Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga


Fitzhugh Fella

Recommended Posts

Toast time I think...

 

"A club going into administration twice in three years would have their membership of the League withdrawn"

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/2973263.stm

 

 

I hope the journalists writing articles are made aware of this!

 

I think the get out clause will be this. When Southampton were docked points because of the parent company's administration this was justified on the basis that the parent company was, basically, just SFC. Pompey's parent company is a real parent company with a number of commercial interests, therefore, there administration won't count and, therefore, they won't be kicked out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And despite the "inextricably linked" comments in this thread, I could see a case being made that Convers is different to Southampton Leisure Holdings. There isn't the same one to one relationship.

 

Agree, this is technically different to SLH vs SFC

 

That said, surely the writing is on the wall for the football club.

 

You'd have thought so. All "the club" has to do to avoid going into administration is prove that it is a 'going concern' in its own right....simple as that....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait for ..................

 

1) Chanrai claiming the ownership never fully passed to CSI because it was incumbent only under the terms of a promisory note from CSI or Snoras.

 

and because of that

 

2) AA announcing that as CSI never owned the football club no second Administration has occured to the club only to a company who didnt actually own it.

 

Chanrai will then walk in as the white knight again to sort it all out !!!!!!

 

And the cheats will get away with it again !

 

IMHO only of course

 

Chanrai will liquidate the thing if he has to come back.

 

Don't think he'll waste any more time running a football club he never wanted in the first place.

 

If he has a lien over all assets, my guess is he will simply sell off the component parts for what he can get and then walk off into the sunset ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With aa just announcing on sky sports he is looking for a buyer, there is one name left to come up.

 

I predict he already has a hard on and that he has just renewed his hosting contract. All that is left for him to do, is check that the monkeys and chickens are still ok.

 

I'll bet my life that clown will turn up, before this circus has left town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait for ..................

 

1) Chanrai claiming the ownership never fully passed to CSI because it was incumbent only under the terms of a promisory note from CSI or Snoras.

 

and because of that

 

2) AA announcing that as CSI never owned the football club no second Administration has occured to the club only to a company who didnt actually own it.

 

Chanrai will then walk in as the white knight again to sort it all out !!!!!!

 

And the cheats will get away with it again !

 

IMHO only of course

 

^My money is on this I fear

 

CSI were paying Chanrai installments, effectively buying Poertsmouth Football Club on hire purchase (?)

 

If I were to buy a car on hire purchase then right up until I pay my last installment the car is still owned by the company I bought it from, isn't it? I don't "own" it as such before then?

 

With AA coming back into the frame this has got all the hallmarks of another "getting away with it" chapter in PFC's recent history...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With aa just announcing on sky sports he is looking for a buyer, there is one name left to come up.

 

I predict he already has a hard on and that he has just renewed his hosting contract. All that is left for him to do, is check that the monkeys and chickens are still ok.

 

I'll bet my life that clown will turn up, before this circus has left town.

 

;):facepalm::toppa::suspicious:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sky saying that parent company in administration and Portsmouth football club continue to trade.....

 

Isn't this exactly the same situation that we found ourselves in? And the football league threw the book at us.

 

As has been mentioned in the thread , although circumstances may be a little different technically; there is no way on earth PFC can survive financially without the support of the parent company the number simply do not add up. Without serious investment and soon they are toast. If you had a large wedge to spend would you seriously 'invest' it there at the moment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sky saying that parent company in administration and Portsmouth football club continue to trade.....

 

Isn't this exactly the same situation that we found ourselves in? And the football league threw the book at us.

 

I do not think it is the same. We were trading as Southampton Leisure holdings on the stock exchange. I think in the skates case they are two seperate companies with the same director/chairman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did the money for Huseklupp, Varney, Norris etc in the summer for either big fees and/or big wages come from? Plus they still have others on huge wages like Ben Haim, Kitson, Lawrence etc.

 

David Lampitt stated recently they were they were the second highest net spenders in the summer transfer window. How did they manage to fund that and continue to fund that wage bill and the CVA that is yet to start?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been mentioned in the thread , although circumstances may be a little different technically; there is no way on earth PFC can survive financially without the support of the parent company the number simply do not add up. Without serious investment and soon they are toast. If you had a large wedge to spend would you seriously 'invest' it there at the moment?

 

This though should and probably will be their downfall......maybe!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did the money for Huseklupp, Varney, Norris etc in the summer for either big fees and/or big wages come from? Plus they still have others on huge wages like Ben Haim, Kitson, Lawrence etc.

 

David Lampitt stated recently they were they were the second highest net spenders in the summer transfer window. How did they manage to fund that and continue to fund that wage bill and the CVA that is yet to start?

 

On a totally different matter - how much money went missing from Snoras?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how the wage bill will be paid this week....

 

Maybe the administrator of the parent company will loan the wages to the 'going concern' that is Portsmouth Football Club 2010 and claw it back later through either the proceeds of a sale or liquidation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It speaks volumes that there is only funding "for the short term". If PFC was trading solvently, and not reliant on their parent company, surely they could continue trading regardlessly? True, they would need investment to improve, but that is not what Lampitt is saying; they need funding to survive. And I guess it depends on what your definition of "short term" is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Potentially big, big differences with SLH. At least in theory.

 

If SLH had hit the buffers because another subsidiary it owned had collapsed (e.g. if SLH had owned Northern Rock), but Southampton FC had - in its own right - been a going concern, then we would almost certainly have avoided the points penalty.

 

In practice, however, it seems to me almost impossible to believe that Pompey are a going concern in their own right.

 

Others have crunched the numbers endlessly. There is no way the club's income covers its expenditure and liabilities - their only prayer was (and remains) a sugar daddy bailing them out.

 

I would have thought that Portsmouth FC are now trading while insolvent. Which, I believe, is illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Potentially big, big differences with SLH. At least in theory.

 

If SLH had hit the buffers because another subsidiary it owned had collapsed (e.g. if SLH had owned Northern Rock), but Southampton FC had - in its own right - been a going concern, then we would almost certainly have avoided the points penalty.

 

In practice, however, it seems to me almost impossible to believe that Pompey are a going concern in their own right.

 

Others have crunched the numbers endlessly. There is no way the club's income covers its expenditure and liabilities - their only prayer was (and remains) a sugar daddy bailing them out.

 

I would have thought that Portsmouth FC are now trading while insolvent. Which, I believe, is illegal.

 

That's the crux of the matter. The key question to me is how long does a 'child' company have to prove that it can trade solvently without the support of it's ailing parent company before it is put out of its misery? Days, weeks, months, years? Or is it entirely up to the administrator's discretion as to when that moment arrives?

 

And who is it that acts as judge? The Office of Fair trading? The football authorities? The administrator alone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.companyrescue.co.uk/company-rescue/guides/insolvency-testWe're under lot's of pressure, but is our company insolvent? How can I tell and what is insolvency?"The Cashflow TestSimply - can the company pay its debts when they fall due for payment?The Balance Sheet TestSimply - do you owe more than you own as a company or are the company's assets exceeded by its liabilities? If yes, then the company could be insolvent. The Legal Action TestIf a creditor has obtained a County Court Judgment, this may demonstrate the company's insolvency and the creditor may petition to wind up the company. (See compulsory liquidation).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the get out clause will be this. When Southampton were docked points because of the parent company's administration this was justified on the basis that the parent company was, basically, just SFC. Pompey's parent company is a real parent company with a number of commercial interests, therefore, there administration won't count and, therefore, they won't be kicked out.

 

As Steve has pointed out the question is the economic link between the parent company and PFC. If that is found to be an inextricably linked (ie the club depends on CSI), they will be in trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget HMRC, they won't take a chance this time of being a major creditor so if CSI pays them its too late, if PFC is liable and can't pay then I can see HMRC winding the club up. Whatever, PFC won't get away unscathed, some form of penalty awaits the IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote from a Skate board:

 

http://fansonline.net/portsmouth/mb/view.php?id=390213

The logical thought process dictates that this isnt an accident.Rather an engineered exit strategy.One that has been bought forward by the bank liquidation.

There have been too many dirty b.astrds involved here,and they have potentially just sounded our death knell.

 

Reminds me of:

 

http://rumafia.com/material.php?id=220

New scam leads to Portsmouth

 

Once the scheme of stealing money of the Central Bank failed to go through Urin, Alexander and Vladimir Antonov with Victor Yampolsky offered Mendeleev and the leadership of Russian Railways to carry it on. They found full support there.

 

According to the bankers’ and state monopolies representatives’ plan, STB, on the edge of bankruptcy, will be merged with “The Bank of Savings and Loans" (Sberkredbank is owned by Vladimir Antonov). The new bank, based on its assets, may qualify for a stabilization loan from the Central Bank, which can amount to 10 billion rubles (about $ 320 million). Of this money 8 billion rubles will go to repay the debt to Russian Railways, about 800 million rubles to be transferred to MOITK (Moscow Regional Investment Trust Company), STB and the Antonovs being the old-time debtors.

 

The funds from private individual deposits will add up to the remaining 1.2 billion rubles of the stabilization loan – the newly merged bank plans to offer good interest rates on deposits. The interested parties may thus divide among themselves more than 2 billion rubles and spend it at their discretion. For example, why not purchase the English "Portsmouth"?

 

The newly merged bank will stay afloat for some time, then it can be driven to bankruptcy, assigning stabilization loan repayment to the Central Bank to Deposit Insurance Agency.

 

According to Russian intelligence, the documents were recently filed in the Central Bank for the merger of STB and Sberkredbank, and they will be approved soon. Yampolsky was informed about this by Central Bank Deputy Chairman Melikian, who also promised that the newly merged bank will qualify for a stabilization loan for at least 10 billion rubles. Rumafia correspondents reported that in early February Yampolsky met with the head of the Russian Railways, Vladimir Yakunin. During the meeting they discussed the creation of the merged bank, what will happen to the debt and a possible stabilization loan from the Central Bank and the purchase of ... English Portsmouth. According to the same source, top managers of Russian Railways also expressed interest in the purchase of this football club.

It is worth mentioning that Vladimir Antonov has been long haunted by the fame of Roman Abramovich who owns football club “Chelsea”. Antonov also wants to be a legal billionaire and owner of any team. Meanwhile, he cannot even become a legal owner of “Saab”. GM flatly refused to sell Saab to Spykers Cars for as long as Antonovs are the cowners of the latter. Father and son faked the sale of their stake in Spykers Cars (it was a bogus deal). This left Vladimir Antonov as of of the owners of Spykers Cars and the company then proceeded in purchasing Saab. Antonov just recently announced that he is going to purchase Spykers Cars again, which already owns Saab.

 

Vladmir Antonov was not much more successful in purchasing a European football club. His negotiations to purchase “Glasgow Rangers” or "Bournemouth" ended in failure, after that he suddenly expressed interest in Russian football market. In 2010 he announced his intent to purchase Moscow Region “Saturn”. This was not a random choice. This club was on the edge of bankruptcy and owed 800 million rubles to MOITK. The amount of the debt became the purchase price for the club. The Antonovs, Yampolsky and STB were well familiar how to work with this entity, since they have been feeding on it for a long time. STB still owes 800 million rubles to MOITK. Antonov chose to play on this fact. He knows that this debt will be paid out of Central Bank budget, so you can just add couple hundred millions and get “Saturn” from MOITK. “Saturn” itself cannot pay a penny. However, Antonov’s plans did not find any support among his partners – Russian Railways already owns football club “Locomotiv”. As a result, “Saturn” has ceased to exist, and the masterminds of the grand scam decided to focus their efforts on the purchase of English “Portsmouth

 

And now it all makes sense. The Lativians may have forced his hand but this has been the plan all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^My money is on this I fear

 

CSI were paying Chanrai installments, effectively buying Poertsmouth Football Club on hire purchase (?)

 

If I were to buy a car on hire purchase then right up until I pay my last installment the car is still owned by the company I bought it from, isn't it? I don't "own" it as such before then?

 

With AA coming back into the frame this has got all the hallmarks of another "getting away with it" chapter in PFC's recent history...

 

This situation is not the same as PFC (2010)Ltd is owned by CSI Ltd (The shareholders) Chainrai has a debenture over PFC (2010) Ltd's assets for money he was owed when he sold the club to CSI. Antonov was a director of PFC until today. A director is a separate legal entity from the Company (Soloman V Soloman 1896). Directors though, can be liable for unlawful trading (whilst their Compamn is insolvent) under the Incolvency Act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So then if the parent company has gone into admin doesn't that mean they are due a points deduction again? If i remember right when that talk of Liverpool's parent company was about to go into admin last year the PL said they would get a 9 point deduction. So surely they now get another deduction and because it is the 2nd one in a year that is a 25 point deduction or something like that? If that is the case then they are relegated for sure.

 

I actually feel sorry for them. I know a lot of people here will be enjoying it and rubbing it in but there is a real chance they will go under now. I wouldn't wish that on any fan even our rivals. Without them we would have no derby games to look forward to.

 

If they get the Luton punishment then that will be game over for sure. Nobody will want to buy a club with £50m+ debts in the technical 5th division. If that happened i would imagine the fans would make their own club like AFC Wimbledon anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...