Saint_John

Some reading for the legal ones of Comical Andy's previous cases 1/ Tradition (UK) Ltd v Ahmed & Ors [2008] EWHC 2946 (Ch) http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2008/2946.html Quote from Judge 2/ Griffin v UHY Hacker Young & Partners (A Firm) [2010] EWHC 146 (Ch) http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2010/146.html (from http://www.insolvencynews.com/article/show/Portsmouth-administrator-criticised ) 3/AQUA (From http://www.insolvencynews.com/article/show/Portsmouth-administrator-criticised ) .

Compared to last season :- 14th July 5,000 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~1721970,00.html 22nd July 8,700 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~1729983,00.html 2nd Aug 10,600 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~1740123,00.html ** start of season 8th Aug ** 21st Aug 11,300 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~1761089,00.html . 25 Jan +1,200 Half St (12,500) http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~1943451,00.html

Read the link above again, it says 1/ Comical Andy is taking the money from the Company, it is NOT new money from the buyer. 2/ The judgement in the Woolworths and Lehman cases were given down by HIGHER JUDGES and MORE RECENTLY. They may well get the same judges when they return to Court. As it says in the blog

Try read this from April this year by insolvency firm Mercer & Hole - http://insolvency.mercerhole.co.uk/2010/04/articles/uk-insolvency/unfair-football-creditors-rule/ and

In the case of Leeds, they offered 1p in £ before the CVA vote, this was raised to 8p in the £ the last day before end of the 28 day cooling off period. They finially paid 11.2p in the £. In the case of Luton, the FL insisted on 16p in the £ (same as cva offer) IN EXCHANGE for their Golden Share. http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/football-league/luton-town-hit-with-points-penalty-864607.html So ignore the Skate he hasn't done his research, it all mouth and no facts.

The last dates I've seen are :- Sept 14 2010 for Plea at Southwark Crown Court. May 16 2011 for the real court case. but these dates could have been changed without being in any papers. Also before we get any rubbish from Comical Andy over the next few days about Liquidation can I remind everyone what happened at Leeds http://www.mightyleeds.co.uk/seasons/200708part1.htm

AP quotes on o/s http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~2091521,00.html

In the Leeds case the original offer was 1p in the £, this was increased to 8p in the £ the day before the cva vote. After the cva was challeged by HMRC a the sale of the club was for 11.2p in the £. A good read of events is http://www.mightyleeds.co.uk/seasons/200708part1.htm with the letter sent to creditors for the 11.2p offer http://www.mightyleeds.co.uk/pdf/season200708kpmgletter.pdf I think in the luton case a High Court judge said that the "terms of the cva" should be paid, but i cannot find that online now. I expect any "private sale" of the Cheats to be at least 20p in the £, with 15pts or 17pts (2nd Admin) penalty points.

There are lots of things in the CVA which could be challeged, for example 1/ They only expect the question of Image Rights payments overseas without Tax & NI deductions to be questioned. 2/ As Hutch has said the Football Creditors rule, remember it will be 35p in the £ instead of 20p if it was not there. By adding it to the challenge it will force the Football Authorities to address the "writ" rather than let it drag on through the Courts for a few years. 3/ Comical Andy's CVA only had Portpin, Falcondrone and current Employees in the "Connected Creditors" (9.01), there was no mention of "Gunrunner" or the "Clown in the cap". If you remove these 2 and add the fact that original 2004 ruling against HMRC (Wimbledon case) that "Football was an Association, a group of clubs etc., there is a case that they should be added to the list of "Associated Creditors" which I think would overturn the second vote, 50% vote. 4/ They can also question the fact that Gunrunner loans, (I believe) were only placed against the company just before he sold PCFC and not when they were issued. I wonder if any documents from the raid on Mana & Yossifoff in Israel just happen to arrive on the fax machine at HMRC. 5/ More importantly I think HMRC will push for the removal of Comical Andy as they did in the Joe Blogs Jeans case. His whole arguement of "my cva or liquation and lost of the £48M" doesn't stand anymore because of the other IP's cva. The question for me is whether the Cheats follow Leeds and take the 15pt penalty or try to bluff it out with HMRC until the Court cases in ? Sept ?. To do so they will need an additional loan from BC, the £6M to see them through Admin must be almost gone by now.

And here is the hero who started this thread one year ago. (2 mins into tonight's South Today bit on "Yesterday Football") http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p008rmxx

I bet 165k wasn't the value placed on him by Storrieteller in the SOA. I seem to remember Skates saying his value was in the millions.

When I went for a run this morning I noticed that they have installed "Ticket Machines" to the entry for both the North and South Car Parks. There are 4 machines (2 North & 2 South) on the entry to each Car Park and a further 2 on the Building (1 by the Shop and 1 by the Ticket Office). The machines are currently covered in cardboard but it said they were made by Zeag (a Swiss company) and the model was Orion XR http://www.zeag.ch/ (Very similar to the picture but I hope they do them in Red instead of the Blue, otherwise Stu will be really upset). The packaging said 1 of 8 and 2 of 8 etc, but I could only count 6 at the ground so I don't know where the other 2 are. (Joke) Before Stu comes out with perhaps thay are going to charge £3.01 to park for people going to the Ticket Office to buy Tickets.

Is there some more money being transferred from Daddy to Chainrai ?. This article dated this month says that Chainrai attempted to make Daddy bankrupt in March but they have come to a out of court settlement. So does that mean more money heading to the Cheats from frozen bank accounts ? http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000568967&fid=942 The interesting thing is the link in the article fails, however as I found it via google I was able to get to the cache version and read it. (Google :- "gaydamak chainrai out of court tel aviv" and select the cache.

I don't think they like Sky games either

A Radio Station that was purchased for £1M and ran at a lost of £0.25M a year for 6 to 8 years EQUALS about HALF of our OVERDRAFT limit (£6M) that caused the Admin. Yet when the FL looked at the last EOY Accounts for SLH they only saw the Football Club and nothing else, which imo is why we would have won any legal challenge.

There was once a Police raid on the Skates in July 2007. Further raids on certain addresses in 2008 e.g. Sandbanks. Charges brought against certain people in 2009. Court Case for "plea" due in Sept 2010. Full Court Case due in May 2011. That is a few years from start to finish for those cases. In this case I expect HMRC to appeal the cva within the 28 days and for a High Court visit for the CHEATS / Android in Sept. Then there could be an appeal by one side or the other.

Can I just point out that HMRC can now question everything in the CVA now. If the Andriod had not massaged the figures yesterday then HMRC could only vote for or against the cva. However because of his dismissal of part of HMRC claim WHEN the case goes back to the High Court for the appeal, HMRC can add ANY NUMBER OF ISSUES they have with the CVA to their appeal. If you go back to the Leeds case, HMRC originally only appealled against Yorkshire Radio and another creditor. However when the case was due to be heard in Leeds Crown Court they then ADDED the ISSUE OF THE FOOTBALL CREDITORS RULE. http://www.thefootballnetwork.net/main/s277/st127940.htm?print=1 What these means in the case of CHEATS FC is that when HMRC appeal the fact that their share of the vote was reduced WITHOUT REASON AT the CVA MEETING, they can then ADD ON any number of other issues. They could add the issue of FOOTBALL CREDITORS being paid 100% and link it to the outcome of the writ/court case against the football authorities, they could question Gay-gunrunner loans, they can question the business being run while insolvent, thus increasing the debt. etc. Everything in the cva can be questioned, not just the percentage of the vote given to HMRC. Remember also this case is unlikey to get to court until Sept by which time Andriod cva said that they will have sold over £13M of players (page 64 of 102 - £6,750,000 in July and £6,855,341 in August). That could be a viewed as good test of the CVA in the Judges eyes.

I hope we follow the example of Borussia Dortmund and ban them from our ground. Why should clubs with a small number of supporters be able to make up for their crap support with musical instruments like bells (2,731 on 26/9/2000), drums or "1000s of bees".

As this is the 125 year and Saints first kicked a ball on the 21 Nov 1885 it would have been nice to move the Peterborough game to Sunday (21st) , however with the Brighton game on the following Tuesday (23rd) i'm not so sure now. Which game should Saints use for the celebration game ?

I must have heard a different Radio Solent report to you because the one I heard at 07:15 had Tony H saying what 90% of us on here think, namely it will go to the High Court again if Comical Andy fixes the figures. (IMO - 28 days = 15 July therefore High Court on the 14th July is my bet).

They owe £3M to Spurs for him and £92,250 in bonuses to the player. If Comical Andy's report is to be believed.

I expect Comical Andy to do something similar to leeds. In leeds original cva the creditors were offered 1%, however the day before the cva vote this was raised to 8%. I expect Comical Andy to change his cva this week to something like 21% (from 20%) and 40% (from 5%) if they get promoted to the PL. i.e. he will attempt to make out they are offering 60+% which should get a "one liner" on SSN & the papers. In the leeds situation there was also a last min credit note from a BVI company that just so happen to take the vote to 75.2% in favour. I expect Comical Andy to try something similar this week, either refuse to accept HMRC image rights claim or add some more debt from a BVI company. He will then say the cva has been passed. Leeds then insisted that the FL give them their Golden Share, however they refused and told them to wait for the 28 day cooling off period. After 27 days and 23 hours HMRC went back to the High Court to "block" the cva. I believe something similar will happen with CHEATS FC. Leeds then accepted the 15point penalty because the Admininistraor said he could not pay for Leeds to stay in Admin. This is where thinks might change in that the Skates may take another loan (original loan of £6M repaid at £9.2M imo will run out at the end of July) OR they may follow the leeds situation and come out of Admin without a cva (-15pts). All imo.

IMO the CVA proposal shows some interesting facts re their running costs :- http://www.uhy-uk.com/media/download/turnaround-and-recovery/PFC%20CVA%2028th%20May%20Final2.pdf (see page 54) Since Admin (Feb) the running costs until (May) show the Income as £13.1M of which £6M was a LOAN and outgoings of £9.4M (page 55) of which Wages were £5.1M and Paye/Ni (on those wages) at £3.2M. So they made an operating profit of £3.6M (page 55) which is mainly because of the loan and to a lesser extent the FA Cup. IMO that loan will be used up in a couple of months (end of July ?) because of wages, what happens after that date if the HMRC have stalled the CVA ? I dont think they can use the £8.9M (Aug 2010) from the PL (page 64) because that will be used for the Football Creditors (page 64 again). Now if you look at the CashFlow statement for the year ending May 2012 (page 65) it shows "Administration Loan Repayment of £6.3M in Aug 2011, £1.4M in Nov 2011 and a further £1.4M in Mar 2012 (total £9.2M). That is a very nice rate of interest.

My calcuations mean that the toal unsecured debt would be (£16.xM + £22.4M = £38.xM ) of the total (£105.4M) which would mean about 36.9p in the pound if HMRC won the case, which is better than the 20p in the pound on offer with THIS cva. I posted this blog last week http://insolvency.mercerhole.co.uk/ which has the following quotes . and

My nephew sent you a PM at lunchtime with my email address did you get it ? Anyhow, I remembered my Camera could take movies so I had a go with min pixels to keep the size down. http://s298.photobucket.com/albums/mm258/Saint_John_Photos/Football/Cup_Final_76/?action=view&current=Jasper_Cup_Final_76.flv