Pompey Takeover Saga

[alehouseboys]

Don't look if you have a delicate disposition.

 

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=771587&sec=england&cc=5739

 

 

A taster.....................

''The club [Lens] have now agreed to let him play in the final, because they think it would be a good showpiece platform for him to get a move,'' Pompey administrator Andrew Andronikou told Soccernet. ''But Portsmouth's feeling is that he needs to play in the other games leading up to the final and he needs to be totally match-fit to play against Chelsea. I have made a last ditch attempt to find some rational ground between us.

 

Which just goes to prove they are cheating and deliberately fielding weakened teams.

 

He's only fit to play if they don't have to pay out.

 

CHEATS

[1576]

We obviousy made a mistake in the preparations for the cup game all we needed to do was demand that our cup tied players should be allowed to play.

[Saint Lindford]

Premier league vote unanimously to extend parachute payments for relegated clubs from 2 years to 4 years.

 

This will be ratified at the AGM in June.

 

But has to be approved by the Football League. Can't see that they would vote for it meaning their member clubs will not be able to compete with the relegated clubs for longer. 4 years of parachute payments means that teams that come down can keep the PL structure for longer thus almost guaranteeing a return with 1 or 2 years to the PL.

[redkeith]

From that pompey trust link...

 

"RG Asked if the prime aim is for PFC to be self sufficient? If so how would the debts also be paid back? AA Said that the CVA would take 4-5 years to clear."

 

 

The parachute payments are worth far more than the remaining assets of the club, but will only have any value if the club continues to exist and is a Football League member. This is probably the best way for an administrator to maximise the return to the creditors.

 

In this way Chanrai gets his money back, the football creditors get paid, and any remaining parachute money will be divied up between the remaining creditors, who will probably get more than they would have if the club was liquidated.

 

This will leave the Skates to survive on gate money alone for the 4 or 5 years until the CVA is paid off. Good times !

[dronskisaint]

Accrington of the south!

 

Gretna of the south...without any sympathy factor!

 

Bought success, went bust.

[rallyboy]

to clarify the great news they've had this week -

 

'they will be allowed to play in Europe'

 

 

 

(if they meet the criteria which includes exiting admin trouble-free and filing accounts)

 

 

 

'they will get four years of increased parachute payments'

 

 

 

(if the FL turkeys go mental and vote for Christmas)

 

 

These two gems have pushed the defiant 'we will get the points penalty overturned' back into the shadows.

 

 

Put that together with 150 of the best fans in the world seeing their glorious team grab a 0-0 draw at their twinned football town and you have a fantastic week, and we may still have court proceedings today to add to the frivolity.

[ivangolac]

 

'they will get four years of increased parachute payments'

.

 

Surely this proposal does not include clubs relegates THIS season ?

[Channon's Sideburns]

Lens are FOOLS if they let Pompey play Dindane.

 

Blackburn already wanted him in January.

 

They need to tell Andronikou 'Pay up or **** off'. Sooner or later someone, somewhere is going to go public about their cheating ways.

 

But they won't....

 

I wonder, with the CVA letters being sent to creditors today, will Andronikou make it clear how much the debt has increased under his watch??

 

Also...HOW THE HELL can he give the creditors CVA letters if he hasn't completed forensic accounting?

 

Is it just me, or am I being skatelike?

[OldNick]

Surely this proposal does not include clubs relegates THIS season ?

thats what I thought.

Watching David Gold this morning on tv looking so chuffed, it is good for the PL and good for the FL' he said.

How can it be good for the FL? I assume if the PL clubs go straight back up the para payments atre then shared with the FL clubs. Still no consolation.

Im waiting for Avram to come out and say 'no , it is wrong' as all he wants is a level playing field.

[OldNick]

That's a bit harsh, tbf I wouldn't

 

Suppressing your real feeling again MB,

[angelman]

the FL have to agree it. And I can't see why it is good for the FL. It means that the relegated teams have a huge advantage over those that are trying to work their way up.

 

If clubs cannot plan for all eventualities that is their fault. Maybe they should not give their players such lucrative and, more importantly, such long contracts in the first place. They should also put in clauses concerning relegation. I realise that that makes things harder to attract players, but tough.

 

it is systematic of the problems with the PL where you have half a dozen teams with sugar daddies or huge TV incomes and then there are the rest who try and compete and live way beyond their means. The PL has no interest in making it a level playing field and want those half dozen to be able to field teams that others cannot compete with. I really do think that they have half an eye on the Champions League as this is an advert on the PL. If teams do well in the CL then it is perfect advertising for them.

 

Therefore to me the PL is fatally flawed. What is the point of having a competition where most of the teams have no chance what so ever of winning it, let alone finishing in the top 6? Not only that, they (the PL) have created a situation where the remaining 14 teams or so can only survive in the competition by sailing seriously close to the wind with a good chance that they will go under.

 

The people who are really to blame are the chairmen. They are all unrealistic about their clubs' abilities to compete. To appease fans, they strive for success at all costs, and those costs really cannot be met. The PL wave this big golden carrot under their noses and the chairmen snap it up as quickly as possible.

 

I am not sure about the situation at Burnley, but as far as I understand, they are more realistic about things (but of course I could be wrong). They seem to realise that the PL is way beyond their means but they refuse to bankrupt themselves in the vain hope of competing. This is at risk of relegation, and the fans who have waited so long to get to the top, seem to accept it. For that reason I hope they survive.

[Smirking_Saint]

Just a thought i have had whilst sat here. And i wonder if any of you guys can enlighten me ??

 

The debt has spectacularly increased now, but the HMRC debt has remained the same. Does this mean that technically HMRC have less of an impact on the CVA hearing ??

 

i.e their level of debt could cause other debtors to affect the number of pennies in the pound that they get ??

 

Could this be a ploy to actually get a CVA ??

 

Or have i not understood how it works properly ?

[stevegrant]

Just a thought i have had whilst sat here. And i wonder if any of you guys can enlighten me ??

 

The debt has spectacularly increased now, but the HMRC debt has remained the same. Does this mean that technically HMRC have less of an impact on the CVA hearing ??

 

i.e their level of debt could cause other debtors to affect the number of pennies in the pound that they get ??

 

Could this be a ploy to actually get a CVA ??

 

Or have i not understood how it works properly ?

The thing that baffles me the most is that all debt is supposed to be frozen during administration and any additional costs are to be met as and when they fall due, so all PAYE and NI costs since they went into administration have been paid on time, hence the debt to HMRC hasn't increased. Yet the overall debt has leapt from £60m to more than £100m in the last 6 weeks...

[Justin C]

thats what I thought.

Watching David Gold this morning on tv looking so chuffed, it is good for the PL and good for the FL' he said.

How can it be good for the FL? I assume if the PL clubs go straight back up the para payments atre then shared with the FL clubs. Still no consolation.

Im waiting for Avram to come out and say 'no , it is wrong' as all he wants is a level playing field.

 

I bet they give every FL club an extra £500,000 to sweeten them so they vote for it.

[JonnyLove]

Ok this made me laugh. For those of you with an iPhone you can now get FM10 for it. Under the reviews (no.2 from foals4life~) I can quote this.

"And can we have a larger transfer budget as Portsmouth only have 9k which is't enough to buy anyone in any division"...... "Please update with more transfer budget money"

 

Really that really made my day.

[OldNick]

The thing that baffles me the most is that all debt is supposed to be frozen during administration and any additional costs are to be met as and when they fall due, so all PAYE and NI costs since they went into administration have been paid on time, hence the debt to HMRC hasn't increased. Yet the overall debt has leapt from £60m to more than £100m in the last 6 weeks...

Vantis have siad nothing. If the debt has been shown to be 40m more than they produced in thier SOA then they surely are in the mire.

If AA pays back the agents for example their 8-9m then that would be suubject to vat being paid, therefore Pompey would then claim that back from HRMC and so the debt they owe to them would be less. Can you get my drift. thereofre if the football creditors are paid back 50m and that is subject to Vat then £8.75m vat would be paid out, so the liability the vat man has is reduced by that amount.Sohe is then not a 25% unsecured creditor

I hope you can understand what im trying to get at.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

Just a thought i have had whilst sat here. And i wonder if any of you guys can enlighten me ??

 

The debt has spectacularly increased now, but the HMRC debt has remained the same. Does this mean that technically HMRC have less of an impact on the CVA hearing ??

 

i.e their level of debt could cause other debtors to affect the number of pennies in the pound that they get ??

 

Could this be a ploy to actually get a CVA ??

 

Or have i not understood how it works properly ?

 

The thing that baffles me the most is that all debt is supposed to be frozen during administration and any additional costs are to be met as and when they fall due, so all PAYE and NI costs since they went into administration have been paid on time, hence the debt to HMRC hasn't increased. Yet the overall debt has leapt from £60m to more than £100m in the last 6 weeks...

 

Kerchinng!

 

This is exactly what the Administrator and his 'advisors' have been angling for! Marginalise the HMRC so that they get a CVA signed off.

 

Job done.

 

They got away with it.

 

CHEATS!

[badgerx16]

Kerchinng!

 

This is exactly what the Administrator and his 'advisors' have been angling for! Marginalise the HMRC so that they get a CVA signed off.

 

Job done.

 

They got away with it.

 

CHEATS!

Yes, but remember, AA has previous in "enhancing" certain creditors standing to the detriment of others, so as to get an otherwise potentially awkward CVA through.

 

CHEAT ( working for CHEATS )

[Whitey Grandad]

Vantis have siad nothing. If the debt has been shown to be 40m more than they produced in thier SOA then they surely are in the mire.

If AA pays back the agents for example their 8-9m then that would be suubject to vat being paid, therefore Pompey would then claim that back from HRMC and so the debt they owe to them would be less. Can you get my drift. thereofre if the football creditors are paid back 50m and that is subject to Vat then £8.75m vat would be paid out, so the liability the vat man has is reduced by that amount.Sohe is then not a 25% unsecured creditor

I hope you can understand what im trying to get at.

If the money is already due to the agents and they have submitted invoices then the VAT element would already have been included in the net amount owing to HMRC, that is they would already have 'claimed it back'. It depends on the tax point which must be very close to the date of supply of the service.

[View From The Top]

The key thing is that all footballing debts have to be paid in full.

 

It will be all sweetness and light this side of Wembley and then it will really bite 'em.

[OldNick]

If the money is already due to the agents and they have submitted invoices then the VAT element would already have been included in the net amount owing to HMRC, that is they would already have 'claimed it back'. It depends on the tax point which must be very close to the date of supply of the service.

That could well be correct

[Whitey Grandad]

That could well be correct

Indded. They have probably 'claimed back VAT' that they haven't actually paid, and probably never will!

[OldNick]

The key thing is that all footballing debts have to be paid in full.

 

It will be all sweetness and light this side of Wembley and then it will really bite 'em.

Is that a promise? I do hope you are right. Spurs having an off day put a spanner in the works.

[OldNick]

Indded. They have probably 'claimed back VAT' that they haven't actually paid, and probably never will!

Probably used to get the loans in!!

[Minsk]

Which just goes to prove they are cheating and deliberately fielding weakened teams.

 

He's only fit to play if they don't have to pay out.

 

CHEATS

 

Fully agree.

 

I sincerely hope they will be fined at least 50k for every match he (or any of the others not played for 'financial' reasons) does not get selected for.

 

I doubt this will happen though.

[Chez]

The thing that baffles me the most is that all debt is supposed to be frozen during administration and any additional costs are to be met as and when they fall due, so all PAYE and NI costs since they went into administration have been paid on time, hence the debt to HMRC hasn't increased. Yet the overall debt has leapt from £60m to more than £100m in the last 6 weeks...

 

is it not a case of a real debt figure has now been established whilst previously the £60m figure was just plucked out of the air by the press?

[Whitey Grandad]

is it not a case of a real debt figure has now been established whilst previously the £60m figure was just plucked out of the air by the press?

How does this relate to the 'Statement of Affairs' which in itself must be a legally accepted document?

[Joensuu]

Sorry, but if unsecured football creditors have to be paid 100%, how can other unsecured creditors be paid any less (as legally don't all unsecured creditors have to agree to receive the same x pence in the pound?)

[Channon's Sideburns]

How does this relate to the 'Statement of Affairs' which in itself must be a legally accepted document?

 

Well how about this...

 

How can Android claim that the £100M is accurate if he hasn't completed forensic accounting of the books?

 

Doesn't make logical sense.

 

Or, will they go ahead, issue a CVA agreement then go through the books and unearth MORE debt?

 

C H E A T S ON ALL LEVELS

[benjii]

Sorry, but if unsecured football creditors have to be paid 100%, how can other unsecured creditors be paid any less (as legally don't all unsecured creditors have to agree to receive the same x pence in the pound?)

 

Well indeed. That's why there will be another points deduction.

 

Football rules say you have to exit administration with a CVA. Football rules say you have to pay all footballing debts in full. General insolvency law stops you from preferring football creditors at the expense of other categories of the same class. So it's either:

 

Pay everyone 100%, CVA, football debts paid in full, happy days.

Pay football debts in full, don't get a CVA > points deduction.

Get a CVA, don't pay football debts in full > potential withholding of golden share, but more likely a points deduction.

 

At least, that's what I think the rules say. Either way, I think the football creditor's rule is stupid.

[Weston Super Saint]

Kerchinng!

 

This is exactly what the Administrator and his 'advisors' have been angling for! Marginalise the HMRC so that they get a CVA signed off.

 

Job done.

 

They got away with it.

 

CHEATS!

 

Isn't there still a caveat from the last High Court appearance whereby the court [iIRC] can challenge the legality of the administration if it deems any funny business is / has gone on?

 

Pretty sure that will be the get out clause to ensure they don't 'get away with it'

[OldNick]

is it not a case of a real debt figure has now been established whilst previously the £60m figure was just plucked out of the air by the press?

The figure in the SOA could not have been plucked out of the air . Was it 78m then I can't recall exactly as so many changes in the debt seem to be published

[Whitey Grandad]

Well indeed. That's why there will be another points deduction.

 

Football rules say you have to exit administration with a CVA. Football rules say you have to pay all footballing debts in full. General insolvency law stops you from preferring football creditors at the expense of other categories of the same class. So it's either:

 

Pay everyone 100%, CVA, football debts paid in full, happy days.

Pay football debts in full, don't get a CVA > points deduction.

Get a CVA, don't pay football debts in full > potential withholding of golden share, but more likely a points deduction.

 

At least, that's what I think the rules say. Either way, I think the football creditor's rule is stupid.

I think it's more a case of 'we won't let you play in our League until somebody has paid all the football-related debts. Imagine if one of your customers had defaulted on you owing you millions and then came back as a different company under a slightly different name. Would you still give them the same trading terms and prices?

[Channon's Sideburns]

The figure in the SOA could not have been plucked out of the air . Was it 78m then I can't recall exactly as so many changes in the debt seem to be published

 

Vantis said £86M.....

 

http://www.sports-city.org/news_details.php?news_id=11019&idCategory=1

[Channon's Sideburns]

Oh and the circus continues......

 

28th May??

 

Surely that's after the FA Cup Final.......

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8624753.stm

[OldNick]

Vantis said £86M.....

 

http://www.sports-city.org/news_details.php?news_id=11019&idCategory=1

Thanks

[Weston Saint]

Oh and the circus continues......

 

28th May??

 

Surely that's after the FA Cup Final.......

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8624753.stm

Looks like the prosecution are struggling

 

Judge Peter Testar told prosecutor John Black, QC: ''It would be a rather unfortunate own goal, wouldn't it, if you didn't comply.''

 

Andrew Trollope, QC, defending Storrie, added: ''A red card.''

 

From the Echo report

[spyinthesky]

Interesting that Manderic 'lives' at the Walkers Stadium

 

That's dedication of duty for you

 

Understand that when he was at Pompey he stayed at the De Vere in Soton

[saint lard]

Interesting that Manderic 'lives' at the Walkers Stadium

 

That's dedication of duty for you

 

Understand that when he was at Pompey he stayed at the De Vere in Soton

 

He owned the 'penthouse suite' on the top floor at Port Solent.

[Corporate Ho]

Despite you lot bleating on about getting away with it and cheating etc etc etc ad nauseum we've got an administrator who's clearly only interested in fleecing as much money for Chainrai as possible (as he's done before for previous dodgy clients) who is doing as much as possible to obstruct potentially interested parties, who hasn't carried out the forensic accounting after 8 (!) weeks on the job and whose valuation of our "debt" (despite Chainrai and Gaydamak not actually really not being owed anything, or certainly nothing like the numbers being bandied about) seems to rise and fall like a Millbrook girl's knickers on a Saturday night.

 

We're not "cheating" by not playing a fuill strength side, we're resting players so they don't get injured. You've done the same in the past and clubs do it every week. So please stop whining about it, it's dull and boring.

 

No Pompey fans I know object to a 9 points deduction and have all said that if we get further penalties for next season for not getting a CVA then so be it. Those are the rules. You can easily find a couple of mongs on a message board saying it's unfair but one or two posts, believe it or not, do NOT automatically make it the opinion of the majority.

 

I'm not sure what we're getting away with or what penalty you genuinely feel would be suitable but we'll be punished according to the rules. Most on here last year were citing a legal technicality as to why you shouldn't be docked 10 points. I've never seen such a sanctimonious bunch of blowhards (I've waited years to use that word) as there are on this board. The smug, self satisfaction about the intelligence shown on here is laughable. The same topics were debated at the same time on the Pompey boards. There have been so many "conclusions" about what will happen to Pompey on here that I guess one of them will be right in the end and be held up as a magnificent example of how intelligent you all are and all the other scenarios you've proposed conveniently forgotten about.

 

Give it up girls. The fact that no other fans are bothered about the situation says it all. Most fans are of the opinion that we overspent, went bust, got docked 9 points and have been relegated and that's enough of the story. You try and dress your ridiculous levels of interest as some laughable sort of moral superiority like a bunch of net curtain twitching Daily Mail readers when the truth is, of course, if it wasn't Pompey you wouldn't have even mentioned it. Grow up and get on with supporting your own team.

 

I've been walking in the rain just to get wet on purpose

I've been forcing myself not to forget just to feel worse

I've been getting away with it all my life (getting away)

However I look it's clear to see

That I love you more than you love me

I hate that mirror, it makes me feel so worthless

I'm an original sinner but when I'm with you I couldn't care less

I've been getting away with it all my life

Getting away with it all my life

I thought I gave up falling in love a long long time ago

I guess I like it but I can't tell you, you shouldn't really know

And it's been true all my life

Yes, it's been true all my life

I've been talking to myself just to suggest that I'm selfish

(Getting ahead)

I've been trying to impress that more is less and I'm repressed

(I should do what he said)

Getting away with it...

[teamsaint]

So corp, serious question, since i missed it in all the fun, you say that Chanrai didn't lend the £17m.So please do explain what did happen, and how he got control.

 

Oh and if you want to know why us Saints want a real big punishment for your lot, I suggest its very simple.We went bust for a few million and a stadium repayment we couldn't meet.

 

You are going bust for £100m and after some really pretty dodgy financial stuff. Yet at this stage your penalty may come out exactly the same. Plus you are our rivals !!

 

Anyway, the Chanrai thing. please...............because I'm genuinely interested.

[Quickfire Double]

 

I'm not sure what we're getting away with...

 

A whole lot of unpaid taxes during one of the worst economic climates a lot of folk have ever experienced?

[Corporate Ho]

So corp, serious question, since i missed it in all the fun, you say that Chanrai didn't lend the £17m.So please do explain what did happen, and how he got control.

 

Anyway, the Chanrai thing. please...............because I'm genuinely interested.

 

Always happy to genuinely talk proper football.

 

I did post this a couple of days ago but here's what I believe (allegedly, Saints Web lawyers) happened.

 

Gaydamak Snr stiffed Chainrai and his business partner over a deal which has all been well reported. Chainrai sued and was awarded £17m but Gaydamak never paid. Now, remember when Fahim was buying Pompey, Gaydamak refused to sell to al Faraj because of who his backers were. What reason could Gaydamak possibly have for doing that when he was desperate to sell up? The only conclusion I can come to is that Faraj's backers were Chainrai and his partner. Anyway, Fahim's backer doesn't come up with the cash he promised leaving Fahim high and dry and as a result he sells to "Faraj". A couple of months later, Faraj runs into money problems (imagine!) and Chainrai, supposedly out of nowhere steps in and lends him (surprise) £17m, taking a charge on the club if Faraj defaults on the "loan". Now, the fact that someone who'd supposedly never even heard of Faraj at that point is willing to lend him £17m is strange, wouldn't you say. But have I mentioned that Chainrai's company (Portpin) and Faraj's company (Falcondrone) are both based in the British Virgin Isles? The money supposedly for the club is transferred out to Falcondrone and PFC never see a penny of it. The question is, how difficult would it be then for Falcondrone to transfer the money back to Portpin's account in the BVI? Not very is my answer. Faraj, if he even exists, defaults on the "loan", Chainrai takes over, promising to fund the running of the club (but wages still aren't paid) and becomes a secure creditor, ensuring he gets his £17m back.

 

Meanwhile, the club get hammered from all angles while these ******s are the real ones getting away with it.

 

My only hope is that some info comes to light that ****s Chainrai up. I've been told that someone got their hands on some documents that prove that Chainrai was issuing orders to PFC staff long before he was supposed to have been around. Hopefully that's true and it will make sure he doesn't get his hands on any money.

 

Personally (and this is my own view and doesn't represent all PFC fans) I don't care if we get docked more points or even demoted a couple of divisions (although personally I feel that would be unfair as the club has been used by crooks rather than trying to profit illegally from activities on its own) as long as these ****s are exposed and forced out. And before anyone says "you didn't say that when Gaydamak was there", you're right. But whatever he was doing he wasn't using the club as a pawn in an argument between himself and a rival.

 

HTH

[Thedelldays]

Corp

 

what do you think of storrie..and what is the general feeling with the fans regarding him

 

as earlier in the season his name was ringing out loud and proud at fratton..

[Johnny Shearer]

To be honest Corp I still feel hard done by that Saints didnt get by on the whole seperate entities.

Laws and regulations have been exploited before in other walks of life and will continue to do so, therefore why not football?

If we had got by on the legal technicality I would have been overjoyed - dont care what others would have said. The FL would have simply closed that avenue down for future clubs.

Still we got hit with the -10 and take it on the chin.

[Corporate Ho]

Corp

 

what do you think of storrie..and what is the general feeling with the fans regarding him

 

as earlier in the season his name was ringing out loud and proud at fratton..

 

I've been pretty consistent in what I've always said about Storrie DD. I think that like most things in life nothing is black and white. He's done some stupid things (and will rightly get punished for them) and was on a very high salary. But, to be fair, the salary wasn't the £1.2m that was always reported (I know he got bonuses) and whilst he was one of the highest paid in the PL he did a lot more in the role than many others with the same title at other clubs did as he had nowhere near the number of assistants most other clubs have. Some of the deals may be questionable but he still did great deals when selling players (Diarra, Johnson, Distin to name a few who all went for way more than we paid for them). He could have walked, done "the honourable thing" but how many of us would walk away from our own jobs if we had a contract? Not many I suspect. If he did avoid paying tax thewn he deserves whatever punishment he gets. And as for the chanting his name, some Pompey fans did. Many others have never liked him and to them he's always been "Storrie teller". I'm in the middle. He did the job he was (very well) paid to do. He did some good things and some bad things. personally, I feel it's time for all the current guys to go and for a clean sweep so the club can start again.

 

To be honest Corp I still feel hard done by that Saints didnt get by on the whole seperate entities.

Laws and regulations have been exploited before in other walks of life and will continue to do so, therefore why not football?

If we had got by on the legal technicality I would have been overjoyed - dont care what others would have said. The FL would have simply closed that avenue down for future clubs.

Still we got hit with the -10 and take it on the chin.

 

I understand that completely Johnny and am glad you said it. Because if you had "got away with it" 99% of Saints fans would have been happy with the decision. It's the moral superiority on here about Pompey's situation that really bugs me when I know that if the roles were reversed there wouldn't be this laughable moral outrage about the situation and you'd be crossing your fingers that someone bought you and that the 9 points was all you got as a penalty. I understand Saints fans enjoying the situation but it's the hypocrisy that I find hard to take.

[RonManager]

25000 ticket allocation for the Final just announced on SSN.

[TopGun]

Always happy to genuinely talk proper football.

 

I did post this a couple of days ago but here's what I believe (allegedly, Saints Web lawyers) happened.

 

Gaydamak Snr stiffed Chainrai and his business partner over a deal which has all been well reported. Chainrai sued and was awarded £17m but Gaydamak never paid. Now, remember when Fahim was buying Pompey, Gaydamak refused to sell to al Faraj because of who his backers were. What reason could Gaydamak possibly have for doing that when he was desperate to sell up? The only conclusion I can come to is that Faraj's backers were Chainrai and his partner. Anyway, Fahim's backer doesn't come up with the cash he promised leaving Fahim high and dry and as a result he sells to "Faraj". A couple of months later, Faraj runs into money problems (imagine!) and Chainrai, supposedly out of nowhere steps in and lends him (surprise) £17m, taking a charge on the club if Faraj defaults on the "loan". Now, the fact that someone who'd supposedly never even heard of Faraj at that point is willing to lend him £17m is strange, wouldn't you say. But have I mentioned that Chainrai's company (Portpin) and Faraj's company (Falcondrone) are both based in the British Virgin Isles? The money supposedly for the club is transferred out to Falcondrone and PFC never see a penny of it. The question is, how difficult would it be then for Falcondrone to transfer the money back to Portpin's account in the BVI? Not very is my answer. Faraj, if he even exists, defaults on the "loan", Chainrai takes over, promising to fund the running of the club (but wages still aren't paid) and becomes a secure creditor, ensuring he gets his £17m back.

 

Meanwhile, the club get hammered from all angles while these ******s are the real ones getting away with it.

 

My only hope is that some info comes to light that ****s Chainrai up. I've been told that someone got their hands on some documents that prove that Chainrai was issuing orders to PFC staff long before he was supposed to have been around. Hopefully that's true and it will make sure he doesn't get his hands on any money.

 

Personally (and this is my own view and doesn't represent all PFC fans) I don't care if we get docked more points or even demoted a couple of divisions (although personally I feel that would be unfair as the club has been used by crooks rather than trying to profit illegally from activities on its own) as long as these ****s are exposed and forced out. And before anyone says "you didn't say that when Gaydamak was there", you're right. But whatever he was doing he wasn't using the club as a pawn in an argument between himself and a rival.

 

HTH

 

Hmmm... sounds feasible Corpy

[View From The Top]

I understand that completely Johnny and am glad you said it. Because if you had "got away with it" 99% of Saints fans would have been happy with the decision. It's the moral superiority on here about Pompey's situation that really bugs me when I know that if the roles were reversed there wouldn't be this laughable moral outrage about the situation and you'd be crossing your fingers that someone bought you and that the 9 points was all you got as a penalty. I understand Saints fans enjoying the situation but it's the hypocrisy that I find hard to take.

 

And there were very many, myself included, who just accepted the fact and sucked it up because, believe it or not, we deserved it.

 

It's your ongoing cheating that really ****es us off.

[Gingeletiss]

And there were very many, myself included, who just accepted the fact and sucked it up because, believe it or not, we deserved it.

 

It's your ongoing cheating that really ****es us off.

 

For the second time. Corp Ho ho ho, your club has this mentality, that you can rack up debts to a certain level, then go into admin, wipe them out, and start again. You never learnt from the first time, and here you are again, ripping off all and sunder. TAXES my fishy friend, if I don't pay mine, I lose my house, go to jail even, so why is it, that you lot down the road, feel that it's acceptable, to rip of the taxpayer, to the tune of anything between £16m - £24m, depending what you believe. Thats without taken into account all the small buisnesses you have stiffed (twice).

 

Don't come on here for the sympathy vote mate, you had that 11 years ago, this time it is plain cheating. Dress it up how you like, but facts are facts. As for your forums, I suggest you read them a bit more, before coming onto ours claiming it's just the blue phew. It's a lot more than that, and most blame everything and everybody, but fail to put the blame at your own door.

 

As for punishment, you will get you just rewards, it's all amatter of time. Minus 9, that is just the start!