Pompey Takeover Saga

@pn_neil_allen: Due to popular demand and them being so funny, all your best Kanu non-sightings will be in tomorrow's News. Keep it up! #Pompey #whereskanu

I must have missed the precursor to this....the article where they published the "so funny" sightings of the £130,000,000 they owe the clubs creditors, tax payers, players, etc...?

God bless side splitting repair kits

Chris Johnson ‏@thechief1981 @MatthewLeGod seems to spend more time researching #pompey then his own team!

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/pompey-past/the-men-who-will-decide-pompey-s-future-return-1-4037146

Appy pompeii

Kanu is treating the Club and Michael Appleton with disrespect. He has in turn lost the respect of the Club's supporters. Never mind fining him, sack him and if he fancies his chances see him at a Tribunal!

FFS...

But i really like this bit

As Appleton indicated during his press briefing, that number will go down, however, in the coming days and weeks.

That simply has to be the case – otherwise Pompey’s pre-season return yesterday will be irrelevant.

Chris Johnson ‏@thechief1981 @MatthewLeGod seems to spend more time researching #pompey then his own team!

 

For those keeping track of the nutjobs that was trousers 2,500th post on this thread!

For those keeping track of the nutjobs that was trousers 2,500th post on this thread!

Bless 'im, he's got nothing to do on his morning commute... Not sure he get's much done during the day either!;-)

The News is fun reading: "Kanu is treating the Club and Michael Appleton with disrespect. He has in turn lost the respect of the Club's supporters. Never mind fining him, sack him and if he fancies his chances see him at a Tribunal!"

1. Pompey can't afford him.

2. Pompey can't afford legal represenation.

3. Pompey can't (and this is the clincher) afford to lose their Golden Share...

When I've finished laughing I too will get on with some work...

Bless 'im, he's got nothing to do on his morning commute... Not sure he get's much done during the day either!;-)

 

The News is fun reading: "Kanu is treating the Club and Michael Appleton with disrespect. He has in turn lost the respect of the Club's supporters. Never mind fining him, sack him and if he fancies his chances see him at a Tribunal!"

 

1. Pompey can't afford him.

2. Pompey can't afford legal represenation.

3. Pompey can't (and this is the clincher) afford to lose their Golden Share...

 

When I've finished laughing I too will get on with some work...

Might as well write the rest of the day off, then.

Just a quick note of thanks to appy, for making me laugh on such a miserable day.

I don't know if they have coaching on this sort of thing down there, but they say these things with such conviction, it's almost as if they actually believe in what they are saying.

Anyway, it looks like they will be saying their goodbyes to Varney and Norris in the next couple of days. I wonder how much harder it will be to get them to negotiate on their deferred wages from afar. No local press to put pressure on them, not around the fans in the street demanding they save the club, no contact with the administrator who keeps threatening to liquidate the club if they don't give up their money and no more having to meet the manager who is determined to uphold the integrity of football contracts..... I am sure that trev will see them right.

For those keeping track of the nutjobs that was trousers 2,500th post on this thread!

Cor blimey c o c k....2,500 posts? Or, as it's known in Portsmouth.....10 posts....

A chant for this Saturday at St Mary's...

Kanu is ****ing magic,

he's playing hide and seek.

But first he signed a contract,

to screw the Skates this week!

@pn_neil_allen: Due to popular demand and them being so funny, all your best Kanu non-sightings will be in tomorrow's News. Keep it up! #Pompey #whereskanu

 

I must have missed the precursor to this....the article where they published the "so funny" sightings of the £130,000,000 they owe the clubs creditors, tax payers, players, etc...?

 

God bless side splitting repair kits

http://pompeypages.com/2012/07/10/whereskanu/

Sent to me by a desperate skate who works for one of our suppliers in a vain attempt to prove that they can still laugh at themselves.....after I'd sent him the link to the Mustapha Dumbuya article....

He who reads this thread laughs loudest, longest and most satisfyingly...

http://pompeypages.com/2012/07/10/whereskanu/

 

Sent to me by a desperate skate who works for one of our suppliers in a vain attempt to prove that they can still laugh at themselves.....after I'd sent him the link to the Mustapha Dumbuya article....

 

He who reads this thread laughs loudest, longest and most satisfyingly...

I wonder if that chap Appy who's laying down the law is the same one who had this to say about Kanu after their defeat to Forest in the last game of last season:

‘Dave (Kitson) wasn’t in the squad, Benjani wasn’t in the squad, King wasn’t in the squad. ‘Basically I don’t think they’ve got a future at the football club. It’s as simple as that.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/pompey-past/blues-stars-could-walk-away-for-free-1-3912291

A question for any of you bright folks ... So IF they were to sack Kanu for breach of contract could he in turn sue them for a large amount for their previous breach of contract thus ending up having to pay him for the full amount of his contract?

Once Varney , Norris and Kanu are gone then the whole of their efforts will centre on the 30k a week man

Oh I don't know oldnick..... That still leaves, Kitson Lawrence, Husklep, Halford and TBH and don't write Kanu off just yet, I've got a feeling he won't be going anywhere for a while

From the News comments re-Appleton's threat to Kanu.

Helio

3:47 PM on 10/07/2012

DunKirk - With respect, I think there are two massive mistakes in your thinking.

- First, if Kanu gets his money, then he has got what he is contractually entitled to. If PFC doesn't pay Kanu what he is contractually entitled to, then it's PFC and not Kanu that will have "got away with it".

Is that a good lesson for the youngsters? - "Don't bother about written promises, you can break them whenever it suits you..."

- Second, PFC (to my undying shame, as a Pompey supporter) has "got away with" writing off more than £100 million in debts to creditors. It has failed in recent years to honour so many contracts that we'd need a month to read up on them all. But now Appy, working for PFC, tells us solemnly that if you make a contract, you've got to keep it. That's pot-kettle-black...

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/pompey-past/ready-to-act-1-4037165

A question for any of you bright folks ... So IF they were to sack Kanu for breach of contract could he in turn sue them for a large amount for their previous breach of contract thus ending up having to pay him for the full amount of his contract?

Pretty much exactly that.... Not that they could sack for him for not tunring up, but even if they did he would obviously claim for the full amount of deferred wages owed to him (Which is what he is doing anyway ) Addditionally he may be owed some money from the first CVA (Not sure on my dates with that one).

He will be fine.

http://pompeypages.com/2012/07/10/whereskanu/

 

Sent to me by a desperate skate who works for one of our suppliers in a vain attempt to prove that they can still laugh at themselves.....after I'd sent him the link to the Mustapha Dumbuya article....

 

He who reads this thread laughs loudest, longest and most satisfyingly...

My guess is that the comment by "Neil" isn't going to pass moderation.

Maybe he’s in an office somewhere counting the millions of pounds that Pompey are never going to pay to charities, small business and taxes (used to fund nurses, police, teachers)? If so, don’t expect him back anytime soon. 130 million is a hell of a number to count to….

My guess is that the comment by "Neil" isn't going to pass moderation.

Looks like it's vanished already...

@mattslaterbbc: When pressed on Football Cred Rule, RS said PL was different because it could settle FCR claims out of 'withheld central funds'

This is a quote from Richard in front of MPs CMS committee today. Looks like kanu et al's claim is safe???

In my own experience of dealing with a few commercial disputes in various high courts, there is a rule which says that a party to a contract cannot benefit from it's own breach of that contract.

I know it's not that clear cut, but it's a good place to start if it gets that far. It is of course possible that Kanu has simply deferred his return to training.

From the News comments re-Appleton's threat to Kanu.

 

Helio

 

3:47 PM on 10/07/2012

DunKirk - With respect, I think there are two massive mistakes in your thinking.

- First, if Kanu gets his money, then he has got what he is contractually entitled to. If PFC doesn't pay Kanu what he is contractually entitled to, then it's PFC and not Kanu that will have "got away with it".

Is that a good lesson for the youngsters? - "Don't bother about written promises, you can break them whenever it suits you..."

- Second, PFC (to my undying shame, as a Pompey supporter) has "got away with" writing off more than £100 million in debts to creditors. It has failed in recent years to honour so many contracts that we'd need a month to read up on them all. But now Appy, working for PFC, tells us solemnly that if you make a contract, you've got to keep it. That's pot-kettle-black...

 

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/pompey-past/ready-to-act-1-4037165

Have highlighted the "Nutshell of the Day" statement above in big easy to read letters for those down the road who are still wiping the sand from their eyes....

Can Pompey afford to take it to court?

Did you really ask that?

Just when you thought the Rangers fiasco couldn't get any weirder Gazza turns up right on cue!

http://www.thesun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4420369/In-your-dreams-team.html

If only an Ex-Skate would arrive to plead for players to join the club?

Defoe?

Crouch?

Sol?

Benjani?

Yakubu?

James?

Oh.

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/586557160?-11209

No Cheques, They Probably take to long, they may not be around long enough to get the money,

@mattslaterbbc: When pressed on Football Cred Rule, RS said PL was different because it could settle FCR claims out of 'withheld central funds'

 

This is a quote from Richard in front of MPs CMS committee today. Looks like kanu et al's claim is safe???

Interesting. However, how does it play with the fact that if they are liquidated the FCR goes out the window as its only of use to maintain a clubs golden share? Part of chinny's takeover plan is that he would pay all the football creditors in full and one assumes he has a good idea what that figure is? However if the creditors are paid from the PP rather than via chinny it would remove the option of constantly putting off the football creditors till the PP's are banked and possibly made off with?

Did you really ask that?

No, it was a rhetorical question. What is the point of those?

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/586557160?-11209

 

No Cheques, They Probably take to long, they may not be around long enough to get the money,

Ticket Office open 9 to 5

must be rushed off feet

or is it 9 to 5 past 9

Interesting. However, how does it play with the fact that if they are liquidated the FCR goes out the window as its only of use to maintain a clubs golden share? Part of chinny's takeover plan is that he would pay all the football creditors in full and one assumes he has a good idea what that figure is? However if the creditors are paid from the PP rather than via chinny it would remove the option of constantly putting off the football creditors till the PP's are banked and possibly made off with?

Chanari wants his £18 million out. The para paymets are ?£14M? - let's say that would cover what he wants.

Without them, what is there? - £9M a year in wages and probably another £3M overeads to keep it simple - so £12M a year with an income of probably half that on gates of 10,000 - 15,000 a week.

Without the PP there's not enough money to get his grubby little habnds on - just a load more debt.

'till 9 to 5 have passed through the door.

@mattslaterbbc: When pressed on Football Cred Rule, RS said PL was different because it could settle FCR claims out of 'withheld central funds'

 

This is a quote from Richard in front of MPs CMS committee today. Looks like kanu et al's claim is safe???

Sorry Trousers...... THIS IS THE NUTSHELL OF THE DAY

Sit tight pompey players - You are covered for the full amount :) :)

Interesting. However, how does it play with the fact that if they are liquidated the FCR goes out the window as its only of use to maintain a clubs golden share? Part of chinny's takeover plan is that he would pay all the football creditors in full and one assumes he has a good idea what that figure is? However if the creditors are paid from the PP rather than via chinny it would remove the option of constantly putting off the football creditors till the PP's are banked and possibly made off with?

Football creditors & the football creditors rule are 2 different things. One thing that is 100% certain is that the PL will pay the parachute payments due to PFC in full, irrespective of whether the club is liquidated or not. The question is to whom? The rules have 3 possibilities - the club, the football creditors or the other PL clubs. Take your pick.

Payment of football creditors directly from centrally distributed PL funds is separate from the FCR.

Either way, another day passes, another lack of transfer movement. Lots of bluster from Neil Allen to placate the Fratton Faithful, but the runaway Liquidation Train hurtles towards the ravine...

Football creditors & the football creditors rule are 2 different things. One thing that is 100% certain is that the PL will pay the parachute payments due to PFC in full, irrespective of whether the club is liquidated or not. The question is to whom? The rules have 3 possibilities - the club, the football creditors or the other PL clubs. Take your pick.

 

Payment of football creditors directly from centrally distributed PL funds is separate from the FCR.

I would suspect:

1) Other PL clubs owed money by pompey.

2) Other Football creditors at the request of the FL

3) The Club

I would suspect:

 

1) Other PL clubs owed money by pompey.

2) Other Football creditors at the request of the FL

3) The Club

4) The PFA

4) The PFA

I think the PFA are covered by other football creditors. (2 in my list). There is an interesting argument to be had between the liquidator who may be expecting the parachute payments to distribute as they feel fit and the PL who may want to distribute it another way.

One thing that is 100% certain is that the PL will pay the parachute payments due to PFC in full, irrespective of whether the club is liquidated or not.

How can they pay money to a club that doesn't exist?

I think the PFA are covered by other football creditors. (2 in my list). There is an interesting argument to be had between the liquidator who may be expecting the parachute payments to distribute as they feel fit and the PL who may want to distribute it another way.

Just ask the question, why did the Former Head of integrity at the FA go to the trouble of getting himself registered as a football creditor if he knew with absolute certainty that football creditors wouldn't get paid in the event of liquidation?

If they are liquidated the FCR is meaningless.

Just ask the question, why did the Former Head of integrity at the FA go to the trouble of getting himself registered as a football creditor if he knew with absolute certainty that football creditors wouldn't get paid in the event of liquidation?

That is an extremely good point.

If they are liquidated the FCR is meaningless.

Not at all sir, not at all

Not at all sir, not at all

I thought the rule was a football league rule, to stop the domino effect if a club goes into admin.

If PFC are liquidated they are no longer a football league club so what their rules are doesn't matter, secured creditors get first dibs. That's my understanding.

I don't think Scudamore's evidence clears anything up. It just states that the money is available.

Those seeking the £14m PPs still include BC, other clubs who are owed, all the Pompey players and any other football creditor (including PKF).

I'd guess that's sure to go to court one way or another. The question is whether PKF will continue to guarantee the existing PFC at their own risk if BC and/or the PST refuse to cover the CVA or can't cover the CVA.

United Arab Emirates club Al Wasl fires Diego Maradona as Coach perhaps the Skates could get him in now.....as a player as he is a free agent?

As no one seems to be prepared to give up the PP money at stake, despite the debts rising and court costs looming, it's great for the nutjobs on this thread - a PFC - a Perfect *****ing Cyclone - with days for it to hit in full force!

I thought the rule was a football league rule, to stop the domino effect if a club goes into admin.

 

If PFC are liquidated they are no longer a football league club so what their rules are doesn't matter, secured creditors get first dibs. That's my understanding.

I think the point of contention is that the secured creditors of the club will get what can be made from the liquidation but if the league decided that the parachute payments go to the football creditors first then that's not going to be much for chinny. The question is can the PL play hard and fast with who gets the PP. Birch assumes in his document they go to the club but that may be wrong?

I thought the rule was a football league rule, to stop the domino effect if a club goes into admin.

 

If PFC are liquidated they are no longer a football league club so what their rules are doesn't matter, secured creditors get first dibs. That's my understanding.

That's my understanding also.

The FCR has been found to not be illegal but it doesn't then follow that it is a legal requirement to pay football creditors in full - it is merely a football league condition for the granting of the golden share.

Liquidation -> no club -> no expectation of a golden share -> football creditors join the queue with the rest of the unsecured creditors.

It is also questionable what happens to parachute payments in the event of liquidation. My understanding is that these may well be withheld by the PL and then divided amongst PL members. This is reinforced by the Justice Mann's judgement on the original CVA following HMRC's challenge.

The judge's ruling on that case: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2010/2013.html

HMRC challenged the CVA as the parachute payments were not shown in the "liquidation" scenario on the CVA. Here, the judge is saying that is acceptable because they might not be payable in that scenario:

And then it would be necessary to point to the fact that the payments might well not come in at all because the Premier League would undoubtedly take the view that they are not payable to a company in liquidation and which is not running the business of a football club because its rules (and in particular Rule 59) do not allow a relegated club which is no longer in the Football League to be paid the parachute payment

Proposals which referred to the possibility of getting in the parachute payments would therefore have to present it as being dependent on a potentially very difficult piece of litigation which the Premier League would be bound to resist because it would go to the heart of its insolvency policy.

Just ask the question, why did the Former Head of integrity at the FA go to the trouble of getting himself registered as a football creditor if he knew with absolute certainty that football creditors wouldn't get paid in the event of liquidation?

Probably because he knew that former employees owed money would get a tiny amount under any CVA (as will be the case if the proposed one should go ahead) whereas, as a football creditor, he would be paid every penny. Put another way, he was staking his claim in the event that the club is not liquidated. And I don't think the whole thing has much, if anything, to do with the FA; it's the leagues that deal with clubs.