Pompey Takeover Saga

[saintbletch]

#7448 Today, 12:30 PM

hutch

Full Member

 

Join Date: Oct 2007

Location: Worldcup2010land

Posts: 236

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is the really interesting bit - the first time they have admitted the loan to pay December's wages was secured against the tv cash. But who would have lent on this basis given it was well known that Premier league was going to withold the money?

 

Hmm. I'd be surprised if someone lent this money without some other security because as you say their finances are in a parlous state and whether it was known that the PL might withhold their TV money, I think I'm right in saying that HMRC was already knocking on the door.

 

You can't offer up the expectation of £7M coming in in January as security for a short-term loan. It might make the lender feel happier that there will be some positive cash-flow but it didn't ever guarantee that the lender would have seen any of it.

 

So if I had been lending them the money, I'd have wanted another chunk of land or some such as security. What other assets do they still completely own that might have some realisable value?

 

Player's registrations? Could they start to get loans against player's registrations? It's a bit Tevez/Macherano though isn't it and I thought the PL/FA closed that loophole.

 

It's all a bit of a bloody mess.

[pedg]

According to some BBC journo on twitter (the joys of using the latest option on google search) the results of the pompey appeal will be released at 10:30 tomorrow:

 

http://twitter.com/bbc_matt

 

#portsmouth

judgement expected at 1030 2moro. Can they nip that HMRC winding-up order in the bud? Squeaky bum time at Fratton Park

[Weston Saint]

According to some BBC journo on twitter (the joys of using the latest option on google search) the results of the pompey appeal will be released at 10:30 tomorrow:

 

http://twitter.com/bbc_matt

 

#portsmouth

judgement expected at 1030 2moro. Can they nip that HMRC winding-up order in the bud? Squeaky bum time at Fratton Park

Judgement reserved means very little, it just means the Judge wants more time to consider the issues.

 

In this type of case the solicitors for both sides will be handed the judgement an hour or so before given in court.

 

I had a reserved judgement in the London Commercial Court a few years back. The judgement was handed to both sides QC's (it was about £1m riding on it) the night before but they were under strict instructions not to disclose to anyone including the clients until it was handed down by the Judge. All I got was a call saying it was being handed down at 10:30 am the following day and I could sleep well

 

Looks like Pompey may have arguments worth considering.

[hutch]

Looks like Pompey may have arguments worth considering.

Not necessarily. Confusing statements about whether the hearing was today or on Friday - at least I'm confused. If there was any hearing today, and assuming the Judge was "on duty" all day, I wouldn't have expected the judgement before tomorrow.

[Weston Saint]

Not necessarily. Confusing statements about whether the hearing was today or on Friday - at least I'm confused. If there was any hearing today, and assuming the Judge was "on duty" all day, I wouldn't have expected the judgement before tomorrow.

No the hearing was on Friday but it may have been completed this morning. The Judge may wish to sit and look at the arguments, may be discuss with another experienced Judge before he prepares his judgement.

 

Not unusual for civil cases

[pedg]

Not necessarily. Confusing statements about whether the hearing was today or on Friday - at least I'm confused. If there was any hearing today, and assuming the Judge was "on duty" all day, I wouldn't have expected the judgement before tomorrow.

 

Indeed the earlier twitter from same chap said the hearing was this morning.

 

 

1. #portsmouth attempt 2 swerve taxman heard in private @ High Court this morning. 'judgement reserved'! Never easy with PFC, is it? about 2 hours ago from txt
   

[Snopper]

The judge must be awaiting psychological reports before issuing his judgement?

[hutch]

Yes, I agree. I spend more time than is healthy in those (and other) Courts. But the "tweet" says the application was heard in private at the High Court this morning, whereas "The News" said it was heard on Friday.

 

So, tomorrow morning it is then.

[View From The Top]

If it was held in private then I doubt it's been more than legal argument as to whether pfc have a case as opposed to a direct challenge to the case pending.

 

I'd be very surprised if they are successful with a challenge and if they lose it could well be game over.

[sussexsaint]

Is the issue that noone should pay VAT on transfers? Sorry to ask such a basic question, surely the potential fallout if they declare in favour of the blue few would have widespread implications , no?

[stevegrant]

Is the issue that noone should pay VAT on transfers? Sorry to ask such a basic question, surely the potential fallout if they declare in favour of the blue few would have widespread implications , no?

Pretty sure the dispute is over PAYE contributions.

[slickmick]

Is the issue that noone should pay VAT on transfers? Sorry to ask such a basic question, surely the potential fallout if they declare in favour of the blue few would have widespread implications , no?

 

 

Probably £ billions.

[hutch]

The petition is about unpaid VAT, PAYE and NI.

 

I've seen nothing about the content of the application which is being considered at the moment. With the skates current track record, it could be about anything.

[sussexsaint]

OK thanks, Still don't understand how they are owed money from Sky either when they owe so much more than just 5mil to the other clubs, how can they possibly use the 2 mil they are owed on transfers when they are 60mil in debt and can't pay any of the wages on time.

[saint si]

Is the issue that noone should pay VAT on transfers? Sorry to ask such a basic question, surely the potential fallout if they declare in favour of the blue few would have widespread implications , no?

 

That is my understanding. In fact, it is not just about paying VAT, it also then becomes about whether the receiving club can reclaim VAT.

 

Changing this for future transactions would have a negligible impact. If it is retrospectively changed, then the fallout would be huge.

 

Consider the example:

 

Club P sells a player to Club S

Club S pays £1m to Club P for the player

Club P pays £175k (VAT) to the taxman and keeps the remaining £825k for itself

However that is not the end of it...

Club S, as a business, has its own VAT bill. They can offset this VAT bill by the £175k of VAT that was part of the transfer fee (incidentally, this is why receipts always show the amount of VAT as part of the bill... if it is a business transaction, then the VAT can be reclaimed)

So Club P ends up with £825k and Club S ends up having paid a net fee of £825k. The taxman ends up with net zero.

 

Without VAT, the transfer would have just been £825k.

 

However, if it is changed retrospectively, then club P end up getting the £175k back from the taxman and then either Club S or the taxman ends up £175k out of pocket! This is why I believe it is extremely unlikely to be changed retrospectively.

 

If it is changed for future transfers, then there will be no benefit to Pompey anyway, as fees will just be lower in the first place as they won't have to take VAT in to account.

 

There is a good case to be made for VAT on player transfers, as transfer fees are part of the fundamental costs of running a football club.

[pedg]

The petition is about unpaid VAT, PAYE and NI.

 

I've seen nothing about the content of the application which is being considered at the moment. With the skates current track record, it could be about anything.

 

As I understand it, though based on snippets of information from various sources, so may well not be correct.

 

Pompey got bill for VAT, PAYE and NI

 

Pompey paid most of it but disputed the VAT payment level

 

HMRC issued winding up order for remainder of money due

 

Pompey took HMRC to court over the disputed VAT and thus the winding up order.

 

 

So though the bill was for more than VAT it appears they have pinned their colours to just the VAT mast and that their argument that they should not pay VAT on transfer payments would have a very large effect as I think in the HMRC document linked to earlier it is based on some rule relating to payment in kind or similar so would not only be a landmark ruling in relation to transfer fees but also for the payment of VAT in other much larger areas.

[hutch]

The Sky payments are nothing to do with the High Court case.

 

I think their argument with the PL is that the PL have only paid out 5m so far from the 7m the skates were due. PL have held onto the balance for more payments due soon. Skates say they can't do that. PL say they'll give skates the 2m if skates can prove beyond any doubt that they can, and will, meet all the future payments. Seems skates can't (or won't) do that either, so now threatening PL with arbitration.

 

Personally, I wouldn't mind if PL gave skates the balance. I don't want them to go into admin until after they're relegated.

 

Every little helps.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Dont know if anyone saw this or it's been posted earlier, but they were discussing Skates on Sunday Supplement. A journo on there was saying how the upcoming court cases would show that Redknapp, Storrie and Mandric were all paid a percentage of players sales, he went on to say, he had never heard of another club where the CEO and Owner took a cut of transfer sales.

 

I bet they'll regret their "One Peter Storrie" chant.

[Channon's Sideburns]

Dont know if anyone saw this or it's been posted earlier, but they were discussing Skates on Sunday Supplement. A journo on there was saying how the upcoming court cases would show that Redknapp, Storrie and Mandric were all paid a percentage of players sales, he went on to say, he had never heard of another club where the CEO and Owner took a cut of transfer sales.

 

I bet they'll regret their "One Peter Storrie" chant.

 

Haha.

[Highfield Saint]

Firstly I do object to them being referred to as "P**pey". This is a nickname and as such infers a degree of warmth or respect. There is none. They are simply portsmouth or skatesmouth.

 

Secondly is there some less than obvious agenda here whereby skatesmouth are attempting to defer any league games until after the players have returned from the African Cup of Nations? They seem to want to abandon games for the slightest reason.

 

Sorry if this has been posted before but I have a short attention span

[sussexsaint]

I don't want them to go into admin until after they're relegated.

 

Every little helps.

 

This is very much my opinion as well

[Weston Super Saint]

Firstly I do object to them being referred to as "P**pey". This is a nickname and as such infers a degree of warmth or respect. There is none. They are simply portsmouth or skatesmouth.

 

Secondly is there some less than obvious agenda here whereby skatesmouth are attempting to defer any league games until after the players have returned from the African Cup of Nations? They seem to want to abandon games for the slightest reason.

 

Sorry if this has been posted before but I have a short attention span

 

Which would also be a nickname - seeing as it isn't their actual name - which would imply a degree of warmth or respect, to which you must surely also object....

[sussexsaint]

I bet they'll regret their "One Peter Storrie" chant.

 

Not as much as I regret 'Harry and Jims red and white army' - Shudder

[pedg]

Dont know if anyone saw this or it's been posted earlier, but they were discussing Skates on Sunday Supplement. A journo on there was saying how the upcoming court cases would show that Redknapp, Storrie and Mandric were all paid a percentage of players sales, he went on to say, he had never heard of another club where the CEO and Owner took a cut of transfer sales.

 

I bet they'll regret their "One Peter Storrie" chant.

 

So they did pay VAT, unfortunately it was the Villains Appropriation Tax

[stevegrant]

Dont know if anyone saw this or it's been posted earlier, but they were discussing Skates on Sunday Supplement. A journo on there was saying how the upcoming court cases would show that Redknapp, Storrie and Mandric were all paid a percentage of players sales, he went on to say, he had never heard of another club where the CEO and Owner took a cut of transfer sales.

Yep. Absolutely no hint of a conflict of interests there

[holepuncture]

'Once again we are being treated as the poor relations and the black sheep of the family.'

 

Love it!

[holepuncture]

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Pompey-go-to-war-with.5990325.jp

[rallyboy]

That can't be right - it makes the club sound like a corrupt company that has been run by criminals for their own personal gain, and that wouldn't be tolerated by the Premier League.

I'm sure these fit and proper people will be cleared of all charges and continue to be heroes to the blue few.

And if these three were running around with filthy cash hanging out of their holes from signing overpaid players via dodgy agents for no reason, I can't see how that could lead to an unsustainable wage bill and financial collapse...

It's not like they closed their youth team to concentrate on 'unusual' transfer activity a few years ago, that would make it sound like they planned huge personal gain and deliberately prevented young players coming through to halt their little scheme.

 

It must be the nasty press picking on the plucky underdog again.

I'm sure it's all a misunderstanding, as are the land issues, ownership, unpaid debts, wagebill, etc, etc.

 

 

 

Is it correct that Redknapp signed Nugent and Utaka on the same day?

To sign one liability is unfortunate, to do it twice on the same day could be considered criminal.

[bridge too far]

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Pompey-go-to-war-with.5990325.jp

 

So let me get this straight - the £2m they claim they are owed is going to cover the following:

 

Player and staff wages for January

Staged payments to the overseas clubs

 

Given that the player wages alone are reportedly £1.8m a month, the remaining £0.2m will cover non-playing staff wages and staged payments?

Their legal advisors must be costing them a fortune too.

 

Doesn't add up somehow and where will they get the money for February salaries and February stage payments?

 

Oh I forgot - from the gates

[Saint Keith]

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Pompey-go-to-war-with.5990325.jp

 

i love it that he said "the pl should use their discretionary powers to help us."

 

in other words, bend the rules

 

what a bellend

[pedg]

Given that the player wages alone are reportedly £1.8m a month, the remaining £0.2m will cover non-playing staff wages and staged payments?

Their legal advisors must be costing them a fortune too.

 

I think somewhere its claimed their total wage bill for January will be £3m so some people on the non playing side are obviously taking home a tidy wage. I wonder who??

[OldNick]

'We feel we have come in and been fully open and frank with them to explain the club's position, where we are and how we'd like to go forward.

 

Are they for real? When have they been frank and forward?

[Puddings and Monkeys]

I think somewhere its claimed their total wage bill for January will be £3m so some people on the non playing side are obviously taking home a tidy wage. I wonder who??

 

Although Storrie is on a big wedge, I think the bulk of the extra is PAYE/NIC on the 1.8m players' wages. Still, it all adds up. (smiley)

[saintwarwick]

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Pompey-go-to-war-with.5990325.jp

 

You have to laugh at a premiership club sweating over a £2million payment like it was life or death. You also have to laugh when they claim the money is owed to them and the PL have no right to withhold the payment yet they (skatesmouth) withheld payments owed to other clubs for so long.

[Gingeletiss]

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Pompey-go-to-war-with.5990325.jp

 

 

'The total amount that we directed the Premier League to discharge and pay these clubs is approximately £5m. So there is a net balance due to the club approaching £2m. We cannot see how they can keep the money and also continue with the embargo.

 

:smt081:smt081:smt081 They can't even get their story right between them:D:D

[Highfield Saint]

Which would also be a nickname - seeing as it isn't their actual name - which would imply a degree of warmth or respect, to which you must surely also object....

 

I dont know who kate is but if she has a mouth like a skate then she'll be very popular in certain areas.

 

Actually though - Skatesmouth isnt a nickname it is an alternative Proper Name and I apologise for the grammatical error in missing the capital letter in my original post.

 

Thank you for pointing that out

[saint si]

It seems quite clear to me that the PL is with-holding the cash to ensure that Watford get their payment that is due at the end of the month, and maintaining the embargo on the basis that they don't want p****y to incur any more footballing debt, nor for yet-another-player to not be getting their January wages.

 

In that sense, it seems pretty obvious that the PL is acting in the interests of the game by ensuring that Watford get their rightful money and that no further clubs and players are "harmed" by the fratton financial black hole. If the PL did not do this, the £2m would disappear faster than the blink of an eye, Watford would never see a dime of what they are owed, and signing on fees, loan fees etc will not get paid.

 

Whether the PL is allowed to do this or not will be decided by arbitration, but it certainly seems like they're doing the right thing.

[Gravesend Saint]

Comedy gold:

 

http://www.portsmouth.vitalfootball.co.uk/article.asp?a=185059

[Saint Keith]

Comedy gold:

 

http://www.portsmouth.vitalfootball.co.uk/article.asp?a=185059

 

jeesus. like the band still playing on the titanic

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

So Pompey are going to try and take on the PL? I reckon I know who will win!

[Jimmy_D]

I reckon that Pompey 'directed' the Prem to pay 5 million of the TV money to pay off creditors, so that they could then claim it was all their idea and say that they were owed the remainder.

 

I also reckon that they owed more than 7 million to football creditors and the Prem haven't taken any notice of what Pompey have said and have just paid off as much as they can with the 7 million.

 

Pompey can then claim that they directed the Prem to pay off creditors and that they are owed 2 million of the remainder, in an effort to gain sympathy and try and paint the Prem as the bad guy here. Pretty laughable really if I'm right.

[Clapham Saint]

I reckon that Pompey 'directed' the Prem to pay 5 million of the TV money to pay off creditors, so that they could then claim it was all their idea and say that they were owed the remainder.

 

I also reckon that they owed more than 7 million to football creditors and the Prem haven't taken any notice of what Pompey have said and have just paid off as much as they can with the 7 million.

 

Pompey can then claim that they directed the Prem to pay off creditors and that they are owed 2 million of the remainder, in an effort to gain sympathy and try and paint the Prem as the bad guy here. Pretty laughable really if I'm right.

 

Petty laughable regardless!

 

Although I wouldn't be at all surprised if you are right. :smt081

[NickG]

heard bit of one of their fans groups on radio on way home.

 

they put a letter into Jacobs and he met them to give them answers

 

guess what? They came away, half an hour later with no answers!

 

guy said that Jacobs told them;

we were going to have investors, but then they saw how badly portsmouth started the season and pulled out

when asked why they can't pay the wages Jacobs said - we did in September!

[Saint_clark]

heard bit of one of their fans groups on radio on way home.

 

they put a letter into Jacobs and he met them to give them answers

 

guess what? They came away, half an hour later with no answers!

 

guy said that Jacobs told them;

we were going to have investors, but then they saw how badly portsmouth started the season and pulled out

when asked why they can't pay the wages Jacobs said - we did in September!

 

[View From The Top]

I reckon that Pompey 'directed' the Prem to pay 5 million of the TV money to pay off creditors, so that they could then claim it was all their idea and say that they were owed the remainder.

 

I also reckon that they owed more than 7 million to football creditors and the Prem haven't taken any notice of what Pompey have said and have just paid off as much as they can with the 7 million.

 

Pompey can then claim that they directed the Prem to pay off creditors and that they are owed 2 million of the remainder, in an effort to gain sympathy and try and paint the Prem as the bad guy here. Pretty laughable really if I'm right.

 

I too have felt as if pfc are attempting to cast the EPL in the role of villain as if it will absolve the current owners from blame when the fall into admin at the end of this month.

[Greenridge]

heard bit of one of their fans groups on radio on way home.

 

they put a letter into Jacobs and he met them to give them answers

 

guess what? They came away, half an hour later with no answers!

 

guy said that Jacobs told them;

we were going to have investors, but then they saw how badly portsmouth started the season and pulled out

when asked why they can't pay the wages Jacobs said - we did in September!

 

Just saw a clip on South Today regarding this. You can guess who handed the letter over can't you...Mr Westwood himself lol! It will be covered in more detail in the Football show at 11:35 on BBC1 tonight.

[Ponty]

7,500 posts. Blimey.

[Saint_clark]

Just saw a clip on South Today regarding this. You can guess who handed the letter over can't you...Mr Westwood himself lol! It will be covered in more detail in the Football show at 11:35 on BBC1 tonight.

 

It better f*cking not be, they've been advertising that as for Football League discussion only.

[Greenridge]

It better f*cking not be, they've been advertising that as for Football League discussion only.

 

They just interviewed Jonathon Pearce (who is heading up the program) on South Today and that's what the man said. He also said Graham Murty will be on every week.

[INFLUENCED.COM]

I too have felt as if pfc are attempting to cast the EPL in the role of villain as if it will absolve the current owners from blame when the fall into admin at the end of this month.

 

Take out pfc and EPL replace with sfc and FL and you see a pattern under these circumstances