Pompey Takeover Saga

[dubai_phil]

Sorry, the page had got a bit dull, and even Granty had dropped the ball on his Notlob v Nottarf comparison

 

Point being Eddie D is earning a decent rate of interest on his loans..... (All well and good but sustaining the income to pay that interest could be an issue with their awful start)

 

But a better comparison would be Notlob with Newcastle & Rick Astley .. Sustainable for a season maybe two but then implode

 

Anyway we had gone off topic so seeing as Ohio should just be eating his cornflakes around now.....

 

 

 

Fixed the broken linky thing for you.

 

[rallyboy]

Man Utd have debt, why weren't they docked points? was the great claim by the few.

 

Let's have some honesty here, most pompey fans don't have a clue what is going on and don't care.

A visit to our own main board shows there is a certain level of ignorance there too, so it may be a general problem.

 

When you find yourself trying to debate a technical point with someone who can't spell Nigel, then perhaps you know the game is up.

 

 

Most pompey fans don't understand how failing to pay debt is different to servicing it, hence the laughable claims about our situations being the same.

When you are up against that sort of argument you know it's pointless trying to explain - but still we try.

 

 

If Bolton haven't missed any payments then their fragile and risky business model works - well done them.

The main difference was the pompey's was doomed to failure from day one - it was the work of a madman.

 

Those fans that said everything was alright last season, do they not now reflect on one of their players earning more than two League One squads put together, as slightly unusual?

Even though it was dirty scummahs pointing out the blatantly obvious, were the alarm bells not tinkling a little?

 

 

I had to explain to an educated and clued-up pompey fan why they had another points penalty due - he thought it was for two seasons in admin!

They have been starved of all negative info by the local paper, and as a result they don't understand what's happening.

 

 

 

The Trust figures have never stacked up either, and there was resentment that their budget wanted to reduce payments to creditors but increase wages again.

There is this feeling that when it comes to paying back money they plead poverty and throw themselves on the mercy of the court.

...Only to go out the next day and splash out on shiny tat.

 

They need to get back to basics.

What is our likely income?

What can we afford?

That's what we pay - even if we miss out on players.

Tis pretty simple.

 

Their problem today is that they are spending next year's working capital.

 

 

As for Mr Hall's fine work, I just get this feeling that it is only being embraced NOW because many fans want to use it as a stick to beat Chanrai.

When criminality was hanging heavy in the air before, they were happily strutting up Wembley Way giving it large - other than Mr Hall, they denied any wrongdoing, and claimed their club was solvent

They even stood around cheering in SMS as their heroic plucky players spent the next few years income, and consigned the club to poverty.

 

Nutjobs have been trying to explain how the figures don't stack up but it's like talking to a brick wall, until Mr Hall's blog - and then some are still denying it.

 

You can take Avram to an industrial estate but you can't make him....buy a commercial vehicle.

[dubai_phil]

You can take Avram to an industrial estate but you can't make him....buy a commercial vehicle.

 

Bless

 

In other "pending insolvency & financial meltdown news"

 

tariq panja ‏@tariqpanja Birmingham City owners tell HK stock exchange that they've been approached by buyers and board discussing sale of team.

Retweeted by Matt Slater

[Doctoroncall]

The likes of McLeod are allowed to sign for 4k a week, and Buszaky for over 6k (if the murmurings about him rejecting 6k a week at Bristol City are true) as at this stage the Football League is not overseeing transactions. Only until the takeover is complete will the skates lose their 10 points and the financial restrictions imposed by the FL will take effect.

 

So all of these short contracts would seem to be one last hurrah, a final opportunity to spend parachute money into the black hole. Player wages and the short-term future has always been of the utmost importance, NOT ONCE have they considered their long term future over the past 10 years. Not even now, after all that has happened. If they even cared about their future, then we wouldn't have seen 'superstar' Sam Magri depart for QPR.

 

It makes you wonder if they tried their hardest to get a good set of players in to harvest as many points as possible before the first of January to see what points they need to either cling on to League one status or if they have a good chance of promotion. Appy must be hoping results improve as currently it doesn't reflect the wage investment which could see a dramatic fall when the club is sold and promotion slips away.

[trousers]

So my question to you all is, where does reasonable investment stop and cheating start?

 

When you continue to improve your squad knowing that your club is in dire financial straits whilst not paying taxes, local businesses and charities.

[Frank's cousin]

Cheating... IMHO is surely when for WHATEVER REASON - monies used to gain a competitive advantage are not paid back when required to do so. Simple really.

 

I am comfortable admitting (saying I am happy to would confuse the issue) we 'cheated' - we were unable to provide the funds to Barclays when they called in the overdraft - for whatever reason - but the difference that many pompey fans fail to appreciate is that this was AFTER we had tried to address this by giving ourselves a competitive DISADVANTAGE by shipping out high earners and plyer lower cost youngsters - and whats more, when new owners came in, they paid up in full what was considered reasonable by the TWO creditors - well over 50p in the £. When you take into acccount the interest and additional fee paid to Aviva on returning to the prem, we will have actually paid 95% of what teh original stadium loan was - so I feel comfortable with that - agian because the creditor was in full agreement.

 

So our debt was acumulated primarily by infrastructure investment - so was this borrowing giving us a competitive advantage? You could argue its purpose was to provide additional funds, but short term the expansion will only have covered the repayments on the original loan and yielded maybe and aditional 1m a year in revenue - 20K a week in teh prem, will not and did not give us any sort of advantage so even the dumbest of the dumb can see its not teh same as gettinginto 120mil +58 mil of debt in 7 years with nothing to show for it because its all dissappeared on transfers, and wages...

 

That mike cahp - spoke elloquently and with lot of sense, a true and passionate fan of his club, but even he falls short of acknowledging that any success they have had, was as a result of that debt - if its all paid back, then they can hold their heads high and be happy with their cup win... 0.2p in the £ tarnishes it as well as their prem period forever in my book.

[Ken Tone]

I don't know how to do that but it is a small article in Nico's Football League News on the bottom right of page 23 of the Goals supplement.

 

thanks . Was hoping for an URL, so I could post it on, and i can't find it on line. Presumably not in internet version

[The Kraken]

It makes you wonder if they tried their hardest to get a good set of players in to harvest as many points as possible before the first of January to see what points they need to either cling on to League one status or if they have a good chance of promotion. Appy must be hoping results improve as currently it doesn't reflect the wage investment which could see a dramatic fall when the club is sold and promotion slips away.

 

What they did is start the summer with Portpin telling Birch his business plan would likely include a budget at £4K per player per week. Appleton then went off to source a squad of players at that wage level, and took many of them on pre-season. Days before the start of the season, Portpin dropped a bombshell that they would only be able to subsidise a £1.5K per player per week allowance. Appleton then squinnied in the papers about how unfair it was, and how he now needed to go and find a whole new squad of players within that new budget.

 

At that point Trevor Birch had a decision to make. He could let Pompey start the season by playing the kids (and likely losing every game, driving crowds and revenues down). Or he could just sign up the players Appy had originally sourced, at the original £4K per week budget, but just on 1 month contracts. Those players should have more than enough to be very competitive in League 1 (most other L1 clubs can't afford at least half of Pompey's team, that's for sure), and if the sale went through within a month or two then the league table looked healthier and it was someone else's problem to take over and manage the budget when PKF left; Tricky Trev had done his bit, by jove. However, he hasn't. 2 months on and they're looking not much closer to exiting admin than at the start of the season.

 

As soon as the club do exit administration, they start to come under FL review of their wages. In administration, they aren't there yet. And under FL review they have to provide a business plan, and demonstrate that they are working within the confines of the budgets set within that plan. In other words; all of their players must accept massive wage drops, or they have to find new players on much lower wages.

 

While PKF hoover up more and more working capital day by day, one thing is becoming very clear: whoever takes over has all sorts of financial black holes to plug, and a wage bill that they have to more than halve in size. All alongisde a manager who is constantly crying that £4K per week isn't enough and he should be allowed to sign many more players. Good luck with that.

Edited 9 October, 2012 by The Kraken

[trousers]

I am comfortable admitting (saying I am happy to would confuse the issue) we 'cheated' - we were unable to provide the funds to Barclays when they called in the overdraft

 

Whoa there pardner....I don't see that as "cheating" because Barclays changed the rules half way through the game.... We were servicing our debt quite satisfactorily (e.g. offloading high wage earners due to our financial difficulties....spot the difference...?) until Barclays reduced the overdraft facility by £1m which in turn triggered a c.£4,000 cheque to bounce....

 

It's a bit like someone raising the high-jump bar an extra foot whilst the competitor is running up and then having a pop at him for failing to clear the height.

 

If anything we didn't "cheat" enough to increase our chances of survival in the Premier League...

Edited 9 October, 2012 by trousers

[Ohio Saint]

As for Mr Hall's fine work, I just get this feeling that it is only being embraced NOW because many fans want to use it as a stick to beat Chanrai.

 

They is gettin suffistikated. Normally, they would use an actual stick.

[The Kraken]

Whoa there pardner....I don't see that as "cheating" because Barclays changed the rules half way through the game.... We were servicing our debt quite satisfactorily (e.g. offloading high wage earners du to our financial difficulties....spot the difference...?) until Barclays reduced the overdraft facility by £1m which in turn triggered a c.£4,000 cheque to bounce....

 

It's a bit like someone raising the high-jump bar an extra foot whilst the competitor is running up and then having a pop at him for failing to clear the height.

 

If anything we didn't "cheat" enough to increase our chances of survival in the Premier League...

 

Agreed. The overdraft was on its way down from over £6M to £4M. Other financial considerations were being met; the club wasn't healthy by any stretch but tax, NI, wages etc etc were all being paid, as were all outstanding creditors. Players had been lost from the wage bill, plans were in place to lose more at the end of the season to bring in much needed funds. Barclays obviously saw something they didn't like and changed the conditions, and that was the end game.

[trousers]

Agreed. The overdraft was on its way down from over £6M to £4M. Other financial considerations were being met; the club wasn't healthy by any stretch but tax, NI, wages etc etc were all being paid, as were all outstanding creditors. Players had been lost from the wage bill, plans were in place to lose more at the end of the season to bring in much needed funds. Barclays obviously saw something they didn't like and changed the conditions, and that was the end game.

 

Reading between the lines at the time, I'm inclined to believe there was more 'intrigue' to the Barclays decision than we saw on the surface. The mysterious migration of a certain Barclays account manager to work for the administrator for example....

[Ken Tone]

Re their current wages.....

 

The budget they have for a squad of 25+ players is currently being spent on 20, or less, players, meaning they can pay more per head. Similarly they are paying monthly, which means no commitment to pay for the summer. In effect they can pay 12 months worth of wages over the 9 (?) months of the season.

 

So in the short term thay can pay players some 50% more than they could with a full squad full year, without increasing their annual budget.

 

I suspect that PKF understand this, but clearly Appleton does not. When he whinges about not being allowed to sign more than 20 players, or to sign on a normal contract, he does not grasp that to do so would mean paying less per player and therefore losing most of his current well-paid squad, in order to achieve for the first time ever, quantity over quality.

[trousers]

Why haven't we heard from Birch for several weeks? Are the rumours about him being sidelined true?

[Frank's cousin]

Whoa there pardner....I don't see that as "cheating" because Barclays changed the rules half way through the game.... We were servicing our debt quite satisfactorily (e.g. offloading high wage earners due to our financial difficulties....spot the difference...?) until Barclays reduced the overdraft facility by £1m which in turn triggered a c.£4,000 cheque to bounce....

 

It's a bit like someone raising the high-jump bar an extra foot whilst the competitor is running up and then having a pop at him for failing to clear the height.

 

If anything we didn't "cheat" enough to increase our chances of survival in the Premier League...

 

Yep - as stated we were doing what we could to reduce spending and the overdraft - but going by my definition, that it becomes cheating when you cant pay back what is required, we have to say we were in that boat whether our fault or not - its was not our fault that Barclays changed the game plan, but we must acknowledge that we could not pay back what we owed when asked to do so - as its states on any OD facilty, the bank reserve the right to call it in at anytime - unlike a contractual loan we had with Aviva - who were happy whilst we kept paying the installments which we did til the end....

[Ken Tone]

Why haven't we heard from Birch for several weeks? Are the rumours about him being sidelined true?

 

I can't see any other explanation.

 

My interpretation is that Birch 'went native' and favoured the trust bid for the sake of the club, over the creditors, even though it does not really add up, and when chainrai threatened legal action, the rest of PKF said 'what the hell is going on?' and moved him to one side.

[Gemmel]

Why haven't we heard from Birch for several weeks? Are the rumours about him being sidelined true?

 

 

The pst guys seem to think that is the case and I think that he probably has, although, at a guess, it was probably his shout.

[saint si]

Agreed. The overdraft was on its way down from over £6M to £4M. Other financial considerations were being met; the club wasn't healthy by any stretch but tax, NI, wages etc etc were all being paid, as were all outstanding creditors. Players had been lost from the wage bill, plans were in place to lose more at the end of the season to bring in much needed funds. Barclays obviously saw something they didn't like and changed the conditions, and that was the end game.

 

Agreed - we took significant steps to address the debts we had, and severely impacted our competitiveness on the pitch to the point where we were - horrors - uncompetitive.

 

Businesses take risks all the time - they spend money on research, or developing new products, or they make investments, or acquisitions - with the hope of reaping a return over a longer term. Sometimes it works and they grow or become more profitable, and sometimes it doesn't work. But the risks are weighed up, the business case is put together, and expected returns are understood in order to compensate for the risk.

 

What beggars belief about the skates' whole approach is that they didn't have any kind of plan at all. They paid out silly money, achieved a modicum of success, but even that success didn't actually pay for the "investment" in players - they went bust after winning the FA cup, going on a European tour, and still whilst receiving premiership level income streams.

 

So really... what exactly were they expecting to happen!?

[Gemmel]

The blue few have turned into budding journos and investigators...... as previously said, just the three years too late.

 

Thats said, one of them emailed baker tilly and asked when the report was due and this is the response;

 

Hello Richard –

Unfortunately we won't be publishing the details of our investigation - not least because to do so would prejudice the various pieces of litigation on claims against various parties. Investigations for the purposes of making these claims is ongoing, and by no means concluded.

I'm sorry I can't be more helpful at this stage.

 

Kind regards

 

Corinne

Corinne Gladstone

Head of PR

Baker Tilly Management Limited

 

25 Farringdon Street

London, EC4A 4AB

Phone: 020 3201 8000

Fax: 020 3201 8001

http://www.bakertilly.co.uk

 

So who is litigating who? .....Also I didn't know that baker tilly and PKF had the offices next to each other

[Winchester Red]

The general feeling seems to be that it becomes cheating if/when you can't pay it back if it's asked for, or maintain interest payments.

 

That definition would mean that 90% of the teams in the league are behaving properly unless something outside of their control changes and then they're cheating.

 

Examples of things that could change include:

Bank reducing previously agreed overdraft (Southampton)

Owners being idiots (Previous americans at Liverpool)

Owners being criminals (Portsmouth and watch this space for a few more)

Owners deciding they need their money back (most clubs)

Owner dying and estate not wanting to continue funding (Nottingham Forest, Southampton?)

 

This list could go on forever

 

I think the Reduction of Overdraft one is a particularly harsh definition of cheating. In my time I have had personal loans and an overdraft and if they were called in for instant payment I'd have been in trouble, but I don't consider myself a cheat.

[Big Bad Bob]

Yep - as stated we were doing what we could to reduce spending and the overdraft - but going by my definition' date=' that it becomes cheating when you cant pay back what is required, we have to say we were in that boat whether our fault or not - its was not our fault that Barclays changed the game plan, but we must acknowledge that we could not pay back what we owed when asked to do so - as its states on any OD facilty, the bank reserve the right to call it in at anytime - unlike a contractual loan we had with Aviva - who were happy whilst we kept paying the installments which we did til the end....[/quote']

 

Hmm, my recollection is at odds with yours.

 

I believe that RL was living within the "reduced" overdraft facility but then wanted to spend some money that would have taken us £150k over the limit.

 

Barclays declined, RL threw his toys out of the pram and put us in admin...

[eurosaint]

Why haven't we heard from Birch for several weeks? Are the rumours about him being sidelined true?

 

Word on the street is that Chinny's mob have a contract out and that he's holed up in a safe house !

One of my boys saw a horse's head being dumped from his gaff along with the food waste the other day !

Can't divulge my source cos I ain't no grass, capiche ??

[stevegrant]

Reading between the lines at the time, I'm inclined to believe there was more 'intrigue' to the Barclays decision than we saw on the surface. The mysterious migration of a certain Barclays account manager to work for the administrator for example....

And the mysterious migration of that Barclays account manager onto the Saints account during a certain ex-chairman and significant shareholder's tenure before that, with a shared dislike of another ex-chairman and significant shareholder...

[Gemmel]

Hmm, my recollection is at odds with yours.

 

I believe that RL was living within the "reduced" overdraft facility but then wanted to spend some money that would have taken us £150k over the limit.

 

Barclays declined, RL threw his toys out of the pram and put us in admin...

 

At the risk of going off topic, it was definately Barclays who put us in admin ( I was convinced we had done it ourselves, but sepnt 20 minutes with Rupert who was spitting nails as he relived the story).

 

The action from Barclays was (I suspect) two fold and encouraged by third parties. My best guess (And that is all it is) was Barclays were spooked at the falling attendances, when lowe returned and the fact we didn't get rid of anyone in the January transfer window (Infact my ailing memory thinks we added one player). Lowe for his faults was excellent when it came to getting the highest fees for our players, so (Am guessing again) refused to accept reduced offers.

 

But it has been and gone and we are now a better club for it..... The irony is now that with Aviva getting an additional 4 million from us joining the prem, together with all previous payments (Lowe doubled up on repayments in the early years) the settlement from the purchase (Including all other creditors being paid in full) then Barclays who started everything off, might have lost more than anyone.

[ottery st mary]

Hmm, my recollection is at odds with yours.

 

I believe that RL was living within the "reduced" overdraft facility but then wanted to spend some money that would have taken us £150k over the limit.

 

Barclays declined, RL threw his toys out of the pram and put us in admin...

 

Some talk of £4,000 but I was under thye impression a couple of big hefty value cheques went in for the benefit of certain individuals....Wages?

 

This is what Fluuucked Barclays and made them very unhappy that some were taking the piiish..

[dubai_phil]

Hmm, my recollection is at odds with yours.

 

I believe that RL was living within the "reduced" overdraft facility but then wanted to spend some money that would have taken us £150k over the limit.

 

Barclays declined, RL threw his toys out of the pram and put us in admin...

 

TOTALLY disagree with that.

 

And yes evidence to support that your theory is not correct is stored by certain forum members for the day when it is time for FF to write the history of those dark days, and no it will never be PM'd or put on here

[Big Bad Bob]

TOTALLY disagree with that.

 

And yes evidence to support that your theory is not correct is stored by certain forum members for the day when it is time for FF to write the history of those dark days, and no it will never be PM'd or put on here

 

So, are you saying that they hadn't already reduced the OD facility (at the beginning of the season), from £6m to £4m, and that we WERE living within the new OD limit.

 

Or are you saying that they suddenly reduced the OD from £6m to £4m and got upset when we couldn't materialise £2m out of thin air??

 

Banks are stupid but not *THAT* stupid.

 

I def know what I read at the time so it's not really a theory, just generally perceived "wisdom" at the time....

[stevegrant]

So, are you saying that they hadn't already reduced the OD facility (at the beginning of the season), from £6m to £4m, and that we WERE living within the new OD limit.

 

Or are you saying that they suddenly reduced the OD from £6m to £4m and got upset when we couldn't materialise £2m out of thin air??

 

Banks are stupid but not *THAT* stupid.

 

I def know what I read at the time so it's not really a theory, just generally perceived "wisdom" at the time....

The bank's continued support at the start of that season was based upon the business plan of reducing the overdraft over the course of the season down to £4m from around £6.5m. I think it had been reduced to around £4.1m at the end of March when the accounts had to be signed off, but Barclays refused to give the required assurances.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Reading between the lines at the time, I'm inclined to believe there was more 'intrigue' to the Barclays decision than we saw on the surface. The mysterious migration of a certain Barclays account manager to work for the administrator for example....

 

 

It was political alright Barclays lost faith in Lowe - end of!

[Big Bad Bob]

It was political alright Barclays lost faith in Lowe - end of!

 

Oh gods, of course it was political, only a fool would believe that it wasn't. To cut their noses off for the sake of £100k, it can't be any other way..

[Fitzhugh Fella]

And the mysterious migration of that Barclays account manager onto the Saints account during a certain ex-chairman and significant shareholder's tenure before that, with a shared dislike of another ex-chairman and significant shareholder...

 

Complete the name of this well known chocolate bar

 

+++'s Turkish Delight

[stevegrant]

Karma was well served, though, with all three major shareholders and Barclays ending up significantly out of pocket.

[PES]

So effectively what your saying is we cheated and won the FA cup, you cheated to gain a cometitive advantage to get back to the Prem and ****ed it up. Fair enough, we successfully cheated whereas you **** out, its still trying to gain a competitive advantage. Thank god for bored swiss billionaire eh? Look the whole thing is sick as ****. We may be the worst example of what is wrong, but were gone now, yesterday news. U asked yesterday how much Ramirez was being paid, inc. Bonuses etc. No one answered. Doesnt anyone know? I think its pretty massive? Is this why NC borrowed from a BVI loan shark? Who was it and at what rate of interest? Its big ****ing money isn't it. Sodoes anyone know whats going on behind the scenes at SFC and isn't anyone concerned? Having been proper butt ****ed, i'd want all the details!

[Doctoroncall]

What they did is start the summer with Portpin telling Birch his business plan would likely include a budget at £4K per player per week.

 

Would Birch follow Portpin's business plan with no agreement in place? Shows him up to be a fool, especially with what has gone on and wouldn't he then prefer another bid if he was stitched up like a kipper?

[saint si]

So effectively what your saying is we cheated and won the FA cup, you cheated to gain a cometitive advantage to get back to the Prem and ****ed it up. Fair enough, we successfully cheated whereas you **** out, its still trying to gain a competitive advantage. Thank god for bored swiss billionaire eh? Look the whole thing is sick as ****. We may be the worst example of what is wrong, but were gone now, yesterday news. U asked yesterday how much Ramirez was being paid, inc. Bonuses etc. No one answered. Doesnt anyone know? I think its pretty massive? Is this why NC borrowed from a BVI loan shark? Who was it and at what rate of interest? Its big ****ing money isn't it. Sodoes anyone know whats going on behind the scenes at SFC and isn't anyone concerned? Having been proper butt ****ed, i'd want all the details!

 

So you were actively paying down your debts to HMRC when they petitioned to wind you up, yes?

[Torres]

So effectively what your saying is we cheated and won the FA cup, you cheated to gain a cometitive advantage to get back to the Prem and ****ed it up. Fair enough, we successfully cheated whereas you **** out, its still trying to gain a competitive advantage. Thank god for bored swiss billionaire eh? Look the whole thing is sick as ****. We may be the worst example of what is wrong, but were gone now, yesterday news. U asked yesterday how much Ramirez was being paid, inc. Bonuses etc. No one answered. Doesnt anyone know? I think its pretty massive? Is this why NC borrowed from a BVI loan shark? Who was it and at what rate of interest? Its big ****ing money isn't it. Sodoes anyone know whats going on behind the scenes at SFC and isn't anyone concerned? Having been proper butt ****ed, i'd want all the details!

 

Woooah, settle petal.

[Torres]

Would Birch follow Portpin's business plan with no agreement in place? Shows him up to be a fool, especially with what has gone on and wouldn't he then prefer another bid if he was stitched up like a kipper?

 

Why wouldn't he? They were the only game in town and would already be in charge if the FL hadn't forced them to go away and hatch another little plan by restricting the amount of secured debt they could carry over.

 

He hasn't been stitched up either - he's still taking £9k from PFC, each and every day. I imagine he's actually rather pleased with his work so far.

[Pamplemousse]

So effectively what your saying is we cheated and won the FA cup, you cheated to gain a cometitive advantage to get back to the Prem and ****ed it up. Fair enough, we successfully cheated whereas you **** out, its still trying to gain a competitive advantage. Thank god for bored swiss billionaire eh? Look the whole thing is sick as ****. We may be the worst example of what is wrong, but were gone now, yesterday news. U asked yesterday how much Ramirez was being paid, inc. Bonuses etc. No one answered. Doesnt anyone know? I think its pretty massive? Is this why NC borrowed from a BVI loan shark? Who was it and at what rate of interest? Its big ****ing money isn't it. Sodoes anyone know whats going on behind the scenes at SFC and isn't anyone concerned? Having been proper butt ****ed, i'd want all the details!

 

Looks like the WUM just got WUMMED! LOL :lol:

[trousers]

The blue few have turned into budding journos and investigators...... as previously said, just the three years too late.

 

Thats said, one of them emailed baker tilly and asked when the report was due and this is the response;

 

Hello Richard –

Unfortunately we won't be publishing the details of our investigation - not least because to do so would prejudice the various pieces of litigation on claims against various parties. Investigations for the purposes of making these claims is ongoing, and by no means concluded.

I'm sorry I can't be more helpful at this stage.

 

Kind regards

 

Corinne

Corinne Gladstone

Head of PR

Baker Tilly Management Limited

 

25 Farringdon Street

London, EC4A 4AB

Phone: 020 3201 8000

Fax: 020 3201 8001

www.bakertilly.co.uk

 

So who is litigating who? .....Also I didn't know that baker tilly and PKF had the offices next to each other

 

Just when we thought the plot couldn't get any thicker....

[Gemmel]

. U asked yesterday how much Ramirez was being paid, inc. Bonuses etc. No one answered. Doesnt anyone know? I think its pretty massive? Is this why NC borrowed from a BVI loan shark? Who was it and at what rate of interest? Its big ****ing money isn't it. Sodoes anyone know whats going on behind the scenes at SFC and isn't anyone concerned? Having been proper butt ****ed, i'd want all the details!

 

1st things first, BVI loan shark? (Also used by Everton & Fulham) The company is registered in the British Virgin Islands, as are 850,000 other companies - Not sure it takes a rocket scientist to work out why, but this company could be Barclays (Or a private arm) as easily as it could be "Honest arry (& Rosie's) loan corp. You have chosen to go with loan shark...Why? As for being big ****ing money, - in the grand scheme of things, it would appear not as it is only secured on one seasons ST value - which is probably around 10 - 12 million mark.

 

As for why Ramirez package is so important - why? Everything that has ever been discussed publically, by Cortese with regard to running the business would be to live within it's means, we don't get the 70 millon premiership money until June 2013, so there was always going to be the need of a cash injection to sustain a Premiership club. I don't consider a loan for say 15 million to fund the squad until we get the guranteed 70 million a gamble. There are of course a million and one other things that need to be taken into consideration, but at a high level, you can see my point.

 

The only relevance to it all, is the reasonable assumption we are no longer bank rolled by the family, which most of us assummed at the point at which they exchanged their loan for equity.

 

Of course we want details, but the closest we will get is audited company accounts, that will tell us enough to know whether to start arranging "pack the park" fund raisers....Oh of course and the way things have been conducted to date, with every promised kept, every milstone reached, every creditor paid back and every loan note (Not withstanding this latest on) dispensed of.....I don't think we need to hit the panic button just yet.

Edited 9 October, 2012 by Gemmel

[trousers]

So effectively what your saying is we cheated and won the FA cup, you cheated to gain a cometitive advantage to get back to the Prem and ****ed it up. Fair enough, we successfully cheated whereas you **** out, its still trying to gain a competitive advantage. Thank god for bored swiss billionaire eh? Look the whole thing is sick as ****. We may be the worst example of what is wrong, but were gone now, yesterday news. U asked yesterday how much Ramirez was being paid, inc. Bonuses etc. No one answered. Doesnt anyone know? I think its pretty massive? Is this why NC borrowed from a BVI loan shark? Who was it and at what rate of interest? Its big ****ing money isn't it. Sodoes anyone know whats going on behind the scenes at SFC and isn't anyone concerned? Having been proper butt ****ed, i'd want all the details!

 

I'd see a doctor about that raw nerve if I were you.

[Saint Garrett]

So effectively what your saying is we cheated and won the FA cup, you cheated to gain a cometitive advantage to get back to the Prem and ****ed it up. Fair enough, we successfully cheated whereas you **** out, its still trying to gain a competitive advantage. Thank god for bored swiss billionaire eh? Look the whole thing is sick as ****. We may be the worst example of what is wrong, but were gone now, yesterday news. U asked yesterday how much Ramirez was being paid, inc. Bonuses etc. No one answered. Doesnt anyone know? I think its pretty massive? Is this why NC borrowed from a BVI loan shark? Who was it and at what rate of interest? Its big ****ing money isn't it. Sodoes anyone know whats going on behind the scenes at SFC and isn't anyone concerned? Having been proper butt ****ed, i'd want all the details!

 

£38k.

[View From The Top]

Of course we want details, but the closest we will get is audited company accounts, that will tell us enough to know whether to start arranging "pack the park" fund raisers....Oh of course and the way things have been conducted to date, with every promised kept, every milstone reached, every creditor paid back and every loan note (Not withstanding this latest on) dispensed of.....I don't think we need to hit the panic button just yet.

 

Lovely.

[Doctoroncall]

Why wouldn't he? They were the only game in town and would already be in charge if the FL hadn't forced them to go away and hatch another little plan by restricting the amount of secured debt they could carry over.

 

He hasn't been stitched up either - he's still taking £9k from PFC, each and every day. I imagine he's actually rather pleased with his work so far.

 

The money isn't from some unlimited pot to be replenished, if he wants to take his 9k a day as well as the £1.85m bill already raked up a month or so ago I would have thought he would want to make sure the pot of money was available as long as possible.

[FloridaMarlin]

Man Utd have debt, why weren't they docked points? was the great claim by the few.

 

Let's have some honesty here, most pompey fans don't have a clue what is going on and don't care.

A visit to our own main board shows there is a certain level of ignorance there too, so it may be a general problem.

 

When you find yourself trying to debate a technical point with someone who can't spell Nigel, then perhaps you know the game is up.

 

 

Most pompey fans don't understand how failing to pay debt is different to servicing it, hence the laughable claims about our situations being the same.

When you are up against that sort of argument you know it's pointless trying to explain - but still we try.

 

 

If Bolton haven't missed any payments then their fragile and risky business model works - well done them.

The main difference was the pompey's was doomed to failure from day one - it was the work of a madman.

 

Those fans that said everything was alright last season, do they not now reflect on one of their players earning more than two League One squads put together, as slightly unusual?

Even though it was dirty scummahs pointing out the blatantly obvious, were the alarm bells not tinkling a little?

 

 

I had to explain to an educated and clued-up pompey fan why they had another points penalty due - he thought it was for two seasons in admin!

They have been starved of all negative info by the local paper, and as a result they don't understand what's happening.

 

 

 

The Trust figures have never stacked up either, and there was resentment that their budget wanted to reduce payments to creditors but increase wages again.

There is this feeling that when it comes to paying back money they plead poverty and throw themselves on the mercy of the court.

...Only to go out the next day and splash out on shiny tat.

 

They need to get back to basics.

What is our likely income?

What can we afford?

That's what we pay - even if we miss out on players.

Tis pretty simple.

 

Their problem today is that they are spending next year's working capital.

 

 

As for Mr Hall's fine work, I just get this feeling that it is only being embraced NOW because many fans want to use it as a stick to beat Chanrai.

When criminality was hanging heavy in the air before, they were happily strutting up Wembley Way giving it large - other than Mr Hall, they denied any wrongdoing, and claimed their club was solvent

They even stood around cheering in SMS as their heroic plucky players spent the next few years income, and consigned the club to poverty.

 

Nutjobs have been trying to explain how the figures don't stack up but it's like talking to a brick wall, until Mr Hall's blog - and then some are still denying it.

 

You can take Avram to an industrial estate but you can't make him....buy a commercial vehicle.

 

Poor old Mike Neasom must be spinning in his grave. He was a great local paper journalist, who would have asked all the right questions and given the answers straight to the phew, right between the eyes, whether they found it unpalatable or not.

 

He probably would not have been able to prevent the current shambles, but he would have made bloody sure that it was fully documented and reported and those responsible were - at the very least - embarrassed to the tips of their ears.

 

It's probably a result of falling newspaper sales, a desperation to cling on to the readers they have and not risk upsetting or alienating anybody, but there is very little in the way of investigative or hard-hitting journalism in local papers these days. You can't entirely blame the individual reporters, they just follow the editor's policy (and often the editor follows diktats from the parent company or owner).

So if it's the paper's policy to soft-pedal, keep the club onside and spoon-feed happy-clappy stuff to the masses because the truth would upset them and drive them away, you can't entirely blame reporters for dishing up pap if they want to keep a job.

This isn't a defence of Neil Allen or The News, who appear to find it difficult to be objective in their reporting. It's a trend across provincial journalism where fear of losing advertisers has culled a lot of investigative and campaigning journalism.

[Wes Tender]

Complete the name of this well known chocolate bar

 

+++'s Turkish Delight

 

I recall the intrigue and conspiracy theories when this Fry who had been in charge of our account at Barclays suddenly appeared on the scene in a significant position within the staff of the administrators of our club. If memory serves me right, he had been listed amongst the personnel on their website and shortly after this was brought to the attention of we fans on the forum, his name just as mysteriously disappeared.

 

I would like to think that one significant factor that led to Barclays pulling the plug on us, was the increasing fall in attendances following the return of Lowe and Wilde. If I recall correctly, we needed attendances of around 17,000 to keep our heads above water and the campaign to boycott matches and the protest marches had begun to erode attendances below this figure and were gaining momentum.

 

In any event, when you do publish the book detailing the facts behind this sad episode in our history, I suspect that the sales will be quite high.

[Frank's cousin]

PES - read my post again with respect to competitive advantage - even you must see a lsight difference between your clubs and our clubs situations, the cause, the activty to retain control of teh situtaion and how it was put right....

 

Secondly, if a club takes a 'RISK' on an asset, the first thig any sensible business does is ensure that the VALUE of said asset is worth waht is being paid for it and also so that should the worst happen, teh asset can be sold easily to cover any resulting shortfall in future revenue streams - this is in not in borrowing to get players, the risk is in not being able to pay it back - which you cant do if you buy old players on long contracts or fail to invest in youth that has potential to increase in value - as others have said - teh risk is manageable whilst teh sum of any borrowings is well within the total value of the club and its assets - which given our squad and infrastructure is not in any doubt.... your clubs model, was spend big on players with no real sell on value and with no infrastructure in place to make it easy either - money ****sed upi teh wall for teh sake of a trophy.... slight difference when it comes to being 'worried' about the approaches....

[Weston Super Saint]

Why haven't we heard from Birch for several weeks? Are the rumours about him being sidelined true?

 

Not sure about the rumours, but tricky hasn't given us one single up date since he went on record to say he was very confident that he would get the eventual points deduction over turned.

 

I'd like to hear more about this particular cunning plan, but tricky has gone missing ever since he made the statement. Perhaps the FA have buried him in Burton?

[sidthesquid]

Poor old Mike Neasom must be spinning in his grave. He was a great local paper journalist, who would have asked all the right questions and given the answers straight to the phew, right between the eyes, whether they found it unpalatable or not.

 

He probably would not have been able to prevent the current shambles, but he would have made bloody sure that it was fully documented and reported and those responsible were - at the very least - embarrassed to the tips of their ears.

 

It's probably a result of falling newspaper sales, a desperation to cling on to the readers they have and not risk upsetting or alienating anybody, but there is very little in the way of investigative or hard-hitting journalism in local papers these days. You can't entirely blame the individual reporters, they just follow the editor's policy (and often the editor follows diktats from the parent company or owner).

So if it's the paper's policy to soft-pedal, keep the club onside and spoon-feed happy-clappy stuff to the masses because the truth would upset them and drive them away, you can't entirely blame reporters for dishing up pap if they want to keep a job.

This isn't a defence of Neil Allen or The News, who appear to find it difficult to be objective in their reporting. It's a trend across provincial journalism where fear of losing advertisers has culled a lot of investigative and campaigning journalism.

 

Though interestingly not the Echo which has been, for as long as I can remember, quite confrontational and definitely not happy-clappy about Saints.

[trousers]

@solentsport: GOAL #pompey 0-1 Wycombe.Grant stuns Fratton Park with a goal after 13 seconds!