Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga


Fitzhugh Fella

Recommended Posts

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.

 

£48m of the £56m is covered by parachute payments...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest given the optimistic circumstances that need to occur for the full 20p in the pound to be paid I expect a lot of the creditors could well settle for 5p in the pound up front on the grounds that that way they are then at least sure of getting something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

 

That's enough to be going on with. Bompey did a similar thing last season and look how much they achieved in L2!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

 

I think not!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, but it only needs one creditor owed at least £750 (and the HMRC is one of them) to issue a winding up petition...

 

Luckily for them AA latest figures show that only £749 of the HMRC debt can be included...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Android never fails when he delivers his comical Andy speeches :rolleyes:, Fictional extended debt to get a fictional CVA, then threaten HMRC with massive law suit if they appeal. As they have a fictional new buyer who has miraculously appeared when he rubbed that old lamp he found last week. Or is the new buyer Chainrai :facepalm: more likely.

He is desperate not to go to court, as he will have to convince the judge that the extra debt he has amassed is not just a figure in the debt column a slip of the pen & is a true debt. he will also have to explain why it has almost doubled from the SOA since he took over. AA has a history of fictionally increasing debt in the high court, which will go against him should it get that far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£48m of the £56m is covered by parachute payments...

 

I guess you haven't been following this thread too closely, as you seem to have selective recall;). As we keep saying, 'it's the hope that kills you', and you lot still have hope, and that's the real laugh here:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Ask Bournemouth what happens to the transfer embargo if you come out of admin without a CVA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

In the case of Leeds, they offered 1p in £ before the CVA vote, this was raised to 8p in the £ the last day before end of the 28 day cooling off period. They finially paid 11.2p in the £.

 

 

 

In the case of Luton, the FL insisted on 16p in the £ (same as cva offer) IN EXCHANGE for their Golden Share.

 

A Football League statement today read: "Luton Town were unable to agree a CVA with their creditors and as a consequence are unable to satisfy the normal conditions of the League's insolvency policy for exiting administration.

"The board decided, however, that they were prepared to exercise their absolute discretion under their 'exceptional circumstances' provisions in order to accommodate the new entity.

"In accordance with recent precedent, the board decided to include the following principle conditions of entry as a pre-requisite to the exercise of that discretion.

"1) The new company (Luton Town 2020) should pay the unsecured creditors the amount offered at the time of the CVA hearing (16 pence in the pound).

"2) A 20-point deduction should apply in the 2008-09 season, which also takes into account the fact that this is the club's third insolvency event in the last 10 years."

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/football-league/luton-town-hit-with-points-penalty-864607.html

 

So ignore the Skate he hasn't done his research, it all mouth and no facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2266529/hmrc-faces-millions-costs

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".

 

 

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.

 

So, if I'm reading those two quotes correctly, Andrew Andronikou would only "pursue HMRC for costs and losses" if HMRC lodge an appeal AND lose that appeal in court.

 

Or, in other words, if HMRC lodge an appeal today BUT withdraw said appeal 1 day before the court date (in November, let's say) then Andrew Andronikou would not be in a position to pursue them for costs, losses, etc.

 

So, bottom line, HMRC have nothing to lose by lodging an appeal, and withdrawing it later on, in order to make PFC squirm a bit longer?

 

Yes/No?

Edited by trousers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2266529/hmrc-faces-millions-costs

 

 

 

 

So, if I'm reading those two quotes correctly, Andrew Andronikou would only "pursue HMRC for costs and losses" if HMRC lodge an appeal AND lose that appeal in court.

 

Or, in other words, if HMRC lodge an appeal today BUT withdraw said appeal 1 day before the court date (in November, let's say) then Andrew Andronikou would not be in a position to pursue them for costs, losses, etc.

 

So, bottom line, HMRC have nothing to lose by lodging an appeal, and withdrawing it later on, in order to make PFC squirm a bit longer?

 

Yes/No?

 

Think that's what they did with Leeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you could be spot on with this Trousers. This would force them to exit administration without the cva therefore incurring the -15/17 points penalty. I reckon the HMRC would see this as the best warning shot to other clubs thinking of talling the p!ss.

http://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2266529/hmrc-faces-millions-costs

 

 

 

 

So, if I'm reading those two quotes correctly, Andrew Andronikou would only "pursue HMRC for costs and losses" if HMRC lodge an appeal AND lose that appeal in court.

 

Or, in other words, if HMRC lodge an appeal today BUT withdraw said appeal 1 day before the court date (in November, let's say) then Andrew Andronikou would not be in a position to pursue them for costs, losses, etc.

 

So, bottom line, HMRC have nothing to lose by lodging an appeal, and withdrawing it later on, in order to make PFC squirm a bit longer?

 

Yes/No?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

according to the news...

A spokesman for HMRC said it was appealing on two grounds.

 

The first was that the interests of HMRC 'have been or will be unfairly prejudiced' by the agreement.

 

The second was that there were 'irregularities' in the way the votes of creditors were taken to secure the agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK then. What happens next?

 

Depends if you live in the real world or in pompey world.

 

In pompey world they will be bought by BC for a pittance within day and have to accept a 17 point deduction as their only punishment.

 

In the real world any sale of the club without the CVA will still leave them open to legal action from creditors that could lead to liquidation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends if you live in the real world or in pompey world.

 

In pompey world they will be bought by BC for a pittance within day and have to accept a 17 point deduction as their only punishment.

 

In the real world any sale of the club without the CVA will still leave them open to legal action from creditors that could lead to liquidation.

 

I take it that includes HMRC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...