EastleighSoulBoy Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 If they weren't a football club they wouldn't have got past the first High Court appearance in front of that gutless judge. This. If it had been your little local corner shop she would have hung the owner out to dry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamesaint Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Notice, that with the Sh1te hitting the fan, he fails to stick his gills in on here! Any comment Peter/Ho? He disappeared for 6 months last year after Anothersaintinsouthsea ripped him apart - although in the fantasy world in which he lives A - He replied within a week or so (posted by him last month) B - He never left the site and just posted on here using another login (posted by him last summer) C - He posted using his wife's computer. (posted last summer) I don't know what is the most deluded of these comments - probably the one where he says he has a wife / sister. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 (edited) This. If it had been your little local corner shop she would have hung the owner out to dry. Exactly - when Corpy Ho Ho Ho claims there's been no collusion between the 'higher parties' involved, that one example indicates who's right. They 'got away with it' in THAT court appearance - when that judge gave them more time to give financial projections (wonder if those were ever checked eh?) it gave them the mileage they needed. They shouldn't have been able to go to court without those figures, and as a result, as they didn't, should have been liquidated. Can't see any other Limited Company IN THIS COUNTRY being given extra time. Edited 9 January, 2012 by Channon's Sideburns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_John Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Anyone know when the next FL meeting is? (at which the PFC situation is on the agenda) No, however in the past they have often been on a Thursday usually in the 2nd week of the month i.e. this Thursday. If you are a twitter person you could ask them on http://twitter.com/football_league , you MAY get an answer. I believe there is a big meeting in Feb of all 72 clubs to discuss the Financial Fair Play rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 I know the Echo is quite antagonistic towards Saints, but the News (or Pompey Pravda as I call it) is almost the PR department of the club. Is it just lazy journalism, or do they think they are helping the inbreds by not telling them the truth? You would never know from reading it that there was a problem, never mind a potentially catastrophic one, at the club. There is the occasional oblique reference to 'finances permitting' regarding signings, and a jolly 'new buyer will be terrific' from AA, but that is it. No investigation into how serious the situation really is or what their real prospects are. It is no wonder the deluded few remain so deluded. Perhaps it's all a sinister government experiment on collective delusion or media manipulation for when the financial balloon goes up. If they can persuade a small town in Hampshire that all is absolutely okay as it goes to sh1t, perhaps Mr Cameron can pull it off nationally before the next election. (you see, Ho, it really is a conspiracy.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 One thing the FIA action highlights is the decisiveness of one sporting regulator compared to the dithering of another... FIA: "no money? You're out!" FL: "no money? Give us 9 months and we'll let you know" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Don't know why people are worried about the FL. They have a history of acting decisively and strongly (ask Luton). They just want to know all the facts (Portsmouth have only been under their duristiction (sp?) for 6 months. When they act they'll want to do it in the knowledge that they're 100% right and appeal proof. The FL will do Portsmouth no favours. (Not unless someone there is being 'influenced' in some way..... What am I thinking, sorry, no chance of that. All their owners and their cohorts are such honest and trustworthy people!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 I see it didn't take Appleton long to see through AA. Quote from the News below. I note the 24-48 hours SSN quoted AA as saying has become 48-72 even for Appleton, and actually it's now not far short of a week. Oh and btw it's the second week of January. It's so obvious that AA is trying the same trick as last time ... make anything up to delay, delay, delay, to put off liquidation or big points deduction whilst he tries desperately to find a new crook, conman, or nutter to pay his fee. Appleton added: ‘Andrew Andronikou came out a few days ago and said we would have a new owner in the next 48-72 hours. ‘But I did sit down with the players and say “please take that with a pinch of salt” because I think you have got to be more cautious than anything on this one. ‘From our point of view, we are told there are two or three really interested parties and they are pushing each other very hard. ‘From my point of view we are in the first week of January now going into the second week – I think it is important, if we can, to get a little bit of stability in the football club – i.e. new owners. ‘I see it as a perfect opportunity to come in January and really stamp their authority and show what their ambitions are for the club.’ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 I know the Echo is quite antagonistic towards Saints, but the News (or Pompey Pravda as I call it) is almost the PR department of the club. Is it just lazy journalism, or do they think they are helping the inbreds by not telling them the truth? You would never know from reading it that there was a problem, never mind a potentially catastrophic one, at the club. There is the occasional oblique reference to 'finances permitting' regarding signings, and a jolly 'new buyer will be terrific' from AA, but that is it. No investigation into how serious the situation really is or what their real prospects are. It is no wonder the deluded few remain so deluded. Perhaps it's all a sinister government experiment on collective delusion or media manipulation for when the financial balloon goes up. If they can persuade a small town in Hampshire that all is absolutely okay as it goes to sh1t, perhaps Mr Cameron can pull it off nationally before the next election. (you see, Ho, it really is a conspiracy.) Thing is they probably think they are helping the club by making it sound better than it is in the hope that an investor comes in to rescue them. In fact all they are doing is helping the goons that have been fleecing them for years and years fleece them some more. Maybe if they reported more honestly with good and bad the dross that is attached to the club would crawl back under their rocks and leave the club to be rescued by someone more honest. I suppose they are that far into bed with the current lot that they feel they have to keep going and hope thatr the next owners will be better than the last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporate Ho Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 When put like that it makes you realise Pompey still have some decent fans that feel like they have been shafted from on end to the other. Which is what I've been saying for the past couple of years to you dunces on here. The club has been used by a bunch of chancers like Chainrai to line their own pockets. They're the ones who should be getting the stick, NOT the club. The FIA have terminated NOS's WRC contract effective from today. CSI looses its only other business. http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/wrc/2012/Pages/wrc-nos-2012.aspx Cue the Corpse with his claims of 'still not inextricably linked financially', and AA claiming they're a solvent business to anyone who is still stupid enough to be listening to him! FFS, are you being deliberately dumb or is it just a gift? I've never said we're not linked financially to CSI, of course we're linked to them, they owned us. What I've said is that we're not linked to them like you were to SLH "as one economic entity". The fact that they had the WRC rights proves that surely? And whilst they may have lost them now, the fact is that at the time they went into administration they had more than one business besides Pompey that wasn't dependent on the football club like the rest of SLH's businesses were on SFC. Therefore, we're not linked "as one economic entity" which is why you got a points deduction. I've said all along that the FL may decide to dock us points anyway but banging on about us being "inetricably linked" to CSI means nothing as it's completely different to your situation. Is it really that hard for you to grasp? Notice, that with the Sh1te hitting the fan, he fails to stick his gills in on here! Any comment Peter/Ho? I don't post on here at weekends, only when I'm at work. I've mad that clear God knows how many times. Shall I write it in capitals for ou next time? He disappeared for 6 months last year after Anothersaintinsouthsea ripped him apart - although in the fantasy world in which he lives A - He replied within a week or so (posted by him last month) B - He never left the site and just posted on here using another login (posted by him last summer) C - He posted using his wife's computer. (posted last summer) a. I did reply. I think the list was originally posted when I wasn't on here but when it was posted up after I started posting again I replied pretty much straight away. Go back and check b. I posted on the main board using another username, posting a load of unbelievable crap saying I was a saints fan that many on there lapped up. hard to believe so many were so gullible but after so many of your lot went onto POL posing as Pompey fans I thought it only fair to balance things out. c. I used my wife's laptop when posting with my "saints" username so the IP address wouldn't be the same as I usually use when at work. Exactly - when Corpy Ho Ho Ho claims there's been no collusion between the 'higher parties' involved, that one example indicates who's right. They 'got away with it' in THAT court appearance - when that judge gave them more time to give financial projections (wonder if those were ever checked eh?) it gave them the mileage they needed. OK, I give up, you know better and have a greater understanding of UK law than a high court judge. Simple mistak for me to make really I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 (edited) I've never said we're not linked financially to CSI, of course we're linked to them, they owned us. What I've said is that we're not linked to them like you were to SLH "as one economic entity". The fact that they had the WRC rights proves that surely? And whilst they may have lost them now, the fact is that at the time they went into administration they had more than one business besides Pompey that wasn't dependent on the football club like the rest of SLH's businesses were on SFC. Therefore, we're not linked "as one economic entity" which is why you got a points deduction. I've said all along that the FL may decide to dock us points anyway but banging on about us being "inetricably linked" to CSI means nothing as it's completely different to your situation. Is it really that hard for you to grasp? You are possibly/probably correct when talking about the past. But what about the here and now? Just because PFC were seemingly protected by CSI owning the WRC rights in the past (which it now turns out weren't actually worth anything anyway, because they were subject to the renewal being approved by the FIA) we are where we are.... So, as of TODAY, would you agree that PFC 2010 and CSI are to all intents and purposes now "one economic entity"? Edited 9 January, 2012 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 I see it didn't take Appleton long to see through AA. Quote from the News below. I note the 24-48 hours SSN quoted AA as saying has become 48-72 even for Appleton, and actually it's now not far short of a week. Oh and btw it's the second week of January. It's so obvious that AA is trying the same trick as last time ... make anything up to delay, delay, delay, to put off liquidation or big points deduction whilst he tries desperately to find a new crook, conman, or nutter to pay his fee. Appleton added: ‘Andrew Andronikou came out a few days ago and said we would have a new owner in the next 48-72 hours. ‘But I did sit down with the players and say “please take that with a pinch of salt” because I think you have got to be more cautious than anything on this one. ‘From our point of view, we are told there are two or three really interested parties and they are pushing each other very hard. ‘From my point of view we are in the first week of January now going into the second week – I think it is important, if we can, to get a little bit of stability in the football club – i.e. new owners. ‘I see it as a perfect opportunity to come in January and really stamp their authority and show what their ambitions are for the club.’ To be absolutely fair and objective, I think that this guy is too good for them ! I hope that their new crook owners (should they ever arrive?) sack him forthwith and bring back an idiot like Clotterill, just for our amusement you understand !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 It's very simple. All CSI businesses were entirely reliant on CSI funding and were not making money. (there may be obvious reasons for why that was acceptable to the owners...) When the CSI cash injections abruptly stopped, every subsidiary became insolvent the same day. Only two of those businesses were of any consequence. North One has closed. pompey* struggle on. CSI did have a portfolio of businesses, but they all relied on CSI funding for day-to-day running so there is the link and a points penalty is clearly due. AA has to find loans or investment to pay wages and transfer fees this month or they will be exposed as blatantly insolvent. Again. *You have to earn respect, I don't think the club deserves a capital letter, I'll reinstate it when they pay their debts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holepuncture Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 a mate who deals with a skate reckons Pompeys new owner will be... David Dein (ex-Arsenal Chairman)... that is what the skate chap reckons anywho. Would he get involved with the likes of Chainrai and Gadymack? He did stitch Arsenal up selling his stake to the Usmanov Eastern European gang, so maybe he could get involved in the dark underworld at Nottarf. When a business has liabilities far exceeding its value (ie: insolvent), why buy it pre administration? Would he be looking for a pre-pack admin deal with AA? AA said he would reveal his super new investors about 48 hours ago so we should see soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carljack Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 a mate who deals with a skate reckons Pompeys new owner will be... David Dein (ex-Arsenal Chairman)... that is what the skate chap reckons anywho. Would he get involved with the likes of Chainrai and Gadymack? He did stitch Arsenal up selling his stake to the Usmanov Eastern European gang, so maybe he could get involved in the dark underworld at Nottarf. When a business has liabilities far exceeding its value (ie: insolvent), why buy it pre administration? Would he be looking for a pre-pack admin deal with AA? AA said he would reveal his super new investors about 48 hours ago so we should see soon! This is old news in a new wrapper from 2009, but your contact has left out a man who is well known to us all,he goes by the name of Peter Storrie,him and Dein were allegedly going to buy Pompski when they were in trouble the first time round, or was it the second?. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 (edited) I don't post on here at weekends, only when I'm at work. I've made that clear God knows how many times. Shall I write it in capitals for you next time? What happened to your wife's laptop broken is it? by the way, I've added a few corrections to your post, I know how keen you are on English and spelling! Edited 9 January, 2012 by Gingeletiss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 a mate who deals with a skate reckons Pompeys new owner will be... David Dein (ex-Arsenal Chairman)... that is what the skate chap reckons anywho. Would he get involved with the likes of Chainrai and Gadymack? He did stitch Arsenal up selling his stake to the Usmanov Eastern European gang, so maybe he could get involved in the dark underworld at Nottarf. When a business has liabilities far exceeding its value (ie: insolvent), why buy it pre administration? Would he be looking for a pre-pack admin deal with AA? AA said he would reveal his super new investors about 48 hours ago so we should see soon! Spookily enough, I caught sight of David Dein in London over the weekend but could only grab this quick close up snap of him.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Appleton has plenty of targets if he gets to enter the January transfer window but he still feels there is enough strength in Pompey's squad to impress in the Championship. "The longer the January window goes on the opportunities that you get to bring players in dwindles a little bit," he added. "I've been doing about three or four lists of different scenarios and I think I'm on my third or fourth at the minute. LIST: Toaster setting 1: resign loanees Toaster setting 2 : sell tal Toaster setting 3 : sell tal, Lawrence, Varney... write CV Toaster setting 4 : Sell tal, Lawrence, Varney, husklepp, mokoena, Post CV to all clubs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohio Saint Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 *You have to earn respect, I don't think the club deserves a capital letter, I'll reinstate it when they pay their debts. We could always declare it a verb, that way it will never have a capital letter. eg: "You've just been pompeyed in the butt" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 (edited) We could always declare it a verb, that way it will never have a capital letter. eg: "You've just been pompeyed in the butt" Would be quite funny to do for pompey what was done to Senator Santorum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_"santorum"_neologism basically someone made up a new definition for his name, put it on a website and then got lots of people to link to it so it became the top result on google when you search for Santorum). Edited 9 January, 2012 by pedg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 (edited) OK, I give up, you know better and have a greater understanding of UK law than a high court judge. Simple mistak for me to make really I suppose. Come on Corpy, answer me this. Do you know of any company that would go to the High Court, facing insolvency proceedings, without the necessary documents to prove their solvency? Secondly, would you not say that it would be fair, in that instance for them to be liquidated if they went there so ill-prepared? If you wonder why we're so 'moralistic' about your beloved 'club', there's one example right there. It's basic UK law. And, whichever way it's viewed by Pompey fans, you got let off, big time. If it were my company, I wouldn't still be in business. Guaranteed. Edited 9 January, 2012 by Channon's Sideburns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 (edited) It's very simple. All CSI businesses were entirely reliant on CSI funding and were not making money. (there may be obvious reasons for why that was acceptable to the owners...) When the CSI cash injections abruptly stopped, every subsidiary became insolvent the same day. Only two of those businesses were of any consequence. North One has closed. pompey* struggle on. CSI did have a portfolio of businesses, but they all relied on CSI funding for day-to-day running so there is the link and a points penalty is clearly due. AA has to find loans or investment to pay wages and transfer fees this month or they will be exposed as blatantly insolvent. Again. The blue few appear to be pinning their hopes on the fact that at the moment CSI went into admin pompey was not their only company and that it was the situation at that point that is important not the current 1 to 1 relationship. Does anyone know if that has any basis in fact or is just wishful thinking? Edited 9 January, 2012 by pedg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 (edited) The blue few appear to be pinning their hopes on the fact that at the moment CSI went into admin pompey was not their only company and that it was the situation at that point that was important not the current 1 to 1 relationship. Does anyone know if that has any basis in fact or is just wishful thinking? But that's surely irrelevant isn't it? (in the non-make believe world outside of Pompey Towers) As per my earlier post, if Pompey and their parent company are a "single economic enitity" TODAY does it matter what they were YESTERDAY (or the day before that, or the day before the day before that, etc, etc, etc). If I had a car crash today, would I be covered by my car insurance that ran out last week? And anyway, given that the FIA was in a position to terminate NOS's contract without financial penalty, CSI didn't actually own another significant economic entity when they went into administration, as it turns out the WRC contract was worthless. So, there was only ever one actual significant economic entity in the CSI empire when they went into administration....namely CSI and PFC 2010.... Edited 9 January, 2012 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 And, to add to Trousers' analogy, SLH at one time had other businesses. But at the time of SLH's administration it had only one business - SFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 The blue few appear to be pinning their hopes on the fact that at the moment CSI went into admin pompey was not their only company and that it was the situation at that point that is important not the current 1 to 1 relationship. Does anyone know if that has any basis in fact or is just wishful thinking? Don't be misled by Ho's 'inextricably linked as one economic entity' bullsh1t. That was merely the terminology used in our case. What is more important is the question as to whether Poopey gained an advantage over other teams with funds they received from their parent company which is now in administration. A simple way to discover the answer to that question would be for the FL to insist that they pay back the 10.8m immediately and in full (not 20p in the pound) or take a points deduction. If the money is handed over no advantage has been made, if not............. Now, hands up all those who think the Skates have a spare 10.8m down the back of the sofa......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Don't be misled by Ho's 'inextricably linked as one economic entity' bullsh1t. That was merely the terminology used in our case. What is more important is the question as to whether Poopey gained an advantage over other teams with funds they received from their parent company which is now in administration. A simple way to discover the answer to that question would be for the FL to insist that they pay back the 10.8m immediately and in full (not 20p in the pound) or take a points deduction. If the money is handed over no advantage has been made, if not............. Now, hands up all those who think the Skates have a spare 10.8m down the back of the sofa......... Totally agree, but if it's as simple as that, why no instant points deduction from the FL (asked Trousers rhetorically) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Totally agree, but if it's as simple as that, why no instant points deduction from the FL (asked Trousers rhetorically) Because the FL are (by only discussing the matter at their next meeting) probably covering their own arses by giving them more time to find a new owner. It's groundhog January all over again. TBF on Appleton, he's shown more understanding in his recent comments about AA than ANYONE who is connected to that club in the last 3 years. Fair play to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Because the FL are (by only discussing the matter at their next meeting) probably covering their own arses by giving them more time to find a new owner. It's groundhog January all over again. TBF on Appleton, he's shown more understanding in his recent comments about AA than ANYONE who is connected to that club in the last 3 years. Fair play to him. Yep, got to agree, this Appleton chap is no fun at all. Far too sensible and also seems to be doing a good job to boot. I much preferred the Clot and Avram. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 I don't think the FL will change their view on a points deduction whether they have new owners or not. They just want to be sure of the facts before they make a decision and they want the correct in arguable data so they can knock AA straight back into his place when he whinges about it. It was Luton's new owners who took the information regarding misdemeanors by the previous owners to the FL, but it didn't stop the FL giving the new regime a massive penalty. The only time there has ever been instant penalties is when it's been a clear cut decision, ie, we're calling in the administrator, ok here's a 10 point penalty. Ours wasn't instant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Still not getting hung up on "linked commercial entity" as the only area where a points deduction could apply. The small print in the rules mentions unfair competitive advantage. That is likely to be the issue. Consider - any new owner coming in has to cover the CVA & any secured creditors (latter from Parachute payments no doubt) Why should they add in the 10.8 mil to CSI? Chinny is their main creditor, he won't care about that, only the Lithuanians may want that money back. So the most likely scenario is that a new buyer prepares to take on the club and that 10.8 gets written off. Now THAT is where other nPc clubs will start to have an issue, by their own admission, poopey used that money to improve their squad (c'mon, nobody is gonna believe they spent 10,8mil on the dripping taps & hot water) so UNLESS the new onwers pay that back, they get a points deduction for unfairly taking 10,8mil of money and not paying it back. THAT would then give leave to a nice legal battle - like what we had (yeah right) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jillyanne Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Is this the longest thread in the world ever yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Is this the longest thread in the world ever yet? Is this the longest painful death of a Football Club ever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Is this the longest painful death of a Football Club ever? Im sick of them being sick. Just die or get better already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Im sick of them being sick. Just die or get better already! They're PFC. Even if they get better, they'll still be sick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Is this the longest thread in the world ever yet? Funnily enough (or perhaps sadly enough!) I looked that up this morning and there are threads out there with 250,000+ posts... Some way to go yet.... :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Funnily enough (or perhaps sadly enough!) I looked that up this morning and there are threads out there with 250,000+ posts...[/QUOTE] Is that one titled, "pompey creditors" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Which is what I've been saying for the past couple of years to you dunces on here. The club has been used by a bunch of chancers like Chainrai to line their own pockets. They're the ones who should be getting the stick, NOT the club. But thats the thing, the club are the ones that have got into bed with this chancers based on the advice of the likes of story teller and co. the dunce fans have gone along with it and lapped it up claiming FA cup success and major coups for signings where other clubs have not been able to compete. Look where it has left your club? And now the dunce fans expect everyone to give you an easy ride as its not the clubs fault, its all down to the chancer owners. blame them not us. The club has been used and I doubt many on here would argue otherwise. But its the clubs name that sits along side all the non payment of tax or charity non payments. its the clubs name that sits along side the incredible wages a mid ranged size club chose to pay out. and its the fans that lapped it all up happy to get away with anything they could at the expense of others. Some of the clubs fans genuinly seem embarressed at how the club has ripped off others and its those I feel sorry for. But when you and PFC come on here spouting how everything is fine and its not your fault, or how its all exagerated and come up with wild claims that somehow make your situation look bettter while ignoring what is staring everyone else in the face I want more and more for harsh action to be taken. What is the realistic way forward that you can see that will not only keep a club for you all to support while dropping the chancers that have been trying to bleed you dry for feck knows how many years? If Chainrai is the only real hanger on that is continuing to cripple your club how do you ensure he is gone? What about Gaydamak? Or AA? Can you honestly see someone on the horizon that wants things done properly and will get rid of the chancers once and for all? Or is the bidding only open to yet more chancers? If the FL actually had the balls to shut up your shop so the main men lose out completley and the comunity got behind an AFC pompey I genuinly think you would all be better off for it. The longer you all continue to follow the club that is on life support only to line the pockets of Chainrai and Gaydamak the longer it will be before you can honestly look at your club with some pride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 The blue few appear to be pinning their hopes on the fact that at the moment CSI went into admin pompey was not their only company and that it was the situation at that point that is important not the current 1 to 1 relationship. Does anyone know if that has any basis in fact or is just wishful thinking? At the time SLH went into administration the rules stated that there would be no points deduction to a club whos parent company entered administration. Or something along those lines. That turned out well for us didnt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 And, to add to Trousers' analogy, SLH at one time had other businesses. But at the time of SLH's administration it had only one business - SFC. I think it still had others. It had dropped the Credit card/Insurance/Radio Station by then. Those companys were deemed mad at the time and just some of Rupes crazy ideas. They acted as a noose rather than any help. I doubt it would thought of that by having them still going they would of helped in our case against deductions and most were happy when Wilde and co got rid of them all. I guess they wernt making the money they should of been and maybe even costing money which is why they probably got ditched. It also helped in the feel good factor as the new leaders got rid of traces of Rupes. No matter now though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 (edited) What would be a breath of fresh air would be for the FL to say, 'We acknowledge that the FPPT has been a complete **** up in this case and now PFC is so riddled with the effects of corrupt ownership, dodgy payments, etc that it is beyond repair. Therefore in the best interests of all concerned we are going to withdraw their FL membership and shut them down. As we acknowledge that our FPPT didn't offer the the club and it's fans the protection they, and all clubs, deserve we are going to assist them in the setting up of a new club and allow them into the League Pyramid at an unusually high level (say, Conference South). Any honours the club has gained since the club was sold by Milan Mandaric will also be expunged. We apologise for our part in this club's downfall but acknowledge that the only way to purge the club and more importantly the Football League itself of these individuals is to take what we consider to be a firm but fair action, giving the club a fresh start. What chance huh? I know some people will say they don't deserve it. They lapped it up at the time, but I think it's probably the only way out, and it is within the FL's power Edited 9 January, 2012 by Winchester Red Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 What would be a breath of fresh air would be for the FL to say, 'We acknowledge that the FPPT has been a complete **** up in this case and now PFC is so riddled with the effects of corrupt ownership, dodgy payments, etc that it is beyond repair. Therefore in the best interests of all concerned we are going to withdraw their FL membership and shut them down. As we acknowledge that our FPPT didn't offer the the club and it's fans the protection they, and all clubs, deserve we are going to assist them in the setting up of a new club and allow them into the League Pyramid at an unusually high level (say, Conference South). Any honours the club has gained since the club was sold by Milan Mandaric will also be expunged. We apologise for our part in this club's downfall but acknowledge that the only way to purge the club and more importantly the Football League itself from these individuals is to take what we consider to be a firm but fair action, giving the club a fresh start. What chance huh? I know some people will say they don't deserve it. They lapped it up at the time, but I think it's probably the only way out, and it is within the FL's power ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sussexsaint Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 ;-) Way way past that mate - we are up to Pigs In Space now. Makes me wonder why we are bothering do do things properly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Way way past that mate - we are up to Pigs In Space now. Makes me wonder why we are bothering do do things properly Morals mate, that's all you need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waterside.saint Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 dunno if this has been posted before - more evidence (if any were needed) that other fans have caught on: Football Finances, come laugh at portsmouth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamesaint Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 (edited) I did reply. I think the list was originally posted when I wasn't on here but when it was posted up after I started posting again I replied pretty much straight away. Go back and check That's strange - a fantasist wants us to check the facts. The facts are: Corporate Ho was posting his normal drivel on here last winter. On 7 January he made 3 posts. On 14 January he made 3 posts - the last one being at 1.10pm. On 14 January at 1.48 pm Anothersaintinsouthsea destroyed Corporate Ho with his famous post which pointed out quite a few inconsistencies in Corp's postings. ( post 36357 on page 728 if you want to re read it.). It was hilarious and completely destroyed any credibility that Corp had. We then heard nothing from Corporate Ho for many months. If he had resumed his normal rate of posting there would have been a reply from him within a week. But there was nothing. He was too ashamed to post on here . Corp was often spotted during this time by many people reading the board. Not once however did he post - doubtless aware that he was even more of a laughing stock than normal. He never once attempted to defend himself - which isn't surprising after the savaging that he took. Corp Ho next posted on 1 July - nearly 6 months after Anothersaintinsouthsea's post. His response was so cringeworthy it wasn't really worth the wait. The man is a complete fantasist. He says that "the list was originally posted when I wasn't on here" .... but he had been posting 38 minutes before the post appeared !! It was the post that made him disappear for 6 months!! Just remember Corp that you are dealing with Southampton fans on here - not the normal half wits you associate with in Portsmouth. You are going to have to try a whole lot harder to better us. Edited 9 January, 2012 by Tamesaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 not strictly takeover related, but can I suggest you buy/read this months edition of When Saturday Comes. Nice article about the derby game in there by James De Mellow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyLove Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 That's strange - a fantasist wants us to check the facts. The facts are: Corporate Ho was posting his normal drivel on here last winter. On 7 January he made 3 posts. On 14 January he made 3 posts - the last one being at 1.10pm. On 14 January at 1.48 pm Anothersaintinsouthsea destroyed Corporate Ho with his famous post which pointed out quite a few inconsistencies in Corp's postings. ( post 36357 on page 728 if you want to re read it.). It was hilarious and completely destroyed any credibility that Corp had. We then heard nothing from Corporate Ho for many months. If he had resumed his normal rate of posting there would have been a reply from him within a week. But there was nothing. He was too ashamed to post on here . Corp was often spotted during this time by many people reading the board. Not once however did he post - doubtless aware that he was even more of a laughing stock than normal. He never once attempted to defend himself - which isn't surprising after the savaging that he took. Corp Ho next posted on 1 July - nearly 6 months after Anothersaintinsouthsea's post. His response was so cringeworthy it wasn't really worth the wait. The man is a complete fantasist. He says that "the list was originally posted when I wasn't on here" .... but he had been posting 38 minutes before the post appeared !! It was the post that made him disappear for 6 months!! Just remember Corp that you are dealing with Southampton fans on here - not the normal half wits you associate with in Portsmouth. You are going to have to try a whole lot harder to better us. Amended for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamesaint Posted 9 January, 2012 Share Posted 9 January, 2012 Amended for you Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Munster Posted 10 January, 2012 Share Posted 10 January, 2012 Don't be misled by Ho's 'inextricably linked as one economic entity' bullsh1t. That was merely the terminology used in our case. What is more important is the question as to whether Poopey gained an advantage over other teams with funds they received from their parent company which is now in administration. A simple way to discover the answer to that question would be for the FL to insist that they pay back the 10.8m immediately and in full (not 20p in the pound) or take a points deduction. If the money is handed over no advantage has been made, if not............. Now, hands up all those who think the Skates have a spare 10.8m down the back of the sofa......... Wait, wait, over there ... Corpse has his hand up. Oh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Munster Posted 10 January, 2012 Share Posted 10 January, 2012 Funnily enough (or perhaps sadly enough!) I looked that up this morning and there are threads out there with 250,000+ posts... Some way to go yet.... :-) Yes, but those threads are composed almost entirely of crap. Ours is full of witty, insightful and intelligent posts about crap. A subtle but important difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts