angelman Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 does that mean PFC is insolvent as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 I read something on there about portpin being a secured creditor. Does that mean chanrai is owner again? Lmfao! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 does that mean PFC is insolvent as well? Not necessarily. Depends entirely on how reliant the club is on CSI's money on a month-to-month basis. Without direct access to the books, it's pretty much impossible to know for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Not necessarily. Depends entirely on how reliant the club is on CSI's money on a month-to-month basis. Without direct access to the books, it's pretty much impossible to know for sure. What would be your guess for what happens now? Chanrai takes control? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Are we sure this thread shouldn't be closed now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Oh dear oh dear oh dear, Christmas coming early for Gingeletiss CSI subject to insolvency procedings :lol:great news Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 http://fansonline.net/portsmouth/mb/view.php?id=390213 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 This farce just will not stop. Cant' see them going into administration again, they'll wiggle themselves out of it somehow so they can continue this season - but there is now an extreme possibility that they'll be L1 very shortly, and continue to fall through the leagues. They're back to a position where they'll need to get rid of their higher earners again. (Lawrence, Mullins, Tal) etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Not necessarily. Depends entirely on how reliant the club is on CSI's money on a month-to-month basis. Without direct access to the books, it's pretty much impossible to know for sure. I once heard of another South coast club, who's parent company went into administration, any one remember the authorites stance on that Without being overdramatic, and against everything I have posted to date on this thread, this really might be it for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruffalo Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 pn_Emma_JuddEmma Judd I have a feeling today is going to be an interesting one for Pompey owners CSI. Let's hope it's interesting in a good way! Better than we could have hoped. Thanks for the early heads up, Emma.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 What would be your guess for what happens now? Chanrai takes control? It depends what Chainrai's security is held over. If it's CSI's shareholding in PFC, I wouldn't expect him to get his hands on anything for some time, as CSI entering administration (as seems pretty much nailed-on now) would protect them from creditors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 emichalczuk Joe Michalczuk Chainrai's Portpin files a charge making it a secured creditor of CSI...worrying times for #Pompey - if CSI default..Balram could be back Unconfirmed rumours that Chainrai might even be filing for insolvency of PFC - via Pompey Trust Chairman@AshBeen23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 I once heard of another South coast club, who's parent company went into administration, any one remember the authorites stance on that Without being overdramatic, and against everything I have posted to date on this thread, this really might be it for them We were completly different to this. We'd have been ok if we still had the old peopls home, as it was, there was SLH and all it had was the club, a blatant dodge, CSI actually have other realy buisness's to prop up as well. West Ham were much the same. Of course, with no finding coming into the filth they too could soon be in admin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 It depends what Chainrai's security is held over. If it's CSI's shareholding in PFC, I wouldn't expect him to get his hands on anything for some time, as CSI entering administration (as seems pretty much nailed-on now) would protect them from creditors. And as it is PFC's parent company, would that not leave them subject to the same rules as we had when we went into admin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 I once heard of another South coast club, who's parent company went into administration, any one remember the authorites stance on that Without being overdramatic, and against everything I have posted to date on this thread, this really might be it for them Unfortunately there is a fundamental difference between the two circumstances. While Southampton Leisure Holdings plc was essentially the football club, CSI does own a pretty diverse range of companies with absolutely no connection to Pompey, so I can't see them being penalised on that rule. The only thing, IMO, that can get them is if PFC is heavily reliant on CSI's cash to prop up its own cashflow. As I said just now, it's difficult to tell just how reliant they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Islander Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Er toast anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Unfortunately there is a fundamental difference between the two circumstances. While Southampton Leisure Holdings plc was essentially the football club, CSI does own a pretty diverse range of companies with absolutely no connection to Pompey, so I can't see them being penalised on that rule. The only thing, IMO, that can get them is if PFC is heavily reliant on CSI's cash to prop up its own cashflow. As I said just now, it's difficult to tell just how reliant they are. I guess we will find out soon! Haven't posted on here for a while but I read every day. If they go pop I will be most said to miss most of phil's nonsensical drivel . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Not necessarily. Depends entirely on how reliant the club is on CSI's money on a month-to-month basis. Without direct access to the books, it's pretty much impossible to know for sure. FLMFAO FPMSFL ROFLMFAO Portsmouth FC is a company wholly owned by CSI - why even our friend Corpse has pointed this out to us! In the same way that Southampton Football club was wholly owned by Southampton Leisure Holdings. When SLH went into administration, so did SFC Ergo, now that the parent company is in administration, so is PFC Two admins in three years means the FL 'should' revoke their licence - by their own rules. The question is, will they have the hairy ones to do it! They should do, otherwise all their rules become a bit of a mockery. Christmas has come early for us 'toast' advocates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Just as long as they hold off until at least December 19th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Where's Ho? Ho are you there? just wondered if you had any views you wanted to share with us. Ho? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 FLMFAO FPMSFL ROFLMFAO Portsmouth FC is a company wholly owned by CSI - why even our friend Corpse has pointed this out to us! In the same way that Southampton Football club was wholly owned by Southampton Leisure Holdings. When SLH went into administration, so did SFC Ergo, now that the parent company is in administration, so is PFC Two admins in three years means the FL 'should' revoke their licence - by their own rules. The question is, will they have the hairy ones to do it! They should do, otherwise all their rules become a bit of a mockery. Christmas has come early for us 'toast' advocates But I thin the point is that they are not 'intrinsically linked' with their parent company like we were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMPR Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Wont be admin this time. Club will be extinct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimond Geezer Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Two admins in three years means the FL 'should' revoke their licence - by their own rules. Is that the case though, as first time around they were in the Prem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Is that the case though, as first time around they were in the Prem? This could be another loophole to exploit as they were in the Premier League when they entered administration (i.e. "suffered an insolvency event", as the rules would probably say). However, the courts may determine that "Newco" is in breach of its CVA because its 100% owner has gone into administration itself and initiate liquidation proceedings. I do think jumping to that sort of conclusion will have to wait until the end of this week to determine whether the players get paid on time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 The news journalist just tweeted that Andronikou is the administrator or CSI! You couldn't make it up! Lmao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint si Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 I wonder if they tightened up the rules after our dispute about parent company versus club... http://www.football-league.co.uk/regulations/20110629/section-3-the-league_2293633_2125717 12.3 Sporting Sanctions Introduction The following rule provides for how sporting sanctions will be applied to Clubs when the Club, or any Group Undertaking, becomes subject to or suffers an Insolvency Event, and also makes provision for an appeals mechanism, but only on the grounds of 'Force Majeure' 12.3.2 If a Group Undertaking of a Club becomes subject to or suffers an Insolvency Event, then the Board shall have the power to impose upon the Club a deduction of 10 points scored or to be scored in the League Competition. In exercising this power the Board shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case and to:....(etc) http://www.football-league.co.uk/regulations/20110629/section-1-general_2293633_2125698 'Group Undertaking' has the meaning set out in section 1161(5) of the 2006 Act. So, can anyone find that definition of "Group Undertaking". Whilst it is not the same as our situation (accepted), if the parent company is bust, then does that count under the league's rules...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 https://mobile.twitter.com/#!/pn_neil_allen Lol lol lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mozz Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 This is the definition of "Group undertaking" referred to in the FL regulations: (5)In the Companies Acts “group undertaking”, in relation to an undertaking, means an undertaking which is—. (a)a parent undertaking or subsidiary undertaking of that undertaking, or. (b)a subsidiary undertaking of any parent undertaking of that undertaking.. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/1161 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wurzel Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 [video=youtube_share;A949JshqvbI] Looks like this would be more like the West Ham parent company in admin scenario than our own. BUT how many more chances can the authorities (football and corporate) be prepared to give them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saints_is_the_south Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/pompey-past/great-matches/breaking_news_pompey_owners_go_into_administration_1_3292526 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohwhenthesaints Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 The news journalist just tweeted that Andronikou is the administrator or CSI! You couldn't make it up! Lmao. What a ****ing surprise. So much fishy business down there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 If they tightened up the rules after us then sfc have had a direct impact in PFC's demise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruffalo Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Statutory meaning of 'undertaking', etc. ss. 1161 - Meaning of “undertaking” and related expressions (5) In the Companies Acts “group undertaking”, in relation to an undertaking, means an undertaking which is— (a) a parent undertaking or subsidiary undertaking of that undertaking, or (b) a subsidiary undertaking of any parent undertaking of that undertaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint si Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 I wonder if they tightened up the rules after our dispute about parent company versus club... http://www.football-league.co.uk/regulations/20110629/section-3-the-league_2293633_2125717 12.3 Sporting Sanctions Introduction The following rule provides for how sporting sanctions will be applied to Clubs when the Club, or any Group Undertaking, becomes subject to or suffers an Insolvency Event, and also makes provision for an appeals mechanism, but only on the grounds of 'Force Majeure' 12.3.2 If a Group Undertaking of a Club becomes subject to or suffers an Insolvency Event, then the Board shall have the power to impose upon the Club a deduction of 10 points scored or to be scored in the League Competition. In exercising this power the Board shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case and to:....(etc) http://www.football-league.co.uk/regulations/20110629/section-1-general_2293633_2125698 'Group Undertaking' has the meaning set out in section 1161(5) of the 2006 Act. So, can anyone find that definition of "Group Undertaking". Whilst it is not the same as our situation (accepted), if the parent company is bust, then does that count under the league's rules...? http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/1161 In the Companies Acts “group undertaking”, in relation to an undertaking, means an undertaking which is— a parent undertaking or subsidiary undertaking of that undertaking, or Oh dear oh dear... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_Jonny Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Looks like they'll be hit with a points penalty. Dear oh dear oh dear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 The news journalist just tweeted that Andronikou is the administrator or CSI! You couldn't make it up! Lmao. Time to shut this thread? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mozz Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 12.3.2 (a), (b), © & (d) of FL regs do seem to enshrine the ability for the FL to make it up as they go along with regard to parent companys going into admin. Even if the club and parent company aren't seen as intrisically linked they can still deduct on the basis of taking into account the integrity of the compeition and the reputation of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericofarabia Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Child-mailer....Child-mailer? This is some sort of new service being introduced by Royal Mail, yes? Ok, I get it. Yes, I can see it now: In fake American infomercial accent: "New from the Post office- Going on holiday? Want to save money on expensive air fares? Want more time alone with the wife? Got kids? If the answer is YES! to all of these, send your little darlings on holiday to Benidorm by post with: 'CHILD-MAILER!' With easy, youth size zip-up pouches, your offspring will be hermetically sealed in a survival cell that will enable them to withstand all the thrills and spills of Europe's finest mail services, arriving safely* at your holiday destination a week** into your holiday, and at half the cost of a budget airline ticket! SPEND! More time with the missus while the kids are extracted from a jammed sorting machine in Madrid! SAVE! Money, as the kids will be too sick for days to want to go on the latest gut-wrenching rollercoaster! FEEL PRIDE! Knowing you've given your kids an adventure they'll never forget- assuming they still remember anything after having a half a ton of newly printed Drachma's dumped on top of them at the Athens airport sorting office! CHILD-MAILER: almost approved by the NSPCC! *Safe arrival in Italy not guaranteed **two weeks if holidaying in Greece Sorry mate but, like Corp, you've lost me with this one. I tend to spell and grammar check as I'm one of the pedants who picks people up on their errors. Nope, no error there. Quite, correctly, as opposed to quiet. LOL ... maybe it was a bit obscure but and not intentionally aimed at you, but all of us Anyway it looks like we have bigger fish to fry today to keep PFC123 and Ho occupied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 (edited) Odds just went long on making the 1000 pages... Edited 29 November, 2011 by Pugwash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 [TABLE] [TR] [TD=bgcolor: #ffffff][/TD] [TD=bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=bgcolor: #ffffff, colspan: 2]CONVERS Sports Initiatives, the owners of Portsmouth FC, are in administration, The News can reveal. Accountancy firm UHY Hacker Young have confirmed they were appointed as adminstrators on Friday. Peter Kubik and Andrew Andonikou, who were administrators of Portsmouth FC in 2009, have been appointed as joint-administrators. More details to follow as soon as possible[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 The news journalist just tweeted that Andronikou is the administrator or CSI! You couldn't make it up! Lmao. He just wants to make sure he earns even more fees and protects his interest in the first administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/pompey-past/great-matches/breaking_news_pompey_owners_go_into_administration_1_3292526 20 Drayton in Singapore Tuesday, November 29, 2011 at 02:24 PM appointed administrators last Friday, oops! now thats a biggie. Ummmmm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/15944523.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 BTW, is this correct: "A club going into administration twice in three years would have their membership of the League withdrawn" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holepuncture Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Good to hear that the new co is indeed responsible and legally binded to honour the CVA, whether it is the loan shark or the russian mafia that has to pay it - couldnt care less. the creditors voted yes for a deal whereby AA can name his price on the 'expenses'. As I said a million pages ago, if a big business took me for a ride and then offered me a deal like that I would have two choices. a. Accept that I've been conned and take the potential pittance over a few years like a feeble little lapdog. b. Vote against it, put them out of business, and dance on their dirty corporate grave. Other than if you are one of the few, I cannot see why any small business wouldn't go for the latter - It would be B for me every time. Then again I'm not a big fan of people stealing money off me - perhaps the creditors are more rounded citizens than I and take these things lightly. The creditors voted for a shafting and that's exactly what they are getting. I though Andys expenses were around £1m, or is it likely to rise over the years? Even the administrators at skate house are dodgy, nothing is clean down that way, its like a disease. speaking of vulnerable creditors who bent over for AA and the boys, it seems the skates and the russian mafia are looking to line some more innocent parties to mug off and steal from: http://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/LatestNews/news/League-Begins-Search-For-201213-Charity-Partner-2853.aspx Fans are being asked to vote for the charity they want to see the club steal from, bit of a toughie that! You couldnt make it up... In the comments, someone called realmole2 is claiming CSI have just gone into administration… Interesting, as it's a rumour I also heard yesterday PFC is a subsidary company of CSI, how does the saying go, inextricably linked[/]... unless they blag there way out of it in a West Ham holding company sort of way... but if they can do that, then they have no money coming forward and we all know they are well under breakeven week-by-week... i dont think Lampitt will be chucking any money in the kitty! I guess CSI need to fold just to get some protection, all the articles from the Baltic press suggest Vlad robbed the Lithuanian publics life savings to fund his personal projects, which is basically CSI and Pompey... I suspect that when Roman publically bleated "we are trying to save a lot of jobs" and "we are trying to save the business" blah blah blah, he was refering to the CSI corporate structure... the little boys club of cars, golf, and of course poopey: http://www.converssport.com/structure Heres a nice write up from the respectable and upstanding CSI 'Five Months at PFC' , some gems from this load of spin and guff glazing over the criminal undercurrent of money laundering and corruption: Funds have been set aside for the improvement of many of the toilets and this work has now begun. Some of the changes have not been quite so visible but are equally important, with important improvement work to guttering as well as an overhaul of the heating and plumbing services to the team dressing rooms. This reflects the continuing strength of the PFC brand. We are only five months into our ownership of Portsmouth Football Club and are certainly looking to the future with optimism. ... We will soon have our five-year strategy in place, Roflcopter We're not going to make any grand statements about the ground, PMSL Do Lampitt and Chinny realise 2x administrations = expulsion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Neil Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 [video=youtube_share;WJmKStqugMc] TOAST! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyinthesky Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Undoubtedly there will reamin many twists and turns along the way Meanwhile I feel sorry for the genuine Pompey fans who love their football and their club They have been badly let down As for the significant minority of mindless morons, recent bandwagon jumpers, and those who rejoiced in our problems a few years back, I do hope you suffer fully from the ridicule and shame being heaped down on your shambles of a club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 I LOVE THIS THREAD!!!!!!! :lol: Let's all laugh at Pompey...Let's all laugh at Pompey... la la la laaaaaaaahhhhhhh!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 speaking of vulnerable creditors who bent over for AA and the boys, it seems the skates and the russian mafia are looking to line some more innocent parties to mug off and steal from: http://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/LatestNews/news/League-Begins-Search-For-201213-Charity-Partner-2853.aspx Fans are being asked to vote for the charity they want to see the club steal from, bit of a toughie that! You couldnt make it up... I voted for the NSPCC............ :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts