Channon's Sideburns Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 So...no more comments from Pompey regarding the Storrie stories then?? Of course, it's all about Lloyd today isn't it? Almost as if those reports never happened.... ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 OMG! Not sure if its been on here yet but there's a letter from this bloke on pompeyonline. He actually uses the phrase 'football first philosophy.' I'm going to die laughing. Who posted it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Is this Pompey case still happening?Yes it has to go back before the Judge for "technical" issues. It is not listed for today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Who posted it?Let me guess!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Who posted it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Can someone post a link please or do you have to be registered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Yes it has to go back before the Judge for "technical" issues. It is not listed for today. The BBC article linked earlier has it down for tomorrow. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/p/portsmouth/8567019.stm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 I am searching for "tommows hearing" nothing up yet http://search.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/kbroker/dca/hmcs/search.ladv?cs=UTF-8&sc=hmcs&sf=&ss=&ln=en&ut0=1&otx0=portsmouth+football&op0=1&ty0=0&tx0=portsmouth+football+&fl0=&ut1=1&otx1=&op1=0&ty1=0&tx1=+&fl1=&ut2=1&otx2=&op2=0&ty2=0&tx2=+&fl2=&ha=115&dt=30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 I am searching for "tommows hearing" nothing up yet http://search.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/kbroker/dca/hmcs/search.ladv?cs=UTF-8&sc=hmcs&sf=&ss=&ln=en&ut0=1&otx0=portsmouth+football&op0=1&ty0=0&tx0=portsmouth+football+&fl0=&ut1=1&otx1=&op1=0&ty1=0&tx1=+&fl1=&ut2=1&otx2=&op2=0&ty2=0&tx2=+&fl2=&ha=115&dt=30 It's in Court 17 at 10.30 before Lewison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Are we mixing up two hearings? PFC v Campbell today and HMRC v PFC tomorrow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Are we mixing up two hearings? PFC v Campbell today and HMRC v PFC tomorrow? Yep. v Campbell today v HMRC tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Are we mixing up two hearings? PFC v Campbell today and HMRC v PFC tomorrow? I definitely was All clear now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wibble Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 News from court - Portsmouth have agreed that Sol is due 1.6m plus interest but his lawyers say he will defer till they are out of admin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Campbell v PFC case agreed. PFC agree thety owe Campbell £1.6m plus £50,000 interest. Campbell has agreed to defer settlement until the club come out of Administration On that basis I assume he will be a "football Creditor" and be paid in full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 News from court - Portsmouth have agreed that Sol is due 1.6m plus interest but his lawyers say he will defer till they are out of admin. So what's that - £85.6 million & counting..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/frattonlatest/Court-rules-Pompey-must-pay.6152755.jp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 "But the player and administrator Andrew Andronikou have agreed that the debt will not have to be repaid until Pompey finds a buyer." What a load of sh1te. The moratorium (freeze on the dbets) means that the debt is a claim in the administration and would not be paid now anyway. So in effect they have agreed to comply with the law/rules already in place. Well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 "But the player and administrator Andrew Andronikou have agreed that the debt will not have to be repaid until Pompey finds a buyer." What a load of sh1te. The moratorium (freeze on the dbets) means that the debt is a claim in the administration and would not be paid now anyway. So in effect they have agreed to comply with the law/rules already in place. Well done. You have returned! Any comment on the current affairs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 You have returned! Any comment on the current affairs? someone better wake Nickh up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctoroncall Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 I see some of the skates are getting excited (sorry deluded) from 606, for example: comment by LincolnSaint (U13801258) posted 16 Hours Ago Can I ask a genuine question (not wumming) I dont understand why they would buy Pompey. I can understand it if you guys stay up (if you dont get the points deduction I genuinely believe that you will) then the club might be a half decent investment opportunity. But if you end up next season in the championship there are more attractive clubs to buy (probably cheaper) such as Norwich, Cardiff, Leeds who all have a bigger fan base and more modern facilities. So whats in it for him as a Liverpool fan is the crux of my question. ------------------- What you are looking at is potential for growth compared to how much you invest. Liverpool would firstly cost a fortune to buy and then another fortune to pay off the debt those two plonkers have put on the club. Pompey are available for a lot less than that. Then, they will be looking at the huge amount of space Pomepy own bang in the centre of a city on the south coast of England. They'll be looking at moving us to Horsea, building a new stadium with higher revenues and sponsorship. What they'll look to do with Fratton is build housing, supermarkets etc etc. That should cover the cost of the stadium after a few years. So, long term, it is a sound investment as long as its done properly. Remember, we are bottomed out a bit in the property market. These chaps will be looking at a minimum of 5 years (financial cycles etc). Its encouraging that Investec are involved. They are a highly respected firm of Fund managers. And a big deal. They also sponsor a lot of sporting events in the UK (ashes, england games etc.) So, what you are looking at Lincoln is speculation from a club bottomed out, rather than taking over a massive club like Liverpool, who need a lot of investment in playing staff (to stay as champ league challengers) and a much bigger stadium is requred.. And their debt is huge.. ours isn't that bad in comparison, although it is all relevent.. These people will be looking to increase their equity values once they have invested. The only way to do that with Pompey is to Build a new stadium and develop the old land (great for the fans) and in most probability, have a stable Premiership team at some point. (great for us again..) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 http://212.137.36.113/cms/list_chancery.htm COURT 17 Before MR JUSTICE LEWISON Tuesday, 16 March 2010 At half past 10 GENERAL LIST GLC 67/10 In the Matter of Portsmouth Football Club Between Portsmouth Football Club v Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs GLC 68/10 Same v Same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/frattonlatest/Court-rules-Pompey-must-pay.6152755.jp Nice one, so that's another 2 million reasons why they won't find a buyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 You have returned! Any comment on the current affairs? I still think they're toast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SO16_Saint Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 http://212.137.36.113/cms/list_chancery.htm COURT 17 Before MR JUSTICE LEWISON Tuesday, 16 March 2010 At half past 10 GENERAL LIST GLC 67/10 In the Matter of Portsmouth Football Club Between Portsmouth Football Club v Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs GLC 68/10 Same v Same what are they in for now??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 what are they in for now??? Likely to just be the formalities of rubber stamping the administration. Even though the HMRC were happy with it, no matter what it still had to go back to court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 So Sol is now an unsecured creditor and would have to approve any CVA, is that right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fowllyd Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 I still think they're toast. My but that's good to hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Likely to just be the formalities of rubber stamping the administration. Even though the HMRC were happy with it, no matter what it still had to go back to court. Dotting t's and crossing i's probably Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Dotting t's and crossing i's probably Yep...would be funny if HMRC dropped a bomb though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 from a skate on their MB's - ''Hi all, Been asked if I can clarify the situation regarding the exclusivity, the administrator and the £3 million bond so I've made a couple of phone calls in between my work for you. As I said, Andronikou has already met some of the other people working on this deal, and is meeting Rob Lloyd tonight at the Liverpool game. The £3 million bond has been paid and is in the system with the solicitors. Exclusivity starts from tomorrow morning. A lot of things are happening just now, so let's just calm it and let things happen, and see where we are in a couple of weeks once the exclusivity deal is done and we see where we are. Things are looking hopeful though.'' sounds more and more like a pinnacle-esque effort as the day goes on. The same poster has also had a ''meeting'' with the proposed buyers, as is very encouraged by what they have to offer. I'm sorry, but any buyer with any credibility at all does not go having meeting's with fans. I think we found that out - they may have the best interests at heart, but are very often skint. Markus and Nicola just did the deal, didn't involve fans and i also don't think they paid exclusivity. That's what happens when you have the money, you can get a deal done without having to go through weeks and weeks of tosh.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Likely to just be the formalities of rubber stamping the administration. Even though the HMRC were happy with it, no matter what it still had to go back to court. Possibly but I'd be suprised if HMRC didn't further pursue the WUO. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 1) Pinnacle/Tony Lynam/Michael Fialka last summer wrote a very similar letter to this... Dear Portsmouth Supporter I am writing to you to outline our plans for Portsmouth Football Club. I believe that the Club’s previous management team has lost the support and confidence of a wide body of supporters. Moreover, we believe there has been a breakdown in communication between the Football Club and its supporters. The Club’s fortunes, both commercially and on the field of play have also deteriorated. This has come against a backdrop where the previous Boards have failed to raise any new equity investment monies for a period of in excess of 5 years. We believe that if the Pompey are to be put back on the road to success, significant changes need to be made to the strategy and operations of the business, in order to revitalise and re-establish Portsmouth as a Football Club that is genuinely capable of sustained success on and off the field of play. I am pleased to have been able to bring together a management team comprising a blend of exceptional business people; highly committed fans; and experienced football business executives. Together, we share the philosophy and motivation required to “give” the Club back to the City of Portsmouth and its supporters. This document spells out briefly, as far as we can at this stage, our proposed strategy to achieve a renewed unity of purpose and mutual trust amongst everyone connected with the Club. Our aim is to deliver the success that all supporters and shareholders and indeed all other stakeholders rightly demand and deserve. I summarise briefly below its core components and the philosophy of our approach. • As a priority, we are seeking to establish an open, inclusive and interactive system of communication with our stakeholders The new Board of Portsmouth City Football Club Limited will exercise overall financial and operational control over Portsmouth Football Club and will be responsible for ensuring that the governance of the Company is both proper and effective. The Directors will be held fully accountable for their actions and will ensure transparency in all of the Company’s dealings. The proposed new Directors will comply fully with their obligations as Directors of a limited company. We believe there are several potential new investors who are fans and are genuinely interested to invest in the Club, but who were categorically unwilling to do so while the previous Directors remained in place. We also believe that ownership of the Club should remain widely spread amongst fans. • Our aim is to put at the Football Manager’s disposal the best facilities and resources to enable him to develop a playing squad capable of delivering football success; adoption and implementation of a Football First philosophy. • We do not merely intend to achieve a speedy return to the Premiership. As we explain in this document, our objective is to build the infrastructure, management team and playing squads necessary for sustained football and business success. Such a plan has a substantial cost and without access to the financial and other proprietary business data of the Company, and a thorough analysis of that information, together with a knowledge of the prospects of an appeal against the 9 point deduction, it is impractical for us to suggest precisely the level of investment required to achieve our objectives. However, we would propose to keep all shareholders and fans alike fully informed of the results of our analysis once we had completed such a review. • We also discuss in this document the characteristics that single out Portsmouth Football Club as a family orientated, community-based institution. Within the bounds of sound commercial principles we intend to introduce ticket pricing and related initiatives to recognise these factors. I hope you will agree with our aims to partner with the Club’s supporters to recreate a strong team and commercial business. I believe that the supporters are the lifeblood of the Club and their relationship with us should be a strong, long term and special bond. To this end we will be discussing with supporter representatives how they can be represented at board level. I look forward to sharing with you the success I believe we can bring to Portsmouth Football Club. Signed Rob Lloyd 2) They appeared on Sky Sports News and sent letters to fans on fan forums before talking to the administrator. 3) They claimed to have large backers that they were representing that wanted to remain anonymous, yet their own business background was dubious to say the least. History is repeating, just 13 miles further down the M27. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpb Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 sounds more and more like a pinnacle-esque effort as the day goes on. The same poster has also had a ''meeting'' with the proposed buyers, as is very encouraged by what they have to offer. I'm sorry, but any buyer with any credibility at all does not go having meeting's with fans. I think we found that out - they may have the best interests at heart, but are very often skint. It does sound very Pinnacle-esque but if they have paid up £3m for exclusivity then perhaps they do mean business... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 1) Pinnacle/Tony Lynam/Michael Fialka last summer wrote a very similar letter to this... I think you'll find it was contained in this document. I like to call it a roadmap to administration and relegation. They tends to happen when you put football first and economics last... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 It does sound very Pinnacle-esque but if they have paid up £3m for exclusivity then perhaps they do mean business... Hmmmmm. Yet Pinnacle paid for exclusivity - via Leon Crouch - and they turned out to mean business didn't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fowllyd Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 from a skate on their MB's - ''Hi all, Been asked if I can clarify the situation regarding the exclusivity, the administrator and the £3 million bond so I've made a couple of phone calls in between my work for you. As I said, Andronikou has already met some of the other people working on this deal, and is meeting Rob Lloyd tonight at the Liverpool game. The £3 million bond has been paid and is in the system with the solicitors. Exclusivity starts from tomorrow morning. A lot of things are happening just now, so let's just calm it and let things happen, and see where we are in a couple of weeks once the exclusivity deal is done and we see where we are. Things are looking hopeful though.'' sounds more and more like a pinnacle-esque effort as the day goes on. The same poster has also had a ''meeting'' with the proposed buyers, as is very encouraged by what they have to offer. I'm sorry, but any buyer with any credibility at all does not go having meeting's with fans. I think we found that out - they may have the best interests at heart, but are very often skint. Markus and Nicola just did the deal, didn't involve fans and i also don't think they paid exclusivity. That's what happens when you have the money, you can get a deal done without having to go through weeks and weeks of tosh.. Oh dear, oh dear. Time will tell and all that, but this really does look frighteningly* like Pinnacle - the sequel. Not just all the hype, meetings with supporters and so forth, but that bit about the £3M being 'in the system with the solicitors' - when, if ever, will it find its way to the administrators? And does nobody at that benighted end of the M27 think it odd that this saviour has met some supporters before leaving as much as a calling card with Andronikou? * On second thoughts, maybe 'frighteningly' isn't quite the word. How about 'hilariously'? Yes, I think that works much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 I still think they're toast.Oh FFS somebody who works in the trade is saying that!!!! How can I go against Clapham who I know is experienced about these things.All I need is Bucks saint to wade in and say the same and Im in a quandery. Pompey will get out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Oh FFS somebody who works in the trade is saying that!!!! How can I go against Clapham who I know is experienced about these things.All I need is Bucks saint to wade in and say the same and Im in a quandery. Pompey will get out of it. No longer funneh Nick - in fact a bit tedious TBH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 No longer funneh Nick - in fact a bit tedious TBH Almost as bad as Dalek2003 and his Hoddle obsession! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 No longer funneh Nick - in fact a bit tedious TBH It is a superstition now BTF, a bit like not mentioning Macbeth if you are an actor. Just watch the bad news stories come out of Pompey now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMPR Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Hi all, Just a heads-up as I've been asking about the posting made by GM Food made in this thread. Basically, I was told that, as far as they knew, Rob Lloyd wouldn't have written anything like this and no 'document' was known about, so it was extremely doubtful that it would have come from him. So, I'd be extremely doubtful about this, especially after a bit of investigation has shown that the user GM Food seems to be based....in S*uthampton. Amazing what you can find out. From the owner of the site where the letter came from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 From the owner of the site where the letter came from Who did the digging Clouseau? Nice to see your return, you haven't been on gardening leave by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 From the owner of the site where the letter came from That's not Mr Guided Missile Food is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMPR Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Who did the digging Clouseau? Nice to see your return, you haven't been on gardening leave by any chance? Nope still enjoying beating your lot 4-1 thanks. Even though we had a weakened team as well just the same as you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 That's not Mr Guided Missile Food is it?I doubt he'd be quite so obvious, but.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 The £3 million bond has been paid and is in the system with the solicitors. I'm not exactly business brain of Britain but, surely it's either been paid OR it's with their solicitors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krissyboy31 Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 That's not Mr Guided Missile Food is it? Can't be! Remember, he got banned just for "being a scummer on a wind up!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_John Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 It's in Court 17 at 10.30 before Lewison Should anything be made of the change of Judge from last time Justice Norris -> Justice Lewison. Is it normal to change the Judge? Or does it imply there are no surprises from HMRC and it is only technical issues ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chin Strain Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Nope still enjoying beating your lot 4-1 thanks. Even though we had a weakened team as well just the same as you Not quite as 'weakened' as it should have been though. Imagine if you'd actually tried to avoid administration by 'gasp' selling players, rather than signing players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the colonel Posted 15 March, 2010 Share Posted 15 March, 2010 Nope still enjoying beating your lot 4-1 thanks. Even though we had a weakened team as well just the same as you A weakened team two divisions below you.....congratulations.......plank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts