Frank's cousin

...not sure, but I would imaginethat anyone with Fionancial control (there's a laugh) in a company, eg FD or CEO etc, is legally obliged to notify teh relevent authorities when the business becomes insolvent, shareholder or no... I am sure the books would substatiate such a claim....?

Solution? Best one I can see is if Limpett calls in the administrators and PompeyNew Co goes into admin... -20 odd points probably but its the only way to get rid of some of the debt... Pompey New co only owe CSI 10.8mil, - if in admin that would be reduced under a new CVA. The parachute payments will just about cover the existing CVA, so we can forget about that. As CSI did not pay Chinny his 17 mil, in effect Chinney now owns Pompey... but that 17 mil is not really a pompey debt I would imgaine as its the money CSI should have paid Chinney for PFCnewCo and not loans from Chinney to PFC? (Pls correct if i am wrong) So Chinney would be left with a club not worth very much and looking to sell, he might get a pound. That leave Gaydamrk and his few mil owed ? how much in total as a secured creditor from the last admin? So, realistically, Admin would at least mean Chinney has to accept alot less and teh debt burden would be reduced, provided they can get CSI to agree to 20p in the pound... they could get out of it with only having debts of around 4-5 mil, albeit in L1, and with no squad... but it would be better than liquidation... question is how much dioes chinney want and what would he be prepared to accept to walk away once and for all... ...whatever the truth, its a right feckin mess... but as they used to say in primary school, ''cheats seldom prosper''...

No, patriotism is not a dirty word, but you continually get confused between this and nationalism... they are not the same thing. Some of the replies on this thread are f u cking dispicable - either we have a small minority of bigotted halfwits, or a bunch of kids who think the whole sectarian issue is funny - either way pretty shameful. The Celtic tool who started this thread is obviously a pillock, but there are plenty on here who go into some sort of bitter twisted rant when clubs come in for our players....

NO, just reinforcing sterotypes. Good question though - The problem with making positive statements about 'races' (although we are actually all one Human race) in this way and including the 'colour' is that in principle its no different from a negative statemnet about a group which is racist - whats the difference, if differentiating a group on colour when we know its not actually true - the fact that the 100 m final in 2012 will be 8 Black men is not because they are black - but because of a variety of reasons - some will be genetic - and this is where it gets dangerous as its these princinciples that Nazi nutters based Eugenics on - a genetic advantage that is the result of environmental impact on evolution - particularly where those humans have had to survive in far harsher environmental conditions - and where there is high infant mortality - meaning there is a stronger natural selction impacting on the localised gene pool than in more affluent countries + the normal environmental survival advantages. This has nothing to do with being balck though - as we see with the quality of sportsmen and women who are white but have a multi-generational history in South Africa or even Australia etc. The other main one IMHO is the same reason we so many good Russian and Eastern European Tennis players - the economic question - the drive to improve your situation - no surprise the number of top class sportsmen that have pretty humble backgrounds. Re. Dianne A being racist? - not really, but she as others have pointed out, she does have a massive chip on her shoulder. Thing is when we know that there is still racism out there (and far more than most would like to believe) its probably easy to be paranoid, but her comments were not only unwise but do not help improve the situation either.

True, but even if they win, it would not be applied retrospectively - that boat has sunk

so in simple terms lets speculate ...maybe his 'money making' model is.... invest a few mil in a sinking ship.... 'float it' and take the cash - leave ship floundeing... he seems to me a man whose money has been made by convincing some fools to buy shares in companies he has set up to build...er casinos, floating hotels...pipedreams? yet has not actually built anything yet.... I dont know, if i were pompey, and he is the front runnner, I would be worried.

Easy when we're winning! ;-)

To be fair, at least Brian Howe has stated (somewhere) that they would be looking to 'start afresh' - no massive spening but debt reduction and financial management that has been lackking for them for some time now - so fair play to him. However, if there is any justice, they should be getting their punishment first before they rebuild... sadly its not in the FLs interests, so suspect feck all will be donew about it - I think it would be far better for them to go back into admin, take the hit and relagtion, and get someone who is genuinely looking to start again on a sound footing, rather than false promises...

Dune, when will you wake up and realise its 2012 and not 1900? You make suchj sweeping generalisatyions about all the political parties based on the premise on which they were founded, rather than how they ahev evolved to suit the evolving global socio-economic development - suggesting a political naiviety/complete wind up that never really adds anything constructive to any discussion...

Any bloke who pays more than £7 for a haircut is a tart IMHO...;-)

Its waht they started in Germany in 2000 after they had been crap for a coupel of tournamnets across the national and club academies to all players playing a similar style and could slot in - reaping the benefits now as the system allows a nice combination of play styles, patient build ups as well as more direct fast breaks as we saw in the WC... naturally you need the players as well, but I think the biggest problem with England has been players coming in from clubs that play totally differnt styles, out of position and demotivated, knackered and an bunch of overpaid knobs - thing we need a winter break - if we dont want to lose the chrimbo fixtures fair enough have it in Jan... but thats for another thread. kids seem to be doing good right now.

Surprised no one has mentioned...yet....Must be a muso, guitar playing certain age thing - completely so uncool, they are cool, those Canadian Prog Rockers Rush - Band of my teenage years - seen them live a few times and great shows. Difficult to pick a favourite of all time though, too many diverse genres that I like.

I think... (can never be too sure as far as Pimply are concerned) sequence is as follows: Vlad wanted in connection with alleged monies missing from Banks in Lithuania Chiminery gets worried CSI will be considered and asset and frozen and he wont get his cash Chiminery cher roo, places a charge in CSI Chiminery Chiminary Chim chim cher roo now has power to place CSI in Admin and thus in theory protect CSI assetts from the Lithuanians CSI goes into Admin Chiminery in effect in control of CSI and appoints AA (his buddy from old) as the Administrator As the only secured creditor of CSI, AA is in effect only really looking for best deal for his mate Chiminery but looking for a buyer for Pimply so Chiminery cherr roo can get his cash AA in effect unofficial administrator for pimply as CSI have nothing else that generates any revenue on their books.... Think thats it please correct if I am wrong.

Salmond might be a a bit of a prat (in my IMHO), but he aint completely stupid - if teh deal looks poor he wount take it too teh referendum as it would be self defeating. Interestingly, given that less than 30% od Scots are in favour at the current time, yet 40%+ of the English and going by the jingoistic London centric ****** on here, I am surprized more Scots dont want it - all this sheidt about 'cut them adrift and WE will be better off' - what next anything North of Stevenage? NO wonder the rest of the South and its London centric arrogance so feckin annnoying. I suspect its a sign of the current harsher economic climes which always brings out Mr selfrighteous selfish white van man and his proclamations of Englishness 'uber alles'. ''If its not the dirty forieners stealling our jobs its the jocks and taffs bleeding us dry..... '' What a great attitude....

er.... Do I like top Gear? used to watch it... become repetitive Do I Like Clarkson's right wong ranting? Given that he is paid to be controversial, it can actually be quite funny. If he truey believed all that ****e he spouts though, would not make him that pleasent an individual. Is is worth 2. whatever mil? Well if his programms bring in huge revenues to fund the BBC then undoubtedly - just because I dont watch it anymore, BBC remit is to appeal to all tastes so those taht love it and watch it should have it... so not sure what the issue is really

So what have you got against the Scots, ever been here? ever lived here? No? Your atttude seems stuck in some historic time warp - maybe you conveniently forget the way Thatcher thrust various doomed experiements such as the Poll Tax on Scotland (the sort of thing that is the root of much of the anti-westminster (note not anti-English feeling) - I have lived in Scotland on and off for over 10 years. I have also lived in London and the South east for much longer. The Scots are politer, more friendly and social generally - the most rude obnoxious and arrogant tend to be those is London, where you are considered wierd if you say good morning to someone on the tube - here its considered rude if you dont! Get over yourself FFS. There is a fair amount of BS on this thread, the Uni thing for instance. ALL who are resident in Scotland and that includes a fair few English qualify for the free places - the only reason students from England and Wales have to pay is thatt for Scotish Unis they and non EU students are the ONLY ones they can charge under EU law and all Universitys need money - my wife works in one so knows what she is talking about. I dont want a break up of the union, and I certainly dont have a lot of time for Salmond and the SNP, but you cant have it both ways. Scotland would not need the types of subsidy you refer to if it had had the North sea oil revenues it would have been entitled to since the 70s given where the international sea boundaries would have been had it been independent... and you well know that both those banks, like all banks in recent times are international businesses that are all guilty of the stupidy - look at the city of London and the way they behaved if you want to make some sort of valid comment on that particular issue...

er... sorry , I live here. I have never had any anti-englishness thrown at me, whether in Glasgow, Edi or where I live rurally in Fife... Sure I would get some stick if I went around slagging the Scots (and some of the posts in this threads suggest you can see why there is some anti English sentiment) - worst I get is good natured banter during the annual egg chasing game. Also, please get sme facts right before using things such as the Uni Fees to beat the Scots - the situation is not based on some Anti-English sentiment, but on EU law - ironically if independent, english students would be legally entitled to the same fee structure as Scots/EU students - and lets not forget this is nothing to do with nationality. Even English kids would get Free Uni fees if resident in Scotland - nowt to do with anti-englishness. EU law simply dictates that whatever you offer must be avaibale to all within the EU, with only regional variation allowed within the national border - and all other EU nations do the same - eg we could get free Uni education in Germany with many causes taught in English if we wanted to... I dont like Salmond, and I am not in favour of independence - and nor are about 55% of Scots FWIW.

That the thing - once you start down this road... where does it stop? What 'category' of murder justifies it... is one murder more hideous than another? or put it another way is one victims life worth more than another simply due to the way they were killed? Because that is waht the death penalty is saying, if it is reserved for 'certain' crimes... and Alps, mate think you should take back that post, its pretty sick and surely has no place in a serious debate? You have a strong opinion for sure, whic you arer entitled to, and its probably one thing saying it down the pub, but read it back as tell me you really feel like that... I dont believe you do.

The match thread should be seen as something different - its where those that cant attend can vent their spleen - its reactive and emotive, as all fans are during a game - ups and down, highs and lows and Alps is far from alone when it comes to being wrong about football - 99% of those who post on here are fans because they dont know enough about football to work in the game... :-) Me included. BUt I think the problem is that sometimes on some threads people get confused between opiniion and emotive reaction - Opinion is formed based on accumulated knowledge - so as you learn more your opnions will change. Those who attend games frequently will on average be able to express a more infrmed opinion on the quality of than those that cant simple because they see it all, and we still get diverse opinion - but when I read the 'just back from the game thread - it often tends to be far more positive that a negative scoreline can suggest - folk who see us play etc... But all opinions are equally valid - we just need to try and judge whose are based on more accumulated knowledge. The only thing that really bugs me is when we have a thread say about a new player or transfer target that is meant to be discussing teh background, merits, strengths etc of a potential signing decend once again int a club bashing session, because in someones 'opinion' the player is not what they want and so the club, NC etc must be either skint, lack ambition or they are getting it all wrong.... and the sad truth is, thsoe that express that 'opinion' tend to be the same folk over and over again - if they want to express their thought on NC and the clubs ambition, start a thread about it - and let those who want to post on a player and what they bring to the table discuss that...surely?

But are you not also an atheist? There are many gods that you cant/dont believe in - (fair play, we no longer worship the moon and sun gods etc.. or poseidon, or Thor - but many more still out there) I just happen to believe in one less than you.

You get into very dangerous ground when you bring 'cost' into the equation and 'taxpayers' expense - surely no one is seriously say that a life or death judgement should be based on it....? I do believe that those who have the opinion that its is something we should bring back for the most hideous of crimes, must be looking for some form of vengence - I would be able to to understand that perfectly if we were talking about personal experience - as I said before its a very natural human reaction to want to kill those that have harmed those you love. Cant remember what the is that psychologists and psychiatrist would use.. transferenc emaybe? Maybe for some this very personal emotion is kicked in when we see this sort of shocking news? Totally understandable, but is it a good time to make a judgement on something as important as this when reacting emotionally to such hideous crime? I think Chapel End Charlie is right though when he says that if we think killing or murder is wrong.. then surely it is wrong, even if considered as punishment? Back in the middle ages, you could be hanged for stealling a deer from someones estate to feed you family and kids - as times moved on, we as a society accepted that was wrong and learned from it. I like to think that we abolished capital punishment for the same reasons that our successive Governments also believed that if we want to stand above those that commit these hideous crimes, be morally supierior, we cant as a state make life or death decisions in these cases - especially when we know there must be something fundementally wrong with these people psychologically for them to even contemplate such acts. These are sick ill individuals - its just theat their 'illness' makes them dangerous and intollerable to society so they need locking up to safeguard society - if we start utilising capital punishmnet to remove the 'ill' is it really that far removed from the murder of the mentally and physically handicapped by the Nazis in the 40s? I know that will appear a controversial statement to many, but if we accept the principle that no rational, normal healthy and mentally balanced individual woyul committ the sort of crimes we detest, we are in effect saying they are not normal, healthly people - they do have something so very wrong with their psychological profile that they even contemplate such acts... should the punishment be death for being abnormal? A while back I did at times lean more to the 'bring it back for child murder and rape' idea - until I discussed it with someone who posed a very interesting question - 'what if it was your son or daughter? not who was the victim, but who was the accused - if either you believed they were innocent, or it became clear that they had some very serious psychological issues' - would you be able to stand by and watch whilst the crowds bayed for the death penalty, could you really say you agreed? Its why for me, whilst I appreciate everyone has their own opinion, if ever it came up for a debate in the House again, i would strongly urge thsoe making teh decsion to look at teh bigger picture, that we are a mature society that does not need vengence to satisfy our very real need and desire for justice - the two are NOT the same in a civilised society, no matter how much personal satisfaction we might get from it if personally involved.

Gandalf said it all: '' many that deserve death, live, many that are dead desewrve life, can you give it to them?'' OK so maybe a little trivial on what is a serious issue. Whenever we hear these horror stories the natural reaction of most normal folk is emotive; shock disgust and a belief that JUSTICE is best served by a death penalty. Thankfully we have elected governments (from all sides of the poloitical divide) that assess the evidence more rationally and adhere to the premise that the UK is a mature and civilized society - we know longer have state sponsored retributive murder, as a state we dont lower ourselves to the level of these hideous criminals... but life should mean life for the worst crimes. Alps also mentioned that we are 'now seeing so much of this... we need a deterent' - well to be honest, I dont have any stats but the very worst crmes have been happening for donkeys years, but now we here about everyone of them on the 24 hour media - as teh stats for the US show it does not work as a deterent.... and lets be honest for a moment. The crime most would argue 'deserve' teh death penalty are those of child rape and murder, rape and murder etc... yet the reality is, these committing these crimes tend to be ill, seriously sick, twisted and warped... they dont see what they do as a crime, let alone be deterred by what might happen if they are court. As a father of a 7 year old girl, I know that should anyone harm her i any way I would respond with a violence that is not in my nature. I know I would want to kill anyone who harmed my wife or child. That is a normal protective reaction to such threats to loved ones - the thing is you cant make up laws based on emotional responses of individuals - you have to make up laws based on rational thinking about what is best for society. Its easy to suggest that ridding society of such rapists and murderers would be beneficial, but their is evidence to suggest that having such state sponsored death penalties, actually sends out the wrong message about how we should value life. I am PROUD of the governments we have had, be they Labour or Conservative for the way they have dealt with thsi issue whenever it comes up - maturely and rationally and despite the ****e we have to put up with in this country, these makes me proud to be British and not Texan or Georgian (US)....

Thing is, somewhere deep inside of me is just teh ordinary fan of football and having supported saints fro 37+ years (since I was 5) and having seen the ups and downs I can actually feel sorry for them.... IF instead of dreaming up such fantasy delusion about us - they had fans on there saying 'enough, we made our bed we have to lie in it, acknowledge that teh way ou club has been run is criminal at best, and demand an owner who will do what is necessary to put it right even if it means L2 - this should be about integrity, accepting teh punnishment etc. We were very lucky after teh slight recklessness of Crouch and Wilde in their all out bid - as good intentioned as it was, it was simply a too risky strategy and we paid the price, most accepted it. None of tehm seem to have accepted their fate or shown any kind of real anger at their owners, just making up things about us in a desperate attempt to try an make themselves feel better - sad really. I really mean it, a decnt owner who may not have much cash, but loads of integrity, who would get them running within their means whilst slowly paying off the debts and building them a more solid foundation for future growth and they would get my best wishes... as thing stand I hpope they rot in the cesspit of their own sheidt.... I suspect however that AA will find a solution to keep this thread going for another 500 pages or so...

To be honest, thats the approach they need and if they can find someone sensible who could buy teh club for £1 and manage their debt over the next 3-4 years appropriately, they should be given that chance - but it need sto change dramatically - the way the club has been run, the way its has used other folks money, tax payers money, etc without a hope in hell of paying it back to achieve some short term success is cheating whatever corpse says - and they have been LUCKY that teh FA and FL have been so lenient with them on this. However, if they find an owner with integrity and common sense who is prepared to stand up to the idiots within teh fan base and build the club within its means then fair play and good luck.... but that is a big if...

5. Pompey were in effect running at a loss with out this CSI cash, some of it used on transfers some on wages - lets suggest PFC running about 4mil per annum short without CSI cash - Without doubt running at a loss, if they put in 10.8 million in between July and now and they (According to aa will run out by the end of January, you could argue it's more than 4 million per annum and as high as 18 million (July to January divided by 7 and times by 12) Just coming back on this bit - I sugegsted 4 mil per annum as the 10.8mil borrowed since July went on part on transfer fees so only a proportion of this for wages etc... elsewhere though its stated they are paying for transfer on installments so you may be right in that the majority of this has been used to cover operating costs and overheads.... if that is the case then they they are in deeper ****e than I imagined. On the points deduction - I think the get out clause may well be that this money from CSI was in teh form of a loan. As such had teh moeny been borrowed from a bank that folded, it would not result in points deduction so I can see a way in which PFC could rightly argue they are not linked financially - however, if they do not find a buyer very soon, they are in effect trding insolvently and wil;l be back in admin very soon and we all know what that means... its why AA is confident on the points thing and desperate for a buyer...