saint si

HMRC are not making a statement or singling out PFC for special treatment. Past payment of tax does not give you any kind of "loyalty" bonus, allowing you to default on or delay future payments. This is plainly and simply about adhering to the rules... or more accurately, the laws of the land. HMRC are simply saying: it does not matter who you are, or what you do. Pay your taxes when they're due, or we will come for you. Let one slide and they open the door for every other It is abhorrent and rather insulting to the taxpayers (that's me and you) that a sitting MP, of a party in government, would come out on the side of a company that is not paying its taxes... and has known they would be unable to, since the moment CSI pulled the plug.

Surely if AA were appointed administrator, then that would create a conflict of interests between CSI admin and the pompey admin, as he would be representing a creditor on one side of the equation and a debtor on another? It would be in his interests to give preferential treatment to a particular creditor if he could do so? One presumes that may be a grounds for complaint by HMRC? But I suppose that hasn't stopped him becoming administrator of North One Sport as announced yesterday (we missed this yesterday in all the excitement of HMRC's WUP for PFC)... http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/60041/notices/1516969/all=north+one+sport;sort=newest

http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/183205/north-one-sport-acquired-by-csi So that page could be out of date? Or perhaps as a result of defaulting on payment, the rights and ownership to "North One Sport" revert to NOT?

Seems unlikely that he'd have waited until just after it went public? He could have paid it a week ago and avoided the reputational damage which may scare off prospective buyers.

Free transfer... So almost certainly we did the deal with him in the summer (hence shirt #19 was free), and allowed him to complete his contract and finish the J-league season which ended in December.

Good news for their bitter rivals Tesco, if true.

The more things change, the more they stay the same http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/dec/30/portsmouth-customs-revenue-winding-up http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8434987.stm Portsmouth said it disputed the amount of money owed and expected HMRC "to withdraw their demands forthwith". Not quite so combative this time, are you lads!

Nothing on London Gazette today ... did the Guardian speak out of turn? Perhaps HMRC are only threatening WUP, and haven't issued yet?

http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/recent/10/corp-insolvency-winding-up-court/petitions-companies/start=1 Friday's issue of the London Gazette now online. Pompey not in there. Watch this space tomorrow...

I think this is the attitude that most annoys me. All the bleating about the owners they've had. Well guess what, if those characters hadn't turned up when they did to repeatedly bail you out, then you'd have disappeared in to oblivion a long time ago. Now which is it you want again?

Meanwhile, somewhere in South London... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/tottenham-hotspur/9031301/Spurs-manager-Harry-Redknapp-in-dock-over-tax-evasion.html Shaping up to be a fun couple of weeks!

(and the bit from company rescue i meant to include) You CANNOT sell the company and you cannot sell the assets, as this sale may be reversed by the Court Bit of a problem perhaps?

Great find! This would rather complicate things... http://www.companyrescue.co.uk/company-rescue/guides/what-is-a-winding-up-petition What can I do if we receive a winding up petition? What should I do? Once the company receives a petition there are now fewer options available; Oh dear! And note the typical contradictions in the article... The club is not in administration, the club is still running under the steam of the board Umm, so how come you can say... in general terms we are looking to lower the average wage bill. If you're not running the club, then it isn't yours to lower!

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/blogs/elliot-green/elliot-green-licensed-insolvency-practitioner-trials-and-tribulations/wrongful-tr Interesting... The short answer is Wrongful Trading is the unlawful act as set out in Section 214 of the Insolvency Act 1986 Wrongful trading is the act by Directors of a period of trading in which debts and liabilities are incurred and typically increase, whilst having no reasonable prospect of a company avoiding insolvent liquidation. There are two tests for solvency defined in Section 123 of the Insolvency Act 1986, being 1) are your assets exceeded by your liabilities and 2) are you failing to discharge your debts as and when they fall due. If you satisfy either criteria then you are technically insolvent in accordance with the definition of the same in the legislation. Assets vs. liabilities - tough one, as player registrations and golden share are hard to value. Discharging debts when they fall due - pretty clearly failing this test as publicly admitted by the CEO and the parent company's administrator.

Won't liquidate because the only things of value the club has would instantly become worthless: - player registrations - football league membership - future parachute payments which are contingent on ongoing existence. Admin is a strong prospect without an owner or other injection of funds. Failure to pay the April CVA payment would likely lead to yet another court case, with HMRC pushing for liquidation. There may be a technical argument about oldco vs newco, and whether the CVA technically belongs to newco, but I am sure a court would be able to see through that little ruse, particularly as the whole point of it was to carry out a forensic investigation of oldco, which has apparently not taken place anyway...

Bidders?! You really think there is a competition here?

27 TaskForce Friday, January 20, 2012 at 09:04 AM On a serious note l wonder if it will affect the attendances if this Cala becomes owner some fans may see him as another idiot in charge and stay away. Oh no, not the precious attendances!

They're conveniently forgetting that AA is not administrator of Pompey, and his only duty of care lies to the creditors of CSI. PFC is nothing more a headache to get off CSI's books... Telling the FL they have a duty of care? Hope the FL tells them where to go. It's literally unbelievable that they do not see the link between their current hardships and the brief flirtation with success that they enjoyed last decade.

It could be that PFCTV has bought rights from PFC for broadcasting highlights etc over the internet. PFCTV then sells this service on to the fans (as per saintsplayer). Makes sense they'd be in trouble, given their dwindling support. Wonder if that means PFC called in the debt... Also be interesting to see what ownership of PFCTV looks like...

Nicolas Bendtner's role model by the sounds of it

Cala is the best possible result for all concerned. Pompey get to keep their club (for a few more weeks at least) and we get to keep our thread. Everyone's a winner!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16598951.stm Month long loan. Must be confident in our attacking options to let him go. Will be good for him to get some games.

Wonder what the story will be when nothing happens on Thursday... "still negotiating, very close blah blah blah"

Can see the headline in the News now "Fans consortium in line to rescue Pompey!" (just don't mention which club we're fans of).

So then let's see a proper business case for it, rather than present it as a "reward" for the queen... And surely Gove is way outside his remit here anyway, to even be talking about it...