Pompey Takeover Saga

[Dark Munster]

Oh, and the new 3rd kit of theirs? As well as having a woman with her legs open on the shoulder, it also has a giant phallic shape on it. Look at the piping....

 

 

 

 

It certainly gives a whole new meaning to 11 dickheads running around on the pitch.

[Golden Balls]

Oh, and the new 3rd kit of theirs? As well as having a woman with her legs open on the shoulder, it also has a giant phallic shape on it. Look at the piping....

 

 

This is hilarious!!

[dubai_phil]

PMSL. Is that how your business operates Philly? You have a budget one year and that's duplicated the next year, and the year after that, and the year after that? What a strange, tin pot little business that must be. Meanwhile, back in the real world, other companies change budget from year to year. They take funds from one area of the business and use it in another where they want more focus at that time.

 

Still, if you're saying that's it, I assume, with your wealth of business knowledge and understanding of budgetary allocation and control you must be right. £3.8m and lights out it is

 

Oh, by the way, is Antonov not going to use the EIB loan to SAAB to fund us any more? What happend to that juicy little tidbit that you kept throwing out in your usual "aw shucks, I'm not ITK but here's some more incredible info I've been told by my contacts"?

 

 

What is amusing is how the troll simply fails to read what you post before he makes up something new. This is a class example showing that 1) he is either about 14 years old or 2) actually works at PCFC.

 

I posed a question some pages back - CSI group have an investment budget that they allocated last year to a football related project. I gave the chance for people to google to find the details but nobody bothered. Anyway their budget was 8mil, and nobody has yet found any evidence to show that this year's budget will be any different. As they are a multi-national corporation, their planning will be done on an annual basis.

 

I then pointed out that 4.2mil had been spent, which would leave 3.8mil

 

and I got this astonishing attack

 

Apparently IF you have a business you should NOT budget each year "You have a budget one year and that's duplicated the next year, and the year after that, and the year after that? What a strange, tin pot little business that must be"

 

So any business that has a budget is Tin Pot eh - the troll MUST be an employee of that astonishing thought leader in global business.

 

Dear troll, learn English. A budget is an allocation of Funds for a specific period of time, most usually one year or one financial period.

 

Still as he says and as history has shown if the budget is not enough "They take funds from one area of the business and use it in another where they want more focus at that time."

 

Well THAT one is true - they take the money owed to small businesses and spunk it all on players wages.

 

Anyway, back to my original point after that pleasantly educational self destruction.

 

The budegt allocated to Sports Investement in UK by CSI was 8million and was spent on F1 last year, nobody could be bothered to look that up. Obviously the PCFC project means they will be raping one of their other projects.

 

Which one would that be Corpy?

 

Spartak Moscow Ice Hockey?

Ferrari Challenge?

Le Mans Series?

Zalgiris Basketball?

Spyker GT Race Team?

 

or maybe they will have reduced their support for the Revival of Historic Traditions at Kremlin project in order to pay some salaries?

 

Obviously with these being connected to their major Russian, Baltic & Czech business projects they will easily drop those and "They take funds from one area of the business and use it in another where they want more focus at that time."

 

Oh and in other news. Anybody notice the reference to a 5 Year Plan? I wonder where that idea came from? Surely they have not indicated that "Investment in their Academy" would be a priority? After all, that would be too much of a co-incidence surely?

 

 

And before anyone asks, who saw that How to Buy a Football Club programme with Bryan Robson and Thailand? Guess what his business plan called for?

 

Fantastic isn't it, everybody has the same cunning plan to become a Champions League team.

[Corporate Ho]

See Corp Ho ho ho, I'm having this massive debate with a 'ammer, at the moment, he acknowledges that his club are 110million pounds in debt, but he doesn't give a stuff, as all he wants is PL football.Sound familiar to you and your ilk?

 

So one fan's opinion means every Pompey fan thinks that? I don't give a monkey's about PL football. I watched Pompey in the old Div 4 and I'm happy watching them in the Championship. They're my club ad I'll watch them wherever. If we go up I'll happily take SKY's money but your fans seemed to agree after your first relegation that it was more enjoyable in this division as it was far less predictable.

 

Companies house will tell you that for the accounts year ending June 07, Pompey were nearly £70 million in debt when Gaydamak was still in charge

 

According to David Conn's article in The Guardian in 2009 (see below) which included the latest available info from companies house Pompey's debts had increased to arund £58m

 

OK but you have not made it easy on yourself. I agree that its not always possible to hold a rational debate on these issues' date=' but you have to acknowledge that you have not always helped yourself in that regard?[/i']

 

FC, thanks for agreeing with me that the whole of football don’t view Pompey with contempt for what happened. I just wish the Pompey haters on here would accept it and grow up. But once again, you’re falling for a misconception about our level of debt. I keep saying it and keep getting either ignored or dismissed but of our £120/30m of “debt” more than half of that figure was owed to Gaydamak, Chainrai and even Al Fahim for debts they’d incurred but loaded onto the club. It wasn’t £130m spent on players as so many on here keep insisting. Hopefully the forensic inspection will find out what happened to that money but again, quite a few on here seem to think that any financial irregularities will automatically result in a penalty on a par with Luton’s rather than realising that every case is different. Indeed, if money went into people’s pockets then they might be prosecuted rather than the club. Difficult for some of the posters on here to understand I know. David Conn’s article in the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/jun/03/english-premier-league-debt) from 2009 with figures taken from the latest registered at companies house at that time show that our debts were around £58m and our big spending on players was effectively over by that point. From then on we sold over £50m worth of players including Johnson, Crouch, Muntari, Kranjcar etc so whatever the cause of the debt doubling, it certainly wasn’t from signing players was it? As for those players being “way beyond our means”, again, the article shows that our turnover that year was £70m, wages as a % of that were 78% (considerably less than your turnover/ wages ratio from your last accounts you’ll notice) and that we lost £17m but, had we sold a couple of players and brought in a couple of more conservative replacements those losses could have been easily managed downwards towards a break even figure. I’m not defending anything here, I’m stating facts.

As for your point about your debts, I accept that Liebherr’s track record is for not to use outside debt and that’s laudable. But, that doesn’t mean that the debt/ loans don’t have to be repaid to the Liebherr’s at some point. A loan is a loan (although it could be converted into equity which I accept but as you’ve also accepted, you don’t know for sure).

 

 

What is amusing is how the troll simply fails to read what you post before he makes up something new. This is a class example showing that 1) he is either about 14 years old or 2) actually works at PCFC.

 

I posed a question some pages back - CSI group have an investment budget that they allocated last year to a football related project. I gave the chance for people to google to find the details but nobody bothered. Anyway their budget was 8mil, and nobody has yet found any evidence to show that this year's budget will be any different. As they are a multi-national corporation, their planning will be done on an annual basis.

 

I then pointed out that 4.2mil had been spent, which would leave 3.8mil

 

and I got this astonishing attack

 

Apparently IF you have a business you should NOT budget each year "You have a budget one year and that's duplicated the next year, and the year after that, and the year after that? What a strange, tin pot little business that must be"

 

So any business that has a budget is Tin Pot eh - the troll MUST be an employee of that astonishing thought leader in global business.

 

Dear troll, learn English. A budget is an allocation of Funds for a specific period of time, most usually one year or one financial period.

 

Still as he says and as history has shown if the budget is not enough "They take funds from one area of the business and use it in another where they want more focus at that time."

 

Well THAT one is true - they take the money owed to small businesses and spunk it all on players wages.

 

Anyway, back to my original point after that pleasantly educational self destruction.

 

The budegt allocated to Sports Investement in UK by CSI was 8million and was spent on F1 last year, nobody could be bothered to look that up. Obviously the PCFC project means they will be raping one of their other projects.

 

Which one would that be Corpy?

 

Spartak Moscow Ice Hockey?

Ferrari Challenge?

Le Mans Series?

Zalgiris Basketball?

Spyker GT Race Team?

 

or maybe they will have reduced their support for the Revival of Historic Traditions at Kremlin project in order to pay some salaries?

 

Obviously with these being connected to their major Russian, Baltic & Czech business projects they will easily drop those and "They take funds from one area of the business and use it in another where they want more focus at that time."

 

1. Oh dear Philly, are you really that dumb? Of course budgets are allocated and usually on an annual basis. My point was does your business (or anyone who posts on here’s company) allocate exactly the same amount of funding to each department/ company year after year? If I was allocated a marketing budget of £2.5m in 2007, would I be allocated exactly the same amount year after year? Of course not. Budgets are reviewed and changed around depending on different factors (economic climate, new product launches, shift in focus/ priority from one product area to another and so on). The fact that you feel that because they spent £8m on a project last year means that’s exactly the amount they’ll spend this year is, let’s be kind, speculation. Maybe last year they’d earmarked that amount for a different “project”. Maybe this year they’ve allocated £20m. Or maybe they’ve allocated £4.2m and that’s it for the year. Maybe they’ve decided to pump some of their own money into the club and not use CSI’s funds, who knows. You certainly don’t. My question to you was – does your company allocate you exactly the same budget to your department year after year after year. So, do they?
   

[dubai_phil]

Ah bless.

 

The troll typed something but that wasn't the point he was making.

 

Nothing new there then.

 

Corpy. You haven't answered the question. How much IS their budget for this year?

 

At this point the empirical evidence shows up that they have 3.8mil left to spend.

 

Unless of course PCFC is more important than their Core businesses

[holepuncture]

"Good Morning Soccer AM

 

I am writing to you in preparation of the Pompey fans visit to your fantastic show on Saturday. I couldnt help but notice the strange tubing on Pompeys new 3rd kit, it resembles a giant penis shape, whilst also having a woman with her legs open on the shoulder, heres a picture for you:

 

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/8637/capturexga.jpg

 

They are a strange old bunch the skates, and remember; before they start bleating on about 'the bestest fans in the world tm' perhaps they would like to explain the dwindling home support and utterly pathetic away following!

 

Many Kind Regards"

[Corporate Ho]

Ah bless.

 

The troll typed something but that wasn't the point he was making.

 

Nothing new there then.

 

Corpy. You haven't answered the question. How much IS their budget for this year?

 

At this point the empirical evidence shows up that they have 3.8mil left to spend.

 

Unless of course PCFC is more important than their Core businesses

 

It was eaxctly the point I was making Philly. And that point was, most companies don't duplicate budgets to exactly the same level year after year. Does your company do that? Is your budget the same this year as it was last year? Or the year before that? Or has it changed depending on what your targets are? My budget has gone up considerably this year as the area of the business I look after looked like it wasn't going to be hit as hard by the economic slow down as some of the other areas of our business. Does your company not do that?

 

In answer to your question, I don't know what their budget for PFC is this year. But nor do you. You have evidence that they'd allocated £8m last year to a project. Where's the evidence it's the same this year. And even if it is, what are you saying? That they'll spend this last £3.8m then fold the club? Why would they waste £8m if that was their intention?

 

There you go, I've answered your questions. How about you answer mine. Does your company allocate exactly the same budget to each department every year, year after year. Yes or no?

[suewhistle]

In answer to your question, I don't know what their budget for PFC is this year.

 

Well, it's a fairly critical question, I'd have thought. I'm surprised you aren't more worried...

[Saint_John]

I see their own paper has finally noticed what a poorly supported club they are

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/pompey-past/great-matches/pompey_pay_the_price_as_fans_feel_the_pinch_1_3031234

 

Compared to this stage last year, Championship crowds at Fratton Park are down.

In addition, just 4,464 fans turned up to watch the Blues take on Barnet in the Carling Cup in Pompey’s first home game of the season.

That was the lowest Fratton attendance for 11 years.

Why didn't they mention the 2,731 ?

 

‘There are supporters out there not in love with Portsmouth Football Club any more and if they keep attracting 14-15,000 every game they are going to have to tackle this issue sooner rather than later.

‘Personally, there are fans I have known for 20 years and half of them don’t go any more.

Only "in love" when they were spending beyond their means ?

 

‘There’s an argument our discounts were too heavy last season.

‘As it stands, we have taken our pricing to the middle of the Championship.

So they admit they gave away tickets last year.

The attendance for the Sky game in Oct against Barnsley (2 taxis & a minibus ?) should be interesting.

 

‘What fans do not accept is there has been no subsequent review of pricing, especially as season tickets are several thousand down on last season.

So did the 7,600 mentioned earlier in the summer every manage to break 8k ? (for info Saints 15k)

[rallyboy]

that can't be right, the likes of Claridge and Merson keep telling me they have fantastic support - the cartoon image the media likes to have of them.

 

Having just got round to watching the How to Buy a Football Club documentary I think I can see why Lampitt was moved on.

These sort of things all went on under his nose, and while its difficult to get to the bottom of ownership and dodgy dealings, it was his only task.

I don't recall too many successes for his department...

But on the positive side, to stand out as incapable among footballing authority figures is quite an achievement, so he should get credit for that.

 

At least he's getting hands on training in how it's done, which may stand him in good stead should the old boys network return him to his former role.

 

And the other message that came out of that programme - boy were we lucky to find Markus and Nicola!

We must have been touted about, though £15M to buy the rights to pick up Sheffield Utd's £57M debt plus agency fees doesn't look that attractive to me.

Football is in trouble - I'm hoping we have avoided the worst of it.

[Gorgiesaint]

All is not well amongst the business empire

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14817674

 

Mind you the similarities between Saab and Pompey are there for all to see

 

However, car analyst Jay Nagley, of Red Spy Automotive, told the BBC that the future still looked bleak for Saab.

 

"I'm just amazed that Saab is still alive at this stage," he said.

 

"It is like a wounded animal. You think it is dead, but then it goes and twitches again."

 

And with regards to funding for this season, will this have any effect on the budget?

 

The EIB agreed to provide Spyker with loans totalling 400m euros when it bought Saab.

 

However, the EIB funds are only being released in tranches, and the money has currently stopped because Saab is not meeting its performance criteria.

 

[saintjay77]

All is not well amongst the business empire

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14817674

 

Mind you the similarities between Saab and Pompey are there for all to see

 

 

And with regards to funding for this season, will this have any effect on the budget?

 

 

 

 

So Spyker have now got something to do with Saab? I thought that didnt happen in the end? Cause the Ruskie doesnt have anything to do with Saab does he? I thought Saab would rather go under than have him in charge the way they are acting.

 

Anyone actually know whats going on between the Ruskies, Spyker, Saab and so on?

[Gorgiesaint]

So Spyker have now got something to do with Saab? I thought that didnt happen in the end? Cause the Ruskie doesnt have anything to do with Saab does he? I thought Saab would rather go under than have him in charge the way they are acting.

 

Anyone actually know whats going on between the Ruskies, Spyker, Saab and so on?

 

To be honest, who knows now. The waters have been muddied so much (which can be no bad thing for the skates) it's hard to keep up with who owns who - bit like Pompey really!

 

This article sheds some light... right Spyker owns Saab, but not Spyker Cars which CPP (Antonov etc) own

 

http://uk.autoblog.com/2011/02/24/spyker-sells-spyker-but-keeps-saab/

 

So no apologies for getting that wrong!!

[saintjay77]

To be honest, who knows now. The waters have been muddied so much (which can be no bad thing for the skates) it's hard to keep up with who owns who - bit like Pompey really!

 

This article sheds some light... right Spyker owns Saab, but not Spyker Cars which CPP (Antonov etc) own

 

http://uk.autoblog.com/2011/02/24/spyker-sells-spyker-but-keeps-saab/

 

So no apologies for getting that wrong!!

 

Ah right, Wasnt after apologies so no need. The whole situation for Saab is pretty unclear so easily to get confused with it. Doesnt look good for Saab but does seem strange that they run the risk of shutting up shop completly but wont let mega rich pompey owner in the doors to save the day.

[Gorgiesaint]

Oops mistype, meant apologies for getting that wrong not no apologies.

[saintjay77]

Oops mistype, meant apologies for getting that wrong not no apologies.

 

Haha typical brits. apologies for apologise lol

 

Anyone got any updates on the court cases? Or have the skates been LOL'ing about their latest penis kit?

 

I messaged Chris from Soccor AM on Twitter to let him know about their 3rd kit as half their supporters will be on the show Sat morning. I got a reply from some @Lord_Palmerston saying "Of course, with a Southampton shirt there's a c**t inside it." My reply was that the Skate shirts have ringfenced them on the shoulder of all their shirts. I didnt hear any more after that. lol

 

Anything new to LOL at the skates today or has it all gone quiet again?

[dubai_phil]

Not sure which emotional roller coaster is funnier.

 

Watching the Indian Cricket fans last night in the ODI slogfest go from ecstacy to agony with a few swipes of Kieswetter's bat or watching a pompey fan discover that his latest billionaire owner isn't.

[Chez]

Your last set of accounts showed you lost £7m that year and had debts of £22m. There seem to be a few people pointing that out but most Saints fans seem to be of the opinion that “we’re loaded, doesn’t matter”. Of course Liebherr’s estate may change those loans/ debts into equity but you don’t know that. [/font]

you make some valid points and this one I certainly agree with and have posted about many times on various threads. Poking fun at you lot for not asking questions about where the money came from is fair enough IMO, but to do so whilst sticking our heads in the sand about our own financial situation isn't clever. I don't have the understanding of finance to feel 100% confident that we'll be alright jack no matter what, so for now I certainly won't be calling for us to spend £6M on a player in this league that's for sure.

 

However I do want to respond to your point `what more could we have done?', well you could have not signed BTH on £38k a week and gone for someone cheaper, and you could also have not spent £500,000 on a loan fee for Quincy half way through the season when by then it was obvious that you couldn't possibly get out of the hole.

Edited 7 September, 2011 by Chez

[holepuncture]

To be honest, who knows now. The waters have been muddied so much (which can be no bad thing for the skates) it's hard to keep up with who owns who - bit like Pompey really!

 

This article sheds some light... right Spyker owns Saab, but not Spyker Cars which CPP (Antonov etc) own

 

http://uk.autoblog.com/2011/02/24/spyker-sells-spyker-but-keeps-saab/

 

So no apologies for getting that wrong!!

 

Maybe its muddy and smokey to confuse the European Investment Bank, as alluded to in RUMAFIA.com, Pompeys Russian Mafia owners use these investment vehicles to effectively steal and launder cash.

 

Haha typical brits. apologies for apologise lol

 

Anyone got any updates on the court cases? Or have the skates been LOL'ing about their latest penis kit?

 

I messaged Chris from Soccor AM on Twitter to let him know about their 3rd kit as half their supporters will be on the show Sat morning. I got a reply from some @Lord_Palmerston saying "Of course, with a Southampton shirt there's a c**t inside it." My reply was that the Skate shirts have ringfenced them on the shoulder of all their shirts. I didnt hear any more after that. lol

 

Anything new to LOL at the skates today or has it all gone quiet again?

 

I have also contacted Soccer AM about the penis kit hilarity, so fingers crossed they will mug off those ditry cheating f**king skate bastards live to the footballing nation!

 

However I do want to respond to your point `what more could we have done?', well you could have not signed BTH on £38k a week and gone for someone cheaper, and you could also have not spent £500,000 on a loan fee for Quincy half way through the season when by then it was obvious that you couldn't possibly get out of the hole.

 

Its ok because 'theres only one' Peter Storrie has scribbled a note for the judge saying his squad had £38million of liquid value. He also promised a judge that he was in advanced talks with foreign investors... one of them pretended to own a gold mine or some old load of b*llocks!

 

And as for Quincy, he personally paid the half million out of his own cash, just to come to skatesville, play 10-15 games for them and get a relegation on his CV - pretty sure that was how it was justified at the time!

 

As for TBH, just standard Skate accounting by Storrie, a nice 4yr £36k PW deal when the club are trading insolvently and owned by an invisible Arab/Spurs fan Lawyer/F*ck knows...

 

 

DIRTY DIRTY SKATES

[Weston Super Saint]

To be honest, who knows now. The waters have been muddied so much (which can be no bad thing for the skates) it's hard to keep up with who owns who - bit like Pompey really!

 

This article sheds some light... right Spyker owns Saab, but not Spyker Cars which CPP (Antonov etc) own

 

http://uk.autoblog.com/2011/02/24/spyker-sells-spyker-but-keeps-saab/

 

 

So, according to that article, Spyker NV owns Saab.

 

According to this website : http://www.converssport.com/structure Victor Muller [of Spyker cars NV http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/07/saab-muller-idUSLDE7860M420110907 ] is also a co-founder AND CEO of Converse Sports Initiatives, which owns the Skates.

 

Now I'm sure the corpse will put it all down to a mad conspiracy theory dreamed up by over eager journalists and people with a grudge against dear old Pompey, but I'm sure most people will agree that there is something fishy about the set up!

 

So no apologies for getting that wrong!!

[dubai_phil]

So, according to that article, Spyker NV owns Saab.

 

According to this website : http://www.converssport.com/structure Victor Muller [of Spyker cars NV http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/07/saab-muller-idUSLDE7860M420110907 ] is also a co-founder AND CEO of Converse Sports Initiatives, which owns the Skates.

 

Now I'm sure the corpse will put it all down to a mad conspiracy theory dreamed up by over eager journalists and people with a grudge against dear old Pompey, but I'm sure most people will agree that there is something fishy about the set up!

 

So no apologies for getting that wrong!!

 

Guys, you really have to stop trying to link Saab, EU loans, Spyker Cars to poopey. You know it upsets our resident troll

[EastleighSoulBoy]

Guys, you really have to stop trying to link Saab, EU loans, Spyker Cars to poopey. You know it upsets our resident troll

 

Specially as the SAAB plant is in Trollhattan.

[Sevvy]

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/518045165?-11209

 

Update, says new company under no legal right to pay money cva money as should have been old co.

[trousers]

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/518045165?-11209

 

Update, says new company under no legal right to pay money cva money as should have been old co.

 

Don't the 'footballing authorities' have more point penalties at its disposal if one of their clubs doesn't meet the obligations ("promises"?!) of a CVA?

 

If Pompey's argument against this is that they are now a wholly new company and/or football club, why didn't they have to reapply to join the English football system at a lower tier.

 

Either they are the same club as before or they're not?

 

(sorry for probably going over very old ground here, but not been keeping up with developments of late)

[sidthesquid]

Don't the 'footballing authorities' have more point penalties at its disposal if one of their clubs doesn't meet the obligations ("promises"?!) of a CVA?

 

If Pompey's argument against this is that they are now a wholly new company and/or football club, why didn't they have to reapply to join the English football system at a lower tier.

 

Either they are the same club as before or they're not?

 

(sorry for probably going over very old ground here, but not been keeping up with developments of late)

 

It's not the same as the CVA - it was a gesture, not legally binding in any way. So legally they are in the clear, but morally... let's not waste our time on that one

[trousers]

It's not the same as the CVA - it was a gesture, not legally binding in any way. So legally they are in the clear, but morally... let's not waste our time on that one

 

But I thought the 'footballing authorities' insist upon a legally binding CVA as part of their criteria of seeing one of their clubs go through the administration process.

 

I seem to recall reams on here about this when we went into admin.

 

In other words....points deducted for going into admin AND further points deducted for not having a serviceable and binding CVA? No?

 

As I say, I've probably list the plot by now!

[Fitzhugh Fella]

But I thought the 'footballing authorities' insist upon a legally binding CVA as part of their criteria of seeing one of their clubs go through the administration process.

 

I seem to recall reams on here about this when we went into admin.

 

In other words....points deducted for going into admin AND further points deducted for not having a serviceable and binding CVA? No?

 

As I say, I've probably list the plot by now!

 

You lost the plot the day you first put your hand in your pocket to buy the Daily Mail, Trousers.

[trousers]

You lost the plot the day you first put your hand in your pocket to buy the Daily Mail, Trousers.

 

I don't buy it....I loot it...it's all the rage...innit

[saintjay77]

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/518045165?-11209

 

Update, says new company under no legal right to pay money cva money as should have been old co.

 

Interesting how the new company believe the adminitrators created this little nugget in a "very wooly way" Its like they are trying to wash their hands of the whole process just in case someone trys to come back and bit them on the arse about it all.

 

Surley the small creditors monies are owed legally within the CVA and the promises to pay full amounts under £2500 were just words to make the children follow the pied piper. If there is no legal document about paying full amounts under £2500 then the small creditors will get 20p in the £1 just the same as everyone else. Can they then argue that they would of voted "No" had that been the case all along? Can they withdraw their vote? That could put the club on very dodgy ground along with the FL as they rattified and rubber stamped the golden share and lack of penaltys for agreeing a CVA that duped the creditors.

 

Who looks more stupid? Small creditors? FL? Or the Ruskies?

[dubai_phil]

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/518045165?-11209

 

Update, says new company under no legal right to pay money cva money as should have been old co.

 

 

NOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What, you mean that there was NEVER any intention of meeting the CVA obligations?

 

 

[saintjay77]

So, according to that article, Spyker NV owns Saab.

 

According to this website : http://www.converssport.com/structure Victor Muller [of Spyker cars NV http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/07/saab-muller-idUSLDE7860M420110907 ] is also a co-founder AND CEO of Converse Sports Initiatives, which owns the Skates.

 

Now I'm sure the corpse will put it all down to a mad conspiracy theory dreamed up by over eager journalists and people with a grudge against dear old Pompey, but I'm sure most people will agree that there is something fishy about the set up!

 

So no apologies for getting that wrong!!

 

So just when you think you can see the bottom the waters cloud up even more. Its OK though cause im sure the Ruskies will facebook everyone with the real details. LOL

[dubai_phil]

So just when you think you can see the bottom the waters cloud up even more. Its OK though cause im sure the Ruskies will facebook everyone with the real details. LOL

 

OK so the NEXT questions are...

 

Who owns the Skates?

Who went through FAPP?

 

The company or the people?

[Weston Super Saint]

OK so the NEXT questions are...

 

Who owns the Skates?

Who went through FAPP?

 

The company or the people?

 

Considering Lampitt is also one of the CEOs of Converse, perhaps he nominated himself as the FAPP with his old muckers at the FA

[saintjay77]

OK so the NEXT questions are...

 

Who owns the Skates?

Who went through FAPP?

 

The company or the people?

 

Its amazing that we are now a few months into this new ownership and there are still basic questions that the skates cant even answer fully due to muddy waters surrounding their club.

 

I know the FL (due to Pompey pushing for it n all) overhauled their FAPP's test to make sure they dont get mugged off again. Surely the same club that pushed for the change would not of exposed yet more holes in the process? Could it happen??? lol

[rallyboy]

smacks of poor due diligence by the mafia.

 

Everyone knew about the small creditors problem, it was in the public domain.

Any sensible company buying the club would have had Chanrai sign paperwork agreeing to sort the payments himself, or would have taken on the debt themselves and knocked a bit off the purchase price - either way it would be sorted.

 

Ignoring it and not realising it would be horrific PR for the club is an odd way of going about things.

And this is a U turn and a new stance, pompey previously were 'working to pay it', now they claim it isn't their problem?

 

As for Chanrai, the few must be confused.

Is he the man who financed the 2nd illegal cup run and the win at St Marys and saved the club when no one else would, or is he a crook who has ripped off locals, and the man responsible for any problem the current regime has?

I 4-1 think that will be another juggling act as they endeavour to be selective about their view of his role.

 

 

Either way the small creditors money is absolutely nothing to a big company - the damage done everyday by it hanging around is enormous.

 

It gives the impression that they haven't got two cocaine-scented rubles to rub together.

[Saint_John]

Interesting how the new company believe the adminitrators created this little nugget in a "very wooly way" Its like they are trying to wash their hands of the whole process just in case someone trys to come back and bit them on the arse about it all.

 

Surley the small creditors monies are owed legally within the CVA and the promises to pay full amounts under £2500 were just words to make the children follow the pied piper. If there is no legal document about paying full amounts under £2500 then the small creditors will get 20p in the £1 just the same as everyone else. Can they then argue that they would of voted "No" had that been the case all along? Can they withdraw their vote? That could put the club on very dodgy ground along with the FL as they rattified and rubber stamped the golden share and lack of penaltys for agreeing a CVA that duped the creditors.

 

Who looks more stupid? Small creditors? FL? Or the Ruskies?

 

The wording of the CVA's "Proposal" to creditors (28 May) can be found here

http://www.uhy-uk.com/media/download/turnaround-and-recovery/PFC CVA 28th May Final2.pdf

 

Section 2.02 (page 14) says :-

Subject to the approval of the CVA, Portpin Limited has undertaken to payall unsecured creditors with claims of up to £2,500 in full and to pay anyamounts owed to Charitable Organisations in full. Upon repayment, the claims of these creditors will be subrogated to Portpin Limited.

 

 

Over to the legal bods, but it implies to me that it was Portpin that made the promise, as it says in a very "wooly way".

 

[pfc123]

OK so the NEXT questions are...

 

Who owns the Skates?

Who went through FAPP?

 

The company or the people?

 

Zzzzzzzzzzzz...........dear oh dear, is life in Dubai really that boring that you have to try to re-heat the same old chestnuts over and over again?

[dubai_phil]

Zzzzzzzzzzzz...........dear oh dear, is life in Dubai really that boring that you have to try to re-heat the same old chestnuts over and over again?

 

Nope

 

Another skate needs to go to specsavers

 

AFAIK CSI own the club & Roman & Vlad are the guys running it. No issue at all that's completely clear, and they RV have both passed FAPP.

 

However as posted above

 

Victor Muller [of Spyker cars NV] is also a co-founder AND CEO of Converse Sports Initiatives, which owns the Skates.

 

So all I asked was WHO went through FAPP. was it the boysh or was it CSI?

 

If it was CSI, who owns that? Does the FAPP actually check out the owners/shareholders of a legitimate Company?

 

It's as much to do with the "How to buy a football Club" issue as it is anything to do with your train set

[eurosaint]

Fair play to the Pompey trust in keeping the pressure on the club to do something !

At least they are not in denial, believing that everything is hunky dory, unlike our resident troll on this thread !

[holepuncture]

Yet again another appalling report, truly disgraceful, although we all saw it coming on here last July...

 

so everyone is refusing to pay charities and small businesses... As Rallyboy quite rightly pointed out, these kind of figures (about 2x weeks of TBH wages +employment costs) is quite simply chicken feed to a big company. A business the size of Pompeys should have ten times that amount as liquid cash in the bank... its simply good business practise, and why they cannot pay a £100k sum is very suspicious... the could even write it down as a marketing or PR exercise FFS...

 

pathetic and disgusting...

 

If I have the time this afternoon I will write a formal letter to the Football league demanding an enquiry into this latest piece work from our filthy neighbours. If anyone has any suggestions or can provide information to support my letter of concern please post them up.

 

The next claim is that the new co' wont be servicing the CVA? It wouldnt surpirse me at all...

[dubai_phil]

m up.

 

The next claim is that the new co' wont be servicing the CVA? It wouldnt surpirse me at all...

 

Although to be fair, this is highly speculative at this point in time.

 

Certainly the situation seems to be that the Old Co has gone and Newco exists. Nobody can tell what contracts and agreements are binding from the old to the new - we need one of our insolvency lawyers again - but if a company is wound up then it is pretty easy to ignore any agreements that company issued unless they really are cast in stone.

 

Did the Russkies do due dilligence? Yes they were alomost certainly given all the facts and figures regarding poopey 18 months ago when they were shopping. They had discussions with sensible recognised football people, so it leaves us with a good few weeks of speculation now about whether they found a loophole, as certainly back when they were talking to the Bompey Echo, they did not see any financial way to look at poopey. Did something change?

 

The old co has gone, a new co has managed to take over the Golden Share and gain a playing licence. While the FL rules are very strict regarding being in a CVA and exiting, if a loophole has been found to make that CVA non-binding, then it's time for a long dig of the FL rules.

 

Now THAT would be amusing - they get around the rules and the FL cannot do anything about it, will keep this going for a few more weeks.

[Frank's cousin]

This is all so confusing... what I would like to know is:

 

1. Will the new company (current club) pay creditors under the terms of the CVA?

2. Are they just paying the larger creditors with the small ones being the responibilty of Portpin?

3. What happens to Pompey under FA regulations on Admin/CVA IF they do NOT keep to the CVA?

4. What happens to Pompey under FA regulations if Portpin do not pay the small creditors as even if it is no longer their responsibilty to pay it, surely if making these payments (via Portpin) was part of the conditions to come out of Admin, then failure by Portpin to pay is a breech of the agreement?

5. What penalties would then be imposed on the new company/club?

6. Has Pompey discovered a loophole in FA regulations as the current company is not the one that went into Admin?

7. Will they in effect get away with this, and will we see the FA close a loophole after this horse manure has already bolted?

8. What do Corps et al think of this? Do pmpey fans care or are they laughing at the FA?

 

I would be just as angry with thsi kind of unswered and ambiguous situation regardless of what club had behaved like this (this is not just a case of being ****edd off because its pompey, but if a club can come out of admin, transfer the 'football club' and its golden share to a NEW company, and as such avoid further penalties if the OLD company default on the agreement with creditors... how can this be Fair or legal?

 

I presume the NEW company are responible for the larger creditors CVAs as its the parachute revenue that is due to pay this.... what is happening with this, anyone know?

 

Corps, its this quagmire, uncertainty and perception that things are not all above board and that there is a potential for 'avoiding' what was agreed that keeps this thread going - Surely you can see that this is about more than just Portsmouth, but about the credibiltyof the FA/FL in general and what is right and proper in ensuring fair competition?

[Frank's cousin]

Phil we must have been writing at the same time.... for me, If the NewCO can indeed avoid fulfilling the terms of the agreement to come out of Admin as the OldCo has been liquidated - then as I see it the only option that would be appropriate would be the withdrawal of the golden share to the NEW CO or at least a very heary points penalty/relgation etc... otherwise what credibilty would there be in the FA/FL.... feck all, thats what.

 

It makes me so angry as without credibility and a fair level playing field, sport is nothing but a sham. This rearly does need to be resolved... Why is the FL not looking into this? Surely they must recognise that this all needs clarification? Why teh feck does nobody care?

[dubai_phil]

Phil we must have been writing at the same time.... for me, If the NewCO can indeed avoid fulfilling the terms of the agreement to come out of Admin as the OldCo has been liquidated - then as I see it the only option that would be appropriate would be the withdrawal of the golden share to the NEW CO or at least a very heary points penalty/relgation etc... otherwise what credibilty would there be in the FA/FL.... feck all, thats what.

 

It makes me so angry as without credibility and a fair level playing field, sport is nothing but a sham. This rearly does need to be resolved... Why is the FL not looking into this? Surely they must recognise that this all needs clarification? Why teh feck does nobody care?

 

There is nothing to look at yet. It is really that simple. Speculation and analysis is one thing but to move into enquiry or even legal levels then there must be more than "a discussion of the possible scenarios). It is this discussion by so many with different backgrounds that has made this thread interesting. It also has a strange offshoot that much of the speculation has eventually been seen to come to pass.

 

So nothing has actually happened yet. In theory until any CVA payment is due to be made nothing can be looked at. In theory CSI could flip the club to someone else who would have no knowledge of the issues. All they care about is having a train set.

 

There is of course one other possible reason why nothing has been done, and that is the old conspiracy theory and the ability to get everything swept under the carpet by the FA et al.

 

Remember that the Al Fahim joke came about because a Senior FA figure introduced him. Also remember that Al Fahim's money was a Swiss Investment Fund. Also remember that fund msyteriously vanished.

 

Also and of course utterly unrelated, that disappearance occured as allegations started to surface that the fund's beneficial owner was someone who had happily passed the FAPP - Taksin.

 

So again no evidence but the few could well have been sacrificed for any number of crazy off the wall conspitatorial cover ups.

 

The Arms dealing Launderette

The FA cosy relationship with improper people

Fake Sheikhs

Chanrai's money lending schemes (what happened with that other Asian Money man? Yeung?)

And now at least people with a track reocrd in sport

[saint si]

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/518045165?-11209

 

Update, says new company under no legal right to pay money cva money as should have been old co.

 

Believe this refers specifically to paying 100% to small creditors (not part of the CVA), as opposed to paying the 25p due to all creditors (which is the CVA).

[pfc123]

This is all so confusing... what I would like to know is:

 

1. Will the new company (current club) pay creditors under the terms of the CVA?

2. Are they just paying the larger creditors with the small ones being the responibilty of Portpin?

3. What happens to Pompey under FA regulations on Admin/CVA IF they do NOT keep to the CVA?

4. What happens to Pompey under FA regulations if Portpin do not pay the small creditors as even if it is no longer their responsibilty to pay it, surely if making these payments (via Portpin) was part of the conditions to come out of Admin, then failure by Portpin to pay is a breech of the agreement?

5. What penalties would then be imposed on the new company/club?

6. Has Pompey discovered a loophole in FA regulations as the current company is not the one that went into Admin?

7. Will they in effect get away with this, and will we see the FA close a loophole after this horse manure has already bolted?

8. What do Corps et al think of this? Do pmpey fans care or are they laughing at the FA?

 

I would be just as angry with thsi kind of unswered and ambiguous situation regardless of what club had behaved like this (this is not just a case of being ****edd off because its pompey, but if a club can come out of admin, transfer the 'football club' and its golden share to a NEW company, and as such avoid further penalties if the OLD company default on the agreement with creditors... how can this be Fair or legal?

 

I presume the NEW company are responible for the larger creditors CVAs as its the parachute revenue that is due to pay this.... what is happening with this, anyone know?

 

Corps, its this quagmire, uncertainty and perception that things are not all above board and that there is a potential for 'avoiding' what was agreed that keeps this thread going - Surely you can see that this is about more than just Portsmouth, but about the credibiltyof the FA/FL in general and what is right and proper in ensuring fair competition?

 

On your last question for Corp, sorry, I'll jump in here and give an answer and it's No, because there isn't a Notts County takeover thread with 842 pages, or a Plymouth Argyle thread with 842 pages, but there's a Pompey takeover thread with 842 pages almost entirely because it's Pompey.

 

If you think these 842 pages worth of posts have been motivated by strong opinions about morals, the state of football, FA and FL governance and the FAPPT, you are naive in the extreme.

 

This thread is nothing more than an abbatoir, free for anyone to come in and hack away at the Pompey carcass at leisure, with everyone baying for more blood in the background. The only problem is that it's now descended into fantasy. The reason Frank's Cousin is confused is that poster after poster on here, thinking he's Poirot, goes off on some long meandering trawl through cyberspace and comes back with yet another new invented scenario where nasty old Pompey are up to their dastardly tricks again. Poirot's, or more accurately, Clouseau's post is then taken as fact by all, generating huge uproar all round before everyone goes home for tea.

 

Most of what is written on here is utter b*llocks, and most of you know it. People who are 'In The Know' generate bizarre flights of fancy as to who owns what in the car manufacturing industry. Sorry people, but most of you have too much time on your hands, time partly spent trawling the net for any small crumb of comfort that it's all a conspiracy that's about to implode any minute now.

 

And of course when it doesn't implode, someone else pops up to reassure those remaining who haven't smelt the coffee, that it's ok, come back, implosion really is just around the next corner, honest!

 

Desperate attempts to breath new life into the dead horse include: CVA non-payment, money laundering, the russian mafia, Spyker cars, Saab cars for Christs sake! Forthcoming gems laid squarely at Pompey's door will include mysteries such as Shergar, Lord Lucan, the Mary Celeste and the Bermuda Triangle.

 

Get real, it aint gonna happen. We're financially the closest watched football club in the country, not by you, but by people who really ARE In The Know.

 

If you still wanted to bleat about Pompey why not concentrate on the one stain that I will grant you is a disgrace- the still non-payment of sub £2500 small creditors. They've been saying for months that it will happen, but Chanrai clearly doesn't want to cough up and the new owners seem unwilling also. If Chanrai isn't going to, CSI should pay it in full right now. It's not big money to them.

 

The rest is just rubbish, complete rubbish.......

[rallyboy]

surely the CVA proposal was a legally binding document upon which the creditors made their decisions, including the one to vote HMRC out of the picture?

 

By including club owner Chanrai's personal offer in the CVA proposal, AA made the committment to pay the small creditors in full a requirement for a penalty-free exit from administration.

 

Any experts wish to throw some light on that?

 

 

And even if they have found a legal loophole to further rape the local community, we all know that legal things have never bothered the FL who have their own rules and will take action against any club trying to get their golden share in a manner they don't approve of.

 

I'd like to think that any attempt by the club to distance themselves from the club's debts just because of ownership change will be robustly dealt with by the authorities.

 

The league can't make them pay anything - but they can stop them from playing.

[Gingeletiss]

This is all so confusing...

 

I would be just as angry with thsi kind of unswered and ambiguous situation regardless of what club had behaved like this (this is not just a case of being ****edd off because its pompey, but if a club can come out of admin, transfer the 'football club' and its golden share to a NEW company, and as such avoid further penalties if the OLD company default on the agreement with creditors... how can this be Fair or legal?

 

Did they not do this 13 years ago......go into administration, set up a new company, then fail to pay their debts from the old company?

[Gemmel]

pfc123 There is some truth in the part you mention about some posters going off on a tangent and grabbing at false straws, but I personally believe there are still unanswered questions, ongoing criminal court cases, Forensic investigations into the accounts and a review from the insolvency commision, that all need to be completed before we leave the abbatoir.

 

For instance, if you read the wording below, I'm no lawyer, but surely if you voted in favour of the CVA, based on the fact that you would receive all your money (For claims under 2.5k) and that was the criereria of the voting, which is now not going to happen, then can they withdraw theri vote towards the CVA or is the vote null and void?

 

Other questions, would be that Chanrai has claimed he is being paid over a period of time and is unsure of whether he will get all his money back - Does he still hold a charge or ownership over pfc until these are paid?

and not so much a question, but one of the russians (Can't remember which one - it is on this thread), made two sweeping statements in a general interview; The first was that there was money to be made in football and if Roman Abromovich walked away tomorrow, he would have made millions out of it. That was closely followed by the statement that pompey are debt free........ Now my dog knows that both of these are total bolliacks and together with his checkered past, suggests things still dont add up.

Subject to the approval of the CVA, Portpin Limited has undertaken to payall unsecured creditors with claims of up to £2,500 in full and to pay anyamounts owed to Charitable Organisations in full. Upon repayment, the claims of these creditors will be subrogated to Portpin Limited.

 

[Gorgiesaint]

On your last question for Corp, sorry, I'll jump in here and give an answer and it's No, because there isn't a Notts County takeover thread with 842 pages, or a Plymouth Argyle thread with 842 pages, but there's a Pompey takeover thread with 842 pages almost entirely because it's Pompey.

 

If you think these 842 pages worth of posts have been motivated by strong opinions about morals, the state of football, FA and FL governance and the FAPPT, you are naive in the extreme.

 

Think of it like this, if the council want to build an abbatoir in my town then I have both a moral viewpoint and a personal viewpoint. My moral viewpoint may be that it's required as I'm a meat eater wherever it's built, but my personal viewpoint would be that I'm happy if its on the other side of town, less happy if it's next door because I don't want to deal with the smell. Morally it wouldn't matter which club was involved, but right now from a personal perspective, the Pompey abbatoir stinks

 

This thread is nothing more than an abbatoir, free for anyone to come in and hack away at the Pompey carcass at leisure, with everyone baying for more blood in the background. The only problem is that it's now descended into fantasy. The reason Frank's Cousin is confused is that poster after poster on here, thinking he's Poirot, goes off on some long meandering trawl through cyberspace and comes back with yet another new invented scenario where nasty old Pompey are up to their dastardly tricks again. Poirot's, or more accurately, Clouseau's post is then taken as fact by all, generating huge uproar all round before everyone goes home for tea.

 

Most of what is written on here is utter b*llocks, and most of you know it. People who are 'In The Know' generate bizarre flights of fancy as to who owns what in the car manufacturing industry. Sorry people, but most of you have too much time on your hands, time partly spent trawling the net for any small crumb of comfort that it's all a conspiracy that's about to implode any minute now.

 

And of course when it doesn't implode, someone else pops up to reassure those remaining who haven't smelt the coffee, that it's ok, come back, implosion really is just around the next corner, honest!

 

Probably most of what is written is rubbish, but even if 1% is true then I would be worried. That is still a lot of dirt to be getting rid of.

 

Desperate attempts to breath new life into the dead horse include: CVA non-payment, money laundering, the russian mafia, Spyker cars, Saab cars for Christs sake! Forthcoming gems laid squarely at Pompey's door will include mysteries such as Shergar, Lord Lucan, the Mary Celeste and the Bermuda Triangle.

 

Get real, it aint gonna happen. We're financially the closest watched football club in the country, not by you, but by people who really ARE In The Know.

 

Yes we know, when is the forensic investigation being published, you know, the one where the forensic accountants called in the fraud experts? And talking of defrauding people, I wonder how that court case is going for your ex-owner, ex-chairman & ex-manager?

 

If you still wanted to bleat about Pompey why not concentrate on the one stain that I will grant you is a disgrace- the still non-payment of sub £2500 small creditors. They've been saying for months that it will happen, but Chanrai clearly doesn't want to cough up and the new owners seem unwilling also. If Chanrai isn't going to, CSI should pay it in full right now. It's not big money to them.

 

The rest is just rubbish, complete rubbish.......

 

We have, just read most of this page and much of the last for starters. So if it's not big money for CSI, why haven't they paid it off?