hypochondriac Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Ok, someone help me here. I'm sure I'm being dense. But from what I gather, the Football League's statement is - in strict technical terms - irrelevant. It is PKF's job to secure the best deal for the creditors not to ensure that Portsmouth FC continue to play football at Fratton Park. If we put together a "nutjob" consortium and offered to pay the creditors in full, Birch would have to accept our offer, not the Trust's surely? The fact that we'd just hold a party on the pitch and then cackle away as we burnt the stadium down ratehr than have any plans at all for fielding a football team is neither here nor there, surely? But doesn't the continuance of the football club mean parachute payments which means the best return for the creditors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 (edited) Ok, someone help me here. I'm sure I'm being dense. But from what I gather, the Football League's statement is - in strict technical terms - irrelevant. It is PKF's job to secure the best deal for the creditors not to ensure that Portsmouth FC continue to play football at Fratton Park. Correct- so why spunk away the PPs on players they shouldn't have had instead of making it available to the CVA 9 months ago ? Particularly when for the last few months they've been effectively operating at a loss. Edited 8 February, 2013 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 PKF are floundering in a pitch black room with a blind fold on and their eyes closed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chopper71 Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Ok, someone help me here. I'm sure I'm being dense. But from what I gather, the Football League's statement is - in strict technical terms - irrelevant. It is PKF's job to secure the best deal for the creditors not to ensure that Portsmouth FC continue to play football at Fratton Park. If we put together a "nutjob" consortium and offered to pay the creditors in full, Birch would have to accept our offer, not the Trust's surely? The fact that we'd just hold a party on the pitch and then cackle away as we burnt the stadium down ratehr than have any plans at all for fielding a football team is neither here nor there, surely? Unfortunately I don't think it is that simple. I think the administrators role is to try and save the business whereever possible and achieve the best possible return for creditors. If it were just to get the best return for creditors he would have liquidated on the day the PP arrived. Of course, we could raise the funds and tell him we were going to run the business, but once it's ours we could do whatever we liked.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwertySFC Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 guildfordblue 9:23 AM on 08/02/2013 Everyone is saying Chanrai will fight us to the death. I don't think so. I do not condone violence but if he did fight Pompey to the death and Pompey cease to exist, I would not want to be in his shoes! How many Pompey fans are there, 100,000? 100,000 enemies.... Gadaffi didn't even have that many!! :lol:100,000:lol: Yes but we have to account of adjustment here for the thickos maths . In real terms @ 0.0002% this equates to 200 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 But doesn't the continuance of the football club mean parachute payments which means the best return for the creditors? I confess I've rather lost touch with what parachute payments arrive and when. As well as who they have been promised to - and whether these promises are legally binding or simply need to be fulfilled in order to fulfill the football creditors rule and retain the golden share. Couldn't a new consortium (or Harris) make a bid to takeover the club one second after the next tranche of parachute payments arrive and then divert these payments to wider creditors (i.e. Chanrai) rather than to the ex-players. Sure, the skates lose their golden share, but it means Balram gets the cash rather than Kanu, TBH etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 If the club goes into liquidation the parachute payments cease. If the FL say only the trust will get the Golden Share to play football then any other consortium will pull out. You do not buy a business that trades only as a football club and whose sole income is from football if you are not able to compete in the football league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 If the club goes into liquidation the parachute payments cease. If the FL say only the trust will get the Golden Share to play football then any other consortium will pull out. You do not buy a business that trades only as a football club and whose sole income is from football if you are not able to compete in the football league. Unless you are only interested in the real estate assets of that business, rather than actually continuing to run the business in its current guise, of course... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 If the club goes into liquidation the parachute payments cease. If the FL say only the trust will get the Golden Share to play football then any other consortium will pull out. You do not buy a business that trades only as a football club and whose sole income is from football if you are not able to compete in the football league. UNLESS you have already sold the plot of land that the club sits in for a 500% profit and believe that you can "persuade" a property developer (Robinson) to take an equal profit on an OPTION to buy a piece of land This is all about the money not the club. IF the land is worth 20 mil let the players take the PP's and tell them.... So long and thanks for all the fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Unless you are only interested in the real estate assets of that business, rather than actually continuing to run the business in its current guise, of course... ...and those real estate assets happen to be more valuable if you're not playing football on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 (edited) So, fact of the matter is that the best outcome for Chainrai (who just happens to be one of the major creditors) is for the club to be liquidated....then lie low for a while (during which time "the fans" set up a new Pompey in the lower leagues playing their home games "somewhere else") and then....sell off the ground for development once the local authority are happy that there's not going to be any football played at Fatpipe Park for the forseeable future.....? Now....I wonder what the best way to engineer liquidation would be....? An 11th hour bidder that far exceeds what the Trust are offering for FP....? An 11th hour bidder that then gets turned down by the FL (without so much of a whimper in return)? All of which happens a week before the FP valuation court case....? Yep, that could work..... Edited 8 February, 2013 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 So, fact of the matter is that the best outcome for Chainrai (who just happens to be one of the major creditors) is for the club to be liquidated....then lie low for a while (during which time "the fans" set up a new Pompey in the lower leagues playing their home games "somewhere else") and then....sell off the ground for development once the local authority are happy that there's not going to be any football played at Fatpipe Park for the forseeable future.....? Now....I wonder what the best way to engineer liquidation would be....? An 11th hour bidder that far exceeds what the Trust are offering for FP....? An 11th hour bidder that then gets turned down by the FL (without so much of a whimper in return)? All of which happens a week before the FP valuation court case....? Yep, that could work..... You'd have to be some kind of evil genius to come up with an idea like that though. Do you have a Hong Kong address Trousers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 @bigadamsport: Just been given details of Keith Harris #pompey takeover bid money by a source and it included £3m cash set aside for transfers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 @bigadamsport: Just been given details of Keith Harris #pompey takeover bid money by a source and it included £3m cash set aside for transfers The skates will be lost as to whether this guy is a hero or a villain. I guess it tends to switch on a daily basis anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wurzel Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 So, fact of the matter is that the best outcome for Chainrai (who just happens to be one of the major creditors) is for the club to be liquidated....then lie low for a while (during which time "the fans" set up a new Pompey in the lower leagues playing their home games "somewhere else") and then....sell off the ground for development once the local authority are happy that there's not going to be any football played at Fatpipe Park for the forseeable future.....? Now....I wonder what the best way to engineer liquidation would be....? An 11th hour bidder that far exceeds what the Trust are offering for FP....? An 11th hour bidder that then gets turned down by the FL (without so much of a whimper in return)? All of which happens a week before the FP valuation court case....? Yep, that could work..... Exactly how I see it, on the assumption that (can someone confirm?) under liquidation the assets .i.e. FP become his under the floating charge. I bet the buyer at Tesco is reserving some new shelves and trolleys as we speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Any views on the valuation of Fratton Park? Or whether Chanrai really would be better off if the club were liquidated? It seems to me - plucking numbers out of thin air - that the owner of Fatpipes could reasonably charge, say, £5 on every ticket as rent at each match. In rough terms, this would be an income stream of about £1m or £1.5m per annum. Is the land really worth more if bulldozed and e.g. sold to Tesco? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanimal Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 All in all, the shenanigans this week will fuel extra energy into the WTFILN chorus from our beloved Northam tomorrow afternoon, which I have no doubt will have the whole of SMS joining in on March 2nd. The PST clearly upped their derisory bid for Nott Arf Krap on the back of my end of season friendly suggestion netting them an extra £300K plus, so I take full credit for that; the sad thing is it looks more and more like they wont be able to fulfill the fixture!! We should really run a sweepstake on the value of NAK, with th enearest estimate winning what though?? Suggestions please...Mine is £5.5M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Just a thought. Maybe the FL rejected the new bid because they actually want rid of PFC and they know the PDT bid is doomed to failure either before take off or very soon after. After all, the FL does know all the details of bid and nobody else other than PKF or the PDT do (transparency? Ha!) Maybe the skates are right and the FL do hate them. The FL could think that public support of the PDT bid to the exclusion of all other options is the ultimate route to destruction, either by liquidation or disappearing through the trapdoor never to be seen again? Thoughts anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21374713 The Cherries boss admits to being saddened by their current plight and paid tribute to the fans and caretaker-manager Guy Whittingham for sticking with the club. "They are a special group of fans, as they have shown by how they have stuck with their club during this period," added the former defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 (edited) Just a thought. Maybe the FL rejected the new bid because they actually want rid of PFC and they know the PDT bid is doomed to failure either before take off or very soon after. After all, the FL does know all the details of bid and nobody else other than PKF or the PDT do (transparency? Ha!) Maybe the skates are right and the FL do hate them. The FL could think that public support of the PDT bid to the exclusion of all other options is the ultimate route to destruction, either by liquidation or disappearing through the trapdoor never to be seen again? Thoughts anyone? I'm always game for a good conspiracy theory.... Edited 8 February, 2013 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21374713 Special meaning going to school on a "special" bus I assume? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 From Twitter...was this really published by the News at the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 We now know that there is no plan B, white knight, or chinny change of heart last minute decide to buy the club again option. Unless the judge sets the price of nottarfkrap at an amount closer to the £3m mark than the £12m chinny wants, its all over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 I find it odd that the valuation is so contested/argued over. Seems weird that some surveyor would claim it's worth £x and another that it's worth £5x. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Trust hopes League ruling will convince fans to unite behind bid?? I thought they had united behind it already? That's what we've been told in this brave new era of transparency. The Trust assure everyone that they and their majority shareholding property-developing friends are ready to go, fully funded and just waiting on Trev - now we see a front page plea for more cash. What an odd angle to take when you have all your funding in place.... If I was touched by Nutjobbery I might consider that they've written their business plan on a cullender and are now making it up as they go along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 (edited) I find it odd that the valuation is so contested/argued over. Seems weird that some surveyor would claim it's worth £x and another that it's worth £5x. I think the complication is probably that it's value as a football ground whilst a football club exists is X while it's value as a piece of land for housing or retail is Y. How do you value it? Valuing it Y causes X not to exist. Whilst valuing at X makes Y not an option. It's a weird one. I personally (and without bias!) think that because it is held as security (and was willingly offered as such) then the security holder ought to be given his way rather than being shafted. He wasn't taking it to secure £2.75m (or £3m), he was securing £17m so to suggest now it is only worth 15% of that is a crazy argument. ---- Edit - You could say that the value of X is actually zero if it really can only be used as a football stadium and nothing else (unless another football club would like to buy it) Edited 8 February, 2013 by Winchester Red Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 I think the complication is probably that it's value as a football ground whilst a football club exists is X while it's value as a piece of land for housing or retail is Y. How do you value it? Valuing it Y causes X not to exist. Whilst valuing at X makes Y not an option. It's a weird one. I personally (and without bias!) think that because it is held as security (and was willingly offered as such) then the security holder ought to be given his way rather than being shafted. He wasn't taking it to secure £2.75m (or £3m), he was securing £17m so to suggest now it is only worth 15% of that is a crazy argument. ---- Edit - You could say that the value of X is actually zero if it really can only be used as a football stadium and nothing else (unless another football club would like to buy it) But skate CVA calculations value Fatpipes as £17M X 0.2%..... = £34K Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 The Trust assure everyone that they and their majority shareholding property-developing friends are ready to go, fully funded and just waiting on Trev - now we see a front page plea for more cash. What an odd angle to take when you have all your funding in place.... Indeed....it's almost as if someone has told them the judge is now likely to laugh their £3m offer out of court....why else would there be a scramble to raise yet more funds...? (Asked Trousers rhetorically) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 But skate CVA calculations value Fatpipes as £17M X 0.2%..... = £34K That only applies to what they owe other people and other peoples assets. When it's pfc's assets it's /0.2% not *0.2% That's how they reached the figure of each match being worth £30m to the local economy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 (edited) I think the complication is probably that it's value as a football ground whilst a football club exists is X while it's value as a piece of land for housing or retail is Y. How do you value it? Valuing it Y causes X not to exist. Whilst valuing at X makes Y not an option. It's a weird one. I personally (and without bias!) think that because it is held as security (and was willingly offered as such) then the security holder ought to be given his way rather than being shafted. He wasn't taking it to secure £2.75m (or £3m), he was securing £17m so to suggest now it is only worth 15% of that is a crazy argument. ---- Edit - You could say that the value of X is actually zero if it really can only be used as a football stadium and nothing else (unless another football club would like to buy it) If the council can seemingly change the conditions of the loan they offered the PDT, what is stopping them changing the conditions over the future usage of FP? These conditions only exist in the first place because they were voted upon at the time. I'm sure the council wouldn't take a lot of persuading to spruce up the area via development of a new Tesco once the dust has settled on the establishment of a Phoenix club elsewhere... Edited 8 February, 2013 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Whilst visiting Gunwharf Quays the other day, I noticed an extremely impressive Superyacht moored alongside, the £100 million Amaryllis. It is relatively new, but has been there for some time. Although some mystery surrounds who owns it, is is rumoured to be Richard DeVos, an American multi-billionaire. Now, in the same way that the rumour-mongers had a field day when Paul Allen's Superyacht moored up in Southampton, the possibility that DeVos is going to take over the Skates must be considered. After all, like Allen, he does have involvement in sport, owning Orlando Dolphins NBA basketball team. Furthermore a bit of googling unearths some opinions that he built his wealth on what some consider to be pyramid selling, so he fits the profile of dodgy owner that they seem to attract. And should he buy them, he would also qualify for the other requirement of having more money than sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Red Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Whilst visiting Gunwharf Quays the other day, I noticed an extremely impressive Superyacht moored alongside, the £100 million Amaryllis. It is relatively new, but has been there for some time. Although some mystery surrounds who owns it, is is rumoured to be Richard DeVos, an American multi-billionaire. Now, in the same way that the rumour-mongers had a field day when Paul Allen's Superyacht moored up in Southampton, the possibility that DeVos is going to take over the Skates must be considered. After all, like Allen, he does have involvement in sport, owning Orlando Dolphins NBA basketball team. Furthermore a bit of googling unearths some opinions that he built his wealth on what some consider to be pyramid selling, so he fits the profile of dodgy owner that they seem to attract. And should he buy them, he would also qualify for the other requirement of having more money than sense. No can do The FL have spoken Trust of bust Now wouldn't that be funny. A billionaire wants to pump in £500m to turn pfc into a footballing superpower but the FL block it in favour of the trust Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andysstuff Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Anyone k ow offhand how much Brighton paid Gillingham to groundshare? Few years ago I know but may point is in the right direction as to a resonable rent, and from there to a resaonable valuation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingsland Red Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 I think the complication is probably that it's value as a football ground whilst a football club exists is X while it's value as a piece of land for housing or retail is Y. How do you value it? Valuing it Y causes X not to exist. Whilst valuing at X makes Y not an option. It's a weird one. I personally (and without bias!) think that because it is held as security (and was willingly offered as such) then the security holder ought to be given his way rather than being shafted. He wasn't taking it to secure £2.75m (or £3m), he was securing £17m so to suggest now it is only worth 15% of that is a crazy argument. ---- Edit - You could say that the value of X is actually zero if it really can only be used as a football stadium and nothing else (unless another football club would like to buy it) Spot on, sports fields have little value, retail would be next up in value in the FP list and housing would secure the greatest value, not unreasonably ten times the value of said playing fields if a planning consent could be secured for a relatively dense development such as The Dell.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint si Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 I think the complication is probably that it's value as a football ground whilst a football club exists is X while it's value as a piece of land for housing or retail is Y. How do you value it? Valuing it Y causes X not to exist. Whilst valuing at X makes Y not an option. It's a weird one. I personally (and without bias!) think that because it is held as security (and was willingly offered as such) then the security holder ought to be given his way rather than being shafted. He wasn't taking it to secure £2.75m (or £3m), he was securing £17m so to suggest now it is only worth 15% of that is a crazy argument. ---- Edit - You could say that the value of X is actually zero if it really can only be used as a football stadium and nothing else (unless another football club would like to buy it) So one way to value it would be to look at what clubs of similar size that don't own their stadium pay in rent. Then turn that in to a valuation through typical rates of return in the property market. Example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-20616466 Cov pay £1.28m a year rent. But cov are a bigger club so let's put fat pipes at 1m a year. Suppose a (very) healthy 10% return pa. That would value the ground at £10m... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 So one way to value it would be to look at what clubs of similar size that don't own their stadium pay in rent. Then turn that in to a valuation through typical rates of return in the property market. Example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-20616466 Cov pay £1.28m a year rent. But cov are a bigger club so let's put fat pipes at 1m a year. Suppose a (very) healthy 10% return pa. That would value the ground at £10m... Or as we say on this thread....Ooops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 What I am unsure about in this court case ,malarky is whether the judge has to rule strictly on teh value of the ground as a football ground, or whether he has to take into acount a) the value under alternative use or c) the fact that this is the security that Chinney holds against his 17 mil owed/ Secondly, I still dont understand why PFK have to sell the ground as part of deal - surely if Chinney holds it as security for his debt, but the value of the ground is less than the value of his debt, he should just be given FP and told thats it - he then has a choice, to sit on somthing that is worthless to him whilst the council refuse a chnage of use application, or lease it back at a reaasonabe rate so it get hims some cash... why the flying feck the Trust did not see this as an option is beyond me... ... and here's another thing - I am sure the trust are all fine upstanding individuals who if asked find it criminal that their club has twice in 2 years shafted so many creditors in a desperate attempt to win things and survive.... to cheat... etc... and that for thsi tehy balme the succession of owners, yet becasue they insist they want the ground for their bid to go ahead, they need to ineffect shaft someone to get hold of it - forget the fact that he has it as security, but they are still willing to begin their reign doing following the same kind of action they I am sure would be criticisng anyone else for.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Wow. Win a £100 guitar. Pretty much sums up the place if that's a prize considered worthy of front page billing in skatesville! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 As I understand it the Judge would not give a figure for the value all he can do is say if the value PKF have put on it is reasonable. The question then becomes what happens if he says it is worth more (but without naming a figure). PKF and the trust could attempt to up the price again and return to court but each time the judge says "No, more than that" its going to cost PKF a fair whack. The obvious solution would be for PKF and Portpin to agree a figure but as they don't appear to get on and their current figures are rather far apart I can't see that happening. All this to the obvious time pressure backdrop of the league's deadline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waterside.saint Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 As I understand it the Judge would not give a figure for the value all he can do is say if the value PKF have put on it is reasonable. The question then becomes what happens if he says it is worth more (but without naming a figure). PKF and the trust could attempt to up the price again and return to court but each time the judge says "No, more than that" its going to cost PKF a fair whack. The obvious solution would be for PKF and Portpin to agree a figure but as they don't appear to get on and their current figures are rather far apart I can't see that happening. All this to the obvious time pressure backdrop of the league's deadline. I guess we're asking what criteria the judge will use to decide whether PST's valuation of c.£3m is 'fair', or not? I would trust Chinny to have something up his sleeve in that respect, he didn't become a multi-multi-millionaire by failing to take care of business Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 I guess we're asking what criteria the judge will use to decide whether PST's valuation of c.£3m is 'fair', or not? It is tricky one. I guess he would consider a) Its value as is, b) its value as a development site and c) the likelihood of it changing status. If, say, he was asked to validate the value of some farm land then if there is 0% change of planning permission being granted his job is easy. If it has a 50% chance of it getting planning permission does he go for the value for farm land, the value as development land or somewhere in-between? I think he would have to look at the situation and determine what chance the site is to be used as a football stadium for the foreseeable future and base his decision on that. That is all assuming that he does not value it, as is, at well over the 3 million in which case he has an easy decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 @pn_neil_allen: 4 years ago tomorrow Tony Adams was sacked. He lifts lid on start of #Pompey financial demise in tomorrow's News. Edin Dzeko for £8m anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 So I am mainly a voyeur on this site, takes so much of my time catching up each night that Mrs Pedro is worried that I watch this more than porn. So my question is, how does Trousers keep a virtual 24 hour watch on anything and everything PFC and just who is Rallyboy, an eloquent contributor with a comedic element that makes this thread so absorbing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andysstuff Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/feb/08/liberal-democrat-mp-alleged-sexual-assault I suppose at least it wasn't his sister. Maybe he'll STFU spouting on about the Skates for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 So I am mainly a voyeur on this site, takes so much of my time catching up each night that Mrs Pedro is worried that I watch this more than porn. So my question is, how does Trousers keep a virtual 24 hour watch on anything and everything PFC and just who is Rallyboy, an eloquent contributor with a comedic element that makes this thread so absorbing. He is one of triplets, they work it in shifts hth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazlo78 Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 He is one of triplets, they work it in shifts hth Trousers, pants and leggings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 He is one of triplets, they work it in shifts hth But only trousers does anything, one of them is just pants and the other slacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Trousers, pants and leggings The middle one sounds like a poopey player, and the last one, an ex poopey player! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suewhistle Posted 8 February, 2013 Share Posted 8 February, 2013 Cov pay £1.28m a year rent. But cov are a bigger club so let's put fat pipes at 1m a year. Suppose a (very) healthy 10% return pa. That would value the ground at £10m... Yep, but Coventry's ground is not a slum... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts