saint si

Correction, looks like positive net income, not loss!

The list of creditors is as of the start of admin; there is a page of the report detailing the net income and outgoings between then and mid-April (a further net loss of about £1m if I recall correctly).

From the BBC live text: "1629: Portsmouth are playing in front of their lowest ever Premier League crowd, 16,027 watching their mudfight with Blackburn."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/portsmouth/7309718/Portsmouth-owner-Balram-Chainrai-first-in-line-for-17m-repayment-as-secured-creditor.html So... the value of the ground has been deliberately over-stated in the club's accounts? Tut tut... That's one helluva coincidence.

Read that earlier - really very good, honest and frank about their chances. Comment 3 made me laugh (now removed, but quoted in comment 13). Typical head-in-sand skate!

This really intrigued me: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8535297.stm

Should have done his due diligence... in a way, his experience will act as a warning to anyone else thinking they can make some easy money from investing in them. You'd have to be damn sure you know where every penny of income has already been committed before thinking your loan is secure...

The article was from over a year ago... they've managed to wipe out the club's value and double the debt since then :-)

This latest attempt from pompey to bend the rules is ridiculous and I can't see it happening. * The fact is, they ARE allowed to sell players at any time. Or at least, they are allowed to receive transfer fees. The rule only prevents the buying club from registering the player for competing this season. * Of course, the amount that a player will command now is likely to be less than it was 3 weeks ago (if they can find a buyer), because the buying club won't pay through the nose for an asset they can't use for 6 months, but this is nobody's fault but Portsmouth's, and if they were desperate for the money they should have sold during the transfer window like everybody else. * Lifting this rule for one selling club would mean lifting it for everyone. You could not have a situation where one buying club can bring in a Portsmouth player and therefore strengthen, but one of its direct competitors can't (because they don't wish to buy a Portsmouth player). This would undermine competition integrity. So you would need to lift the rule for all clubs across all jurisdictions. Basically, Portsmouth want the transfer window revoked because they are in financial trouble. And it's a FIFA rule anyway, not EPL. Given FIFA's attitude towards English football finance, I very much doubt this will happen. * This just smacks of desperation, and rather serves to undermine their claims of solvency. Interesting timing, given that the statement of affairs was submitted yesterday!

16k in the cup? You only just scraped 10k for an all prem cup tie about 3 weeks ago!

It's really really very simple. If this is money that you are entitled to, and that you are absolutely guaranteed to receive, then you will have no problem whatsoever in obtaining a line of credit that is secured against this cash-flow. That is how, in business, you turn future revenue streams in to immediate cash. That you are not doing this indicates either that this future income has already been used as security against a loan (highly likely IMHO), or that you can't obtain a line of credit from anybody at all, given that anyone with half a brain knows that you are probably just going to not bother paying it back. I'm also not sure that the High Court would look too favourably on Pompey taking out yet another line of credit (at undoubtedly exhorbitant interest rates, due to your credit rating), given the difficulties that you have had paying off those you already have. Of course, you can also renegotiate the terms of payments. This is what Saints did with Arsenal. We did not just demand our payment "because it was owed to us". Under the terms of our agreement with Arsenal, we were absolutely not entitled to do that. Instead, the agreement was renegotiated to the advantage of all parties. We got a benefit in terms of immediate cash flow (but taking a P&L hit in the process), and Arsenal got a benefit to their overall net income by reducing the size of their outlay to us. Are you seeking to renegotiate the payment and take an overall hit on the amount you receive? Or do you just want to have your cake and eat it? ("All of the money, and sooner please") Receiving money "earlier than planned" is a very simplistic way of looking at things and discounts the array of knock on impacts. I'm sure the EPL doesn't just hold this kind of money in a slush fund somewhere, and that they forward it on to the 20 Prem clubs (taking a small handling fee) virtually as soon as Sky pay them. So you would be asking the EPL to take out a loan secured against the Sky income... and someone will have to pay for that. Or you're asking Sky to pay up early.... yeah, I'm sure they'll be real happy to do so. After all, NewsCorp has money to burn... oh what's that? A £2bn loss in the last financial year? Hmm, perhaps not... It's abundantly clear you have absolutely no idea how businesses, cash flow, payment terms etc all work. My understanding of business is far from perfect, but I can see the flaws in your stupid comparison without even trying, and I'm sure I'm barely scratching the surface. Corporate, you are not.

I was in the chapel and for the third goal, to be fair, he shaped to stick it in the far post, Davis fell for it completely and moved to his left, leaving a massive yawning gap at his near post. I thought the first two goals were the jammiest. The first was deflected to one of their players who then laid it off to the goalscorer (Quincey something or other). The second just squirmed under Perry's foot on the way to Dindane (I think) and even then Davis got a good hand to it, just enough to loop it in to the far corner beyond Harding running back. Goals 3 and 4 we were just undone for pace having thrown players forward.

Try this: http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8652_5947135,00.html

Interesting timing... according to Companies House, their accounts are due to be filed on the 28th Feb... so will be available for all to see... Go here and search on company 03747237 http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/f409b8d693a80c4f84b67fe89ea12518/wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo

Based on today, my prediction for the future redevelopment of Fratton Park...

Good article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/feb/10/portsmouth-high-court-winding-up

Other key points I'm sure will be considered... Has the club done everything it can to bring in additional revenue? Answer: no, they only sold 2 players (plus williamson) in the transfer window Have they done everything possible to improve their opex position? Answer: no, see above, plus they've signed a bunch of additional players. Has the new owner brought in a fresh management team, doing what they can to put the past behind them? Answer: no, it's the same jokers in charge that got them in to this mess (storrie) or have been strutting about, making grand pronouncement and not actually sorting things out (Jacobs). Have they made genuine attempts to pay the tax bill? Are they just a victim of difficult circumstances? Answer: no, they have been completely ignoring the issue for months now, hoping it would go away, or hoping to delay it with the most frivolous of arguments (boiling down to: we shouldn't have to pay this tax because we don't think we should have to pay it) Is it relevant that they employ 600 staff? Answer: no, as they don't pay them anyway, it would be fairer to allow them to get on with seeking new jobs, and it would be better if those individuals' labour could be put to productive use that generates tax revenue for the state

Gotta love the spin on that. It's as though the court case is pompey's idea, and they're taking HMRC to court!

Seen on the personal ads in The News... Desperate suiter, feeling blue from recent hard luck and rejections, seeks proper fit Thai to come and take control, for possible short term fling. Fun and laughter guaranteed. Own car, house and multi-million pound bank balance are a must.

Agreed, but the creditors have to follow a legal process to get their money back in this situation. So far HMRC and that Grosvenor property company are the only ones to do so (I.e. The winding up petition) but I'm sure others will over the course of this week. We are watching the legal process at work... It takes time, but it can't be stopped now unless they find the money or the creditors back down.

Portsmouth City Football Club Limited is company number 03747237 at Companies House. Googling that number turns up various pages. http://bizzy.info/uk/companies/portsmouth_city_football_club_limited/co_no/03747237/ http://www.ukdata.com/numbers/03747237.html http://www.alacrastore.com/storecontent/experian/03747237 http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/8912861b8c89f3ec746bd7650e32fcf3/compdetails It would appear that they haven't filed accounts since May 2008... and according to the Companies House link, the next accounts are due on 28th Feb 2010... so I imagine a lot of questions will be answered then and the media will be all over the accounts ... assuming that they are still around to file them, and then actually do so. Looks like there are a number of documents available for a fee. Anyone prepared to stump up the readies to see their credit report?! :-) This one caught my eye... http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/8912861b8c89f3ec746bd7650e32fcf3/wcprodorder?ft=1 Statement of Capital £1000000... Any accountants who can explain what this means? Is this money being taken out of the club by the owner?

I've been doing some digging in to winding up orders... First of all, all WU orders are published in the London Gazette, as a matter of public record. Here is the original WU order by HMRC: http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/59312/pages/882 And here is the WU order from Grosvenor Basingstoke Properties: http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/59321/pages/1551 Searches on the Gazette's site for "portsmouth city football" should reveal any further additions to the winding up order over the next week... Then there is this guide to winding up a company: http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/pdfs/guidanceleafletspdf/howtowindupacompany.pdf I specifically wanted to know what happens if the court rules against them at the hearing on the 10th (assuming HMRC or Grosvenor don't elect to adjourn the hearing)... What happens after the winding-up order is made? Usually, the official receiver (who is both a civil servant employed in The Insolvency Service and an officer of the court) will be appointed liquidator of the company on the making of a winding-up order. The official receiver has a duty: ... as liquidator – to collect and realise all assets and pay all creditors. So if the court grants the WU order... they will be liquidated, and the process will begin immediately. And furthermore, according to the PL's rules, the PL then has the power to suspend the club.

On TV too http://www.thefa.com/TheFACup/FACompetitions/TheFACup/NewsAndFeatures/2010/SouthamptonPortsmouthTV.aspx But what the hell is this bit all about? However, just three months earlier, Southampton beat Portsmouth 2-1 in The FA Cup Fourth Round, with Peter Crouch scoring the winner for the Saints via an injury time penalty - a win that helped them on their way to The Final. You might expect a hack journalist to make this mistake, but not the FA themselves!

Once stewarding, policing and other operational costs are taken in to account, they'll be lucky to get enough to pay Utaka's monthly wages.

******* get in!!!