Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella,
in Golden Posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)

[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]14:17[/TD]

[TD=class: chatmsgtext viewer_text, bgcolor: #FFFFFF][TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Comment From sean

if aa is basicaly in charge we can say goodbye to our best player then aa sol our best players last time can u confirm if he will be selling them in jan or not[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

fb_share2.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]14:20[/TD]

[TD=class: chatmsgtext altcaster_text, bgcolor: #FFFFFF][TABLE]

[TR]

[TD]phpqvaNbPlampitt_150.jpg[/TD]

[TD]David:

the directors of the club are in charge of it - PFC is not in admin. the administrator is in charge of CSI assets. this is very different to the situation in 2010. and no plans for a firesale in january!

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

fb_share2.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

PFC weren't one of CSI's assets....?

Edited by trousers
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skintsaint

skintsaint

Posted
Posted
[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]14:17[/TD]

[TD=class: chatmsgtext viewer_text, bgcolor: #FFFFFF][TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Comment From sean

if aa is basicaly in charge we can say goodbye to our best player then aa sol our best players last time can u confirm if he will be selling them in jan or not[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

fb_share2.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]14:20[/TD]

[TD=class: chatmsgtext altcaster_text, bgcolor: #FFFFFF][TABLE]

[TR]

[TD]phpqvaNbPlampitt_150.jpg[/TD]

[TD]David:

the directors of the club are in charge of it - PFC is not in admin. the administrator is in charge of CSI assets. this is very different to the situation in 2010. and no plans for a firesale in january![/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

fb_share2.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

Basically contradicted himself with his answers this afternoon...its laughable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted

14:23

[TABLE]

[TR]

[TD]phpqvaNbPlampitt_150.jpg[/TD]

[TD]David:

thanks everyone - hope it's been informative and good to speak to a few of you at least. sorry for not getting to all the questions but will try and come on again soon. best wishes and pup for the weekend.....we're waiting..... DL [/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

fb_share2.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wes Tender

Wes Tender

Posted
Posted
I asked why he left the FA as Head of Football Integrity to join a club without any integrity. No surprise they filtered it out

 

Great minds think alike. I asked almost exactly the same thing, but I phrased it that he must find it ironic to have been the FA's director of integrity and then find himself at a club where integrity didn't exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dronskisaint

dronskisaint

Posted
Posted
Great minds think alike. I asked almost exactly the same thing, but I phrased it that he must find it ironic to have been the FA's director of integrity and then find himself at a club where integrity didn't exist.

 

I find Lampitt's move to them one of the stranger aspects of an affair where murk, fraud and blatant criminality seem to be the norm.

 

You have to ask why? There is no logical explanation why he would want to be there surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gingeletiss

Gingeletiss

Posted
Posted
I can't see this posted yet:

 

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/transfer-news/Transfer-gossip-Portsmouth-aim-sell-Hreidarsson-Benjani-Kanu-Ben-Haim-in-January-to-raise-funds-for-signings-article842633.html

 

It looks like the sale of Kanu should just about cover the cost of the chrimbo party.

 

David:

the directors of the club are in charge of it - PFC is not in admin. the administrator is in charge of CSI assets. this is very different to the situation in 2010. and no plans for a firesale in january!

 

But he said thus, this very afternoon!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skintsaint

skintsaint

Posted
Posted
I can't see this posted yet:

 

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/transfer-news/Transfer-gossip-Portsmouth-aim-sell-Hreidarsson-Benjani-Kanu-Ben-Haim-in-January-to-raise-funds-for-signings-article842633.html

 

It looks like the sale of Kanu should just about cover the cost of the chrimbo party.

 

Benjani only signed for them as he couldnt find a club as a Free...not sure people would pay anything for him now! Ben Haim is on silly money so will prob not command a fee and the other two are about 50 years old...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedg

pedg

Posted
Posted
I can't see this posted yet:

 

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/transfer-news/Transfer-gossip-Portsmouth-aim-sell-Hreidarsson-Benjani-Kanu-Ben-Haim-in-January-to-raise-funds-for-signings-article842633.html

 

It looks like the sale of Kanu should just about cover the cost of the chrimbo party.

 

I know its a bit of an off the wall suggestion but maybe they could try selling players but not use the money getting new players in and use their youth players instead? Or is that too left field?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wes Tender

Wes Tender

Posted
Posted
I wonder if he was put in there by the FA to clean up their act as part of a deal not to kick them out of the league

So he goes there with the express purpose of overseeing a cleaning up of their act and during his watch, the Skates are taken over by the Russian Mafia and fairly soon after, their Chairman is arrested on suspicion of massive financial fraud and money-laundering.

 

Nice one, Lampitt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidthesquid

sidthesquid

Posted
Posted
So basically they're still getting away freely with everything then? Just say you're not in administration and it'll be fine. Go shopping maybe? Extend some contracts?

 

Why is lampitt there? I know he'd never answer but it's just plain weird. Not sure why journalists haven't really gone for this story, it's years of odd decisions, blind eyes turned, blatant fraud and laughing in the face of the rest of football, taxpayers and creditors. Why is that fine?

 

I'm broke, paid my taxes and wish to buy a house. Can I do that please? Preferably a 2 million pound house. I will maybe pay for some of it one day.

Not wishing to be libellous (and not based on any evidence at all), but maybe there was a reason why he left the FA & fitted in so seamlessly in the cesspit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EastleighSoulBoy

EastleighSoulBoy

Posted
Posted
[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]14:04[/TD]

[TD=class: chatmsgtext viewer_text, bgcolor: #FFFFFF][TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Comment From Andy

Who is currently the 'owner' of portsmouth fc?[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

fb_share2.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]14:05[/TD]

[TD=class: chatmsgtext altcaster_text, bgcolor: #FFFFFF][TABLE]

[TR]

[TD]phpqvaNbPlampitt_150.jpg[/TD]

[TD]David:

the shares in pfc (2010) ltd are now controlled by the administrator of CSI - i think this info is on our website.[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

And the administrator is administrating CSI.

 

[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]14:17[/TD]

[TD=class: chatmsgtext viewer_text, bgcolor: #FFFFFF][TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Comment From sean

if aa is basicaly in charge we can say goodbye to our best player then aa sol our best players last time can u confirm if he will be selling them in jan or not[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

 

fb_share2.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

 

[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]14:20[/TD]

[TD=class: chatmsgtext altcaster_text, bgcolor: #FFFFFF][TABLE]

[TR]

[TD]phpqvaNbPlampitt_150.jpg[/TD]

[TD]David:

the directors of the club are in charge of it - PFC is not in admin. the administrator is in charge of CSI assets. this is very different to the situation in 2010. and no plans for a firesale in january![/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

 

fb_share2.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

 

PFC weren't one of CSI's assets....?

 

Ahhh! but if they are an assett of a business then surely that business owns those assetts?

 

[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]14:17[/TD]

[TD=class: chatmsgtext viewer_text, bgcolor: #FFFFFF][TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Comment From sean

if aa is basicaly in charge we can say goodbye to our best player then aa sol our best players last time can u confirm if he will be selling them in jan or not[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

fb_share2.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]14:20[/TD]

[TD=class: chatmsgtext altcaster_text, bgcolor: #FFFFFF][TABLE]

[TR]

[TD]phpqvaNbPlampitt_150.jpg[/TD]

[TD]David:

the directors of the club are in charge of it - PFC is not in admin. the administrator is in charge of CSI assets. this is very different to the situation in 2010. and no plans for a firesale in january![/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

fb_share2.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Basically contradicted himself with his answers this afternoon...its laughable.

 

Methinks Mr Lampoon has just 'inextricably linked' CSI with poopey?

 

I asked why he left the FA as Head of Football Integrity to join a club without any integrity. No surprise they filtered it out

 

I find Lampitt's move to them one of the stranger aspects of an affair where murk, fraud and blatant criminality seem to be the norm.

 

You have to ask why? There is no logical explanation why he would want to be there surely?

 

This has always been my take on it.

 

I have always been of the opinion that he was 'parachuted in' to try and keep a lid on things and prevent an escalation into the higher regions of the football hierarchies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted (edited)
And the administrator is administrating CSI.

 

 

 

Ahhh! but if they are an assett of a business then surely that business owns those assetts?

 

 

Methinks Mr Lampoon has just 'inextricably linked' CSI with poopey?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have always been of the opinion that he was 'parachuted in' to try and keep a lid on things and prevent an escalation into the higher regions of the football hierarchies.

 

Let us never forget that one of their dodgy owners was introduced to the club by Dave Richards

 

And these are interesting

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/apr/21/premier-league-conflict-dave-richards

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/apr/05/premier-league-dave-richards-bullying

 

Stories mentioning Conflicts of Interest and Bullying in their headlines and the Head of the FA and Lampitt at Pompey

 

All smells a lot worse than some dead Skates

 

Ooh and this

 

http://www.insideworldfootball.biz/premierleague/41-news/9463-fulham-take-dave-richards-case-to-supreme-court

 

And someone else has been on the case - time to mail him a link to this thread peeps?

 

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=9896

Edited by dubai_phil
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted

The 200 percent article - worth a read

 

  • The current Portsmouth owner, Balram Chainrai, became part of the Portsmouth “saga” when he loaned money to a company owned by a man who didn’t exist, making Chainrai complicit or careless to the point of negligence;

  • The chairman of the Premier League, Sir Dave Richards, whether he exceeded his authority or not, declared a literal non-entity (as opposed to the suit full of FA” that he is, in football) “fit and proper”, making him complicit or careless to the point of negligence
  • No-one in the entire Premier League organisation stopped Richards doing this twice, despite he being embarrassingly wrong first time around, making them complicit or careless to the point of negligence ; and
  • There remains plenty for Portsmouth’s administrator Andrew Andronikou to investigate when Portsmouth City Football Club is liquidated, unless he decides to renege on promises to do so, making him… you get the message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rallyboy

rallyboy

Posted
Posted

I told you it was going to kick off! ;)

Pity I've been out and missed the webchat.

 

Bearing in mind AA will obviously attempt to launch a further delay to the CVA pretty soon, how does his position as CSI administrator sit alongside him coming back in to deal with pompey's incompleted administration exit?

 

He is now in charge of PFC as an asset and in that role has a duty of care to CSI creditors like poor Mr Chanrai, yet he also has a duty of care to the unpaid PFC creditors who have been stitched up by AA, as guided by Chanrai. :?

 

AA will have to chase himself up for payment of the CSI loan first...and he can charge two lots of fees as he discusses it with himself.

 

How can he be operating in these two conflicting roles?

Yes the businesses are connected, but the administrator for the two companies has different priorities.

 

And as for Lampitt giving his blunt view on the small businesses owed money by his club - dismissing those small creditors as not his problem wasill-advised at best.

He needs Nige to go over and give him some PR lessons.

 

As FrankC and several of us have been saying for flipping ages, why didn't they put the money towards debt, why continue spending when you are already in DEEP water?

The gaining of sporting advantage through overspending money you don't have, is called cheating.

To repeat the offence is not only cheating, it may well have terminally damaged the business as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tony13579

tony13579

Posted
Posted

Can someone find the evidence that PFC2010 owe the small creditors 100%?

I don't think it exists. I remember that BC was offering the small creditors 100% outside the CVA. I expected it to be paid before the CVA Was adopted. it was not PFC's promise or debt

 

Of course the Small creditors deserve it. But it is un enforceable now.

 

Prove me wrong ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedg

pedg

Posted
Posted
Can someone find the evidence that PFC2010 owe the small creditors 100%?

I don't think it exists. I remember that BC was offering the small creditors 100% outside the CVA. I expected it to be paid before the CVA Was adopted. it was not PFC's promise or debt

 

Of course the Small creditors deserve it. But it is un enforceable now.

 

Prove me wrong ;)

 

Indeed, I expect it has just about the same position is law as political parties manifesto pledges. Can a promise made like that actually be legally enforceable, I suspect not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidthesquid

sidthesquid

Posted
Posted

As we have said on here, normal rules of good governance, legality, decency & sanity do not apply on Portsea Island.

As further proof of the alternative universe down there beyond the M275, I was chatting to a non-footballing colleague based in Devon about the day the Skates rioted in their own town after beating us, not knowing he went to college in the dark city. 'That's nothing,' he said. Apparently they were holding a student party back in the eighties when a dozen or so ****ed-up local football fans gatecrashed. They went pretty meekly, but as soon as they were outside they started throwing bricks from a nearby skip (there's one on every street, I gather) smashing the windows and showering those inside in broken glass and house-bricks, hospitalising about half a dozen students, including girls. And guess what awful event had made them behave so insanely - it was the night they gained promotion to the old Div One.

As I say, an alternative universe down there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
anothersaintinsouthsea

anothersaintinsouthsea

Posted
Posted

So let's say CSI are still in admin at the point Pompey have to make their first CVA payment. If, as expected Pompey don't have the cash what does handy Andy do? When he was involved with Swindon he kept rescheduling and just told the creditors that it was basically tough ****. But this time handy Andy is supposed to be getting returns for CSI creditors. So what does he do? I'm guessing he goes for the reschedule justifying it on the basis of preserving the asset for future resale. What can the creditors of Pompey do about this? Anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Picard

Picard

Posted
Posted
I believe it is not PFC's responsibility to pay small creditors100%. That promise was from BC.

 

It would be illegal to pay the creditors out of sequence from the funds of PFC old co.

Employees

Secured creditors

Unsecured creditors

It would be illegal to pay some creditors a higher percentage than others in the same group. ( from PFC old co)

 

I thing all the funds to pay creditors was comming from the sales of players and the parachute payments. I don't think PFC 2010 are liable for these debts

 

Your thoughts gents?

from http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/east-hampshire/pompey_need_to_pay_1_2m_to_creditors_in_april_1_3334471

 

The figures were revealed in a letter sent by liquidation firm Baker Tilly to update small and unsecured creditors who are still waiting for payment following the club’s administration. The firm was appointed liquidator of the club in February.

Only creditors who are owed more than £2,500 are usually paid under the terms of a CVA. But in Pompey’s case, former owner Balram Chainrai pledged to pay creditors owed less than that amount in full through his company Portpin.

 

The letter from Baker Tilly says that this obligation now rests with Portsmouth Football Club.

 

But Mr Lampitt disputes it is the club’s sole liability to pay small creditors in full.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
solentstars

solentstars

Posted
Posted
So let's say CSI are still in admin at the point Pompey have to make their first CVA payment. If, as expected Pompey don't have the cash what does handy Andy do? When he was involved with Swindon he kept rescheduling and just told the creditors that it was basically tough ****. But this time handy Andy is supposed to be getting returns for CSI creditors. So what does he do? I'm guessing he goes for the reschedule justifying it on the basis of preserving the asset for future resale. What can the creditors of Pompey do about this? Anything?
i expect he will not be allowed to work for both due to a con flict of interest but i,m know expert maybe someone who deals with these sort of issues on here can answer that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fowllyd

Fowllyd

Posted
Posted
I wonder if he was put in there by the FA to clean up their act as part of a deal not to kick them out of the league

 

This has always been my take on it.

 

You need to bear in mind that the FA have nothing to do with the running or regulation of football clubs; that dubious honour belongs to the various leagues. The FA didn't deduct points from us, or investigate the nature of SFC's relationship with SLH, the Football League did. Likewise with Pompey - their deduction was administered by the Premier League. The FA has no powers to kick any team out of any league; to think otherwise is plain wrong.

 

In fact, given the atmosphere level of mistrust and loathing which exists between the FA and the PL in particular, I could easily imagine that the hierarchy within the FA would have found it highly amusing if Pompey had been liquidated back in 2010. Pompey were kept afloat - just about - by the PL, who were terrified at the prospect of one of their members going to the wall, but were more than happy to see the back of them, passing the stinking mess on to the FL.

 

As for Lampitt's presence at Pompey, I reckon this is likely to be nearer the mark:

 

Not wishing to be libellous (and not based on any evidence at all), but maybe there was a reason why he left the FA & fitted in so seamlessly in the cesspit.

 

Hell, even Corp mentioned rumours concerning Lampitt's time at the FA - I know he's normally wrong, but maybe he's right just this once. Or maybe, just maybe, Lampitt wasn't doing a great job, knew it, and went looking for something else. Hard to imagine Pompey were inundated with applications...

 

Ditch the conspiracy theory stuff - quite apart from anything else, the simple cock-up theory is far funnier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Munster

Dark Munster

Posted
Posted
13:59

 

 

[Comment From Richard1 Richard1 : ]

are the club still due a remaining 2 sets of parachute payment from the premier league over the next 2 years?

Wednesday December 14, 2011 13:59 Richard1

13:59

 

 

David:

yes we are due to receive parachute payments for the next two seasons after this.

 

 

If they get that far!

 

Well, they certainly won't go beyond those 2 years, f'sure. The remaining parachute payments are the only reason Chinny and company are keeping the cesspit of a club on life support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted
I told you it was going to kick off! ;)

Pity I've been out and missed the webchat.

 

Bearing in mind AA will obviously attempt to launch a further delay to the CVA pretty soon, how does his position as CSI administrator sit alongside him coming back in to deal with pompey's incompleted administration exit?

 

He is now in charge of PFC as an asset and in that role has a duty of care to CSI creditors like poor Mr Chanrai, yet he also has a duty of care to the unpaid PFC creditors who have been stitched up by AA, as guided by Chanrai. :?

 

AA will have to chase himself up for payment of the CSI loan first...and he can charge two lots of fees as he discusses it with himself.

 

How can he be operating in these two conflicting roles?

Yes the businesses are connected, but the administrator for the two companies has different priorities.

 

And as for Lampitt giving his blunt view on the small businesses owed money by his club - dismissing those small creditors as not his problem wasill-advised at best.

He needs Nige to go over and give him some PR lessons.

 

As FrankC and several of us have been saying for flipping ages, why didn't they put the money towards debt, why continue spending when you are already in DEEP water?

The gaining of sporting advantage through overspending money you don't have, is called cheating.

To repeat the offence is not only cheating, it may well have terminally damaged the business as well.

I see things differently.

 

I think the only good result HMRC actually got last time round was successfully blocking AA's appointment as liquidator of "Oldco", which is now in liquidation. The liquidators of Oldco are Baker Tilley. The CVA is an Oldco problem, it's got nothing to do with "Newco", and AA is now completely out of the picture so far as the CVA is concerned. So paying the creditors under the CVA is Baker Tilley's responsibility, not the club's or AA's.

 

In order to make those payments Baker Tilley have to collect money from Newco over the next 3 years, in the amounts and dates helpfully highlighted in an earlier post by Gruffalo, taken from UHY's Completion Report (the same one where AA's further involvement in the CVA was terminated). Those scheduled payments to Baker Tilley are (or should be) irrevocably included in the original Deed of Sale of the club from Oldco to Newco, and are the responsibility of the owners of Newco (Chainrai when he bought Newco from the Administrator, and then CSI when they bought Newco from Chainrai). If they are not then I would say the terms of the CVA have already been breached.

 

So the real question is what will Baker Tilley do if they don't receive the first scheduled payment from Newco (50% of 15% of 20% of £87m if my sums are correct) in April next year? As I see it only Baker Tilley can change the dates or amounts of payments, and probably only with the consent of the majority of the creditors. Who was it that chose Baker Tilley as liquidators?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rallyboy

rallyboy

Posted
Posted

thanks Hutch -

well that sounds better - I thought AA was only removed from investigating himself, I thought he would still be responsible for any complications to his partially completed admin exit.

 

If AA's role in the CVA is over then pompey-Newco has a real problem, you would like to think Baker Tilley can't do business in the same style as AA.

The deadline will have to be met....I hear a little timebomb.....tickety tickety tick tick tick...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidthesquid

sidthesquid

Posted
Posted
thanks Hutch -

well that sounds better - I thought AA was only removed from investigating himself, I thought he would still be responsible for any complications to his partially completed admin exit.

 

If AA's role in the CVA is over then pompey-Newco has a real problem, you would like to think Baker Tilley can't do business in the same style as AA.

The deadline will have to be met....I hear a little timebomb.....tickety tickety tick tick tick...

I can hear several ticking bombs -

The forensic investigation

The CVA payments

Antonov doing a runner or being banged up

Arry & Mandy in court

Having to pay the wages next month

The FL deciding whether they get docked points

All those bombs might not all explode, but they'd be extremely fortunate if none of them did

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted

I know April is a long way off, but there is a possibility that if Andronikou, as Court appointed representative of the owners of CSI, is not able to make sure that Newco (which he now "owns") makes the required payment in April, he could find himself shafted by his own convoluted arrangements.

 

I expect he will have "passed the parcel" by then, but who knows? As they say, nobody likes a smartar5e.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted

Im probably like many tired of reading that their time has come, only for them to keep getting away with it. How many events have happened where it looks like they are finished only for people to work out they have sidestepped the hangman. The closest they got and will ever was the day in court when the lady lost her nerve to liquidate them, this was after PS seemed to inflate their asset value to ease her concerns. Then AA came on the scene and has played this as a chess game, always being 4 or 5 steps ahead of the authorities and others with their own views.

Sadly Clapham has kept out of posting recently,his was true insight into the IP's position.

I would have thought that DL's wording about the asset being in the administrators hands could be a major gaff. i hope the more legally minded will be able to work that out and send it on to the right people.

As for his last words on the webchat 'we're waiting' was an interesting lick up to the fans and no doubt the 'we-re coming for you' song is being used to psyche up their squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedg

pedg

Posted
Posted
I see things differently.

 

I think the only good result HMRC actually got last time round was successfully blocking AA's appointment as liquidator of "Oldco", which is now in liquidation. The liquidators of Oldco are Baker Tilley. The CVA is an Oldco problem, it's got nothing to do with "Newco", and AA is now completely out of the picture so far as the CVA is concerned. So paying the creditors under the CVA is Baker Tilley's responsibility, not the club's or AA's.

 

In order to make those payments Baker Tilley have to collect money from Newco over the next 3 years, in the amounts and dates helpfully highlighted in an earlier post by Gruffalo, taken from UHY's Completion Report (the same one where AA's further involvement in the CVA was terminated). Those scheduled payments to Baker Tilley are (or should be) irrevocably included in the original Deed of Sale of the club from Oldco to Newco, and are the responsibility of the owners of Newco (Chainrai when he bought Newco from the Administrator, and then CSI when they bought Newco from Chainrai). If they are not then I would say the terms of the CVA have already been breached.

 

So the real question is what will Baker Tilley do if they don't receive the first scheduled payment from Newco (50% of 15% of 20% of £87m if my sums are correct) in April next year? As I see it only Baker Tilley can change the dates or amounts of payments, and probably only with the consent of the majority of the creditors. Who was it that chose Baker Tilley as liquidators?

 

Where does the fee for AA's services that are due to be paid soon come into this? Are they supposed to be coming from oldco or newco? If oldco do Baker Tilley then have to ask newco for it and if so what happens if newco can't pay? (Though I expect the money will be found from somewhere to pay AA, possibly with the help of the CSI administrator).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eurosaint

eurosaint

Posted
Posted

Regarding the under £2,500 creditors (who are now officially f#cked!) wouldn't it be nice if some of the players had a dressing room chat like this :

" Tal, you're on £38k why don't you pay off the kids cancer charity?"

" Liam, you're on £20k why don't you take care of the Red Cross debt?"

" Dave, you're on £20k why don't you look after Fred the butcher?"

" Chuck, we know that you are only on £12k but maybe you could rope in Luke on £8k and sort out Pete the printer?"

They do represent the 'bestest' and after all they are just one big happy family !!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pancake

Pancake

Posted
Posted
Another e-mail sent to the Football League this morning informing them of the Webchat yesterday with Lumpitt and his potential faux pas regarding the link between the skates and CSI.

 

Come again? Where did he state anything that wasnt already in the public domain or had an relevance? CSI owned PFC, simple as that surely...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eurosaint

eurosaint

Posted
Posted
Link just tweeted by Matt Slater from the BBC a few moments ago...

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-15/tale-of-missing-1-6-billion-a-bankrupt-baltic-bank-and-soccer.html

 

:lol: :lol:

 

You cheating skate B*stards...they're coming for you....

 

To be fair, all of his little mishaps and misdemeanours are only 'alleged' !

And with due respect to Corporate Ho, I think that we should consider him 'squeaky clean' until he is either 'banged up' or 'bumped off' !!

You know it makes sense :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...