Weston Saint

Good side

I am not disputing the reason for HMRC issuing the order to send out a firm message. That has been obvious from the day they lost preferred status in 2003 and then lost a number of high profile cases against football clubs over the football debts getting paid off in full. The point I am making is that the winding up order does not give the HMRC preferred status. Administration gives them the same status but they want a winding up petition to succeed to make sure other clubs pay their taxes on time or face the consequences. We all know Pompey have nothing and the HMRC will get nothing. The reason for Administration is to protect the business from creditors whilst a potentially VIABLE company sorts out investment or a change in ownership which will allow it to pay its creditors more than they might get from liquidation. PFC do not appear to fall into that bracket on the present uncorroborated evidence in the media.

Does not say that here http://ezinearticles.com/?Does-Issuing-a-Winding-Up-Petition-Give-Me-Priority-For-Debt-Repayment?&id=3578385 If the company is subsequently ordered to be wound up, then the person or business who initiated the winding up petition will not be treated as a priority creditor. The liquidator will be paid first together with any secured creditors or debenture holders. If there are any funds remaining after the liquidator and debenture holders have been paid, these will be distributed fairly to all remaining unsecured creditors including the initiator of the petition. Generally if a business is insolvent, there will be little or no funds available at this stage and unsecured creditors will receive little or no return.

Makes sense, thanks but they would not be behind football debts. In Administration all not preferred including Football Debts get the same status. When a club is bought out of Administration, the new owners then have to pay off the rest of the football debt to get their "Golden Share" back So if £12m owed to HMRC and £12m owed to football and payout was 10% both would get £1.2m from Administrator (proceeds from sale) The new owners would then have to invest a further £10.8m to pay off the outstanding football debts to get the FA licence (Golden Share") back.

The only point I have issue with is preferred creditor status. My understanding is that they lost their preferred status in 2003. That, I assume, would apply equally to winding up orders.

Well done Steve, Dan and Baj. Decent start Dan, I did listen to it all the way through and yes you did sound like Alan Davies

Three options, first is not going to happen, second in capitals is their best hope but not likely so third is favourite still

Let me make a prediction here based on the above overnight stories of possible takeovers. The court will listen to the possibility of the insolvent club being saved by REAL investment prospects. PFC say the buyers may need 28 days for due diligence which is not unreasonable from a purchasers point of view. The court will look seriously at the evidence put forward. If the interest is genuine and documents to that fact lodged with the court before the hearing I am goint to punt on the club being given another 21 days to develop that REAL interest. My only caveat is that if they are so insolvent (ie FIFA refuse to let them sell assets) the court may wind them up there and then The answer is for anyone wanting to undertake due diligence deposit a non returnable deposit not exceeding 1 month running costs so that period does not see a further deterioration in the insolvent position. So it is takeover completed by 1st March, MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS or Wound up

I think you have just been caught, hook, line and sinker. You mst try to learn not to nibble at obvious bait

This seems very plausable

This says it all

PFC request to reopen the window for sales now confirmed by BBC. Final throw of the dice? You bet it is. Interestingly however, if PL, FA & Fifa agree if any club buy their players to play them that opens the window for them as well. So you would have to open the European window fully. And then the question- why have you signed two out of contract players after the window if you are desparate to sell? Short shift "no way", I would think

Fair points well made. I agree with this.

Really? How many goals does he have? How many assists does he have? How come our midfield central is not contributing enough? I like Schneiderlin. I think he is a cultured player and can pass well but he is not producing the flair/pace/opportunities that someone of his class should, week in, week out. Why, I have no idea. Certainly prefer him over James, Gillett and Mills but not at the expense of Hammond, Lallana or Puncheon

FF has no need to post. Others on here are doing a good job themselves.

We all appreciate what ML & NC have and are trying to achieve but some of us are not just going to roll over and have our bellies tickled. Debate is healthy. Comment, whether good or bad is feedback to the club. We are football customers, not sheep. We pay to watch Saints, it is not for free. We are entitled to a myriad of opinion whether good or bad. Nothing wrong with your opening post though...

Forensic Accountants I used charged me by the hour. As the report was evidence it was prepared by a senior parner but a lot of the investigation work done by less senior people. PWC used to charge me a smoothing rate of £100 per hour about 8 years ago but invariably their report was between £10,000 and £12,500. I fell out with them when they charged me £25,000 for a report. Audit costs are one thing, forensic accountants tend to charge a lot more.

Agree. My costing are conservative as well. I have been retired from that sort of work for 6 years.

We have played Norwich twice at home this season and they were games befitting a higher league. If we can play as well as we did in those games for the full 90 minutes it will be a close game but Norwich look like the Champions now. If we beat them on their own ground Pardew will be able to sleep easy for a few weeks. For me, I predict a 2-0 loss but a recovery in fortunes thereafter

Yes, who do you think you are NickG? Spamming the thread to try to get the count up is not what it is about it my Hammy friend.

Quite possibly. I took a case to Commercial Court. I had (senior) Junior Counsel very experienced in the type of case. A week before the hearing in London before a very senior Judge we found out the other side had a QC. I was happy with my Counsel but she was uncomfortable and we went with a QC. Hearing was only half a day and he cost me £7,500 for the day's brief as well as her £3,500 to act as his Junior. She had advised our QC against a certain approach, he went at it like a bull at a gate telling the Judge he had made a similar favourable decision previously. He smiled at my QC and said "yes and it is in the Appreal Court at present" We still had the Judgement handed down in our favour. He was able to bully their QC a little whereas the Junior would not have done the same. Good QC now would charge about £10,000 for the Brief and his Junior (same counsel as PFC used before about £5,000 Conference before would cost about £3,000 and would likely include senior partner from Vantis charging about another £1,000. On top of that would be Solicitor representing PFC charging about £400 per hour.

Some seem to be getting tied up with dates. This was the original order as I understand it. The court ordered PFC to file the SoA by 4pm today, 17th Feb, which they have done. HMRC had until 4pm Friday 19th Feb to consider. Court to hear earliest date after 19th Feb. It just happens the earlier date found was 1st March but that was not incorportaed in the order only first available date after 19th. We may see a state of inertia after 19th until 1st March but you can bet both sets of Lawyers will be working overtime. I expect Pompey will call another conference with Counsel. It would suprise me greatly if they do not now employ a QC to protect their position at the hearing. Their Junior (despite being called in 1993) was up against an experienced QC for HMRC last time and nearly lost the case at that hearing.

Listening to SSN now and my thoughts are if the report submitted by Vantis to the board at 2pm was showing ongoing solvency why did Portsmouth ask Vantis to factor in other points? Sounds to me that the report is not advantageous. SSN also say that rumour that they will go into Administration now or before 1st March have been denied by the club who say they will fight on. As I said in my post this morning they must have an interested party still and are holding on by their fingertips.......as they have been doing for some time. Anything can happen before 1st March but reading between the lines the game is up. They need to go into Administration before that date or they may find liquidation is suddenly fact and their gambling has destroyed the club beyond recovery.

The report from Vantis will be unaltered. What PFC will do is add their own qualification or comments if they disagree. It is that part they hope HMRC & High Court will look kindly on, in my opinion. For Example: Vantis report - From the full investigation we have carried out the company is insolvent. Storrie addendum - no it is not.

I am sure PFC have an interested party looking at the club purchase and may be sounding out the non football creditors to see what can be "got away with" The problem is that time is against the club. SoA day has arrived. That said HMRC have 2 days to digest and the court case is not before 1st March. Storrie and the other Directors will likely leave any decision to the last minute as long as there is still purchase interest. The day we went into Administration the decision was delayed a few hours after suspension of shares on the Stock Market whilst an interested party was given time to prove funds. It did not happen hense the 11am decision. I suspect PFC will take the same decision to delay until the last minute unless the SoA is so damning as to show any further trading is likely to contravene sovency laws This out of control Caravan has longer to run yet, in my opinion.