Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella
in Golden Posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

qwertySFC

qwertySFC

Posted
Posted

However, a spokesman for PKF said: ‘We had to go to the court in January because it was the one year anniversary of the club being in administration on February 17, so we had to ask for an extension.

 

‘The extension started on February 17, so takes us through to August 17, but we’re not expecting the administration to last that long. Really !!!!!!

qwertySFC

qwertySFC

Posted
Posted

Now here's a thought........ You sign a months contract with the fishy few , you get a red card and banned for 3 games and \Guy states he may rip up your contract . Nice , but if I was a player and in my mind was if I get sent off I will lose me contract don't think I would be making a tackle to much ... You just couldn't make it up

Crazy Diamond

Crazy Diamond

Posted
Posted

davethephoto 12:02pm via Web

 

Thank you @officialpompey for being so accomadating #pompey #stadium # frattonpark #portsmouth pic.twitter.com/pSiA9577mS

Retweeted by officialpompey

 

Must be easy to accommodate someone in a stadium with **** all fans in it.

Pugwash

Pugwash

Posted
Posted
‘For the ten-and-half month period to January 2, these are 7,295 hours and £2.16m respectively.

 

Nice hourly rate there Trev - keep it going me old boy

 

And they've been working another two months since then, with probably another two months to go. Maybe they're working for free from now on?

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)
why wouldn't they claim them all?

 

'Coz this is Pompey and they are a national treasure and the nasty wasty administrator should treat them as a charity case rather than a normal business...

Edited by trousers
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
Nabil Hassan ‏@NabilHassan79

PKF report: Football credtiors' (eg former players) are owed £11.4m by #pompey. Will have to be paid in full by new owners.

 

This is just a tad higher than the £8.5m we have been talking about on here (or does that figure include agreements made in CVA1???) and with around £7m of parachute payments now remaining (is that correct???). I'm getting a little concerned that Kanu might go hungry.

Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
'Coz this is Pompey and they are a national treasure and the nasty wasty administrator should treat them as a charity case...

 

that £4m in the bank is there for one reason and one reason only, to ensure that PKF and the solicitors they have employed get paid.

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
This is just a tad higher than the £8.5m we have been talking about on here (or does that figure include agreements made in CVA1???) and with around £7m of parachute payments now remaining (is that correct???). I'm getting a little concerned that Kanu might go hungry.

 

Maybe the higher figure of £11.4m now includes Kanu's settlement? But who knows.... the last we heard was that Kanu was taking the club to court/tribunal over the matter then we heard no more...

rallyboy

rallyboy

Posted
Posted

yes, there is an alarming gap opening up between PP to come, and the football creditor total....

 

That problem is all of their own doing, there was enought to cover it before the last couple of spending sprees.

They risked their entire future to buy a point at SMS, and a point at home to Bournemouth.

Time will tell how wise that gambling approach was.

And those smug Nutjobs all pointed out that they were borrowing from the future and ignoring debt but hey, what do we know?

 

The Trust will need at least £3M in cash to meet the shortfall of those FC debts before they even think about buying a stadium or funding a CVA.

 

 

Serious question - Is there anyone out there who can demonstrate how the Trust business plan is viable?

It seems to become less realistic with every passing month.

 

I recall doing a rough guesstimate a while back and seeing how they could be solvent in about year four if they service the debt carefully and keep a strict wagecap, but now I don't see how they could survive into year two.

The only way that I can see the Trust still being in business by Christmas 2014 is if they blow off more debt and shaft more people.

Honest trading will lead to liquidation.

 

 

 

We've all pleaded before, please someone, put the beast out of it's misery.

It no longer has any dignity nor quality of life.

Clapham Saint

Clapham Saint

Posted
Posted
yes, there is an alarming gap opening up between PP to come, and the football creditor total....

 

That problem is all of their own doing, there was enought to cover it before the last couple of spending sprees.

They risked their entire future to buy a point at SMS, and a point at home to Bournemouth.

Time will tell how wise that gambling approach was.

And those smug Nutjobs all pointed out that they were borrowing from the future and ignoring debt but hey, what do we know?

 

The Trust will need at least £3M in cash to meet the shortfall of those FC debts before they even think about buying a stadium or funding a CVA.

 

 

Serious question -Is there anyone out there who can demonstrate how the Trust business plan is viable?

It seems to become less realistic with every passing month.

 

I recall doing a rough guesstimate a while back and seeing how they could be solvent in about year four if they service the debt carefully and keep a strict wagecap, but now I don't see how they could survive into year two.

The only way that I can see the Trust still being in business by Christmas 2014 is if they blow off more debt and shaft more people.

Honest trading will lead to liquidation.

 

 

 

We've all pleaded before, please someone, put the beast out of it's misery.

It no longer has any dignity nor quality of life.

 

Yes, Colin Farmery. As he has said many times... It has all been budgeted for.

 

I don't understnad why you keep banging on about this. Sooner or later somebody is going to look pretty foolish.

Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted

The only possible out I see left for them is a rich backer throwing their lot in with the PST, backing them with enough gifted cash to bail out the club.

Ken Tone

Ken Tone

Posted
Posted
Yes, Colin Farmery. As he has said many times... It has all been budgeted for.

 

I don't understnad why you keep banging on about this. Sooner or later somebody is going to look pretty foolish.

 

Lol

qwertySFC

qwertySFC

Posted
Posted
yes, there is an alarming gap opening up between PP to come, and the football creditor total....

 

That problem is all of their own doing, there was enought to cover it before the last couple of spending sprees.

They risked their entire future to buy a point at SMS, and a point at home to Bournemouth.

Time will tell how wise that gambling approach was.

And those smug Nutjobs all pointed out that they were borrowing from the future and ignoring debt but hey, what do we know?

 

The Trust will need at least £3M in cash to meet the shortfall of those FC debts before they even think about buying a stadium or funding a CVA.

 

 

Serious question - Is there anyone out there who can demonstrate how the Trust business plan is viable?

It seems to become less realistic with every passing month.

 

I recall doing a rough guesstimate a while back and seeing how they could be solvent in about year four if they service the debt carefully and keep a strict wagecap, but now I don't see how they could survive into year two.

The only way that I can see the Trust still being in business by Christmas 2014 is if they blow off more debt and shaft more people.

Honest trading will lead to liquidation.

 

 

 

We've all pleaded before, please someone, put the beast out of it's misery.

It no longer has any dignity nor quality of life.

 

 

Also the fishey few, still harping on about lack of quality players, managers etc etc - lets get him in , or wow we have a great player just signed another 4 week contract - 2 weeks later his face represents Satin ;

 

PST this , PFK that , Harris the other - minds are twisted around every day like a dog chasing it's tail , the spin from the Snooze is embarrassing reading - but they lap it up cos they deserve their rightful place in the league.

 

It's a huge decision - if they go to the wall this thread will fade away - I want them taken over in some way just so that we can laugh & laugh & laugh - I remember someone on this thread a while ago saying it's the hope that kills them - well would love to see them kicking off in Division 4 on minus 10 , a team of no hopers and a crowd of 6000 still trying to spend their way up

 

The meltdown begins once or if the PST take over - the infighting is going to keep this going upon our comical way for many year , accusations of preferential treatment , crys of I brought a share and I want a new manager, why is he getting a free ticket I'm a share holder , I want a place on the board and deal with transfers ......... The list will be endless and I 4 1 can't wait

Weston Super Saint

Weston Super Saint

Posted
Posted

Serious question - Is there anyone out there who can demonstrate how the Trust business plan is viable?

It seems to become less realistic with every passing month.

 

I recall doing a rough guesstimate a while back and seeing how they could be solvent in about year four

 

Yeah, but that was done on the 'published' business plan.

 

Since then the business plan has been revised four[?] times, once for every re-arranged court visit ;)

 

No-one has been privvy to the details of these revised business plans, so we can only assume that Colin, who hasn't actually seen them either, is right in that absolutely everything has been budgeted for, twice.

dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted
Twitter_photo_normal.jpgGraham Dubber ‏@grahamdubber

PKF INVOICE: "Arranging attendance of RSPCA officers and overseeing removal of peacock from Milton End = £7,263.50 + VAT".

 

:lol:

 

You see. we even told them how to solve THIS problem.

 

If they had listened to us and our advice then they would already have had their Monkey Chicken Petting Zoo and the Peacock would have fitted in right at home

CB Saint

CB Saint

Posted
Posted
Twitter_photo_normal.jpgGraham Dubber ‏@grahamdubber

PKF INVOICE: "Arranging attendance of RSPCA officers and overseeing removal of peacock from Milton End = £7,263.50 + VAT".

 

:lol:

 

F... Me. That strikes me as a little pricey. At the £300hr charge rate, that's 25 hours. Are the RSPCA that difficult to get hold of and that incompetent that they spent that long chasing the peacock around the Milton End. How big is this End?

Katalinic

Katalinic

Posted
Posted
F... Me. That strikes me as a little pricey. At the £300hr charge rate, that's 25 hours. Are the RSPCA that difficult to get hold of and that incompetent that they spent that long chasing the peacock around the Milton End. How big is this End?

 

Maybe it was a big peacock or something got lost in translation and TCWTB was referred to as a peeing cock in the Milton End.

Katalinic

Katalinic

Posted
Posted
@pn_neil_allen: RT @luke_carden: football league forced to reconsider as harris bid offers a safer long term security. you heard it here first.

 

Break out the popcorn

Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
@pn_neil_allen: RT @luke_carden: football league forced to reconsider as harris bid offers a safer long term security. you heard it here first.

 

The replies to that are funny.

Deano6

Deano6

Posted
Posted

Just trying to collect my thoughts around the amounts involved. Please correct me if wrong...

 

 

Assets & Liabilities

 

From the Sept 2012 PKF 6 month report to creditors:

 

6.7 At the Appointment Date, the value of future Parachute Payments potentially available to the Company (and potentially available to a purchaser) was estimated at c£14.04m. However, it was uncertain whether any Parachute Payments would be released to the Company due to:

 

•Competing claims over certain Parachute Payments due to be released in the period following the Appointment Date; and

•Potential liabilities to Premier League clubs that would have priority of payment.

 

6.8 Following negotiations with the Premier League, the Liquidators of OldCo and Mr Gaydamak we successfully negotiated the release of the Parachute Payments. This deal enabled the Administrators to recover c£6.08m of which c£1.2m has been paid out to Mr Gaydamak and legal advisors for Mr Gaydamak and the Premier League. A further £8m remains to be received over the next 2 seasons.

…

9.2 Current unsecured creditors. claims total c£35m of which c£11.4m are classed as .Football

Creditors.

 

 

From the Jan 2013 PKF 12 month report to creditors:

 

Other Income (17 Aug 2012 – 2 Jan 2013)

Parachute payments: £1.0m

 

 

So with that £1m gone there's £7m parachute payments remaining

Cash in club £4.1m (shown elsewhere)

Total assets £11.1m

 

£11.4m football creditors

CVA contribution £0.5m to unsecured creditors

Buying out FP from Chinny £3.0m

Let's conveniently forget about Chinny's additional £2m floating charge

PKF + Pinsent Masons fees £3.5m (tho BBC today stressing they could be lower)

Total liabilities £18.5m

 

So a shortfall of around £7m. How much do the Trust have? Around £1.5m pledges, £1.5m HNW + £1.5m loan (which will need to be repaid!) Can I call that £5m being generous?

 

They’d better hope they turn a trading profit in the first few years! How could they do that - by paying Conference wages perhaps?

 

 

Profit / Loss

 

From the latest report, over the last 6 months to 2 Jan 2013 they've been running at something like...

 

Football income (incl season tickets and Football League payment [both averaged across season, since payments are once a year], gate receipts, hospitality, sponsorship, matchday income) - £1.8m

 

less...

 

Labour costs (players + staff) - £2.0m (tho this is before they released all their players in Jan)

 

Direct costs (matchday police, doctor and other) - £650k

 

Other costs (incl rents, utilities, insurance, bank charges, ticketmaster fees, ...) - £600k

 

You'd think the income would drop a little next year for reduced attendance, less season tickets and lower FL payments, but probably not all that much. Most of those who would quit have already given up, and performances may pick up next year in a lower league. That was always the Trust's argument too.

 

Direct and Other costs, you'd think would be pretty fixed too regardless of where they play.

 

Which leaves labour costs. It looks like they'll need to cut their wage bill to about 1/3 of previous level to just break even in a season, before they attempt to pay off the shortfall in the debt. Now we know they did go through such a cost cutting exercise in Jan, so they may already be there (does anyone know?).

 

Note that all figures above are quoted as half a season, so cutting to 1/3 of level implies a player + staff wage bill of around £1.2m over the entire season. I've no idea how much of the total labour costs the players normally account for, presumably most, but Appleton was complaining at the start of the season that his £4m player budget was slashed to £1.5m by Chinny before the season started...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19244057

 

Poor old Pompey, being told by Balram to live within their means. They did not like that!

Pugwash

Pugwash

Posted
Posted

 

So a shortfall of around £7m. How much do the Trust have? Around £1.5m pledges, £1.5m HNW + £1.5m loan (which will need to be repaid!) Can I call that £5m being generous?

 

They’d better hope they turn a trading profit in the first few years! How could they do that - by paying Conference wages perhaps?

 

 

That's precisely why they want to defer payments to the players; and the reason that the PFA queried the rejection of Harris' bid that purported to settle up front.

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)

http://www.pompeytrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=527%3Alocal-mp-welcomes-trusts-ethical-bid-for-pompey&catid=34%3Ademo-category

 

Ms Mordaunt has been a staunch supporter of the Trust bid from the outset and has spoken out in the House of Commons about how the Trust bid has been often been frustrated by football's vested interests.

 

'Progress is being made, and I am pleased that the Football League continues to lead the way in the support of community ownership, but it is frustrating that progress is not swifter,' she said.

 

'Each day that passes is an abuse of the massive good will and resources of those people keeping the club going – including Portsmouth’s and other clubs’ fans, the public sector and the PST.

 

'If it were not for that good will this historic club would be finished, and that good will is born of the enthusiasm felt for the Trust bid – not the ambitions of speculators.

 

'We all need to recognise that this is as much about good ethics as it is good business, and in the Trust’s bid those qualities coincide.'

Edited by trousers
rallyboy

rallyboy

Posted
Posted

is that ethical as in building a new business on debt from day one, dressing up a property deal as a fan buyout, threatening anyone who asks for actual details, and attempting to negotiate down for a second time football creditors who have already given up thousands to help the club survive?

 

Yes, that all sounds very ethical.

 

 

Shouldn't she be up in Eastleigh helping them lose that seat?

Oh no, the bakery closed didn't it.

Must be a Greggs there....

Joe Kirkup

Joe Kirkup

Posted
Posted

Just had a coffee over keyboard moment browsing POL.

They are criticising another Pompey forum for the fact that there are a load of posters who are anti Trust and that all that is needed is for them to be told the actual truth in which case they will then get onside. As they ( POL ) are all completely informed about the bid etc then they've decided they should go on the other forum to give them the answers they crave.

On copying and posting one of the questions

The trust aim to own 51% of the shares - who will own the other 49%?``

they then all give different answers to the question.

:facepalm:

Torres

Torres

Posted
Posted
Each day that passes is an abuse of the ..... resources of......the public sector

 

100% correct Penny, at last you seem to have grasped it.

Wes Tender

Wes Tender

Posted
Posted

 

Shouldn't she be up in Eastleigh helping them lose that seat?

 

Oh no, the bakery closed didn't it.

Must be a Greggs there....

It's not like you to get things wrong Rallyboy. Eastleigh was a Lib Dem seat, so Penny can't help the Conservatives lose what isn't currently theirs.

 

Shame about the bakery though. They used to bake exceedingly good cakes.

hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted

Good summary Deano. I haven't had time to look at the Jan report due to more important things to do. Looking at what you've come up with, I don't see that you're wrong, but you have been very generous and given them the benefit of every doubt, to the extent that they would clearly be bankrupt again within a few months.

 

As I see it, if you credit them with the PCC loan then you would have to reduce the remaining pp's by the same amount. It isn't really a loan in the normal sense, more of a factoring arrangement to bring some pp money forward at low interest. They could, of course, try to negotiate a proper loan, but the haven't.

 

You would also need to reduce their available pot of cash by the amount of operating losses since January up until transfer of ownership. The rest may be a bit of swings & roundabouts after some haggling, begging and tears.

 

If you can conveniently ignore "Chinny's floater" then they are currently at least £4m short IF they manage to get FP for a knock-down price of £3m, but more realistically well in excess of £5m short, and that is to buy a club that would need to be running at break even from day one because they have zero working capital. I'm not sure how that fits in with taking over at the start of a three month period with no income whatsoever.

 

The question that is on everyone's lips is - Is betula pendula a real prunus persica or a bit of a citrus limon?

dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted
Good summary Deano. I haven't had time to look at the Jan report due to more important things to do. Looking at what you've come up with, I don't see that you're wrong, but you have been very generous and given them the benefit of every doubt, to the extent that they would clearly be bankrupt again within a few months.

 

As I see it, if you credit them with the PCC loan then you would have to reduce the remaining pp's by the same amount. It isn't really a loan in the normal sense, more of a factoring arrangement to bring some pp money forward at low interest. They could, of course, try to negotiate a proper loan, but the haven't.

 

You would also need to reduce their available pot of cash by the amount of operating losses since January up until transfer of ownership. The rest may be a bit of swings & roundabouts after some haggling, begging and tears.

 

If you can conveniently ignore "Chinny's floater" then they are currently at least £4m short IF they manage to get FP for a knock-down price of £3m, but more realistically well in excess of £5m short, and that is to buy a club that would need to be running at break even from day one because they have zero working capital. I'm not sure how that fits in with taking over at the start of a three month period with no income whatsoever.

 

The question that is on everyone's lips is - Is betula pendula a real prunus persica or a bit of a citrus limon?

 

As I keep harping on.

 

There is one way that the PST bid can succeed.

 

It is so obvious I just don't understand why nobody else sees it.

 

PDT has no working capital. Their business plan has holes that the Titanic could have sailed into. But they can have enough money to run their club in L2.

 

And WHY are the PDT being so secretive?

 

FFS it ain't rocket science, money doesn't grow on trees. It grows in fields

hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted

You're right, rocket science it ain't. But they're not going there. If they were they would have done it a loooong time ago. It's the one sure fire way of getting rid of Chinny.

Highfield Saint

Highfield Saint

Posted
Posted
Why is it when anyone says anything referring to the skates the word "massive" somehow has to be used. Massive delusions of grandeur more like.

 

It works with quite a few of the adjectives I would use to describe them though...

OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted

IMO the Trust dont want the club they want Fratton Park. If the club was paramount to them, they would have let FP go and found somewhere else to play.

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
IMO the Trust dont want the club they want Fratton Park. If the club was paramount to them, they would have let FP go and found somewhere else to play.

 

Indeed. It's what is known as "short sighted" in the trade...

Joe Kirkup

Joe Kirkup

Posted
Posted (edited)
IMO the Trust dont want the club they want Fratton Park. If the club was paramount to them, they would have let FP go and found somewhere else to play.

If they don't get FP what on earth would they actually be purchasing? Three full time contracts, a few knackered old balls and some cones. The golden share is the only thing of value and would the few hundred thousand who have pledged be happy that their money was spent on just that?

Edited by Joe Kirkup
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...