Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella,
in Golden Posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

pedg

pedg

Posted
Posted
Tomorrow (10 days from 16th). But that was to "set up" the creditor's committee, not sure if there was a definitive order about a meeting.

 

So I guess the creditor's committee will consist of HMRC, Gady boy, Sol Campbell and bob the builder. Should be fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JackFrost

JackFrost

Posted
Posted
If there are no obvious credible buyers, and Chainrai doesn't want that sh1theap of a football club... there is still a chance they'd die, right? Hope so... I f()cking hate them.

 

Oh liquidation (or death) is still definitely a possibility. The best summary is that they are buying more and more time until they can find a buyer who is willing to pay tens of millions of pounds to buy a club for free (to wipe the debts, and that's if Pompey even made themselves free to buy), and also willing to inject tens of millions of pounds again to start moving the club forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doctoroncall

Doctoroncall

Posted
Posted (edited)
If there are no obvious credible buyers, and Chainrai doesn't want that sh1theap of a football club... there is still a chance they'd die, right? Hope so... I f()cking hate them.

 

Yes, and the probability of doing so is growing every day there are no takers. Chainrai will need to make a decision soon and I expect that will depend on talks with Sacha Gaydamak (assuming he is).

 

As SG is the largest unsecured creditor at around 50%, he is the key player in all this as he has the land surrounding the ground, including the skates office. Whether the "new" owner can strike a deal with him backing an approved CVA for pittence in the pound and the land is bought at an inflated price, I can see the skates getting out of this dirty great big hole.

 

I would imagine they would still be in a mess financially as the footballing debt has to be paid in full (~£10m) and if Chainrai remains the owner he wants a profit for his troubles. Although being able to turn a £60m debt into something like a £6m + £12m for the land (so SG gets £15m) would be advantageous when there are parachute payments (2x£16m) plus player sales (£10m-£15m) to come over the next two seasons.

 

So the questions are:

 

How much is SG wanting for his approval of a CVA (assuming another 25% agree with him) and the land?

 

How much money does Chainrai want to either squeeze out of the club as owner or as a secured creditor?

 

 

I've probably missed a few bits and pieces as it's difficult to keep up on this thread and do work but that is my take on a possible outcome!

Edited by Doctoroncall
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted
So I guess the creditor's committee will consist of HMRC, Gady boy, Sol Campbell and bob the builder. Should be fun.

I'm sure Baloo will want to be represented. After all, the first task of the committee is to agree on the scope and extent of the investigation to be conducted by the administrators into the previous financial transactions.

 

HMRC didn't roll over for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joensuu

Joensuu

Posted
Posted

Some of the skates seem certain that Chainrai isn't secured, and that he could therefore vote in the CVA. I pointed out that the court was satisfied that the admin was genuine, and therefore that Chainrai was secured and got this response:

 

Sorry, but the detail of the agreement handed down by the court clearly said HMRC continues to treat Chainrai as an unecured creditor. Reports vary on whether Andronikou has agreed to this, but we will find that out tomorrow morning.

 

The previous post about him taking the club apparently doesn;t apply because the debt is greater than the assets so the shares are worthless. However, HMRC still dispute the validity of his charge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Channon's Sideburns

Channon's Sideburns

Posted
Posted

So Mr Astrologicalfees says now, that it's 'early days' regarding the investigation into the missing £1.5M.

 

Really....REALLY??

 

About a week in he 'had two people working on it' vowing to report, as his duty, any wrongdoing.

 

Could it be now that Mr Chinnery is the only chance in Skatesville he has moved those two people onto other duties???

 

TBH he's just as consistent as Storrieteller.

 

YOU CAN'T BELIEVE A WORD THAT LEAVES HIS MOUTH.

 

CHEATS

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted
HMRC won't be able to block such an arrangement; however, they will be able to veto a CVA if they still hold a sufficient proportion of the unsecured debt (which they almost certainly do). Which would, of course, mean that Pompey would start next season with a nice big points penalty from the Football League.

 

I expect Chanrai has loaned them some money to see the season through, thus making HRMC drop below the 25% or whatever is needed to stop a CVA.

 

The whole thing is so corrupt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joensuu

Joensuu

Posted
Posted
it seems to me they are shuffling the debts to make the HMRC's share lower.

Are they able to keep paying some of HRMC debts so that to get them below 25% or do the HMRC want it in 1 lump?

 

As I understand it debts are frozen in admin. As such HMRC cant' be paid off before then. They only get paid when the company emerges from admin, and only as a lump sum (of x pence in the pound)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CB Saint

CB Saint

Posted
Posted
it seems to me they are shuffling the debts to make the HMRC's share lower.

Are they able to keep paying some of HRMC debts so that to get them below 25% or do the HMRC want it in 1 lump?

 

They can't pay the pre admin debts without paying an equal amount to the other creditor.

 

One question for those that know is - can a secured creditor relinquish their status and having done so will this then change the composition of the unsecured creditors so that a CVA is acheivable

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted

I wouldn't be surprised if HMRC get cut out from being a preferred creditor, that they may take this to court to get a landmark ruling. To be honest, it is ridiculous that they aren't a preferred creditor or even a secured creditor, and at some time, I am sure that they will look (again) to change this.

 

http://www.thelawyer.com/opinion-the-ins-and-outs-of-the-football-creditor-rule/1003625.article

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted
I expect Chanrai has loaned them some money to see the season through, thus making HRMC drop below the 25% or whatever is needed to stop a CVA.

As I understand things, I don't think he can. He could give them some money, but he can't loan them some.

 

To do so would increase the debt and worsen the position of the creditors overall, unless there was an equivalent or greater increase in the (reasonably liquid) assets.

 

That's why he needs to:

 

  • Sell players outside the window, or
  • Get an advance on the future TV rights payment, or
  • Get an advance on the parachute money

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gingeletiss

Gingeletiss

Posted
Posted
I expect Chanrai has loaned them some money to see the season through, thus making HRMC drop below the 25% or whatever is needed to stop a CVA.

 

The whole thing is so corrupt.

 

I didn't think they could incur any more debt, whilst in administration!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted (edited)

Pretty conclusive there that Gaydamak is viewed as un unsecured creditor by Andronikou.

 

If the unsecured debts are £85m then I wonder who the other creditors are apart from Gaydamak and HMRC. If we use the figures of £30m and £20m for ease then there's another £35m of unsecured debt out there?!

 

We know Sol is claiming a couple of mill (although I'm not sure if it is actually agreed that that debt is owing). Local trades etc will be owed a bit but certainly not millions, you would have thought.

 

Are there a lot more football debts then? That's bad news for them as they will need to be settled in full or it's further points penalty/demotion time.

 

If they aren't football debts then maybe the £30m that Gaydamak claimed to have written off from his original £60m-ish was contingent on payment of the installments of the remainder being made on time? Maybe he's in fact on the books at £60m again?

 

Who knows!

 

Either way, £100m, that's a shocking figure!

Edited by benjii
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joensuu

Joensuu

Posted
Posted
As I understand it, ( and what do I know ? ), if AA incurs additional debt, HE is responsible for servicing it, not the company.

 

Wonder what would happen were he to not be able to service the debt, declare himself bankrupt, flee the country, and receive 10-30 years worth of wages (1-2m) as a tidy thank you? Wonder if that would be of benefit to all parties?

 

Hypothetically of course

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alehouseboys

alehouseboys

Posted
Posted

Was I the only one who watched those incoherent skates humiliating thamselves on SSN this morning, trying and failing, miserably, to explain their campaign with the pink scarves? They were p*ssing themselves laughing in the studio!

 

Still, at least a big Chelski support guaranteed a rare full-house at little ol' fartton last night.....oh.................................

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
They can't pay the pre admin debts without paying an equal amount to the other creditor.

 

One question for those that know is - can a secured creditor relinquish their status and having done so will this then change the composition of the unsecured creditors so that a CVA is acheivable

Thanks, Im not up on these things (no surprise there!)

It is just that the goal posts keep moving and so it is hard to see what is going on, and it is Pompey of course

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kingsland Codger

Kingsland Codger

Posted
Posted

In 28 February, whilst being interviewed by Gary Richardson on BBC FiveLive, Mr Andronikou said the debt at Portsmouth was £78 million.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00r5y9t

 

And now he's saying 'it’s £100m in total, as near as damn it'

 

(see above sportingintelligence.com link)

 

So, presumably, the £22million added on since the club entered administration is now his responsibility?

 

The increase in the debt is close to £1 million a day; who on earth would want to buy into that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crab Lungs

Crab Lungs

Posted
Posted

Guys, thanks for the responses, very heartening. :)

 

Funny thing is, I wouldn't feel any real animosity towards them at all (perhaps some sympathy) but the way they have acted, wriggling, cheating, conniving and conspiring whilst also playing the hard-done-by card over and over and over again.

 

Oh, and the fans true grasp of the situation is aboslutely shocking. What a bunch of whinging, misguided babies they are...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crab Lungs

Crab Lungs

Posted
Posted
In 28 February, whilst being interviewed by Gary Richardson on BBC FiveLive, Mr Andronikou said the debt at Portsmouth was £78 million.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00r5y9t

 

And now he's saying 'it’s £100m in total, as near as damn it'

 

(see above sportingintelligence.com link)

 

So, presumably, the £22million added on since the club entered administration is now his responsibility?

 

The increase in the debt is close to £1 million a day; who on earth would want to buy into that?

 

This is the thing that annoys me, you see... they are clearly insolvent, have continuously stuck two fingers up to everyone in the PL, the FL and in essence, world football. Why on earth haven't they been shut down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
Is it possible that AA is upsizing the debt as much as possible to ensure that the HMRC element is less than 25% so that HMRC are unable to contest a CVA application?

 

That would be absolutely extraordinary and quite, quite wrong on many grounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidthesquid

sidthesquid

Posted
Posted
This is the thing that annoys me, you see... they are clearly insolvent, have continuously stuck two fingers up to everyone in the PL, the FL and in essence, world football. Why on earth haven't they been shut down?

 

One reason - the desperation of the Premier League not to lose one of its teams mid-season. All any of them want is for the Fishy Few to limp over the line in May, then we can all go off and watch England eff it up again in the world cup as they are quietly killed off.

Reading some of the Skatey comments on the News site the penny is finally, finally dropping over there. Some of them have worked out that their players are worth eff-all and that Andy Android just might not have solely their best interests in mind as he dismantles the club, despite the big talk.

Also, clever chaps, can you remind us about the 'associated' creditors bit, because I'm sure that takes care of them ever getting a CVA whilst HMRC are still in the game regardless of the other debts,

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
This is the thing that annoys me, you see... they are clearly insolvent, have continuously stuck two fingers up to everyone in the PL, the FL and in essence, world football. Why on earth haven't they been shut down?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/mattslater/2010/03/taxman_beats_tactical_retreat.html

 

Marginal seat? General election? Surely not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gingeletiss

Gingeletiss

Posted
Posted
This is the thing that annoys me, you see... they are clearly insolvent, have continuously stuck two fingers up to everyone in the PL, the FL and in essence, world football. Why on earth haven't they been shut down?

 

For a start...the PL:smt086. They are doing what needs doing to ensure Poopey complete their fixtures. They, like everyone else, knows that they are insolvent, and have buried their collective heads in the sand. Add to that Justice Derwent, who bottled it, Chanrai who wants his money, and now AA, who wants what Chanrai wants!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
Is it possible that AA is upsizing the debt as much as possible to ensure that the HMRC element is less than 25% so that HMRC are unable to contest a CVA application?

 

I was going to post exactly the same thing.

 

I wonder if future running costs being included as debts? Does the debt figure not take inot account income from previous player sales be it £22m or £0.5m?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doctoroncall

Doctoroncall

Posted
Posted
That would be absolutely extraordinary and quite, quite wrong on many grounds.

 

You missed out f*cking hilarious, considering the SoA was produced a few months ago, how is it possible that another ~£20m of debt is found? Have they suddenly been deluged in claims or did Vantis miss something?

 

I can see more points deductions coming their way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gaz

gaz

Posted
Posted
Was I the only one who watched those incoherent skates humiliating thamselves on SSN this morning, trying and failing, miserably, to explain their campaign with the pink scarves? They were p*ssing themselves laughing in the studio!

 

Still, at least a big Chelski support guaranteed a rare full-house at little ol' fartton last night.....oh.................................

 

I saw it.

 

Spoke to one greasy oik, something along the lines of:

 

Reporter -''why are you wearing a red and pink scarf?''

Boy - ''its a protest against the owners....and....I like the colours''

 

Cut back to Mike Wedderburn and Alex Quinn trying to stop giggling.

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted

I don't think HMRC, on their own, will be able to prevent a CVA. I don't think that they will have more than 25% of the unsecured debt or more than 50% of the non-associated unsecured debt.

 

The real issue is whether, absent a buyer, there can be a bona fide CVA proposal at all?

 

They have to offer the creditors either a reasonable amount of cash now (needs a buyer) or a very substantial proportion of future revenue (TV money and parachutes) as it arises.

 

With a CVA in place they would exit administration, sort of debt free¹, and AA would pass the "slightly cooler" potato back to it's owners (whoever they are), but how on earth will the "owners" be able to run the club with most of the foreseable income gone?

 

¹ the football related debts would still, of course, have to be paid in full to get a playing licence for next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weston Saint

Weston Saint

Posted
Posted
Is it possible that AA is upsizing the debt as much as possible to ensure that the HMRC element is less than 25% so that HMRC are unable to contest a CVA application?
He would not dare. He has already been caught out by a Judge once trying that although he said it was "boll**s"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rallyboy

rallyboy

Posted
Posted

how on earth could they get it to £100M??....Staggering if true.

 

An ambitious new owner would now need to find £100M to clear debt, £10M for the land, £50M for players, £10M for training ground, £100M for a new stadium, £100M for two years wages, so by 2012 they will be overcoming points penalties and bouncing back to the Premier League with a decent squad and a new ground.

 

Cost - £370M though they could cut corners and do it for only £280M?

 

By then the tv money will kick back in, the revenue streams will open up with the bigger capacity and the business will be solvent! Unless of course they fund this amazing turnaround through borrowing.......

Alternatively you could just buy a controlling interest in Manchester United.

 

With the money that has already gone through the club it now means they paid approx

£175M for a 1-0 win over a bankrupt mid-table championship club - what great value for money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxstone

Foxstone

Posted
Posted
So by reading that Sporting Intelligence link it goes something like this....

 

No-one wants to buy them and Chinarai doesn't WANT to be owner either.

 

As you were.

 

So, Mr Astrologicalfees...when are you going to pull the plug?

 

 

You forgot to say CHEATS ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Under Weststand

Under Weststand

Posted
Posted

I thought that once they went into administration, that the administrator was then responsible for making sure that the company paid its way, and was therefore responsible for making sure that said company (PCFC) traded in a solvent manner & find someone to take said company on and out of administration to the satisfaction of the majority of its creditors?

How can he keep changing his mind on their debt, we know that the courts & HMRC have an SOA lodged with the courts by PCFC the company, which surely tells The courts, HMRC & the Administrator the extent of their debt at the time they entered Administration. So if Android is claiming that the debt has risen then he's not doing his job properly is he?

It is his job to run the company in a solvent manner, if he can't do this, I thought he was required to call a halt to stop the debt increasing?

Just look how close to the precipice we were, & how we had to scrape every penny we could to try to keep trading, PCFC have done very little to become solvent since Android took control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gaz

gaz

Posted
Posted

Just look how close to the precipice we were, & how we had to scrape every penny we could to try to keep trading, PCFC have done very little to become solvent since Android took control.

 

Thats an interesting point, apart from 80 staff losing their jobs, what has changed (to the outside world)? Loanees certainly haven't been given their marching orders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...