretty sure the FL don't have a rule about clubs reneging on their duty to service an agreed CVA. Once there's an agreed CVA in place (before the start of the next season) then that's where the rules seem to end, somewhat bizarrely.

 

But, as you say, the FL tend to make things up as they go along so I would expect them to invent such a law if PFC fail to start servicing their existing CVA.

 

That said, I'm not brave or foolish enough to start holding one's breath quite yet.

[hutch]

1. All this talk of a new CVA is very premature. I don't think that they could get 75% of the debtors by value to agree. I don't know who is allowed to vote, specifically whether Baker Tilly as a representative of the Old Co CVA gets a vote. If it had been AA, there may have been another *unorthodox* interpretation of the rules, forcing it through, but now, I don't think that's likely.

 

2. I think we've all seen the future of Poopey, it's in the opposite direction. Bournemouth had an even smaller squad, which was mainly made up of their youth team and the Football League were incredibly harsh in enforcing the transfer embargo. The Goal Keeping coach had to come out of retirement to sit on the bench and even then they didn't have a full complement of substitutes.

 

3. All this talk of players coming in is a fantasy. I expect some home truths are getting told to MA. The squad will be reduced, the youth team must be played. When a business goes into administration, the administrators become liable for any debts that are accrued during the administration. Birch will not allow them to operate at a loss, beyond the capabilities of the cash in the bank. Welcome to Austerity.

Your first point is an interesting one. As things stand, I don't think they do get a vote. As things stood yesterday when PFC went into admin, they didn't owe BT anything. I don't think admin rules would allow BT to postpone payment in April and add themselves to the list of creditors, and even if the rules do allow it, why would they risk getting a percentage of their money under a new CVA when they are currently guaranteed 100% from the administrator, provided that PFC don't get liquidated in the meantime.

 

I could be wrong, but I don't see any way BT will be a part of any new CVA. HMRC will get what is due to them from now on, in full & on time, or else.

 

I said at the start of the season that they would be relegated due to lack of cash, and that is still my view, whether they only get -10 or more. The only thing the phew should be worried about now is whether they will start next season at all. If they do it will be in League 1 at best, but will they start with a clean slate or a hefty deduction.

 

Edit: I've just seen Clapham's earlier post, so it's safe to assume my opinion is ballocks. If you want facts, ask a commoner.

Edited 18 February, 2012 by hutch
Accuracy

[georgeweahscousin]

Be careful what you wish for fellas, my look at the love/hate rivalry!

 

http://wp.me/p1mFFL-iw

[HedgeEnder]

So when do the points come off? I cannot see anyone wanting to buy them, what happens and how long can a football club stay in administration?

 

10 points have been deducted now

[Wes Tender]

Because there is not any clarity regarding the ten point penalty that has been imposed onto the Skates for going into administration, I have written to the FL, to seek clarification and urge others to do the same.

 

I have pointed out to them that Skate fans and the local newspaper, The News, both conclude that they have "got away" with solely the ten points deduction.

 

I have suggested to the the FL that surely this cannot be the extent of their punishment, as this is the second administration event that they have been involved in within a two year period and furthermore, none of the unsecured creditors from the last CVA has yet received a penny of the agreed twenty percent they were due. I told them that I assumed that a further meeting would be held when the discussion would take place regarding additional deductions to reflect these other factors.

 

I have suggested that an example needs to made of Porstsmouth FC to send a clear message to the Football leagues, that clubs spending money they don't possess to gain a competitive advantage, will not be tolerated.

 

I also gave my opinion that the Skates still possessed a very strong squad, their chief executive even having boasted that it was the second most expensive in the division and that therefore they could still escape relegation, even with the 10% points penalty.

 

I await their response with interest. It would be very timely if others, especially the fans of rival clubs, wrote to the FL urging them to impose stiff penalties on the Skates.

[Thedelldays]

to me...it seems we were punished in a harsher way....we both got -10 yet our hit us in the very next season and probably cost us an immediate return to the NPC

 

they are ridiculously in debt (again) had no intention of playing by the rules and their points deduction (thus far) does not even put them in the bottom 3!!!!

 

I really hope there is more to come for them

[aintforever]

Be careful what you wish for fellas, my look at the love/hate rivalry!

 

http://wp.me/p1mFFL-iw

 

 

Nice read but I don't agree.

 

Portsmouth will always have a football club even if they are liquidated. They will just start up again in some local league and work their way back up. It's just like being relegated 4 or 5 times so it's a bit hypocritical to say you want them relegated but no liquidated.

[Chez]

quick question to help me win an argument with a skate. The paying off of football creditors (using the parachute money in PFCs case), was that part of the CVA? In other words by paying scumball and the other players their backdated wages etc. have they effectively started paying off the CVA or is the payment to non footballing creditors the official first payment of the CVA? Have they or have they not paid a penny of the CVA?

[Chez]

to me...it seems we were punished in a harsher way....we both got -10 yet our hit us in the very next season and probably cost us an immediate return to the NPC

 

they are ridiculously in debt (again) had no intention of playing by the rules and their points deduction (thus far) does not even put them in the bottom 3!!!!

 

I really hope there is more to come for them

Should they come out of admin without a CVA then there will be more points taken off, but I seriously doubt points will go for any other reason.

[Wes Tender]

quick question to help me win an argument with a skate. The paying off of football creditors (using the parachute money in PFCs case), was that part of the CVA? In other words by paying scumball and the other players their backdated wages etc. have they effectively started paying off the CVA or is the payment to non footballing creditors the official first payment of the CVA? Have they or have they not paid a penny of the CVA?

Easy to just make the distinction between the secured and unsecured creditors. Then you can say categorically that not a penny has been paid to the unsecured creditors via the CVA.

[ALWAYS_SFC]

If you had put "I'd love it" in the comment i would have been convinced it was keegan. hopefully, now they have unfairly docked us points and unfairly frozen 'our' money and unfairly not been vigilant enough when checking on our prospective owners they will allow us to pay/borrow the wages for a couple more loanees to come in, it would only fair. otherwise how can we be on a level playing field with the other teams

 

Terrible

 

Why do we bother with mongs like this... you cannot discuss things with people who are stupid....ignore and he will go away

[Chez]

Easy to just make the distinction between the secured and unsecured creditors. Then you can say categorically that not a penny has been paid to the unsecured creditors via the CVA.

my 6 fingered friend uses the term "we were sticking with the CVA" so I think he's actually correct