Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella,
in Golden Posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

saintjay77

saintjay77

Posted
Posted
that means AA has realised that the time for words is over, it's time to deliver! - a cva, debt repayment, a genuine financial report, and perhaps apologies to the fans he's misled, and everyone they've screwed?

 

I expect him to score 0 out of 5.

 

 

Though he might have a different version of the result.

 

No doubt it will be someone elses fault too. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bridge too far

bridge too far

Posted
Posted
So if a CVA if not accepted by the end of Thursday they will start the season on a points deduction?

 

Have a look at the link to Sporting Life that rpb posted above. If I understand it correctly, AA, as Chairman of the meeting, has the option to reconvene the meeting within 14 days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_lambden

Saint_lambden

Posted
Posted
Have a look at the link to Sporting Life that rpb posted above. If I understand it correctly, AA, as Chairman of the meeting, has the option to reconvene the meeting within 14 days.

 

I thought I heard that the CVA thing had to be agreed by the time the fixtures are released (Thursday) hence why the meeting is on the same day.

 

Only if they exit admin without a CVA. They can (if they have the cash flow to do it) remain in administration for the next year without deductions.

 

That's what is confusing me- where would they get the money from to pay 65p in the pound to every person/company owed.

 

The creditors ? ....are they shareholders?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted (edited)
I thought I heard that the CVA thing had to be agreed by the time the fixtures are released (Thursday) hence why the meeting is on the same day.

 

 

 

That's what is confusing me- where would they get the money from to pay 65p in the pound to every person/company owed.

 

The creditors ? ....are they shareholders?

 

You are allowed to start a season in administration. You aren't allowed to start a second season in administration.

 

Pompey can start 2010/11 still in administration if they don't agree a CVA. They won't be allowed to start 2011/12 if they are still in administration, without a MASSIVE points deduction or just kicked out. That however may require funding to see them through 2010/11 which may not be forthcoming.

Edited by Matthew Le God
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
But presumably if they are in administration at the start of the season then the transfer embargo remains in place?

 

Yes.

 

Means they can't buy or loan anyone and also can't offer new contract to existing players, so Kanu, James, Rocha, Hreiðarsson etc have to leave. So they will be left with about 5 players and the youth team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted
Yes.

 

Means they can't buy or loan anyone and also can't offer new contract to existing players, so Kanu, James, Rocha, Hreiðarsson etc have to leave. So they will be left with about 5 players and the youth team.

 

Also the FL are ball busters when it comes to this rule. AFC Bournemouth had to play school kids and rarely had a full bench all last season. They even had some one who was willing to play for free (relation to Howe) but still wasn't allowed to sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
suewhistle

suewhistle

Posted
Posted
I've heard that HMRC has told AA they will not accept the CVA, in advance of Thursday's meeting, so that he can put forward a different proposal.

 

Anyone else heard this?

 

It would make sense. Would that imply he has a second back-up proposal all ready? If he has it'll look a bit suspicious, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Under Weststand

Under Weststand

Posted
Posted

So as we expected HMRC appear to have rejected the CVA, where does that leave Android now? He thinks that the 35-million that HMRC are claiming & therefore above the 25% they need to stop the CVA, is incorrect. can he just go with the figures he claims gives them a mere 21%, & then try to rail-road through the CVA if he gets enough support. Thereby leaving HMRC the 21-day cooling off period to challenge him in court. Or does he have to go back to court to challenge the HMRC's claim, something he really doesn't want to do, as this would lead to him having to proove where the 138-million has come from. With the SOA being given as a legal document by the club some months ago to the courts.

Seems to me whatever the result Thursday it still has a few weeks & at least 1 more trip to court to run yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Faz

Faz

Posted
Posted

There is no guarantee either that HMRC would accept the Griffin proposal.

 

The most likely outcome seems to be that they stay in Admin. Transfer embargo. Chinnery expects to be repaid his loan to AA from player sales, football debts are settled by the Y1 parachute payment. Assuming they raise around £10m from player sales this leaves AA about £2m in hand, plus football income for next season to run the club. Unlikely to be enough so then Chinnery has to decide whether he funds the club through unitl the next parachute payment.

 

Even then still no CVA so assuming their kids get them relegated, and they survive, 2011/12 sees them in L1 with a massive points penalty.

 

And that's before any penalty for irregularities by Storrie, Harry and MM.

 

Its all so unfair

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JackFrost

JackFrost

Posted
Posted
There is no guarantee either that HMRC would accept the Griffin proposal.

 

The most likely outcome seems to be that they stay in Admin. Transfer embargo. Chinnery expects to be repaid his loan to AA from player sales, football debts are settled by the Y1 parachute payment. Assuming they raise around £10m from player sales this leaves AA about £2m in hand, plus football income for next season to run the club. Unlikely to be enough so then Chinnery has to decide whether he funds the club through unitl the next parachute payment.

 

Even then still no CVA so assuming their kids get them relegated, and they survive, 2011/12 sees them in L1 with a massive points penalty.

 

And that's before any penalty for irregularities by Storrie, Harry and MM.

 

Its all so unfair

 

unless Griffin and HMRC are hand in glove with each other

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedg

pedg

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

The related article quite interesting

 

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/2010/06/15/portsmouth-why-thursdays-creditors-meeting-means-so-much-to-so-many-not-least-the-helpless-fans-150602/

 

or has that been posted earlier?

 

Interesting that it says

 

If the chairman of the meeting (likely to be Mr Andronikou) chooses to, or if the meeting votes for it, the chairman can also adjourn the meeting to another date, to be held within 14 days unless extended by the court, in order for the creditors to consider a proposed modification to the proposal.

 

So if it up to 14 days unless extended by a court where does AA get his 21 days from?

Edited by pedg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saints foreva

Saints foreva

Posted
Posted
Yes.

 

Means they can't buy or loan anyone and also can't offer new contract to existing players, so Kanu, James, Rocha, Hreiðarsson etc have to leave. So they will be left with about 5 players and the youth team.

 

I doubt The Football League will allow that, I think Stockport were allowed to make a couple of loan signings to make their squad bigger last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted
So as we expected HMRC appear to have rejected the CVA, where does that leave Android now? He thinks that the 35-million that HMRC are claiming & therefore above the 25% they need to stop the CVA, is incorrect. can he just go with the figures he claims gives them a mere 21%, & then try to rail-road through the CVA if he gets enough support. Thereby leaving HMRC the 21-day cooling off period to challenge him in court. Or does he have to go back to court to challenge the HMRC's claim, something he really doesn't want to do, as this would lead to him having to proove where the 138-million has come from. With the SOA being given as a legal document by the club some months ago to the courts.

Seems to me whatever the result Thursday it still has a few weeks & at least 1 more trip to court to run yet.

Not quite. The administrators have the right to decide what debts they will accept and which they will reject (following certain rules, of course). If any creditor disagrees, that creditor can then take the administrators to Court to have its debt increased. I would imagine that if that happens the CVA vote result would be held in abeyance.

 

So if AA reduces HMRC's debt for nefarious purposes, the ball's in HMRC's court, not AA's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
Not quite. The administrators have the right to decide what debts they will accept and which they will reject (following certain rules, of course). If any creditor disagrees, that creditor can then take the administrators to Court to have its debt increased. I would imagine that if that happens the CVA vote result would be held in abeyance.

 

So if AA reduces HMRC's debt for nefarious purposes, the ball's in HMRC's court, not AA's.

 

ignoring the `are HMRC a creditor over the 25% threshold' factor, if PFC force the CVA through by ignoring the HMRCs claim for £32m, are HMRC then forced to accept the 20p in the pound?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saintjay77

saintjay77

Posted
Posted (edited)

I think if HMRC were ever going to vote for a CVA it would likly be the Griffin one. I cant remember any other club in admin that came close to offering what Griffin believe they can. If it is correct then surly that template should be used for all clubs that go this route?

 

Might make clubs think twice about getting themselves into that much trouble in the 1st place when they know the only way out involves looking after everyone but yourselves for the next 5 years.

 

EDIT: Dammit!!! must remember to hit reply with quote in future!!!

Edited by saintjay77
Numpty
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted

Here's a heartening story about how HMRC act.

 

A successful IT Service company was bumbling along making money when HMRC decided that the Loophole they were using to charge for their services was in fact incorrect, so they hit the company with an 8million quid VAT bill and 30 days to pay it.

 

Now despite all attempts by many people to negotiate HMRC wound the company up, and they will limp out of Admin.

 

The offers included phased future payments, numerous different organisations offering differing CVA solutions but nope - woosh gone.

 

So, the moral of the story is simple. HMRC won't side with anyone in the CVA, AA or Griffins. They will want their money back, end of. If they don't get it they'll make life impossible for whoever is trying to CVA.

 

All guns blazing was the word, they no longer hold back. Go check the Morphy Richards appliances in the kitchen peeps

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ericofarabia

ericofarabia

Posted
Posted
Here's a heartening story about how HMRC act.

 

A successful IT Service company was bumbling along making money when HMRC decided that the Loophole they were using to charge for their services was in fact incorrect, so they hit the company with an 8million quid VAT bill and 30 days to pay it.

 

Now despite all attempts by many people to negotiate HMRC wound the company up, and they will limp out of Admin.

 

The offers included phased future payments, numerous different organisations offering differing CVA solutions but nope - woosh gone.

 

So, the moral of the story is simple. HMRC won't side with anyone in the CVA, AA or Griffins. They will want their money back, end of. If they don't get it they'll make life impossible for whoever is trying to CVA.

 

All guns blazing was the word, they no longer hold back. Go check the Morphy Richards appliances in the kitchen peeps

 

Decisions decisions .... Marmalade or Raspberry Jam?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gemmel

Gemmel

Posted
Posted

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Andronikou-39It-looks-like-we.6364413.jp

 

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Pompey-line-up-trio-from.6364397.jp

 

 

 

Everything is hunky dory in aa's world. It looks like the additional fines imposed by HMRC, don't go towards the percentage of debt that the cva is based on, leaving HMRC with only 21% and only one other creditor supporting them.

Additionally they have a wage budget of 8 million for next season and lining up the loanee's....from (Of course) Harry.

 

it would appear that nick, might have been onto something all along.... and they might just get away with it.

 

From the way that I see it, aa is now in a **** or bust situation and looks like he will come out smelling of roses. They will still recieve point deductions for the tax and illegal scout dealings, but that is pretty much it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saintjay77

saintjay77

Posted
Posted
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Andronikou-39It-looks-like-we.6364413.jp

 

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Pompey-line-up-trio-from.6364397.jp

 

 

Everything is hunky dory in aa's world. It looks like the additional fines imposed by HMRC, don't go towards the percentage of debt that the cva is based on, leaving HMRC with only 21% and only one other creditor supporting them.

Additionally they have a wage budget of 8 million for next season and lining up the loanee's....from (Of course) Harry.

 

it would appear that nick, might have been onto something all along.... and they might just get away with it.

 

From the way that I see it, aa is now in a **** or bust situation and looks like he will come out smelling of roses. They will still recieve point deductions for the tax and illegal scout dealings, but that is pretty much it.

 

I am actually stunned by that.

 

If the creditors accept that offer they must be mad. Even if Griffin's offer was unreachable there must be some ground in the middle that would be better for all party's. To come out of Admin with a CVA based on paying naff all back while funding a bunch of overpaid players must be benifitting from going into Admin. They were relegated even without the - points so I cant see how they have suffered should it now go well for them???

 

Also I thought Footballing debts have to be paid back in full so where does that leave a football agent being owed 40k? Is that not a footballing debt on the back of a transfer or something? Why does he have to vote with the non footballing debts?

 

Can HMRC argue that the money owed to them is all part of the same pot and therefor over the 25% before a CVA gets agreed? Or can AA just keep making up facts and figures to suit when ever he wants?

 

At what point do authorities get suspicious and take a look into whats going on? It seems plain as day that the administrator is not working for the benifit of the creditors but instead working for the benifit of Chainrai. Who's call is it to double check this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gorgiesaint

Gorgiesaint

Posted
Posted (edited)
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Andronikou-39It-looks-like-we.6364413.jp

 

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Pompey-line-up-trio-from.6364397.jp

 

 

 

Everything is hunky dory in aa's world. It looks like the additional fines imposed by HMRC, don't go towards the percentage of debt that the cva is based on, leaving HMRC with only 21% and only one other creditor supporting them.

Additionally they have a wage budget of 8 million for next season and lining up the loanee's....from (Of course) Harry.

 

it would appear that nick, might have been onto something all along.... and they might just get away with it.

 

From the way that I see it, aa is now in a **** or bust situation and looks like he will come out smelling of roses. They will still recieve point deductions for the tax and illegal scout dealings, but that is pretty much it.

 

I fully expect AA to arrange for the CVA to be passed at tomorrow's meeting - he will manipulate the figures so that it goes through by ignoring parts of the HMRC's debt that he doesn't agree with. However it will be back in court when HMRC contest the CVA within the 28 days they have to appeal - and I fully expect a whole world of pain for Pompey & AA to come from that. Then there's the whole matter of the HMRC legal challenge to the PL & FL about the football creditors rule. AA can do what he wants - they have not got away with it yet.

Edited by Gorgiesaint
Football creditors rule
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Andronikou-39It-looks-like-we.6364413.jp

 

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Pompey-line-up-trio-from.6364397.jp

 

 

 

Everything is hunky dory in aa's world. It looks like the additional fines imposed by HMRC, don't go towards the percentage of debt that the cva is based on, leaving HMRC with only 21% and only one other creditor supporting them.

Additionally they have a wage budget of 8 million for next season and lining up the loanee's....from (Of course) Harry.

 

it would appear that nick, might have been onto something all along.... and they might just get away with it.

 

From the way that I see it, aa is now in a **** or bust situation and looks like he will come out smelling of roses. They will still recieve point deductions for the tax and illegal scout dealings, but that is pretty much it.

 

If HMRC are willing to reject in order to get a better deal, they won't let this drop. They will contest AA saying they have under 25%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fromdayone

fromdayone

Posted
Posted
I think if HMRC were ever going to vote for a CVA it would likly be the Griffin one. I cant remember any other club in admin that came close to offering what Griffin believe they can. If it is correct then surly that template should be used for all clubs that go this route?

 

Might make clubs think twice about getting themselves into that much trouble in the 1st place when they know the only way out involves looking after everyone but yourselves for the next 5 years.

 

EDIT: Dammit!!! must remember to hit reply with quote in future!!!

 

No other club has gone into Administration from the premier league with a gauranteed 48 million quid in parachute payments before, thats why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FMPR

FMPR

Posted
Posted
If HMRC are willing to reject in order to get a better deal, they won't let this drop. They will contest AA saying they have under 25%.

 

They cannot, the other money by law is not taxable so they have no right to claim it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted (edited)
They cannot, the other money by law is not taxable so they have no right to claim it

 

Leeds got 75.4% of the CVA vote and they still had their decision contested and Leeds lost leading to -15 points.

 

http://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2195698/leeds-enters-league-without-cva

 

Same may apply to Pompey with the "exceptional circumstances" clause used again. I would imagine there would be alot of Football League clubs upset if they are on 0 points and start signing Tottenham and Arsenal players on loan and sign the England keeper in a new deal.

Edited by Matthew Le God
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FMPR

FMPR

Posted
Posted
Leeds got 75.4% of the CVA vote and they still had their decision contested and Leeds lost leading to -15 points.

 

http://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2195698/leeds-enters-league-without-cva

 

Same may apply to Pompey with the "exceptional circumstances" clause used again. I would imagine there would be alot of Football League clubs upset if they are on 0 points and start signing Tottenham and Arsenal players on loan and sign the England keeper in a new deal.

 

If the CVA is agreed as per League rules why can anyone complain that we are not punished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gorgiesaint

Gorgiesaint

Posted
Posted
Same may apply to Pompey with the "exceptional circumstances" clause used again. I would imagine there would be alot of Football League clubs upset if they are on 0 points and start signing Tottenham and Arsenal players on loan and sign the England keeper in a new deal.

 

I just hope that their transfer embargo isn't lifted in the time between AA passing his dodgy CVA and HMRC taking the whole caravan train back to court - otherwise we'll see what happened in January with lots of deals being done to prop them up again.

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