Fitzhugh Fella Posted 26 August, 2010 Author Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Mandaric or Chenrai Lucky skates - Spoilt for choice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Star drivel....what he sold for stupid money then included the property assets & a lower level (although on course to follow the Redcrap kill-a-club-a -job finance path) of debt...look what he'd get back now! Serbskate **** he may be but not terminally business-challenged! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
positivepete Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Will he pass the fit and proper persons test with a court case hanging over him?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Will he pass the fit and proper persons test with a court case hanging over him?! perhaps it is to go and cover tracks Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 The next page is going to be inundated with pompey hooligans. Watch your backs and stand by your mates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Like him? http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/newshome/Pompey-fan-given-threeyear-banning.6492935.jp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 The Star have missed the vital points that Mandaric's deal was to sell only half the club, and the league has questioned the validity of that deal - two huge stumbling blocks preventing him even opening lengthy negotiations to return south - a suicidal business move that would lose him a fortune. Add in the court cases hanging over him and the storrie is very dead in the water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seaempty Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Brilliant quote from Handy Andy re Wilson: "Quite frankly, we have no need to sell him at the moment" I can think of a few million reasons... And possibly the fact that "As it stands, the Blues still need another £4m to meet their £12m target from summer player sales. This money is earmarked for working capital to keep the club running while it still awaits an owner to be put into place". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Pompey are set to sell Marc Wilson to Stoke as part of a deal to sign Dave Kitson and Liam Laurence. The clever plan was to raise millions and cut the wages, has AA become a bit muddled? This deal is additional wages and a much reduced fee - so it won't help pay the CVA, the overall sales target has been missed by quite a margin and the overheads must exceed the income. This deal is all about strengthening the squad and ignoring the consequences, it weakens the business -the exact mistake that got them a winding up order. Some might even suggest it smacks of a team cheating around the embargo and continuing to ignore debt, offloading youngsters and replacing them with Prem players. I wonder what the FL will make of it. How long can they continue to trade insolvently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamsaint Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Pompey are set to sell Marc Wilson to Stoke as part of a deal to sign Dave Kitson and Liam Laurence. The clever plan was to raise millions and cut the wages, has AA become a bit muddled? This deal is additional wages and a much reduced fee - so it won't help pay the CVA, the overall sales target has been missed by quite a margin and the overheads must exceed the income. This deal is all about strengthening the squad and ignoring the consequences, it weakens the business -the exact mistake that got them a winding up order. Some might even suggest it smacks of a team cheating around the embargo and continuing to ignore debt, offloading youngsters and replacing them with Prem players. I wonder what the FL will make of it. How long can they continue to trade insolvently? as long as the PL keep sending them the big cheques...................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Bournemouth Echo reporting that they tried to hijack the deal to sell Pittman to Brizzle City. The FL & AA get more like Comical Ali every day Embargo? What embargo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 as long as the PL keep sending them the big cheques...................... if you are referring to the parachute payments they've been re-directed to the creditors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 if you are referring to the parachute payments they've been re-directed to the creditors Not all of them, just the football ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
positivepete Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 The transfer embargo continues with the signing of Kanu!!! I am sure AA said during the summer that he was out of contract....... http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11688_6339531,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnners Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 can someone e mail the football league and ask them what the crack is regarding the so called embargo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 When bournmouth had the embargo the press reports were all about how tough things were. Jump forward to the pompy embargo and the only thing we hear is what players they are refusing to sell and what prem players they are about to sign. Someone in the FL getting special favours from AA or something? It's been taking the **** for a while but it continues to grow into a full on comedy act. At what point do other teams in the FL ask questions about this biased treatment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andysstuff Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 At what point do other teams in the FL ask questions about this biased treatment? I doubt they will. Look at Cardiff and Craig Bellamy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panda Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 can someone e mail the football league and ask them what the crack is regarding the so called embargo Perhaps you have thought of doing this rather than demand someone else does? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanimal Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 This is a very bad page number!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Pompey are set to sell Marc Wilson to Stoke as part of a deal to sign Dave Kitson and Liam Laurence. The clever plan was to raise millions and cut the wages, has AA become a bit muddled? This deal is additional wages and a much reduced fee - so it won't help pay the CVA, the overall sales target has been missed by quite a margin and the overheads must exceed the income. This deal is all about strengthening the squad and ignoring the consequences, it weakens the business -the exact mistake that got them a winding up order. Some might even suggest it smacks of a team cheating around the embargo and continuing to ignore debt, offloading youngsters and replacing them with Prem players. I wonder what the FL will make of it. How long can they continue to trade insolvently? wtf!!! Raise no money and definitely put the wage bill up. I still don't get how they are so blase about the wages - Utaka & Nugent alone would equal about £4mill a year of their £12 mill budget. Still think there is something we are missing. If I were a cod-botherer I would be chuffed to nuts over this deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latter day saint Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 This is a very bad page number!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! dont worry it will soon be left in the past,just like its name sake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnners Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 dont do e mail just been reading this thread for over a year and a tad fustrated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 The transfer embargo continues with the signing of Kanu!!! I am sure AA said during the summer that he was out of contract....... http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11688_6339531,00.html Might, maybe, hopeful etc etc, all words that flow freely from the Android, and nothing materialises. Can someone point me in the direction of ALL the players they have signed this summer? How many times they have approached the league for 'special dispensation', and how many times they have [presumably] been refused? I really don't see that the FL are doing them any special favours, because apart from Sonko they haven't signed anyone have they? Lot's of hot air and promises from the Android [currently on holiday in Cyprus ], but not a great deal of any substance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 The next page is going to be inundated with pompey hooligans. Watch your backs and stand by your mates. This is a very bad page number!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 the 857 crew were worse. Just as hard but less sleepy. It's tough to get out of bed early when your sister is a cutie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
positivepete Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 I doubt they will. Look at Cardiff and Craig Bellamy. This one is being brought up at the Football League meeting in September. Doncaster and a few others have questioned how Man City can be paying all the wages, and how this distorts the competition. The old rule was that the club the player was loaned to had to pay all the wages. Doncaster want this re-introduced. This is significant with the 25 man squad rule being introduced in the Premiership this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaz Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Could the FL be letting Pompy make all these approaches and contract offers to players.....just to then say later ''Erm, hang on, you can't register these players with us''? I hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigShadow Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 the 857 crew were worse. Just as hard but less sleepy. It's tough to get out of bed early when your sister is a cutie. This is portsmuff we're taking about, ffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SO16_Saint Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Are they dead yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 26 August, 2010 Share Posted 26 August, 2010 Are they dead yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastcowzer Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 the 857 crew were worse. Just as hard but less sleepy. It's tough to get out of bed early when your sister is a cutie. Are the trains running late. ? I thought it was the 6:57 crew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Munster Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 When bournmouth had the embargo the press reports were all about how tough things were. Jump forward to the pompy embargo and the only thing we hear is what players they are refusing to sell and what prem players they are about to sign. Someone in the FL getting special favours from AA or something? It's been taking the **** for a while but it continues to grow into a full on comedy act. At what point do other teams in the FL ask questions about this biased treatment? Makes you wonder, doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Munster Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 Pompey are set to sell Marc Wilson to Stoke as part of a deal to sign Dave Kitson and Liam Laurence. The clever plan was to raise millions and cut the wages, has AA become a bit muddled? This deal is additional wages and a much reduced fee - so it won't help pay the CVA, the overall sales target has been missed by quite a margin and the overheads must exceed the income. This deal is all about strengthening the squad and ignoring the consequences, it weakens the business -the exact mistake that got them a winding up order. Some might even suggest it smacks of a team cheating around the embargo and continuing to ignore debt, offloading youngsters and replacing them with Prem players. I wonder what the FL will make of it. How long can they continue to trade insolvently? Well, based on what they've got away with so far, I think the answer is "indefinitely". Cheating, lying bastards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 Due to the fact that Portsmouth FC is in administration, The League is currently monitoring many aspects of the club, one of which being regulations regarding their playing squad. However, as you can appreciate in the current situation we are therefore unable to comment or speculate on any resolution at this moment. With regards to playing squad, as is Football League policy, clubs have to be able to field a team and players may be permitted to be registered to enable this to happen. In Portsmouth’s case they had a number of first year professionals on their books but under League regulations first year professionals do not count towards the requisite number of 20 for a first team squad. In addition Portsmouth had recently sold and loaned out players. Due to their shortage of players (and based on the ’20 man squad’ rule) the League approved loan arrivals at the club (one player has since joined them on loan during the close season – Ibrahima Sonko). The above came from the FL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Codger Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 Avram pops back to Nottarf Krap to "steal" another one of SC's staff! Not such a great deal available as that from Stoke. Let's see how they dress this one up! SC stated that Wilson would "be going nowhere" - lets see how strong his resolve is..... (although he has since stated he can't really do much to stop him going!) And so it continues ..... Carry on....... http://www.skysports.com/football/transfer_clockwatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latter day saint Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 are the trains running late. ? I thought it was the 6:57 crew. woosh ! note the use of the word sleepy & comment about tough to get out of bed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 Due to the fact that Portsmouth FC is in administration, The League is currently monitoring many aspects of the club, one of which being regulations regarding their playing squad. However, as you can appreciate in the current situation we are therefore unable to comment or speculate on any resolution at this moment. With regards to playing squad, as is Football League policy, clubs have to be able to field a team and players may be permitted to be registered to enable this to happen. In Portsmouth’s case they had a number of first year professionals on their books but under League regulations first year professionals do not count towards the requisite number of 20 for a first team squad. In addition Portsmouth had recently sold and loaned out players. Due to their shortage of players (and based on the ’20 man squad’ rule) the League approved loan arrivals at the club (one player has since joined them on loan during the close season – Ibrahima Sonko). The above came from the FL How are they allowed to sell and loan out a load of players and then bring in better players on higher wages? Cheats! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
standy Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 Yesterday I heard a story about Uttaka. It was recently said in the press that he was on £30k per week and he had replied that he was on nothing like that. Apparently he is on £60k per week. Also he declined to join the team and get on the bus for a recent away game despite being virtually ordered to do so. He later had a dose of second thoughts and caught a taxi there. There is a lot of unrest within the team over it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 THis is interesting.. http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/frattonlatest/Andronikou-Chainrai-won39t-cash-in.6498223.jp So Charai has a debenture on the entire squad, emaning he is legally allowed to take 80% from any sale of any player.... Blimey! And the administrator is confident Chainrai will not be tempted to take a share of any future transfers. He said: 'Chainrai has a debenture against the players. 'That means he could take 80 per cent of player sales – but he has pledged not to take any money out. 'I believe him, there is no point buying the club if he is taking money out now. 'If anything, that will reduce the club's value and he does not want to do that. 'He has not taken advantage of his debenture so far and does not intend to. He has pledged to me he will not be doing that.' He's not taken advantage of it yet, except for that bit at christmas when he trousered £4m from the sale of whats his name.... So he can get all the players sold, pocket 80% of the cash and still own the club...leaving a dead club and some nice real estate worth a fair old whack that Gaydamak can then flog... meaning both would get a nice payday... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 THis is interesting.. http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/frattonlatest/Andronikou-Chainrai-won39t-cash-in.6498223.jp So Charai has a debenture on the entire squad, emaning he is legally allowed to take 80% from any sale of any player.... Blimey! He's not taken advantage of it yet, except for that bit at christmas when he trousered £4m from the sale of whats his name.... So he can get all the players sold, pocket 80% of the cash and still own the club...leaving a dead club and some nice real estate worth a fair old whack that Gaydamak can then flog... meaning both would get a nice payday... But surely the CVA acceptance was predicated on player sales? Were the creditors aware of this, I wonder? If not, might that have affected their vote? More questions than answers it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 (edited) Say you wanted to get hold of the land... The only way really would be to liquidate the club. Now, you could either liquidate it straight away, but you;d be foolish to do that whilst there were still things worth value. Any players on the books would have their registrations reverted to the football league. So why not realise their value first by flogging them off, leaving nothing but the shell of a club and then liquidating?? Say he was to take 80% of all sales. The estimated income for the CVA to succeed would not be met, the CVA would fail and HMRC would push for winding up/liquidation. The club gets liquidated, HMRC blamed, chinny chinn gets away with it, job done Proper tin foil hat stuff.... Edited 27 August, 2010 by Joey-deacons-left-nut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 so to be sure of covering the CVA they actually need to raise £75M in transfers this window allowing Chanrai to take his cut! Unlike the harbour stadium this news is a development - does the league know that he can take this money, do the creditors know, how long does this apply? No alternative owner would come in knowing the squad is in reality worth less than 20% of the market value. Or is Chanrai demonstrating to the ripped off creditors who voted for 'his' CVA that he's trousering the other 80p in everyone else's pounds? Those that voted yes become more stupid with every passing week, if that is possible. But the funniest bit of all is that we now have the situation where a £5M player sold pays maybe half a mill to agents, the usual £800K to Spurs, and with this the income from £5M is actually about just over half of the fee. So with Chanrai's power over transfer income they technically need to raise £100M in this window - and a further £50M in Jan! He must be chuckling to himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 Another home draw, another 13,000 at £2 a pop that's almost half a week's wage for your stars! Wow! I am really jealous. so to be sure of covering the CVA they actually need to raise £75M in transfers this window allowing Chanrai to take his cut! Unlike the harbour stadium this news is a development - does the league know that he can take this money, do the creditors know, how long does this apply? No alternative owner would come in knowing the squad is in reality worth less than 20% of the market value. Or is Chanrai demonstrating to the ripped off creditors who voted for 'his' CVA that he's trousering the other 80p in everyone else's pounds? Those that voted yes become more stupid with every passing week, if that is possible. But the funniest bit of all is that we now have the situation where a £5M player sold pays maybe half a mill to agents, the usual £800K to Spurs, and with this the income from £5M is actually about just over half of the fee. So with Chanrai's power over transfer income they technically need to raise £100M in this window - and a further £50M in Jan! He must be chuckling to himself. Indeed. Chuckling with incredulity that the creditors, judiciary and even HMRC (because they fecked up) happily helped him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 Say you wanted to get hold of the land... The only way really would be to liquidate the club. Now, you could either liquidate it straight away, but you;d be foolish to do that whilst there were still things worth value. Any players on the books would have their registrations reverted to the football league. So why not realise their value first by flogging them off, leaving nothing but the shell of a club and then liquidating?? Say he was to take 80% of all sales. The estimated income for the CVA to succeed would not be met, the CVA would fail and HMRC would push for winding up/liquidation. The club gets liquidated, HMRC blamed, chinny chinn gets away with it, job done Proper tin foil hat stuff.... Oi! stop telling everyone the plan. That was posted on page 200 and something. Has always been plan A. The only reason for the smoke & mirrors is the ability for many leeches to also make money out of the demise as agents admins etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 As I was driving along Stoneham Lane this morning I saw a white minibus with 'Portsmouth Academy' on the side. It was empty. Who are they trying to fool? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 But surely the CVA acceptance was predicated on player sales? Were the creditors aware of this, I wonder? If not, might that have affected their vote? More questions than answers it seems. That was exactly what i first thought. Additionally where does it leave the football creditors rule, if he decided to take all the money, what about outstanding football debts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 You'll like these little snippets (Genuine) from pompoey fans; London 27/08/2010 12:22:05 4 court cases with HMRC and still heavily in debt so how do the FL let them bring players in like Bellamy.I except Cardiff are'nt in administration but still feel its wrong that they are getting away with it. Cardiff have signed Keogh from Wolves too - how are they able to do it when theyre in so much financial trouble?! Level playing field my haris! Dont sell any of them!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy_D Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 Explains why AA is so reluctant to sell to anyone else though. You can bet if he doesn't become owner Chanrai will be enforcing the 80% of all sales goes to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 That was exactly what i first thought. Additionally where does it leave the football creditors rule, if he decided to take all the money, what about outstanding football debts Parachute payments, I guess they know they are unlikely to get their hands on that cash as the league will just divert the money straight to any football creditors.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 27 August, 2010 Share Posted 27 August, 2010 the 857 crew were worse. Just as hard but less sleepy. It's tough to get out of bed early when your sister is a cutie. clocks not working ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts