Weston Super Saint Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 ‘The league will now continue discussions with the club regarding the administration of its parent company and update the Board at its next meeting.’ Crucial phrase the League's spokesman uses there is 'parent company'. Looks like we're not going to be hit by them for CSI's administration which at least buys time... Erm..... I think the crucial phrase is 'update the Board at its next meeting'. It's the hope that kills ya! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfc123 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Legally Southampton FC didn't go into administration at any point. Mark Fry wasn't the administrator for the club. Andrew Andronikou and David Lampitt seem unaware that Southampton Leisure Holdings had non football related companies (like CSI does), that didn't matter to the Football League though. Pompey have had £10.8m put in (possibly stolen from Lithunain/Latvian bank customers) to keep them going and improve their squad, when that runs out they have admitted they can't fund themselves. Insolvent? I think so... Yes it mattered to the football league in your case because: 'The club and SLH were found to be inextricably linked.' You tried to cheat by claiming that they were separate entities. Leon Crouch admitted on Radio 5 that SLH was set up for the sole purpose of avoiding administration. And what was so called 'parent company' SLH's website address again? Oh yes, it was: saintsfc.co.uk. Noooooo! And the company address? Why, it was: St Mary's Stadium, Britannia Road, Southampton SO14 5FP. Noooooo! And you call US cheats! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 (edited) i,m not worried bout the skates history like huddersield its for the history books when i was growing up saints were in the top division and i had no inkling pompey had won the league twice pre war and always thought they were a div 2 or 3 side but has i said before the latest crisis it would be a slow death once the vultures at the club had stripped the club of all its assets and latest going ons confirm my belief. i think the fans would be better of forming a new club from scratch afc pompey with no debts and climbing he leagues like aldershot did. Edited 8 December, 2011 by solentstars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Yes it mattered to the football league in your case because: 'The club and SLH were found to be inextricably linked.' You tried to cheat by claiming that they were separate entities. Leon Crouch admitted on Radio 5 that SLH was set up for the sole purpose of avoiding administration. And what was so called 'parent company' SLH's website address again? Oh yes, it was: saintsfc.co.uk. Noooooo! And the company address? Why, it was: St Mary's Stadium, Britannia Road, Southampton SO14 5FP. Noooooo! And you call US cheats! PFC...quick question, because you're being good enough to respond. CSI's other companies, you know the ones which Pompey fans are clinging to in the hope that they will show you're not directly linked. When were they all incorporated by chance?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctoroncall Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 I would expect the administrator will be able to keep Pompey alive, just like last time. The question is how much do they need and is all the parachute money already paid out or allocated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamesaint Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 (edited) I'm guessing average league position. Still I'd rather have titles and a lower average, so yep Pompey have one over on us on that score. - I disagree. I think we have a much better history than Pompey. I am in my early 50's and have supported Saints for as long as I can remember. (say since 1965). In that time we have had 30+ years of top flight football. We have won the FA Cup. We have lost in a League Cup Final. We have lost in an FA Cup final. We have finished runners up in the top division. We have had many trips to Europe. We have had many of the greats of English football play for us. We have even produced one or two of the greats of English football. In all that time there have only been 5 or 6 years when Pompey have been in a higher league position than us. They have stumbled from financial crisis to crisis. The last few years have seen them have a bit of fun but by and large their history has been one of mediocrity and failure. Yet because they won a few trophies when my dad was a lad , we are supposed to acknowledge that they have a better history than us ??? Do me a favour!! By that reckoning Wanderers, Royal Engineers and Old Etonians are the greats of the english game because they won the FA Cup so often in the 19th century!! I just thank my lucky stars that I was born a Saint not a skate. My history of supporting my club is so much better than it would have been if I had been of the blue persuasion. Edited 8 December, 2011 by Tamesaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Yes it mattered to the football league in your case because: 'The club and SLH were found to be inextricably linked.' You tried to cheat by claiming that they were separate entities. Leon Crouch admitted on Radio 5 that SLH was set up for the sole purpose of avoiding administration. And what was so called 'parent company' SLH's website address again? Oh yes, it was: saintsfc.co.uk. Noooooo! And the company address? Why, it was: St Mary's Stadium, Britannia Road, Southampton SO14 5FP. Noooooo! And you call US cheats! Unfortunatly that's utter tosh. SLH existed prior to their purchase of the club (it was a reverse flotation IIRC). They did in fact also own a small chain of retirement homes, which if I remember correctly were sold off a year or two before our inevitable administration. If we had kept those we probably wouldn't have incured the points penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfc123 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 I'm guessing average league position. Still I'd rather have titles and a lower average, so yep Pompey have one over on us on that score. However, history doesn't count for much. There can't be many Pompey fans who can remember those title winning days. What matters is the present and the future - ours looks promising...... Agreed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamsaint Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Yes it mattered to the football league in your case because: 'The club and SLH were found to be inextricably linked.' You tried to cheat by claiming that they were separate entities. Leon Crouch admitted on Radio 5 that SLH was set up for the sole purpose of avoiding administration. And what was so called 'parent company' SLH's website address again? Oh yes, it was: saintsfc.co.uk. Noooooo! And the company address? Why, it was: St Mary's Stadium, Britannia Road, Southampton SO14 5FP. Noooooo! And you call US cheats! We did try to use the rules to our advantage, (openly, and we failed). But we never traded whilst knowing we were insolvent. pompey did, which meant deliberately defrauding lots of people.Deliberately.On purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Yes it mattered to the football league in your case because: 'The club and SLH were found to be inextricably linked.' You tried to cheat by claiming that they were separate entities. Leon Crouch admitted on Radio 5 that SLH was set up for the sole purpose of avoiding administration. And what was so called 'parent company' SLH's website address again? Oh yes, it was: saintsfc.co.uk. Noooooo! And the company address? Why, it was: St Mary's Stadium, Britannia Road, Southampton SO14 5FP. Noooooo! And you call US cheats! That was Rupert Lowe's big gamble, it failed and he was turfed out. We went into administration. Justice in that case prevailed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctoroncall Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Yes it mattered to the football league in your case because: 'The club and SLH were found to be inextricably linked.' You tried to cheat by claiming that they were separate entities. Leon Crouch admitted on Radio 5 that SLH was set up for the sole purpose of avoiding administration. And what was so called 'parent company' SLH's website address again? Oh yes, it was: saintsfc.co.uk. Noooooo! And the company address? Why, it was: St Mary's Stadium, Britannia Road, Southampton SO14 5FP. Noooooo! And you call US cheats! I think you'll find that the plc was formed well before the FL admin laws and the holding company did at one time have seventeen companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 (edited) You make this too easy for me... Yes it mattered to the football league in your case because: 'The club and SLH were found to be inextricably linked.' The same could still be found to be the case with Pompey. How do you think your summer spending spree was funded? Antonov gave the club £10.8m to keep it going. Is it solvent without such an investment? No, as the admin has said they only have enough to keep it going short term. Were the funds used to keep Pompey going legally obtained? The Lithuanian/Latvian authorities don't think so... You tried to cheat by claiming that they were separate entities. Leon Crouch admitted on Radio 5 that SLH was set up for the sole purpose of avoiding administration. Nonsense. The Football League's insolvency rules were created in 2004. Southampton Leisure Holdings was set up in 1997. Please explain how they tried to cheat rules that wouldn't be written until 7 years in THE FUTURE!!! And what was so called 'parent company' SLH's website address again? Oh yes, it was: saintsfc.co.uk. Noooooo! And the company address? Why, it was: St Mary's Stadium, Britannia Road, Southampton SO14 5FP. Noooooo! And you call US cheats! Have you seen the breakdown of the other CSI companies earlier in the thread? A number were created suspiciously recently, most of them are tiny and don't provide CSI with any noteworthy income. Southampton Leisure Holding had many companies under it, a number of which had nothing to do with football. The Football League didn't care, their rules are open and they act how they see fit. Edited 8 December, 2011 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 The problem with the above is that you want us to admit that winning the cup was 'cheating' because it will make you feel better, and that it will somehow expunge the whole nightmare for you. The reality is that we were trading solvently with Gaydamaks backing up until the crash of October 2008. We won the cup in May, five months earlier. WE-WERE-NOT-CHEATING. Nothing any of you can say alters that fact, and the fact that our name will be for ever more on there as winners in 2008. GET USED TO IT. Cue yet more immature 'Thick skate' abuse..... Er, Pompey's accounts for tax year ending June '07 showed total debts of nearly £68.9 million with, with £66.8 million of that being racked up within a year. You do not have a clue. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Some of you may have noticed there's some golf going on down here at the moment. Am doing my thing with the media as ever. Mission 1 was to knock 7 bells of krap out of Oliver Brown for his article about us v Hammers in the Torygraph. He will try and publish a full retraction and admit he was wromng and we are now the bestest fans in the world. Secondly I asked them about the few... favourite response - how are they stuill going, it is beyond embarrassing now, I noticed some of their fans are still trying to justify it all. That is really turning the media against them... Anyway Rory looks poorly bless but he still had a magical run. I (again) looked a damned sight better on Sky Sports than anything from up the M27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazza82 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 No decision this meeting apparently http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/pompey-past/great-matches/no_points_loss_verdict_for_pompey_1_3321819 No surprise there then. Well if they take no action then they will be setting themselves up for other clubs in the football league to take advantage of this, same as with the Fa and the Wayne Rooney appeal as Kenny Daglish pointed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfc123 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 No insults from me... but you are wrong in your assumption. I have FRIENDS who are pompey fans, I dont even feel that bothered about rivalries in football as it my team I want to do well - call me old fashioned, but the pre war days of locals fans going to see both clubs is how it should be.... so your cup win as a genuine cup win would not stick in my throat, envious of the success yes, cursing our luck that we drew a full strength gunners in tehf inal and you drew a relative minnow sure... but thats the cup. NOw I dispise what Chelsea have done and Man City are doing now, I even dont have too much time for the disproprionate way in which Man U were able to grow so much bigger than the rest supported by armchair fans and teh lions share of sky revenue... BUT in all cases they have not defaulted on the monies' lost' through squad investment and wages so they just stay on the cusp of what I consider the ethical divide, just as tehy have undoubtedly got a competitive advantage by having losses guarranteed by owners. Leeds were the first to break their bank and thus in effect cheat - because if exposure to liabilities is such that as simple thing as failing to finish in a CL place can tip you over the edge, then that irresponsibilty is cheating in my book. With pompey it was even more extreme, because whatever you like to think you are a relatively small club, that had squad not even affordable by a club with a 50k gate, if left to their own devices and owners who have repeatedly lost teh plot with respect to financial control - you undoubtedly took a path that gave you a competitive advantage on the WAY to winning the cup. Had you had an onwer who underworte that debt in full, fair enough it would not ahve been ideal, but it would not have been cheating. BUt you had owners and directors who did not have a clue where the money was comming from or even give a **** about where it was coming from... when 30 mil in debt in that cup season at christmas - you kept spending and not paying the tax max - THAT IS WHAT DETEST, not the cup win... and the fact that only a smalll handfull of your fans have enough ethical and moral fibre (and indeed intelligence) to see it and get angry about it. FFS, if you were protesting against your owners, getting angry and showing shame in what your club had done, I would feckin applaud you, respect you and support whatever battloes you still needed to face... but the best you can do is blame the FL for its FAPPT - which EVERYONE knows is flawed. As fans of football surely you can see that the way your club has behaved is a disgrace - its the way the vast majority of fans seem to view this that is your shame, not how teh club behaved which I acknowledge is difficult to do a huge amount about, but the way in which you have reacted and deny your club did anything wrong which is so shameful. Ok, two points- Firstly, don't try playing the 'you were lucky to win it' card. No-one who goes away to Man U and wins is 'lucky'. Secondly, yeah we're severly ****ed off and embarrassed at the way the club has been run and passed from one, at best, hard-nosed businessman to another. We all used to agee that in the back of our minds we were nervous about relying on Gaydamak. We knew damn well it was risky to spend big money on the team rather than something more permanent like a decent new stadium. The fatalistic conclusion we used to always come to: 'Enjoy it and hope it doesn't all come crashing down around us', and **** it, we did enjoy it. So yeah, we were embarrassed when it went tits up, charities didn't get paid etc etc, sure we were embarrassed. But now? We're absolutely sick and tired of your miserable bleating and whining about how life isn't fair, that we 'cheated', that we're all so thick- plus a new one today- we're now apparently 'vermin' too. I can see why many many Pompey fans just dont care what other people think of us anymore. Play up Pompey...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Well if they take no action then they will be setting themselves up for other clubs in the football league to take advantage of this, same as with the Fa and the Wayne Rooney appeal as Kenny Daglish pointed out.did not expect them to get any points deduction today has they have to have all the facts before they make a decission,if you remember our points deduction took along time for them to reach and anyway no ones going to buy pompey till they make a decission which hinders any takeover of the club and its not a good position for the club to be in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 (edited) Pompey's case is the most clear cut case of financial cheating there has ever been in English football, even worse than Leeds. At least Leeds had to get relegated before it all went tits up. The FL are just biding their time. I remember them making similar statements when SLH went into admin. When the skates can't afford their player's wages in Jan their decision will be made for them. Edited 8 December, 2011 by aintforever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfc123 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 PFC...quick question, because you're being good enough to respond. CSI's other companies, you know the ones which Pompey fans are clinging to in the hope that they will show you're not directly linked. When were they all incorporated by chance?! CSI itself: 14th September 2010. All the others in the group go back to 2000 at least and varying dates in between. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazza82 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 But now? We're absolutely sick and tired of your miserable bleating and whining about how life isn't fair, that we 'cheated', that we're all so thick- plus a new one today- we're now apparently 'vermin' too. I can see why many many Pompey fans just dont care what other people think of us anymore. So what the **** are you doing on here you dirty skate ****, Cheating bastards!! the lot of you! Pay up pompey!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Pompey's case is the most clear cut case of financial cheating there has ever been in English football, even worse than Leeds. At least Leeds had to get relegated before it all went tits up. The FL are just biding their time. I remember them making similar statements SLH went into admin.agree and i think its not going to help and bring in someone to buy the club till they know what division they will be in.so i,m happy they are in a catch 22 position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_John Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Interesting how Pompey fans never mentioned the number of time both clubs won the Southern League before they were allowed into the Football League in the 1920's...... He probably doesn't want to mention those days because the original football club from that hole namely "Royal Artillery (Portsmouth) Football Club" were thrown out of competitive football by the FA in 1897/98 because of cheating (something to do with forfeiting their amateur status). Same old genes always trying to cheat at football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfc123 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 I would expect the administrator will be able to keep Pompey alive, just like last time. The question is how much do they need and is all the parachute money already paid out or allocated? The parachute money is ringfenced to make sure the CVA is paid off.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazza82 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 He probably doesn't want to mention those days because the original football club from that hole namely "Royal Artillery (Portsmouth) Football Club" were thrown out of competitive football by the FA in 1897/98 because of cheating (something to do with forfeiting their amateur status). Same old genes always trying to cheat at football. Once cheats...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazza82 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 The parachute money is ringfenced to make sure the CVA is paid off.... Boring Cheats! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Something on Wave 105 earlier about Lawrence being sold off to .... Forest. Surprise Surprise.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfc123 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Some of you may have noticed there's some golf going on down here at the moment. Am doing my thing with the media as ever. I (again) looked a damned sight better on Sky Sports than anything from up the M27 How shallow? Superficial IS your middle name. Dear oh dear........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazza82 Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 How shallow? Superficial IS your middle name. Dear oh dear........ Boring cheating vermin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fowllyd Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Ok, two points- Firstly, don't try playing the 'you were lucky to win it' card. No-one who goes away to Man U and wins is 'lucky'. Secondly, yeah we're severly ****ed off and embarrassed at the way the club has been run and passed from one, at best, hard-nosed businessman to another. We all used to agee that in the back of our minds we were nervous about relying on Gaydamak. We knew damn well it was risky to spend big money on the team rather than something more permanent like a decent new stadium. The fatalistic conclusion we used to always come to: 'Enjoy it and hope it doesn't all come crashing down around us', and **** it, we did enjoy it. So yeah, we were embarrassed when it went tits up, charities didn't get paid etc etc, sure we were embarrassed. But now? We're absolutely sick and tired of your miserable bleating and whining about how life isn't fair, that we 'cheated', that we're all so thick- plus a new one today- we're now apparently 'vermin' too. I can see why many many Pompey fans just dont care what other people think of us anymore. Play up Pompey...... Are you familiar with the concept of irony? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Ok, two points- Firstly, don't try playing the 'you were lucky to win it' card. No-one who goes away to Man U and wins is 'lucky'. Secondly, yeah we're severly ****ed off and embarrassed at the way the club has been run and passed from one, at best, hard-nosed businessman to another. We all used to agee that in the back of our minds we were nervous about relying on Gaydamak. We knew damn well it was risky to spend big money on the team rather than something more permanent like a decent new stadium. The fatalistic conclusion we used to always come to: 'Enjoy it and hope it doesn't all come crashing down around us', and **** it, we did enjoy it. So yeah, we were embarrassed when it went tits up, charities didn't get paid etc etc, sure we were embarrassed. But now? We're absolutely sick and tired of your miserable bleating and whining about how life isn't fair, that we 'cheated', that we're all so thick- plus a new one today- we're now apparently 'vermin' too. I can see why many many Pompey fans just dont care what other people think of us anymore. Play up Pompey...... TBF you are vermin and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Are you familiar with the concept of irony? I very much doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Are you familiar with the concept of irony? It's what they called the colour of their stadium before it rusted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 The parachute money is ringfenced to make sure the CVA is paid off.... Actually, I think you'll find it's not. For a start, it won't cover the CVA (you have 2 £8m payouts left), secondly all that was ever said was it "should" cover the CVA,i's never been said that the money is ringfenced (If anythign shoudl happen it will however be ringfenced by teh FA for football creditors)... unfortunatly, now you have no cash, your football debts will have to be paid straight out of the parachute payments by the FA , to the lcubs you owe (I think you have some staged payments due in January and June). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevvy Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 Question, on the subject of the monies owed below £2000 or £2500, i forget the exact amount. now was there a verbal agreement in the public domain that Chinny would pay these out of his own funds. now as he has not, cant these people now take him to court to get the money back. Or is it still tied up in the CVA debarcle, now he is back perhaps he might or not Just a random thought whilst reading all these posts, might be talking rubbish, i usually do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 the remaining parachute money is going nowhere near the CVA, as pointed out it's clearing the massive football creditor bill. If that was really your great get out of jail lump sum I'm afraid it just disappeared quicker than Avram in a police raid. You are obviously one of the sharper members of the few as you try and debate, but don't try and pretend that either cup run was legal. The club has been 'used' for the best part of ten years, the funding for big names to get out of the championship started the house of cards, Harry continued once up in the top flight, and the whole lot has fallen over ever since. The fact that you claim your owner was solvent in 2008 when the whole world knows he wasn't even the owner is laughable for a start. The club was cleaning blood money back then, from a man who wasn't allowed to own the club - were there any alarm bells? Pompey's last administration was one of the most predictable collapses in sporting history - champions league wages on 20K gates = problems. You outbid Liverpool ffs! Shame for the real fans, but as Frank's Cousin summed up so well, a bit of humility would go a long way. If you accept the crimes of the past it would be honourable, defending the criminality just leads to abuse. Supporting the continued criminality is just bonkers and will destroy the club. When we were struggling I recall analysing what I actually cared about. It wasn't players who took wages, they just came and went, it certainly wasn't the board, you end up with just the badge - your problem is that the little moon and stars is now tarnished as well. The last brand that was damaged so badly was the News of the World. It's no good bleating to the league, you need to knock on Lampitt's door and ask him what he's doing, the roots of all the problems have been created within the four walls of Fratton Park, every time. He's only just stopped spending money - three years too late, but it could be progress, unless we see another bonkers January shop. It's gone on way too long, hanging out with one criminal is unlucky, getting into bed with five makes you a cheap prossie. It's over, you'd enjoy yourself far more taking 2K to some crap little ground in the Blue Square and building a viable and respected club. The current one has had it, put it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 (edited) ‘The league will now continue discussions with the club regarding the administration of its parent company and update the Board at its next meeting.’ Crucial phrase the League's spokesman uses there is 'parent company'. Looks like we're not going to be hit by them for CSI's administration which at least buys time... If it's so clear cut that CSI and PFC are not intrinsically linked, why would they need to defer the discussion? If there is so obviously no financial dependancy between the subsidiary and the parent company then they could make a recommendation and/or a decision to waive a points penalty there and then, surely? Unless there's an element of doubt of course... Edited 8 December, 2011 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 The parachute money is ringfenced to make sure the CVA is paid off.... I thought that you were advanced some £8M of that just to see you through the season, IIRC ? Also, wasn't some of it ring-fenced for 'football creditors'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 ...But before you go Particularly F*cking Cretinous 123...are you looking for a used car? I know of two... One comes with it's own fully paid for modern and immaculate garage plus a desirably located service area- is HPI cleared, has immaculate bodywork, very clean interior, impeccable service history, new engine (replaced after a minor problem and currently running beautifully) - Two careful owners or Back street garage special....umpteen outstanding HP payments, outstanding parking and speeding tickets and a police marker on for fraudulent activity, bent and tatty inside and out, on 5th engine (just died) stinks a bit but apparently (but unprovably) had enthusiastic previous owners (not many) The price...the second one costs around six times the first but it has got history... Which would you buy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Lindford Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 PMSL Michael Appleton has told his Pompey players to help attract a new owner.The Blues boss saw his plans for progress come to a grinding halt just two weeks into his Fratton tenure as owners Convers Sports Initiatives went into administration. However, The News understands there has already been more interest from potential buyers than there was during the entire period of administration. There is no doubt it is a positive sign, highlighting the fact the club is now a far more attractive proposition than it was previously. WTF But until there is anything more concrete than interest, Appleton knows his team have a job to do to put the Blues in the shop window. And a club pushing for promotion (dream on) – rather than battling to avoid relegation – would surely generate even more interest. He said: ‘We can only affect what happens on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy_D Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 (edited) Ok, I'll bite- how is your league record better than having won the top flight twice, the second flight once and the third flight three times? Or are you talking about the 'making up the numbers' school of honours? Taking average finishing position into account (you know, counting ALL seasons instead of just those two where you won the league...) we're above you. Also, many of our Southern League wins were won at a time when it was considered the equal of the Football League, and was a seperate entity. Edited 8 December, 2011 by Jimmy_D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaz Posted 8 December, 2011 Share Posted 8 December, 2011 (edited) Re: Intrinsically linked Basically it means could the subsidiary companies exist without one of the parent company? In the SLH/SFC case, the answer was no. Rupert set up SLH to run the club and to generate cashflow through other areas away from football. SLH at one point owned lots of smaller companies such as the care homes, radio station, megastore etc as well as SFC). The Football League closed that loophole and banned the creation of holding companies, but crutially allowed SLH to continue owning SFC as they owned other businesses at the time and could be proven they SLH didn't solely exist for the football club). When SLH started losing money (mainly through the club with the huge management turnover, transfer fees, wages etc), they cut their cloth and did all they could to avoid the losses, such as selling the unneccessary businesses and adjusting the wagebill within the club. At the time, SLH's Admin was inevitable as the club was simply losing more money than it took in, and the club was the only source of revenue for SLH. Thus, SLH and SFC were intrinsically linked as SLH couldn't exist without SFC being there. In the CSI/PFC case its not entirely the same but not vastly different either. CSI also has/had a portfolio of businesses. How much money they make is unclear as Vlad has been the major funding source of CSI, buying whatever he fancies. None seem to have been bought with the aim of making a profit (he leaves that to the banks he owned) so they appear to be things he can say are his. PFC currently exist on the small gate income alone, as their transfer fees have either been taken by the league to pay football creditors, or swallowed up by the black hole known as the PFC wagebill. Now, CSI are in Admin as their funding source has been frozen. It needs to be examined to how much each CSI company makes, to work out how long they have to find a buyer before they too enter Admin or liquidation. In PFC's case, its been publically said that they have funds to cover the ''short term'', whatever that means. They were reliant on CSI's funds to get where they are, but with that cut off, the clock is fast ticking on the admin bomb. Its Handy Andy's job to find buyers of all CSI businesses ASAP. Thus, as of December 8th 2011, no, CSI and Portsmouth FC are not intrinsically linked.....right now. CSI don't exist solely for PFC's benefit, but equally, without CSI's funding, Pompey are screwed and need a buyer within the next couple of months or its Admin time and points penalties again. Exactly how long they have needs to be worked out. Or find about £20m to get them through to the end of the season. Edited 9 December, 2011 by gaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 9 December, 2011 Share Posted 9 December, 2011 If it's so clear cut that CSI and PFC are not intrinsically linked, why would they need to defer the discussion? If there is so obviously no financial dependancy between the subsidiary and the parent company then they could make a recommendation and/or a decision to waive a points penalty there and then, surely? Unless there's an element of doubt of course... Trousers makes the point entirely. It is also the case that the CVA was deferred by the new owners who then put money into new players and wages. It doesn't look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niceandfriendly Posted 9 December, 2011 Share Posted 9 December, 2011 Yes it mattered to the football league in your case because: 'The club and SLH were found to be inextricably linked.' You tried to cheat by claiming that they were separate entities. Leon Crouch admitted on Radio 5 that SLH was set up for the sole purpose of avoiding administration. And what was so called 'parent company' SLH's website address again? Oh yes, it was: saintsfc.co.uk. Noooooo! And the company address? Why, it was: St Mary's Stadium, Britannia Road, Southampton SO14 5FP. Noooooo! And you call US cheats! Haha, so when Southampton Leisure Holdings was set up in the late 90's, we were pre-planning for administration in the mid naughties, right?! Oh and please don't take the "vermin" abuse to heart skate, we wouldn't want you to leave this thread. You're providing us with too much comedy for that to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 9 December, 2011 Share Posted 9 December, 2011 How shallow? Superficial IS your middle name. Dear oh dear........ Nope I think most regular posters on other parts of the forum find my Golf posts as annoying as hell. However, let's face it the golf posts are only annoying and shallow, your posts of justification make Neville Chamberlain's appeasement seem Churchillian in comparison. And the difference is I have offered any regulars who are interested in golf the same chance to do it & stay down here. Beer with Poulter tonight watching the Blackpool game in the Clubhouse methinks so I can beat him up about AOC. We didn't need no dodgy Russian loan at the start of the season, we have an Academy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 9 December, 2011 Share Posted 9 December, 2011 We did try to use the rules to our advantage, (openly, and we failed). But we never traded whilst knowing we were insolvent. pompey did, which meant deliberately defrauding lots of people.Deliberately.On purpose. think that is the big difference we tried got rejected and loss points pompey continued to trade whilst insolvent we stopped Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint si Posted 9 December, 2011 Share Posted 9 December, 2011 At the risk of repeating myself, the club and CSI do not need to be "intrinsically linked" for the FL to impose penalties. Under their current roles, an "insolvency event" has occurred if a parent company (CSI in this case) experiences administration or similar. The case for arguing "it's not the club, it's the parent company, so you can't impose a penalty" is no longer possible. I would imagine the football league tightened up these rules (i.e. expanded the definition of "insolvency event" to include parents, subsidiaries and sister companies) after our own admin. So the FL would be completely within their rights to impose a penalty if they elect to do so. They may choose not to, but that's up to them. In any case, it'll be very interesting to see what they do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevvy Posted 9 December, 2011 Share Posted 9 December, 2011 http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/537210357?-11209 Just thought i would put the link up to what Pompey fans think of the FA's decision at this time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 9 December, 2011 Share Posted 9 December, 2011 I guess the fact that no decision has been made means that it's not quite so cut n' dried as the blue few and AA think.... if it were, it would have been a straight decision there and then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyinthesky Posted 9 December, 2011 Share Posted 9 December, 2011 Ok, I'll bite- how is your league record better than having won the top flight twice, the second flight once and the third flight three times? Or are you talking about the 'making up the numbers' school of honours? If you look at the relative league positions from both clubs entering the League in 1920/1, over this period Saints average position has been higher than Pompey's if you take the past 60 years ie the lifetime of almost all supporters, Saints are so far ahead on so many fronts, league position, average attendances, European competition etc etc I'm pleased to say we have never enjoyed the benefits of the old fourth division but quite a few of your fans get all misty eyed about this. I have to say though that the wonderfully elaborate story about the Soton Company of Union Men was a wonderful jape and hid the strike breaking of Pompey Dockers back in the mid 70's a treat!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 9 December, 2011 Share Posted 9 December, 2011 http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/537210357?-11209 Just thought i would put the link up to what Pompey fans think of the FA's decision at this time That's a slightly disingenous headline: "No points loss verdict for Pompey" The word 'verdict' suggests a someone conclusive decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts