Gemmel

I think that's entirely fair KK. If we take the emotion of the rivalry out of things, then certainly there is respect for what they (PST) have tried to acheive and how far they have got. Personally I want them to succeed. It will ensure South Coast superiority for the rest of mine and my kids liftimes for Saints. However, when you strip things back, what they are trying to do, is exactly what the people who they criticise so much did. Their first liittle trick was to try and rape 6 million off the players, when they actually had the money (And wanted to spend it on players and wages) and now they want another 15 million off Chinny....claiming his charge isn't valid. The only problem with that is the Micha hall articles spell out exactly when and where the money was put in..... It's just they don't want to believe that part.

You would have thought so, but apparently it doesn't work like that. If you take the primary driver of an administrator - To get the best deal for creditors, then if the trust get it for 2.7 million, that is an additional 15 million pound hit to the creditors. If Chanrai offers 10, 15 , 17 whatever (And remember that just comes off his charge) then Birch has reduced that 15 million either greatly or in its entirerity. I am as confused as you are Trousers............... But still looking forward to the court case. FFS Clapham....Tell us how it works, what the judge is likely to take into consideration, what cards Chinny has left to play etc.

This is my loose understanding of it (So could well be wrong and I am happy to be corrected) The administrator owns Fat Pipes, but Chinny has a charge on it. Whatever that charge is settled for 2.7 , 10 or 17 milllion, is ultimatey the cost of the ground and Birch will sign it over, either for nothing or one of those nominal fees of a pound. As to why he doesn't just take fat pipes, he can't whilst they are in administration. So in a way it is both.... It is an assett for the administrator, but all funds from it will go to Chinny. As to what Chinny can do or what the judge will take into consideration, is still guesswork. For me it is hard to believe that a judge can just write off 15 million pounds of one persons debt, to sell something that allows another private company to make money from it, when the person with the charge wants to keep it. The PDT will tell you that's not how it works and genuinely seem to believe that thye judeg might lower the 2.7 million that the PDT are offering. What we need is Clapham Saint to let us know how these things work....Come on Clapham

It won't be Corpy - This is his busiest time of the year...... My money is on PES

Of Course you are komisaruk. Welcome back PES

They are talking about the Newcastle game...... and Lets B Avenue is correct

Champneys is to blame for their bad form. http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/whittingham-being-away-from-family-is-affecting-pompey-players-1-4508998 And as for Rallyboy's continual crowing that the figures don't add up - Well they will now. With this initative in place, they will be signing Beckham, with plenty of cash to spare. http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/10p-on-a-pint-to-aid-pompey-1-4510013

From POL ``And we have an open event in the Victory Lounge on 15th Dec to help people convert their pledges and buy new shares. Personally I'd like to encourage as many people who have pledged to convert before the court date so we can show how real our commitment is.`` I am going to bet on a 62% take up - which ill be dressed up by the pdt as just under a 100%

Oh good good :)

http://boards.footymad.net/forum.php?tno=424&fid=203&sty=2&act=1&mid=2113753887#p33729760 http://boards.footymad.net/forum.php?tno=424&fid=203&sty=2&act=1&mid=2113753842#p33729805 Oh dear oh dear... Time to redo the figures

But will he get the answers I have just got back from a short break & have just downloaded the much anticipated trust prospectus. This is a potentially momentous point in our history, and we need to proceed, as the prospectus says, as a 'Club that is transparent and accountable to its supporters'. I commend the PST on their hard work, and the "glossy" nature of the prospectus. However, as Mike Hall showed recently, transparency is paramount. There should be no sacred cows any longer. No more benefit of the doubt for anyone. Let's say it as it is, and like Mike says, "shine a light" into all of the potentially dark corners, just to make sure. I am being asked to put in money, as the rest of us are, so it is only fit & proper to ask questions. I have a few of my own & I expect others have more too. I wonder if someone from the PST would be happy to answer them? There is a lot of anti pst stuff on the news forums...... Have they suddenly woken up Q1. Page 4 claims that PST ownership will deliver "a new level of appeal to sponsors, increasing attendances and match day spend". What % increase in each of these core revenue streams has been built into the budget? (See Q10 below) Q2. Page 6 says that "The majority of the PST Board are elected by the membership". Why not fully elected? Is this to be the case going forward? Q3. Page 6 says "We want to recognise the individuals who purchase shares by giving them benefits at the club." What "benefits" do you envisage? If these are discounts, have they been built into the financial model? E.g. if 20% discount on season tickets, then has 20% been taken off 2,000 season tickets? Q4. Page 6 indicates that it is possible that the club will be majority owned by "the Presidents". How could such a scenario be described as a "community club"? Isn't this just a consortium of local businessmen purchasing the majority shareholding with the PST simply helping them to get the keys to the boardroom? Q5. Page 7 says that the sale & leaseback arrangement contains a "secure option allowing the club to buy-back the stadium in the next five years." What does the contract say if the 5 years elapse? It is conceivable that funding won't be available within 5 years to purchase outright, as lenders may be reluctant to lend against a football ground (ultimately it isn't a very liquid asset). Q6. Page 7 says that "The ethos of 'one member, one vote' will remain at the core of PST's activities." How can this be the case when the business model is that c.50% of the equity & a minimum of 50% of the seats on the board are being given away to wealthy people? Q7. Page 7 says that the Presidents will have 3 seats on the board of the acquisition company (Portsmouth Community Football Club Ltd), plus a seat for anyone putting in more than £200k. Page 10 says that PST (i.e. the £1,000 brigade) get to elect 3 seats on the board. So the best the £1,000 brigade can hope for is 50% of the seats on the board, but more likely, less than 50%. If the Presidents are as altruistic as we are lead to believe (to quote Mike Hall - "they are saving your club") then why do they need a seat on the board? Q8. Based on the answer to Q7, page 10 says that the board can allow for more shares to be sold to the Presidents. If the board is more than 50% controlled by the Presidents, then would the PST not agree that it has very limited power to actually regulate this process, and the Presidents could quickly, and relatively cheaply dilute the PST? The PST would not have funds to do anything about this as it would need to match the money going in to retain % shareholding. Q9. "Shares can not be transferred or sold". Presumably this is shares in PST, not in PCFC Ltd? I.e. the Presidents are still able to do what they like with their shareholding, but not the £1,000 brigade? Q10. Page 8 shows a 19% growth in revenues between the 2013/14 & 2014/15 seasons. What is driving this growth? Considering that it is likely that we will be playing in League Two, with no guarantees of promotion back to League One, how is it considered prudent to show such growth? Q11. Following on from Q10, if the revenues were to stay the same as they are in 2013/14 for the next 3 seasons in the model, then revenue would be a total of £2.97m lower across the 3 years. Taking the margin of 10.2% shown for 2014/15, then this would mean cash would be £300k lower overall. Indeed, it would mean that the model runs out of cash in 2015/16 (£100k lower in 2014/15 & £100k lower in 2015/16 means negative cash at end of 2015/16). This means that the assumptions behind this strong revenue growth need to be clearly understood. Q12. Page 9 says "More detailed financial analysis can be found on www.communitypompey.co.uk.". I don't seem able to find it? And the FAQ section is being "updated". When will we get to see this? Q13. What happened to the difference between having the pay the former players the £9m and the fact that the PST had only put aside c.£3m? Has this renegotiation been scrapped? If yes, how has the gap been bridged? I do applaud the work done to date, but am a little "nervous" about the power that the "Presidents" have the ability to wield, and am nervous about the PST being driven out / side-lined by these chaps. I have worked on enough start-ups & business deals to know that you have to make concessions, but let's be very clear. If the Presidents are "saviours" and just normal fans, then why do they need a majority of seats on the board? I really want this to work, so don't want us to set-out in the wrong manner. Answers very much welcome Read more: http://www.portsmouth.vitalfootball.co.uk/sitepage.asp?a=300409#ixzz2Cnres3CR

To reflect their new partnership..... property development trust

But the pst aren't getting the ground, a property developer is. As for not getting the the 2p in the pound, Chanrai is the only one to have gone through a formal CVA process, the pst are just piggy backing off what the creditors agreed for Chanrai. Unless I have missed smething, no other stipulations have been made by the unsecured creditors on the pst.

I am not sure that is correct, but either way it makes no difference. The club/ ground whatever, can be sold to anyone, it's just the golden share that has conditions attached.

The only thing that matches the look and symptoms is a false widow spider bite..... Which are actually more common than I knew yesterday. Still painful this morning with intermitent stabbing pains around the actual bite. All very weird, but of great amusement to the rest of the family........... Everytime I mention spider bite, they fall about laughing .

Well I am still alive, but only just.

Just walking in the woods and had a piercing pain on my chest. No sign of a wasp or bee, but it has come up in a huge lump and a very strange redness, that I haven't seen before. What the fook could have biten me if it wasn't a wasp or bee? Feel like a right wimp, but it really foooking hurts and is red hot to touch

I am genuinely intrigued about this court case. I don't know anything about these things, but the few, talk about it as a foregone conclusion. I want the trust to take over for comedy reasons, but just don't get how you wipe 15 million quid of a 17 million debt away, so that you can try and make more money from it. They will absolutely play the trust or bust card and the judge will have to have to deal with that, but I wonder what Chinny has is store.

Didn't hear this song at all.... Confused:?

Ffs

Not relegated

Adkins Got his team, his tactics and his subs spot on. We were quite noisy ....decent away fans We will be OK

BULL **** .....bounce

Ouch...thats 7 months.....but never mind After 3......

16 weeks for that??????????