WestSaint Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 A special rule for Portsmouth - Previous owner and manager in court for tax evasion. Current chief executive in court for tax evasion. Entire club being sued for non payment of taxes, Manager in brothel scandal, More owners than home wins this seasons = Bail out from the Premier league What message does this send out to decent owners trying to run a proper business It Stinks !!
sussexsaint Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 A special rule for Portsmouth - Previous owner and manager in court for tax evasion. Current chief executive in court for tax evasion. Entire club being sued for non payment of taxes, Manager in brothel scandal, More owners than home wins this seasons = Bail out from the Premier league What message does this send out to decent owners trying to run a proper business It Stinks !! Indeed if this is an attempt to save the PL reputation clearly it just doesn't!
JackFrost Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Sorry to be dim - have had a good look around and can't see any official source about the parachute payments - where is this all coming from? I think it was a rumour started in the mirror but neither sky or the beeb are bothering to report it yet last i looked. Supports the "story started by Storrie" theory IMO
Channon's Sideburns Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 I think it was a rumour started in the mirror but neither sky or the beeb are bothering to report it yet last i looked. Supports the "story started by Storrie" theory IMO Could be a ruse to flush out someone prepared to take them over...or at least so they can survive til the summer....then implode. If that happens, expect their Youth Team next season. If they haven't already come to us....haha we could have the last laugh yet!! ;-)
GenevaSaint Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Sorry to be dim - have had a good look around and can't see any official source about the parachute payments - where is this all coming from? Don't let that get in the way of a good story!
buctootim Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Ken Dulieu is a director of Vantis. PFC are ****ed and in need of expert help - so they bring in a company that thinks Dulieu is an asset
dubai_phil Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Day 2 after the fire. Still no factual ATTRIBUTABLE comment from any FAPL sources. Think you're all falling into the "more people taken in by leaks from PCFC sources" category TBH. The fact that there is again no comment tells us all we need to know. They are a Norwegian Blue
Channon's Sideburns Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/newshome/Former-sports-minister-Why-the.6067043.jp
stevegrant Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Let's look at it logically - from what I remember, the Premier League requires a majority of 14:6 when voting on major decisions. Obviously Pompey won't be able to vote, whether that makes the quorum 13:6 or 14:5, I've no idea. For prudence, let's assume the lowest scenario. Teams who Pompey have beaten this season: Wolves Wigan Burnley Liverpool I think it's fair to say that none of these teams will be willing to help Pompey out. If they go under, each of these teams will benefit from their defeats being erased from the records, so they won't lose any points. 4 against the bailout Teams that have beaten Pompey twice: Fulham Arsenal Man City Man United It's fairly safe to say that Fulham, Manchester City and Arsenal will want Pompey to survive. For City and Arsenal, that is because Liverpool dropped three points against Pompey. For Fulham, while relegation is unlikely, Pompey's records being erased would bring them one point closer to the relegation zone (8 points clear instead of 9), and would take them further away from the Europa League qualifying places (11 points instead of 9). It's not quite so clear-cut for Manchester United - while they would lose ground on Chelsea to increase the gap to 4 points instead of 1, they would have a game in hand, and they would expect Chelsea to beat Pompey in their second game anyway. 3 in favour of the bailout, 1 undecided Teams that have beaten Pompey in the only game they've played against them so far: Birmingham Bolton Aston Villa Everton Tottenham Blackburn Stoke Chelsea Unlikely that any of these teams would want Pompey to go bust this season. They've got another game to play against them, and already have 3 points in the bag from the first meeting. 8 in favour of the bailout The rest: Sunderland West Ham Hull West Ham collected 4 points from Pompey - they'll probably be quite happy with that at the moment. They'd drop from 14th to 18th, 3 points from safety, if those points were taken away. Hull only picked up 1 point from the game at the KC Stadium - would they fancy their chances at Fratton Park? Sunderland don't have that option, they conceded injury-time equalisers home and away and will expect other teams around them to pick up points against Pompey, With the records expunged, they'd increase the gap between them and the relegation zone from 3 to 4 points. 1 in favour of the bailout, 1 against, 1 undecided So I make that 12 definitely in favour of the bailout, 5 definitely against it, and 2 undecided - I suspect Hull would lean slightly towards the "against" vote, which would be enough to veto it.
sussexsaint Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/newshome/Former-sports-minister-Why-the.6067043.jp Well those quotes from the PL don't seem to suggest they are happy to bail them out do they
Channon's Sideburns Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Nice to see that Caborn sees what we see...re: Premier only interested in them surviving until they get relegated..then - Who cares? The brand remains intact - as does the FA (Cup) after this weekend. Seeing Mark Fry's comments regarding how surprised he is that they were granted the extra 7 days...do not underestimate the power of the FA. Wonder what Wiseman thinks of all this?
JackFrost Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Let's look at it logically - from what I remember, the Premier League requires a majority of 14:6 when voting on major decisions. Obviously Pompey won't be able to vote, whether that makes the quorum 13:6 or 14:5, I've no idea. For prudence, let's assume the lowest scenario. Teams who Pompey have beaten this season: Wolves Wigan Burnley Liverpool I think it's fair to say that none of these teams will be willing to help Pompey out. If they go under, each of these teams will benefit from their defeats being erased from the records, so they won't lose any points. 4 against the bailout Teams that have beaten Pompey twice: Fulham Arsenal Man City Man United It's fairly safe to say that Fulham, Manchester City and Arsenal will want Pompey to survive. For City and Arsenal, that is because Liverpool dropped three points against Pompey. For Fulham, while relegation is unlikely, Pompey's records being erased would bring them one point closer to the relegation zone (8 points clear instead of 9), and would take them further away from the Europa League qualifying places (11 points instead of 9). It's not quite so clear-cut for Manchester United - while they would lose ground on Chelsea to increase the gap to 4 points instead of 1, they would have a game in hand, and they would expect Chelsea to beat Pompey in their second game anyway. 3 in favour of the bailout, 1 undecided Teams that have beaten Pompey in the only game they've played against them so far: Birmingham Bolton Aston Villa Everton Tottenham Blackburn Stoke Chelsea Unlikely that any of these teams would want Pompey to go bust this season. They've got another game to play against them, and already have 3 points in the bag from the first meeting. 8 in favour of the bailout The rest: Sunderland West Ham Hull West Ham collected 4 points from Pompey - they'll probably be quite happy with that at the moment. They'd drop from 14th to 18th, 3 points from safety, if those points were taken away. Hull only picked up 1 point from the game at the KC Stadium - would they fancy their chances at Fratton Park? Sunderland don't have that option, they conceded injury-time equalisers home and away and will expect other teams around them to pick up points against Pompey, With the records expunged, they'd increase the gap between them and the relegation zone from 3 to 4 points. 1 in favour of the bailout, 1 against, 1 undecided So I make that 12 definitely in favour of the bailout, 5 definitely against it, and 2 undecided - I suspect Hull would lean slightly towards the "against" vote, which would be enough to veto it. Thanks Steve, I was hoping someone was gonna do a rundown cos I couldn't be bothered Pulis has apparently gone on record saying Pompey should be brought to account, or words to those degree Besides this is if this rumour is true and that is looking unlikely currently
Channon's Sideburns Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/10-reasons-why-being-Pompey.6067322.jp Copied from a thread on the main board, but nice to see they struggled to find 10 things.
Fowllyd Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/10-reasons-why-being-Pompey.6067322.jp Copied from a thread on the main board, but nice to see they struggled to find 10 things. Yeah, I read that as well - really feeble stuff. Given their inclusion of Lowe as a reason why it's better to be Pompey than Saints, I think we could come up with at least three chairmen and sundry hangers-on to include on a similar list from our point of view. And 'Arry deserves a place on our list just as much as he does on theirs - after all, he may have relegated us, but that's a mere bagatelle compared to what (in the long term) he did to them!
Gingeletiss Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Yeah, I read that as well - really feeble stuff. Given their inclusion of Lowe as a reason why it's better to be Pompey than Saints, I think we could come up with at least three chairmen and sundry hangers-on to include on a similar list from our point of view. And 'Arry deserves a place on our list just as much as he does on theirs - after all, he may have relegated us, but that's a mere bagatelle compared to what (in the long term) he did to them! Here's my choice,...Terry Venables (Mr £1). Hope this makes the top 10;)
Gingeletiss Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 It seems, that an awful lot of people, are getting their knickers in a twist, over a non-storrie. IMHO, I cannot see the PL doing this, as the fallout will be massive. I still stand by my thoughts, that Poopey will go out of buisness, on their return visit to the courts of Justice. The only way out, is a HUGE injection of cash, and that, I think we all agree, is unlikely. So chill pill chaps and chapesses, the stage is set, the players are all in the theatre, and the show will continue to play for the next week.
Fowllyd Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 It seems, that an awful lot of people, are getting their knickers in a twist, over a non-storrie. IMHO, I cannot see the PL doing this, as the fallout will be massive. I still stand by my thoughts, that Poopey will go out of buisness, on their return visit to the courts of Justice. The only way out, is a HUGE injection of cash, and that, I think we all agree, is unlikely. So chill pill chaps and chapesses, the stage is set, the players are all in the theatre, and the show will continue to play for the next week. Exactly what I was thinking.
Chin Strain Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Here's my choice,...Terry Venables (Mr £1). Hope this makes the top 10;) I think I could come up with five owners, chairman and directors in the last 4 months that would beat Lowe. Nice to see that they can take a pop at us for £4m on Rory Delap....a player who is still playing in the PL. Utaka anyone...and that's just for starters?
View From The Top Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 It seems, that an awful lot of people, are getting their knickers in a twist, over a non-storrie. IMHO, I cannot see the PL doing this, as the fallout will be massive. I still stand by my thoughts, that Poopey will go out of buisness, on their return visit to the courts of Justice. The only way out, is a HUGE injection of cash, and that, I think we all agree, is unlikely. So chill pill chaps and chapesses, the stage is set, the players are all in the theatre, and the show will continue to play for the next week. Agreed.
ottery st mary Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 (edited) A special rule for Portsmouth - Previous owner and manager in court for tax evasion. Current chief executive in court for tax evasion. Entire club being sued for non payment of taxes, Manager in brothel scandal, More owners than home wins this seasons = Bail out from the Premier league What message does this send out to decent owners trying to run a proper business It Stinks !! Having worked in London for many years and witnessed much of the same :smt119...... Your description above... Sounds a similar scenario.. to how many of our big companies operate and likewise that crowd who work under that big clock tower next to the big bridge... But your point is well made about how decent peeps percieve how these cretins get away with it.. Edited 12 February, 2010 by ottery st mary
Bongo badger Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Spoke to two established skates this morning, i can not understand their thought paterns at all. The only thing they are grasping as to the saving grace of their club is the fan power. They think as well as many 1000s of others that because so many people will be effected if the club go OOB, that the courts and PL/FA will see them ok as to not p155 any supporters of. I got really annoyed at this point and left the room.
Baldsaint Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 The only thing they are grasping as to the saving grace of their club is the fan power. Fan power? What, the 14 or 15,000 that turned up for the vital 6 pointer against Sunderland? The only saving grace is that the PL doesn't want a PL club to go bust, that's the only thing that'll save them, apart from some half-witted multi millionaire coming to the rescue who would've already come out of the woodwork if he/she existed.
Bongo badger Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Millions around the world would be effected, dont shout at me lol, their words not mine, mupets
Matthew Le God Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Spoke to two established skates this morning What is an "established skate"?
Evil Monkey Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Millions around the world would be effected, dont shout at me lol, their words not mine, mupets Effected? Possibly. But not in a bad way. Lots of extra promotion spots up for grabs. I'm sure the fans of the clubs after these places wont be too gutted about it being at the skates' expense.
Guided Missile Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 What is an "established skate"? His caravan's on bricks, not wheels...
krissyboy31 Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 They've just signed another player they can't pay.
dubai_phil Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Spoke to two established skates this morning, i can not understand their thought paterns at all. The only thing they are grasping as to the saving grace of their club is the fan power. They think as well as many 1000s of others that because so many people will be effected if the club go OOB, that the courts and PL/FA will see them ok as to not p155 any supporters of. I got really annoyed at this point and left the room. Not only are their thought processes obscure, but they clearly cannot read.... Justice Derrett “I am obviously conscious that, by making a winding-up order, it would have very severe consequences not only for the company as a business but for the supporters, but that is not a consideration that I strictly take into account.”
Winchester Red Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 They've just signed another player they can't pay. If they signed him in time to play against us I'm going to be doubly p155ed off It's F****** outragious The FA and PL should be ashamed of themselves :mad::mad::mad:
ottery st mary Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 What is an "established skate"? Would definitely be minging if established:D
sussexsaint Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 His caravan's on bricks, not wheels... Coffee all over monitor
sunrise Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 The PL should've only lifted the transfer embargo for the purpose of Pompey to sell players only in order to pay some of their debts. It is totally unfair, especially on other PL teams, in and around the relegation spots that a clearly insolvent club is able to sign players. Its a situation that stinks but then again not surprising that the PL and football in general is more or less courrupt.
sussexsaint Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 The PL should've only lifted the transfer embargo for the purpose of Pompey to sell players only in order to pay some of their debts. It is totally unfair, especially on other PL teams, in and around the relegation spots that a clearly insolvent club is able to sign players. Its a situation that stinks but then again not surprising that the PL and football in general is more or less courrupt. I understand from teh Skates on here that they were allowed to sell under the terms of the embargo anyway
Fowllyd Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 They've just signed another player they can't pay. Vexing though this undoubtedly is, especially if he's able to play tomorrow, it can only harm them further in the medium term - ie the next couple of weeks. The judge has already said that she fears they are trading insolvently and that, if allowed to continue trading, they will simply accrue more debts which they can't then pay; their response - go out and increase their running costs! Unbelievable.
St Marco Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Basically for the PL to do that would mean all of the teams would have to agree to it right as would mean a change of the rules? I think the PL will have said something like they will put it to the vote but know it will be shot down. Only the teams owed money by them will agree to it. The teams fighting it down the bottom i.e 40% will say no. Also i think Portsmouth asking for it in the 1st place pretty much prooves they have nobody lined up. They ask for it a day after the court case, if they had a guy coming in or the current owner was going to put his money in they would not need to do that right? As each day goes by i think fans in general are becoming more and more angry at the way this has been dealt with and the way they seem to be given chance after chance. They have lost the "lets feel sorry for them" tag. Like today they have signed a defender. How can they pay him if they are insolvent? It stinks.
Thedelldays Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Have they brought in another player...? I really REALLY hate that club...I hope they go pop
Red Alert Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12875_5944834,00.html Portsmouth have announced the signing of Serbian defender Dusko Tosic on a free transfer.....The 25-year-old has been awarded a work permit and he could go straight into the squad to tackle fierce rivals Southampton in the FA Cup this weekend if he receives international clearance in time. How can this be allowed? Its a disgrace that they cant pay wages on time yet have been able to add extra on to it. I suppose not paying £2million a month costs the same as not paying £1.8 million but it shouldn't be allowed to happen.
OldNick Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 It is comical that the PL etc allow them to sign more players when the Registrar said it looks like they are insolvent. I suspect she will not view tem taking on more overheads very much. Is he on a pay as he plays deal?
Chez Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/10-reasons-why-being-Pompey.6067322.jp Copied from a thread on the main board, but nice to see they struggled to find 10 things. a short list of my own 1. Redcrap - charged with football corruption/tax evasion 2. Tells strories - charged with football corruption tax evasion 3. 64 `PFC supporters' - Guilty banned for football hooligansim after derby game 4. Bond - investigated for football coruption 5. Azougly - providing false evidence in court 6. Venables - Disqualified from acting as a director 7. Johnson - On the spot fine for stealing toilet seat 8. Quinn - Guilty of driving whilst banned and neglecting racehorses 9. Rix - Guilty of underage sex and indecent assault 10. PFCs real owner Gaydamak Sr - Guilty of illegal arms sales oh and if you don't like any of them there is always Alan Biley's haircut. Criminal.
JackFrost Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 I thought I read earlier in the thread that Chainrai was covering the wages??
saintbletch Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12875_5944834,00.html Portsmouth have announced the signing of Serbian defender Dusko Tosic on a free transfer.....The 25-year-old has been awarded a work permit and he could go straight into the squad to tackle fierce rivals Southampton in the FA Cup this weekend if he receives international clearance in time. How can this be allowed? Its a disgrace that they cant pay wages on time yet have been able to add extra on to it. I suppose not paying £2million a month costs the same as not paying £1.8 million but it shouldn't be allowed to happen. Someone should explain to Mr. Tosic what being paid "monthly in arrears" really means at Pompey.
thesaint sfc Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 This really is a total mystery to me. I honestly don't know what the outcome is going to be. As long as we beat them, I don't really care either. I'd rather see them relegated, then relegated again and again and again rather than them going out of existence, however when I hear news that they have been allowed to sign another player it really does make me want them to disappear. I certainly wouldn't lose any sleep over it if they went bust.
aintforever Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 It's got to the stage now that I would be disappointed if they didn't go out of existence, their arrogance is just insulting now.
JackFrost Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 It's almost as if Storrie wants them to go bust
Gemmel Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 It's almost as if Storrie wants them to go bust In his first interview afte rthe case he quoted the lawyer from HMRC who said that they (pompey) have continued to increase thier expenditure (or words to that effect) and how he was wrong............ then storrie goes and.................... increases his expenditure. He is either very very stupid or he is tsicking two fingers up at HMRC - Brave man
SW5 SAINT Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Surely someone should now be liable for those wages they have just obligated themselves to, having been declared insolvent. These wages will be at the expense of some third party who is owed money!!
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 What is an "established skate"? http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/RPIO-4Y97RD?open HTH
stevegrant Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Surely someone should now be liable for those wages they have just obligated themselves to, having been declared insolvent. These wages will be at the expense of some third party who is owed money!! Legally, they haven't... yet. That will come around this time next week.
OldNick Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 Legally, they haven't... yet. That will come around this time next week. And what is vantis's part in all this. If they are over seeing the books surely they would have had some input?
Chez Posted 12 February, 2010 Posted 12 February, 2010 And what is vantis's part in all this. If they are over seeing the books surely they would have had some input? they are drawing up a statement, they have no say whatsoever in money going in and out. they are not an administrator.
Recommended Posts