Clapham Saint

+1 .

It might also help to foster a greater sense of community. Or is that too much to hope for?

Unless they sell it at a discount of course. Maybe they could sell them in "packets" containing some borrowers with reasonable credit ratings and others with less than perfect (lets call them "sub-prime") ratings. Then a purchaser could make a return by... oh.

Fight fight fight! etc.... http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Corporate+Ho&word2=nickh Nobody can arguewith a google fight.

You wouldn't be out of the tax system but you would still be £700 better off though wouldn't you Bungle. Or would you propose that the 20% and 40% income tax bands were raised to pay for it? (sorry just being pedantic). Also as for "closing loopholes". There are undoubtedly loopholes, however the proportion of people who actually use a loophole to effectively trick their way into lower taxation is much smaller than people seem to think. Arranging your tax affairs (transparently) such that you pay less tax is not illegal and is also not something only practiced by the rich. In fact all taxation "schemes" must now be pre registered with HMRC so that they can be approved before they are used.

Who was it that said that the desire to become a politician was the very thing that made somebody unsuitable to be one (or words to that effect)?

Becuase (under an opt out system) if everybody able to pay privately did the same there would be no funding left within the NHS/schools to treat/educate those in need and unable to do so. Although I share the reluctance to be paying for scoungers assuming that all people who are unable to fund services privately are scrounging is unfair. Finding the balance whereby those in need are supported but those taking the p1ss are told to **** off is a lot easier said than done (unfortunately).

If you owe HMRC £2m (as was mentioned somewhere on here) and start anouncing that you have a new billionaire owner and have funds available to invest in new players does anybody really think that HMRC will agree to take a back seat and let the money be spent on players rather than on repaying them?

Genius. If you have the ability to pay, in full, now, then why should the revenue agree to wait for their money? Do Cash rich companies pay their tax late? No. If you have genuine difficulty then they will do a deal with you.

As somebody who negotiates with the revenue on behalf of clients on a regular basis... if the revenue beleive you have the ability to pay then there really isn't any negotiating to be had.

I love that they have bothered to blur the numberplate on the Range Rover photo.

I was about to comment on each paragraph of this individually but actually there is no point as I agree with all of it.

And yours is why many hate old labour/unions. No, not all less well off people are leaching. In fact it will be only a very small proportion. Equally those who are better off are screwing the system through tax avoidance are also very small. Although it is entirely right and proper that those better placed to do so contribute to the state so that it can help those less fortunate without seeking to avoid it at every turn, it is also not appropriate that people who have no desire to ever contribute are given (what some see as) excessive benefits. Demonising anybody who pays higher rate tax does not aid your argument IMO

Was that not also the case with Dr. Al? If our positions were reversed, although obviously excited at the prospect that this might finally be the real deal these... um... ambiguities... following Dr. Al's tenure, would cause me a bit of concern until put to bed.

I think the point being made is that Pompey fans are (understandably) getting very excited. This is something that has happened before, just a month or two ago in fact. Nobody is saying that he doesn't have anymoney or that he won't be willing to put any into the club but these promises are exactly what was promised last time. What they are saying is that this guy's emergance seems very strange. I think that Phil knows what he's talking about in these matters. I would assume that you would prefer that this new chap doesn't turn out to be the same as the last one. In order to establish that this in not the case, as Phil says, there are questions to be answered.

Pompey were (reportedly) days away from administration in which SAF would have been left with nothing. He now has an investor who is (apparently) going to inject significant funds into the company he has managed to retain 10% of. Not bad for what appears to be absolutely no outlay. Completely agree. Really it comes down to a couple of options. Either: The new owner is genuinely super super wealthy and sees buying Pompey as an exoense rather than an "investment" and is doing it for the fun and glory of owning a prem team. Or he isn't actually that wealthy and like Gaydamack (or what ever he was called) has spotted some alternative potential which escapes everyone else. If its the former then they are sorted, the latter then the circus continues.

On the face of it, good fo them. I still don't see the logic in buying them, even if for a quid, rather than another club (such as Newcastle) though. Then again I doubt the skates much care what I think if everything goes through

If the Banks have their security properly in place this won't be possible. At least one will have a fixed and floating debenture covering all assets of the club. If Storie wanted to offer assets as security to anybody else he would require the Bank's permission. Which he wouldn't get. An security given will be from outside the club. The security (if given) gives the right to priority from the proceeds not the right to the asset itself. The Faraj's would have to make a bid to the administrator for the stadium/club/whatever just like anybody else. I doubt however that the Faraj's have given £5m just becuase they think Storie is a top bloke. They must have been promised something. Whether its something that Storie can actually follow up on is another matter.

The PL rules state -9. I did post a link a while back but don't have time to dig it out again now.

:smt041:smt041:smt041:smt041:smt066 Except that if you are currently unable to pay the wages I suspect that without further "helping out" you will be in administration soon anyway. Also, although some may argue differently I suspect that you are already as good as down. If this is the case a potential purchaser would be faced with the choice of: a) purchase before administration, probably for £1. Take on all debts. b) purchase after administration. For more than £1 but debt free (excluding football related debt, transfer fees etc). Given that your debts are reported to be significant I would expect that be would be by far the cheaper and more sustainable option. Buying pre admin would daft. Very good question. Even if he sees the opportunity why not buy out of administration? I doubt the points penalty is going to make much difference at this stage.

Good afternoon CoHo. If (IF) he has given the loan in anticipation of aquiring the club some how then it won't be through an administration procedure. If an administrator were to be appointed now (i.e. after the loan has been made) he would just be another creditor of the company. He might have some security but if the Banks currently lending have set up their security properly the club would need their permission to offer company assets as such (becuase they would no longer provide security for the Banks). Not second guessing his motives, he could be planning a £squiilion purchase for all I know, just pointing out that he will not be in a comfortable position if administrators are appointed. If this is part of a cunning master plan then it is indeed very very cunning.

They don't. They get paid monthly, it is just common practice to describe the amount weekly. Probably as a hang over from the days when they would have earned significantly less.

Because I couldn’t be bothered to re write what I had said on the other threat. If it keeps you happy though... Unless the Premier league are going to pump in cash to meet the clubs financial commitments, or use their time machine to go back and prevent the club from incurring the liabilities in the first place I don't see how that is possible. If there was a different way that the club's current finances could be run in order to prevent administration I'm sure they would already be doing it. Sounds like a rule "for show". And how would they fund things to January? The Banks, players and suppliers will still want paying. The PL can't stop QFCs appointing administrators if that is what they chose to do. Long story short. If the PL want to step in to prevent administration they need to do so BEFORE all of the mistakes are made not after, by which time it is too late.

It doesn't. HTH.