Ken Tone

I see the 'comments' facility on the Portsmouth Evneing News web site has stopped working today. Too many comments getting too close to the truth? Or just usual portsmouth forgetting to pay for something?

He may hope to reduce debts to avery low level via a CVA, potter on using the parachute payments to cover the ongoing losses, and maybe squeeze a few million out for himself, THEN liquidate, emerging as undisputed owner of the ground. After a year or two of seeing Fratton rot (I know, I know...) the council will give in on planning and then chainrai can sell the ground for housing or retail development. But even that scenario relies on at least some of the high wage earners leaving so that he doesnt have to cover significant losses in the 3(?) years of the parachute payments. Assuming that the blue few's conspiracy theorists are wrong and he really did lend the club £18 million, you have to wonder why he go tinvolved in the first place. But from where he is now the scenario above is his best bet of getting some profit back. If he just alllows liquidation now, there will be legal disputes over his 'charge' on the ground, and perhaps forensic examination of the accounts.

I imagine Birch is ****ting himself waiting for the Ward to Palace transfer to go through, because he needs that money to cover the bills he's not been paying for the last fortnight or so -- allegedly

Presumably Birch will present Chainrai's bid to the FL on Thursday as 'proof' that the club will be bought by someone, whether it be BC or the trust. But surely until/unless the creditors agree to acept a bid, nothing is safe? anf=d how can that be confirmed by Thursday's meeting. Does chainrai really have a straight majority of the creditors vote himself?

I see that Alex's brother is the books of PFC's laughingly entitled 'academy'. Anyone know how old he is and if he is any good? Surely if his father has similar ambitions for him as he had for Alex, he will want him to move to us as well?

How do all you lot get to and from the game? I haven't drunk at matches since the drink-driving laws came in!

But meanwhile the taxman himself will have only a tiny fraction of his proper vote because the main tax debt is rolled up into CVA1.

The weird thing about the Rangers situation for me is the short-sightedness of the Celtic fans. Without Rangers to give them at least some sort of a fight ,how boring will the scottish league be? Celtic need Rangers to exist and be competitive. a 2 club league is bad enough , but a 1 club league ... after a while, who will watch it? Some might say we would miss portsmouth ,but here there are plenty of other teams to compete with, even if we lose our love-to-hate-them neighours

Could the HMRC v football court ruling actually work for Portsmouth, if as I presume, it isn't applied retrospectively? The last time they went bust, the ruleand AA's sleight of hand helped them fight off HMRC's attempts to close them down, and as a reult HMRC's big debt is now part of the reduced CVA 1 debt, which means they only have a fraction of the size of vote they ought to have. This time around they could use any new rule that doesn't give football creditors proirity to not pay their high wage earners, AND avoid HMRC's artificially enfeebled attempts to liquidate them

Q1 not sure Q2 It would sit and rot for a bit until chainrai inevitably wins the argument with the city council and gets planning permission-- unless he is daft enough to prefer to lease it to a pheonix club, but I doubt they could afford enough rent to make that an attractive option

Oh, I understand why people follow others on twitter. What I don't get is why tweet, unless you need publicity? Lots of people seem to spend half their lives protecting themselves from identity theft, changing passwords , checking for viruses, fussing about data protection, etc --- and the other half telling complete strangers details of their personal life.

Re the points deduction..... Who actually makes the decsion? Is it a small executive group, or a big meeting of lots of other clubs' chairmen? Because if it is the latter , I can't see Leeds and the like having much sympathy after the punishments they got. And of course if you are the chairman of a L1 club that is a bit worried abut relegation, having one of you rivals start the season on -15 points wouldn't be a bad thing

I hadn't heard about Eastleigh. That's amazing! Quick , let's ring the Telegraph.

I can't for the life of me understand why anyone has a twitter account, unless they are in the media and need the publicity. Why on earth expose yourself to all that crap, just so people you have never met can be told what you had for tea? Weird.

I'm reserving judgement till I see what Dalek predicts.

Exactly the same point was made last year! Nicola doesn't seem to worry too muhc about selling season tickets.

The thing is ,this recommendaton was >>>> Beecroft's most controversial recommendation – that employers should be allowed to sack unproductive staff without explanation in a scheme known as no fault dismissal. That is a contradiction in terms. If the employee is unproductive there is a fault. What the recommendation would have meant in practice, is that anyone the boss felt like sacking could be sacked for any reason, or even no reason at all -- without any need to show that he or she was at fault in any way. No one's job would be safe. I've worked for an irrational, bullying boss in my time -- in fact I was her no.2 -- which was a very difficult position to be in, because I had to be loyal to her whilst seeing how unreasonable she was being to staff. If she had the power to sack on her whim, without having to show good reason there would have been chaos.

Shhhh. Arsenal will be after him.

The creditors votes wil be dominated by chainrai. He wil to a large extent be vvoting for himself.

Simple. Holloway is a clown and Allardyce is a git. Clowns are less objectionable than gits. Therefore Blackpool to win. And Gold and Sullivan are gits too, now I come to think of it.

Quite right. Exactly! (Though not so good on the English syntax!)

Eh? I've said 10 squared = 100 , which it does.

Nothing to do with the decimal points. 0.1 x 0.1 = 0.01 is correct, and 10p does = 0.1 of a £

Well I wasn't actually seriously suggesting that the whole basis of civilisation since the ancient Greeks was built on a mathematical fallacy! But I note you have not pointed out the flaw in this 'proof'. There's no division by zero in this one.

So what happened?