Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella,
in Golden Posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

Chin Strain

Chin Strain

Posted
Posted
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jul/14/portsmouth-football-league-transfer-embargo

 

 

 

However the journo does not appear to realise that James is no longer a Portsmouth player and can't resign for them under the embargo so not sure how much faith to put in the story.

 

If you look at the first team squad of 17 on their website there are 17 players, including James, Rocha, Hreidersson, Kanu (all out of contract) Ben Haim, Boateng, Utaka, (all need to be sold) Diop, (sold)....leaving 9.

 

They seem not to have any information on reserve or youth players...strangely. I seem to remember our first team squad being made up of youth team players when we were trying to avoid admin. Now they're in admin the FL should make them play those players. I have a feeling the FL won't be as charitable as the PL.

 

http://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/squad/first-team.aspx

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chin Strain

Chin Strain

Posted
Posted
So it's Thursday 15th July.

 

Today is well and truly THE day. Today we find out whether 'they have got away with it' or whether they are going to suffer the death of a thousand cuts. It's 7.30 - appeal must be in by 5.00. The next 9 hours and 30 minutes will tell one way or the other.

 

Fingers crossed for the HMRC being able to do the right thing today.

 

Midnight tonight I believe is the deadline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tony13579

tony13579

Posted
Posted

SAN DIEGO: Enrique Esqueda and Israel Martinez scored in a two-minute span to give Club America of Mexico City a 2-1 victory over Premier League side Portsmouth in a friendly match Wednesday.

 

Esqueda put Club America ahead 1-0 in the 14th minute after collecting a back-heel pass from Martinez. Esqueda drew Portsmouth goalie Liam O'Brien completely out of position before rifling a shot off his right foot from the edge of the box into the open net.

 

In the 16th minute Martinez volleyed Daniel Montenegro's left-wing cross inside the right post from 17 yards past a diving O'Brien to make it 2-0.

 

Tom Kilvey of Portsmouth knocked home his own rebound in the 50th minute after Club America goalie Guillermo Ochoa made an initial stop

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StD

StD

Posted
Posted

..Amusing report slating the blue few's goal:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/14/goals-gift-soccer-friendly-q/

 

"Either way, Portsmouth was due some sort of divine favor after the year-long nightmare it has endured — four owners, bankruptcy, relegation from the English Premier League, a fire sale of its best players, an endless journey to the States — and Stott provided it in the second half by overruling his linesman to grant the woebegone English club a goal"

 

They don't seem too impressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted
..Amusing report slating the blue few's goal:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/14/goals-gift-soccer-friendly-q/

 

"Either way, Portsmouth was due some sort of divine favor after the year-long nightmare it has endured — four owners, bankruptcy, relegation from the English Premier League, a fire sale of its best players, an endless journey to the States — and Stott provided it in the second half by overruling his linesman to grant the woebegone English club a goal"

 

They don't seem too impressed.

 

The crowd, scattered throughout the Q’s lower bowl, was substantially less than the “at least 25,000” that promoter Anthony Fernandez predicted in a July 3 article in the Union-Tribune.

 

Oh dear. Looks like the promoter, who is supposedly paying for Pooey to travel the USA, might have budgeted a little over optimistically. Maybe a PL team might have got 25k but who on earth would want to watch some ****-poor team with hardly any professionals playing? If I was the promoter, I would cut my losses now and send Pooey back home ASAP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tony13579

tony13579

Posted
Posted
That’s how dire the situation is for the club that reached the F.A. Cup final just two months ago. That’s what bankruptcy will do to your roster. Only two players who started that game were on the field last night, and none of the club’s seven World Cup players was on this side of the Atlantic.
....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tony13579

tony13579

Posted
Posted

MEAN WHILE....

 

He waits… That’s what he does… And I’ll tell you what; tick followed tock followed tick followed tock followed tick

 

...

 

...

 

as the tax man prepares thier white knight on his burley charger... time ticks on.....

 

empty news wires......

 

Tick, Tock....

 

Its going to be a long day....

 

 

COYHMRC...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gingeletiss

Gingeletiss

Posted
Posted
The crowd, scattered throughout the Q’s lower bowl, was substantially less than the “at least 25,000” that promoter Anthony Fernandez predicted in a July 3 article in the Union-Tribune.

 

Oh dear. Looks like the promoter, who is supposedly paying for Pooey to travel the USA, might have budgeted a little over optimistically. Maybe a PL team might have got 25k but who on earth would want to watch some ****-poor team with hardly any professionals playing? If I was the promoter, I would cut my losses now and send Pooey back home ASAP.

 

It's the hope that kills them:lol:

 

fairy1980 User is online

#2 15 Jul 2010 09:12 Complain | Quote and reply to userReply to user

Signed: February 2009 re: WTF are we doing? ...

Posts: 2,933

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

It does seem a bit pointless.

SOme rumours say it was all paid for by a potential buyer

 

What happened to the good old west country pre season tour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gingeletiss

Gingeletiss

Posted
Posted

How blind can one fool be?

MattPFC2005 User is offline

#1 14 Jul 2010 22:03 Complain | Prev | Next | Quote and reply to userReply to user

Signed: February 2005 Now HMRC are going to appeal, our prospects...? ...

Posts: 10,110

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

I take it as given they will appeal. The administrators indicate as much, that is good enough for me. That HMRC has 'form' towards Pompey.

 

So where will it leave us?

 

We are going to need to get special dispensation to sign players on a very short-term basis. If we don't get that then we are utterly stuffed. If the FL render themselves a farce by refusing, then we should reciprocate the farce by forfeiting Stevenage to prioritise [the league]. We should also- as last year's Cup runner's up- humiliate the FA by requesting a forfeit for the FA Cup.

 

If can winch ourselves up to 20 players then we can still give ourselves a fighting chance. Remember Eddie Howe at Bournemouth who has had a year of an embargo but look what he did last season? Our task will be to finish fourth bottom.

 

What would worry me would be the appeal date. We always have to factor in the worst case scenario, so if AA says the court date will be October or November, I suspect it will be very late November. AA says we stand a good chance of winning. So if we do? I would expect HMRC to appeal that like they appeal everything else. Would that be another 28 days to decide? Then more months before a court case?

 

So potentially January as a transfer window would be scuppered AS WELL.

 

I think the key thing here is to get up ourselves up to 20 players. Then fight HMRC and if we win? I think we should seek MASSIVE compensation for what is an act of vengeful brutality (as I have described it in the past).

 

 

Oh so funny, I thank them for this last years amusment, I really do:lol::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedg

pedg

Posted
Posted (edited)
How blind can one fool be?

MattPFC2005 User is offline

#1 14 Jul 2010 22:03 Complain | Prev | Next | Quote and reply to userReply to user

Signed: February 2005 Now HMRC are going to appeal, our prospects...? ...

Posts: 10,110

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

I take it as given they will appeal. The administrators indicate as much, that is good enough for me. That HMRC has 'form' towards Pompey.

 

So where will it leave us?

 

We are going to need to get special dispensation to sign players on a very short-term basis. If we don't get that then we are utterly stuffed. If the FL render themselves a farce by refusing, then we should reciprocate the farce by forfeiting Stevenage to prioritise [the league]. We should also- as last year's Cup runner's up- humiliate the FA by requesting a forfeit for the FA Cup.

 

If can winch ourselves up to 20 players then we can still give ourselves a fighting chance. Remember Eddie Howe at Bournemouth who has had a year of an embargo but look what he did last season? Our task will be to finish fourth bottom.

 

What would worry me would be the appeal date. We always have to factor in the worst case scenario, so if AA says the court date will be October or November, I suspect it will be very late November. AA says we stand a good chance of winning. So if we do? I would expect HMRC to appeal that like they appeal everything else. Would that be another 28 days to decide? Then more months before a court case?

 

So potentially January as a transfer window would be scuppered AS WELL.

 

I think the key thing here is to get up ourselves up to 20 players. Then fight HMRC and if we win? I think we should seek MASSIVE compensation for what is an act of vengeful brutality (as I have described it in the past).

 

 

Oh so funny, I thank them for this last years amusment, I really do:lol::lol:

 

I think the P in his username actually stands for paranoid. Actually given the chance of them going down the plughole I should think those running the cup competitions would be glad not to have them in from the start.

Edited by pedg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted
My guess is that we won't find out until tomorrow.

+1

 

Reading some of the reports on Leeds, it seems that HMRC gave a Notice of Intention to Appeal the CVA at the last minute. I don't know what is actually required in these circumstances, but if it is simply Notice, then that's just delivery of a formal letter from HMRC's lawyers to Pompey's registered address.

 

Remember back to last December. A week after HMRC issued the Winding Up Petition, Pompey were still denying they'd received it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gemmel

Gemmel

Posted
Posted
+1

 

Reading some of the reports on Leeds, it seems that HMRC gave a Notice of Intention to Appeal the CVA at the last minute. I don't know what is actually required in these circumstances, but if it is simply Notice, then that's just delivery of a formal letter from HMRC's lawyers to Pompey's registered address.

 

Remember back to last December. A week after HMRC issued the Winding Up Petition, Pompey were still denying they'd received it.

 

May be that is his tactic .......to deny he received it on time

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
What benefit do HMRC achieve by delaying the appeal until the last possible minute? Aren't they just lowering themselves to PFC/AA's tit-for-tat level?
its not a delay, they are just using all the time made available to them by the law.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted
I stand to be corrected but I believe it's when it's lodged in the court that is important.

Correct. I've just had a look at the Insolvency Act (1986). Sections 4 & 6 apply.

 

Anybody who wants to dispute the CVA must apply to the Court within 28 days. But that's 28 days from when the Supervisor reported the outcome of the meeting to the Court. We know that the meeting was on 17th June, but we don't know when AA filed the report of the meeting with the Court.

 

Also the potential grounds for challenge are:

 

(a) that a voluntary arrangement [which has effect under section 4A] unfairly prejudices

the interests of a creditor, member or contributory of the company;

(b) that there has been some material irregularity at or in relation to either of the meetings.

 

I think HMRC will find fertile ground on both counts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
andysstuff

andysstuff

Posted
Posted
Correct. I've just had a look at the Insolvency Act (1986). Sections 4 & 6 apply.

 

Anybody who wants to dispute the CVA must apply to the Court within 28 days. But that's 28 days from when the Supervisor reported the outcome of the meeting to the Court. We know that the meeting was on 17th June, but we don't know when AA filed the report of the meeting with the Court.

 

Also the potential grounds for challenge are:

 

(a) that a voluntary arrangement [which has effect under section 4A] unfairly prejudices

the interests of a creditor, member or contributory of the company;

(b) that there has been some material irregularity at or in relation to either of the meetings.

 

I think HMRC will find fertile ground on both counts.

So, today may not even be 'the day' reading that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted
What benefit do HMRC achieve by delaying the appeal until the last possible minute? Aren't they just lowering themselves to PFC/AA's tit-for-tat level by stretching things out?

I believe that HMRC are looking to cut a deal with the leagues over the football creditor's rule, and that if a satisfactory deal is reached they wouldn't appeal. After all, they will get their pound of flesh from the culprits at Pompey in 9 months time under the CVA anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
its not a delay, they are just using all the time made available to them by the law.

 

Yep. I was just wondering if they are using all the time available because they are working up to the wire in building their case or whether they were 'ready' to appeal days/weeks ago but are doing it at the last minute just because they can in order to 'score a point'...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redkeith

redkeith

Posted
Posted

I think that HRMC are leaving it late for two reasons.

 

Firstly, that they have been trying to negotiate a more acceptable figure from AA for the past month.

 

By appealing later, they can keep the CVA rolling until the appeal in October, and so stop the Skates from ****ing more money, that should be paid to the creditors, up the wall druing the transfer window.

 

On the other hand, I do still worry that they won't appeal, that AA knows this and he is just trying to make himself look like a hero for fending them off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tony13579

tony13579

Posted
Posted

HMRC faces "millions" in costs if Portsmouth appeal fails

 

HMRC's expected appeal against Portsmouth CVA could cost the taxman " millions" if it fails, warn administrators

 

 

Written by Rachael Singh

 

Accountancy Age, 15 Jul 2010

The taxman could face a multi-million pound bill if it fails in its appeal, expected to be filed at court today, against the Portsmouth FC company voluntary arrangement (CVA).

 

Should the appeal fail administrators said they would "pursue HMRC for costs and potentially for any loss suffered by the creditors".

 

AdvertisementAdministrators said they had lined up a buyer for the club. The appeal will delay the sale and potentially kill the deal, even if HMRC fails, as costs mount each day the club is not sold.

 

"This could amount to millions should the current purchaser withdraw," administrators told Accountancy Age.

 

HMRC has told Portsmouth administrators it would appeal the CVA ahead of today's

deadline.

 

In a statement, administrators at Portsmouth FC said: "HMRC have advised …they are appealing the outcome of the CVA meeting."

 

HMRC voted against the CVA at the creditor meeting held in June. A CVA needs 75% or more of creditors, by value of their claims, to vote in favour for its approval.

 

At the creditor meeting, in which the CVA was approved, voting was 81.3% for and 18.63% against.

 

As part of the CVA for the former Premiership side, the club will repay creditors approximately 20p in the pound over the next five years. After nine months the "business of football" which includes players, will be transferred to a new company and the old company will enter liquidation. This will allow administrators to investigate the books at Portsmouth FC to ensure no " antecedent" activity took place, essentially forms of fraud.

 

The new club will continue to make CVA payments to the old company.

 

Peter Kubik, joint administrator for Portsmouth, said: "If HMRC is successful in its appeal the administrators may be forced to sell the club in administration meaning a 15-17 point reduction for the Championship side. This could dramatically affect the return to creditors."

 

Joint administrator Andrew Andronikou is reported to have said an appeal may not be heard until October or November this year.

 

An appeal can be retracted before its court date.

 

Andrew Andronikou, Peter Kubik and Michael Kiely, from UHY Hacker Young, were appointed joint administrators to Portsmouth FC on 26 February.

 

HMRC has declined to comment at this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
standy

standy

Posted
Posted

Every one seems to think that HMRC are interested in the amount that they can get back from pimpley. They are interested in maintaining the principle that - if you owe tax, you pay it in full and on time. Think how big their budget for the year is. Well how much tax do we each pay. It makes pimpleys 30 odd million seem trivial. Well it is in comparison. But what if we all thought, they got away with it, so will I. I'll only pay them 20% of what I owe. That is what they need to avoid happening. Hence why they will refuse an offer of 99p in the pound.

 

No. HMRC will appeal andPimpley will be toast.

 

Come on HMRC. (and hurry up, please).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boris Karloff

Boris Karloff

Posted
Posted

Assuming they still have 30-odd players on the books is it in their best interests to bring the squad below 20, because I guess if it drops below 20 they can only get special dispensation to get it back up to 20 again. You leave yourself very exposed with only 20 players. Surely you're better off sticking with what you've got even if it means no new faces?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted
Yep. I was just wondering if they are using all the time available because they are working up to the wire in building their case or whether they were 'ready' to appeal days/weeks ago but are doing it at the last minute just because they can in order to 'score a point'...?

 

HMRC know they wont get the full amount they are owed, so they want to make sure that there is some other major disincentive to stop other clubs doing the same - ie make sure Pompey get the maximum points deduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FMPR

FMPR

Posted
Posted
HMRC know they wont get the full amount they are owed, so they want to make sure that there is some other major disincentive to stop other clubs doing the same - ie make sure Pompey get the maximum points deduction.

 

That only works if they win the appeal, chances are we will come out of admin without a CVA pay 5p total in the pound and the taxman loses even more and we have no further liabilities. Yes we will be hit with a deduction but we can get a new (old) owner in place but we will get the embargo lifted

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FMPR

FMPR

Posted
Posted
Assuming they still have 30-odd players on the books is it in their best interests to bring the squad below 20, because I guess if it drops below 20 they can only get special dispensation to get it back up to 20 again. You leave yourself very exposed with only 20 players. Surely you're better off sticking with what you've got even if it means no new faces?

 

1 3. Brown, Michael

2 4. Smith, Tommy

3 5. Nugent, Dave

4 7. Mokoena, Aaron

5 8. Wilson, Marc

6 9. Hughes, Richard

7 10. Mullins, Hayden

8 11. Webber, Danny

9 12. Ritchie, Matt

10 13. Subotic, Danijel

11 14. O'Brien, Liam

12 15. Nlundulu, Gaël

13 16. Ward, Joel

14 17. Kilbey, Tom

15 19. Gregory, Peter

16 20. Pack, Marlon

17 23. Çiftci, Nadir

18 24. Hurst, James

19 25. Ryan, Perry

20 26. Hughes, Jordan

21 29. Martin, Ellis

22 30. Goddard, Billy

 

These our our professional players if the expected players leave with 4 of them just turning pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wes Tender

Wes Tender

Posted
Posted
Talk about desperation, expect a statement this afternoon along the lines of "If HMRC appeal I will shoot the kitten".

 

AA tries to kid HMRC in the 11th hour that he had lined up a buyer and that if the club doesn't exit administration with a CVA because of the intervention of the HMRC's appeal, they will claim massive compensation from them if the appeal fails. So let's have it then Android. Who is this buyer that you have lined up? And if he is going to pay off all of the monies that the Skates owe to the taxman, then they might be prepared to call off the dogs. Otherwise, if the appeal fails, I don't see the Courts offering much in the way of compensation for a fictitional buyer. On the contrary, any potential buyers are far more likely to buy the club at a bargain basement price when it it has sunk as low as possible when the dust has settled, even if the club is playing its football in the lowest league. After all, it will still have a fanbase that is the envy of English football clubs everywhere and who would continue to support it regardless. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
That only works if they win the appeal, chances are we will come out of admin without a CVA pay 5p total in the pound and the taxman loses even more and we have no further liabilities. Yes we will be hit with a deduction but we can get a new (old) owner in place but we will get the embargo lifted
if you come out or admin without a cva agreed does that allow you to simply pay 5p in the pound and all creditors just have to accept it? I'd of thought creditors could refuse any offer and the consequence would be for PFC to be liquidated instead? - but then again I am not clued up on these things. Enlighten me chaps.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gingeletiss

Gingeletiss

Posted
Posted
That only works if they win the appeal, chances are we will come out of admin without a CVA pay 5p total in the pound and the taxman loses even more and we have no further liabilities. Yes we will be hit with a deduction but we can get a new (old) owner in place but we will get the embargo lifted

 

You want to do the sums my fishy friend, even if HMRC do not appeal, you will fail to deliver on the CVA, thus prompting another winding up order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gemmel

Gemmel

Posted
Posted
HMRC faces "millions" in costs if Portsmouth appeal fails

 

It doesnt really matter does it - they just take it off the amount they are owed ....as they are only getting 20p (Over 5 years) in the pound, they are not losing much

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
That only works if they win the appeal, chances are we will come out of admin without a CVA pay 5p total in the pound and the taxman loses even more and we have no further liabilities. Yes we will be hit with a deduction but we can get a new (old) owner in place but we will get the embargo lifted

 

Your trouble is, if you don't get the CVA agreed, yes you can say you're just going to pay 5p in the £, but you're also left vulnerable to a winding up order on the 95p you're not paying...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
suewhistle

suewhistle

Posted
Posted
SNIP On the contrary, any potential buyers are far more likely to buy the club at a bargain basement price when it it has sunk as low as possible when the dust has settled, even if the club is playing its football in the lowest league. After all, it will still have a fanbase that is the envy of English football clubs everywhere and who would continue to support it regardless. ;)

 

Hmm, and what is "the lowest league" of which you speak? I can recommend the Portsmouth Dockyard League as there'd be lots of local derbies!

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