Clapham Saint

5 :-)

I would assume (ok hope) that although we will old get modest investment this year, should we be promoted the level of financial support for player purchases will increase significantly. Is this something that can be reflected in teh game? Or does the level of investment that an owner is prepared to give stick at a fixed level?

Maybe.

True, however the level of debt and how it is structured can be an issue if things start to go t*ts up. Hopefully not an issue but given what has happened is still at the forefront of people's minds. It would appear to be irrelevant though as it would seem that debt funding wasn't used.

The guy was asked a direct question and answered it directly. What exactly would satisfy your "transparenct and honesty" criteria? Maybe they could invite any fans who are interested into the accounts dept to inspect he books and records? Or post the club's bank account details and log in info on this forum? Either the statement that we a re completely debt free is true (in which case calm the **** down). Or they will be caught out when they release their accounts (in which case calm the **** down).

Where did he get his info from?!

Thanks MLG.

Sorry, Football Manager... Still struggle to think of it under its new name.

Does anybody have a link to somewhere where I can find an unofficial database update for the coming season? I want to start a new game but it's always a bit carp starting a game a season behind reality. Thanks in advance guys.

I'll be there! :-)

Not true. The penalty is minus 9. They'll still go down. Taken from page 94 of the league rules

+1.

FFS! Can you not see what is right in front of your face? They are clearing the decks prior to dr al revealing that he has put together a dream consortium of Paul Allen, Bill Gates and the Sultan of Brunai. Keep up!

Same for me but in this window it will not be more than "a reported" £1m FACT

No!!! Everybody , including the media, seem to have been too side tracked by the totally unbelievable fake stories being released to notice though.

Good idea. I'd like to see some regulation in this area but you have to be very careful not to inadvertently prevent say a short term loan from a director to allow wages to be paid (or similar) As for the blue few, as a few have said on here I don't want them to vanish forever either but I do want them to suffer for a while.

Yes it does!!!

:smt046 :finga:

One of the things that I find amazing is that everybody seems to have bought into the presumption that Dr Al is the new owner. He isn't. He hasn't bought a single thing yet. There has been delay after delay to the deal going through. Be it "in negotiations" "performing due diligence" or whatever. When they ran out of reasons to explain the lack of completion (IMO of course) they made an announcement that a deal had been agreed "in principle" and put Dr. Al on the board. Firstly, agreeing a deal in principle is often (although admittedly not exclusively) done before due diligence based upon the information that the seller is prepared to give up front as a confirmation of serious interest before the books are handed over for full inspection. It makes no sense to do this after the DD. If he has completed due diligence and is happy that he has the full picture why have they not negotiated and completed yet? Even national newspapers are reporting developments at Pompey and including statements about the "takeover which completed last week". It did nothing of the sort! Also unnoticed is that at the time that the "agreement in principal" was announced. Dr. Al had his journalist friend publish this article, seemingly adding weight to the presumption that everything was as good as done. A few weeks later the fact that the stated completion date (24th) has come and gone without so much as a whisper has been ignored. IMO stories such as the Diego M one were also just planted to reinforce the assumption that the takeover was complete in people's minds. Secondly, why would Gaydamak allow Dr. Al to take over the chairman's role, giving him huge influence over one of his major investments, if he hasn't yet sold it? Just doesn't seem like something that somebody would do unless there was more than meets the eye. It may be that I am a conspiracy nut of "the moon landings are a fake" proportions and so all should form their own opinions but I would speculate that either: 1) The deal never goes through. Smoke and mirrors give Gaydamak enough time to extract as much money from the club via player sales and "a slice of" sky money as possible before the administrators show up. 2) The deal does go through. Smoke and mirrors give Gaydamak enough time to extract as much money from the club via player sales and "a slice of" sky money as possible before letting Dr. Al have the club for £1. Dr. Al tries to muddle through. If they make it to the end of the season with no money for new players and not cash (as Gaydamak has it all) and stay up (unlikely) Dr. Al wins. If they don't he only loses £1 so doesn't really care. 3) The deal does go through. Everything is totally above board and as being reported in the media. I am made to look silly for being so sceptical.

Is it really a good idea for you to come on here and yet to have a go based on potential signings? Really? I'm not even going to bother. Too easy. Rolly eyes etc

The only "evidence" that o have seen is the quote from ml's man that the club is debt free. From experience I also think of unlikely that ml took on any of the avia debt. Aviva may have made more money if the debt remained however that is dependent upon somebody making repayments. If the club went out of business they would have lost a lot more.

1) As other people have said above, it appears so, yes. We will know for sure when the accounts are presented. I haven't checked if the new holding company is registered in the UK or Switzerland but am sure that GM or somebody similar will post a link to them on here once they are released. 2) The exact figure won't be known yet. 28 days after the administration ends the administrator will have to have filed a final report at companies house. It should be in there. (The "end of the administration" is not the same as the date of the takeover, there will be a bit of time needed to complete the formalities before the administration of SHL PLC (which is no longer our problem) will be completed.) 3) The shareholders would only receive a payment if there is money left over after all creditors and costs have been paid in full. So yes. 4) I don't think anybody has specifically confirmed either way however you may (hopefully) be able to find out from the Administrator's report. Alternatively when the annual accounts are finally released we will be able to see from those. I don't know but the money raise will have gone towards the running costs of the club (i.e. wages etc) during the admin period. Given the Administrator's reporting responsibilities and annaul accounts this isn't possible. They may have agreed not to disclose details though. Did you own your share directly? If your broker held it for you they may have owned the share in their name on your behalf.

The horizon is a very very very long way away! Damn right you should be smug!

Brilliant!

Spot on.