Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Its a tricky one with possibly being readmitted. On one hand there would be a certain poetic justice if we took pompey's place. On the other do we want to end up being the trick quiz question about what team got beaten twice in one season in the FA cup?

 

:D, Hmmm, we'd better not grab the opportunity, should it come, then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, day and a bit to go, probably day and a half for the SoA by the time someone has to run round the printers, get a few copies bashed out and then boked it up to the court.

 

Imagine the scene right now. Found sitting, Dulieu at a desk, almost buried in old envelopes with scribbles on the back of them. Enter Storrie, unshaven, tie crooked as a former manager's tax return (generic, certainly not implying any current or former employee of PCFC would be anything but scrupulous, ok mods?). He's carrying an Iceland carrier stuffed with more envelopes and bits of newspaper with numbers biroed into the margins:

 

Storrie: Well, that's the ones I had stuffed down the back of the sofa, Ken

Dulieu: Did you phone 'Arry and see if he had any more round his place?

Storrie: Couldn't get hold of him. Other than that how's the SoA doing?

Dulieu: Looking good. I can safely say everything you have done looks to me like a perfect example of corporate governance. I used to follow the policy of spunking a fortune on players we couldn't afford, back when I was at Saints. Did a bloody good job there and we were set fair for a return to the prem when I left. Shame the next lot in didn't have my insight. Blew a glittering legacy in a few weeks, they did. We'd have been playing Milan this week if I'd still been in charge.

Storrie: Yeah, that's pretty much how I see it here. I worry about what might have happened to Pompey without me. So is that what you'll put in the SoA?

Dulieu: yeppers, unless you really have got a buyer lined up before tomorrow teatime

Storrie: Naah, I just said that for a laugh

Edited by Foxy
Link to post
Share on other sites
Its a tricky one with possibly being readmitted. On one hand there would be a certain poetic justice if we took pompey's place. On the other do we want to end up being the trick quiz question about what team got beaten twice in one season in the FA cup?

 

Quiz master: "It was the mighty Southampton, at the expense of a little known club called 'Pours...Porst...Prostmuth,' somthing like that, who went out of business apparently. Anyone here old enough to remember them???"

 

[silence beckons across the pub]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Its a tricky one with possibly being readmitted. On one hand there would be a certain poetic justice if we took pompey's place. On the other do we want to end up being the trick quiz question about what team got beaten twice in one season in the FA cup?

Ultimately, if it's proven that they were trading insolvently, Saturday's game should never have taken place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Its a tricky one with possibly being readmitted. On one hand there would be a certain poetic justice if we took pompey's place. On the other do we want to end up being the trick quiz question about what team got beaten twice in one season in the FA cup?

But we would not have been beaten, we had been beaten by a team playing inelegible players and breaking the rules of the competition. We would be the team who were beaten after the wrongdoing had been brought to light. Frankly i dont care if we went back in or not. Justice would be served and that is what i care about more....also the result would be expunged from history Lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure they've acquired the name, it's the 'League 2' bit that's wide of the mark.

 

The leagues know that attendances will be significantly down, on frankly not many to start with. AFC Skates would be lucky to scrape together 2-3k fans. As for potential fanbase, Dudley & Croydon both have far larger populations but no league team, towns such as Poole & Maidstone are not far short of Skatesville for potential fanbase (were either even in the Premier I'm convinced they could find 16k fans!). Frankly, new teams should start at the bottom of the heap (AFC Wimbledon's 9,000 fans only got offered to start in the Combined Counties league (tier 9!).

 

Although hearing skates talk about back to back promotions and 'real football' etc will grate a little (but you know where they'd rather be!)

 

Ah yes - having re-read the original quote I agree with you. Hard to say exactly where the FA and whoever else would slot a new Pompey team, but League 2 is distinctly fanciful. I'm sure potential fan base and so forth will be taken into account, but I've no idea how anybody will predict what actual attendances might be. The history of a professional club in the city will make a difference there when compared with the likes of Dudley and Croydon though.

 

Time will tell and all that. To be honest, I'll be quite disappointed when it's all finally over, as I've enjoyed this thread a hell of a lot! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about it I think I prefer the trivia quiz question of "In 2010 what team made it to two wembley cup finals" :)

 

(and looking on the bright side for birmingham supporters it's not like it would change their travel plans much is it?).

Link to post
Share on other sites

they said on radio solent this morning that the skates were having a URGENT fans forum on Thursday

http://www.bbc.co.uk/5live/shows/5live-sport/get-in-touch/

 

If we all applied for 4 tickets for a Mr Fake Doctor at xyz address + valid postcode (not SO) and then NOT turn up, or not receive the tickets.

 

Perhap Radio5 will understand why they are called the blue-few.

Link to post
Share on other sites
they said on radio solent this morning that the skates were having a URGENT fans forum on Thursday

http://www.bbc.co.uk/5live/shows/5live-sport/get-in-touch/

 

If we all applied for 4 tickets for a Mr Fake Doctor at xyz address + valid postcode (not SO) and then NOT turn up, or not receive the tickets.

 

Perhap Radio5 will understand why they are called the blue-few.

 

We also need to know:

* your full name

* your postal address (including your postcode)

* your contact telephone number(s)

* how many tickets you require
(up to a maximum of 4 per request)
.

I think they missed off..

*
If you intend to dress like a clown and bring along an annoying bell

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can someone answer a (relatively) simple question:

 

Isn't it overwhelmingly likely that they will have borrowed against the parachute payments already? If I was in their shoes, I would have done. It's £16m over two years, I believe. Couldn't they convert that into £13m - £14m up front?

 

In short, why it is believed the parachute payments are still in play, when they've clearly mortgaged everything else?

 

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere (probably more than 100 pages back on here) that Chainrai's loan was secured against future TV revenue, as well as the stadium, etc, (hence why he got all hissy about HIS £7m being given to clubs to clear footballing debts). Most certainly, it wouldn't have only been Jans £7m used to secure against his £17m.

Link to post
Share on other sites
the post about AFC Portsmouth is pretty near the mark

Mero, the having the stadium is a nonsense, when we were in admin it was reported out council tax was £1m pa, even if yours if half that it is already an unsustainable cost. i do hope you do not let your heart rule your head and make sure if you are part of setting up this new club that you are assured that none of its debts get close to taking you personally down.

IMo I would factor in crowds of 8-10k in the first quarter of the season but soon diminish to to 5k or below as the novelty of BSL sinks in , especially if the results donnot go your way.As for being too big for that league I suggest Luton would have a say about that. They have a good following and also were a sizable club not long ago.

Be careful how you set the new club up. I would be sad to see you damaged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/facup/7231636/Portsmouth-beat-Southampton-but-High-Court-date-looms.html

The quarter-finals are scheduled for the weekend of March 6, five days after Portsmouth are back in the High Court to face a winding-up petition from Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs.

If a buyer has not emerged by then,
the club are believed to be considering going into voluntary administration
, despite the attendant nine-point penalty from the Premier League which would virtually condemn them to relegation.

 

Can they actually do this though?

In a meeting with the supporters’ group SOS Pompey, Premier League chairman Richard Scudamore made the case for a consortium of local businesses and supporters taking over the club. In the minutes of the meeting, seen by
Telegraph Sport
, Scudamore argued that this kind of “grassroots takeover” is possible because the club actually has very little bank debt left and the wage bill has been reduced to near manageable levels.

The tricky part would be working out a deal with former owner Sacha Gaydamak, who remains the club’s major creditor.

If a local consortium does not emerge to rescue the club, Portsmouth could go into voluntary administration which, despite the points penalty, would at least speed up possible investment.

 

Yes after all without the bank debt they ONLY owe 60 million. Ripe for community take over they are.

Edited by pedg
Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/facup/7231636/Portsmouth-beat-Southampton-but-High-Court-date-looms.html

The quarter-finals are scheduled for the weekend of March 6, five days after Portsmouth are back in the High Court to face a winding-up petition from Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs.

If a buyer has not emerged by then,
the club are believed to be considering going into voluntary administration
, despite the attendant nine-point penalty from the Premier League which would virtually condemn them to relegation.

 

Can they actually do this though?

In a meeting with the supporters’ group SOS Pompey, Premier League chairman Richard Scudamore made the case for a consortium of local businesses and supporters taking over the club. In the minutes of the meeting, seen by
Telegraph Sport
, Scudamore argued that this kind of “grassroots takeover” is possible because the club actually has very little bank debt left and the wage bill has been reduced to near manageable levels.

The tricky part would be working out a deal with former owner Sacha Gaydamak, who remains the club’s major creditor.

If a local consortium does not emerge to rescue the club, Portsmouth could go into voluntary administration which, despite the points penalty, would at least speed up possible investment.

 

Yes after all without the bank debt they ONLY owe 60 million. Ripe for community take over they are.

 

Surely they can't go into voluntary admin with a WUP pending? Can anyone who's knowledgable on these things confirm?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere (probably more than 100 pages back on here) that Chainrai's loan was secured against future TV revenue, as well as the stadium, etc, (hence why he got all hissy about HIS £7m being given to clubs to clear footballing debts). Most certainly, it wouldn't have only been Jans £7m used to secure against his £17m.

 

Nail Head.

 

Game over.

 

All they have left is the parachute payments OR next season's PL TV revenue. :smt046

 

Chanrai owns the ground.

 

Nice large Condo development with Squash Courts, Gym and possibly a cinema will cover the council Leisure use. He'll double his money by getting into bed with Sacha and adding in his land as well.

 

Oh look a carve up, didn't see that one coming

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere (probably more than 100 pages back on here) that Chainrai's loan was secured against future TV revenue, as well as the stadium, etc, (hence why he got all hissy about HIS £7m being given to clubs to clear footballing debts). Most certainly, it wouldn't have only been Jans £7m used to secure against his £17m.

 

As an aside, it was revealed recently that West Ham have already borrowed against the next two years' season ticket income. So it's certainly possible that Pompey have done something similar but with the Sky money. And, as you say, for a £17M loan you'd be wanting more than £7M worth of security.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently it IS possible - if it's done quickly:

 

http://www.companyrescue.co.uk/company-rescue/guides/What-is-a-winding-up-petition.aspx

 

However, they've had plenty of time so I guess they cant :smt102

 

That can't be right. It says in there:

 

'Often the company has breached any trust the creditor had, payment deals have failed, cheques bounced and generally the directors have not kept their word.'

 

and that nice Mr Storrie wouldn't do any of that stuff, would he?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep, I think it's a pretty safe bet that acting fast means taking less than two months about it! :D

 

I particularly like this bit:

 

  1. Directors potential personal liability for company debts
    If company directors are found guilty of continuing to allow a business to trade while they KNEW it was insolvent, they may become personally liable for the debts incurred by the company from the time they knew the business was insolvent.

so that was, what, 2 years ago?

Link to post
Share on other sites
To be honest, funny as it would be, I wouldn't want to get reinstated after losing the game. It smacks of a bit of a cheat - rather like us trying to duck the 10pt deduction because of a holding company. We missed our chance at a bye because of the decision to grant P*mpey time to prove they are not insolvent. Our tough luck.

 

An alternative to just awarding the bye to Birmingham would be to either reinstate the team they played in Round 3 (who probably have as much or as little right to be reinstated as anyone else) or to have someone work out when exactly they were insolvent and reinstate the team who they played after that point.

 

It would be up to the teams involved whether they would bother to reschedule their games or pass on the chance to renter the competition.

 

Yes, I know it's just not going to happen - just thought it far fairer than just giving Birmingham a bye or reinstating us. Portsmouth didn't just suddenly acquire a team they couldn't afford.

 

P.S. I'm sure they'd just take the easy road and give Birmingham the bye.

 

Er, how do you figure that out? You would have to be deluded to describe that as Saints cheating. There would be a genuinely fair and logical argument for us going through in their place. Will never happen though and most likely they'll just give the bye to Birmingham.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Its a tricky one with possibly being readmitted. On one hand there would be a certain poetic justice if we took pompey's place. On the other do we want to end up being the trick quiz question about what team got beaten twice in one season in the FA cup?

 

 

We would not be first team to be beaten twice, already happened the year man u did not enter fa cup

Link to post
Share on other sites
Er, how do you figure that out? You would have to be deluded to describe that as Saints cheating. There would be a genuinely fair and logical argument for us going through in their place. Will never happen though and most likely they'll just give the bye to Birmingham.

 

Possibly an interesting question for Birmingham. Which would they prefer? A bye to the next round without TV money, share of gate and possibly prize money(should they get it if they didn't have to beat anyone?) or match against league 1 team with the TV money, share of gate and prize money as well if they won?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If PFC were trading during insolvency and the EPL have seen the Vantis report then they should never have allowed trading incoming players during the transfer window.

O'Hara and Quincy are therefore ineligible players and Pompey should be kicked out as soon as the report has been read later this week.

 

The fact that they cannot afford the rest of their team if insolvent also should not be ignored.

 

The insolvency is a legal issue, the monies owed to HMRC is a financial issue. I believe that we have seen their last game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another question for the experts on here. Surely this Statement of Affairs is purely just a legal formality, as there can be no doubt that they are insolvent? They have had an unbelievable amount of time to pay the HMRC. They do not now dispute the amount. And cannot pay it - what else is that if not insolvent? Or have I missed something?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Another question for the experts on here. Surely this Statement of Affairs is purely just a legal formality, as there can be no doubt that they are insolvent? They have had an unbelievable amount of time to pay the HMRC. They do not now dispute the amount. And cannot pay it - what else is that if not insolvent? Or have I missed something?

 

I think the crucial thing is this. At last week's hearing, both HMRC and the Registrar said, to paraphrase, that they BELIEVED the company to be trading whilst insolvent. But a judgement can't be given on a belief. It has to be based on FACT.

 

This is why the club (through Vantis) have been given a week to produce the SoA - to prove, one way or another, whether this belief, is in fact, fact.

 

Had she adjudged them to be insolvent based on belief, she would have been laying herself open to challenge. This way, she ensures that they swing based on a legal absolute.

 

Let's face it, we'd hate it if she'd made her judgement last week only for them to drag it all out via an appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Possibly an interesting question for Birmingham. Which would they prefer? A bye to the next round without TV money, share of gate and possibly prize money(should they get it if they didn't have to beat anyone?) or match against league 1 team with the TV money, share of gate and prize money as well if they won?

 

They'd go for a bye every time...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ultimately, if it's proven that they were trading insolvently, Saturday's game should never have taken place.

 

True.

 

Their most effective player should never have even been allowed to rejoin the club - we would effectively have been cheated out of a potentially lucrative quarter-final tie.

 

If HRMC do the decent thing next week and Brum get a bye to the semis I don't think the club should necessarily contest that but they would have every right to claim compensation from the FA for loss of revenue as, if trading insolvently, we should have had a bye to the 6th Round with all the financial rewards that go with it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

And we'd probably have knocked them out anyway without their illegal players :smt023

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone answer a (relatively) simple question:

 

Isn't it overwhelmingly likely that they will have borrowed against the parachute payments already? If I was in their shoes, I would have done. It's £16m over two years, I believe. Couldn't they convert that into £13m - £14m up front?

 

In short, why it is believed the parachute payments are still in play, when they've clearly mortgaged everything else?

 

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere (probably more than 100 pages back on here) that Chainrai's loan was secured against future TV revenue, as well as the stadium, etc, (hence why he got all hissy about HIS £7m being given to clubs to clear footballing debts). Most certainly, it wouldn't have only been Jans £7m used to secure against his £17m.

 

Another consideration due the folks in charge - They would try and obtain anything out of the company before it goes boom regardless of the promises made. If they could get £11m (or what ever it was) out before the WUO, they're done a great job.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Its a tricky one with possibly being readmitted. On one hand there would be a certain poetic justice if we took pompey's place. On the other do we want to end up being the trick quiz question about what team got beaten twice in one season in the FA cup?

 

Or the trick quick question about the team that lost in the fifth round, but still won the FA Cup...??? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
True.

 

Their most effective player should never have even been allowed to rejoin the club - we would effectively have been cheated out of a potentially lucrative quarter-final tie.

 

If HRMC do the decent thing next week and Brum get a bye to the semis I don't think the club should necessarily contest that but they would have every right to claim compensation from the FA for loss of revenue as, if trading insolvently, we should have had a bye to the 6th Round with all the financial rewards that go with it.

 

And we'd probably have knocked them out anyway without their illegal players :smt023

 

I wouldn't mind betting all the clubs that have been knocked out by Pompey in this year's cup would look at this. I doubt we'd be the only ones as in theory it's likely that we aren't the only team to be knocked out by an insolvent club

Link to post
Share on other sites
If PFC were trading during insolvency and the EPL have seen the Vantis report then they should never have allowed trading incoming players during the transfer window.

O'Hara and Quincy are therefore ineligible players and Pompey should be kicked out as soon as the report has been read later this week.

 

The fact that they cannot afford the rest of their team if insolvent also should not be ignored.

 

The insolvency is a legal issue, the monies owed to HMRC is a financial issue. I believe that we have seen their last game.

 

IMHO

 

If they are shown to have been trading while insolvent they are in breach of FA rules.

 

Signings made when the embargo was dropped will be a technical issue. If the inslovency pre-dates their siging they will have been ineligible to play in the FA Cup.

 

If it was a League match the penalty for one ineligible player is (I think) -3 points, or possibly an automatic 3-1 win. With two players ineligible and no points to deuct in the cup we could be awarded a 6-2 win.

 

Should the insolvency be shown to predate the statement to the FAPL which allowed the embargo to be lifted (ie showing they misled the PL)

 

Ouch

 

I expect a fudge on ALL those issues of timelines, the mess is way to big. IF tThe SoA shows insolvency of that nature I would imagine they will do something straight away without waiting for the courts (not necessarily admin).

 

For the record though, IF we were offered re-instatement to the FA Cup I believe we should take the moral high ground and politely decline.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL!! Dear oh dear, you poor deluded fool..........

 

Over-optimism is a terrible thing - one to two k I think he meant

Actually 5-6k in the Conference is probably realistic considering your fanbase last time you were in the lower reaches. You'd be on a par with Luton & Oxford, maybe just above the likes of Cambridge, York, Wrexham & Mansfield. There are plenty of formerly well-established league teams in the Conference. (In fact I'm pretty certain I have seen us play Luton & Oxford in the old first division & the others in the old second division, so Poopey wouldn't sit that out of place amongst them.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the crucial thing is this. At last week's hearing, both HMRC and the Registrar said, to paraphrase, that they BELIEVED the company to be trading whilst insolvent. But a judgement can't be given on a belief. It has to be based on FACT.

 

This is why the club (through Vantis) have been given a week to produce the SoA - to prove, one way or another, whether this belief, is in fact, fact.

 

Had she adjudged them to be insolvent based on belief, she would have been laying herself open to challenge. This way, she ensures that they swing based on a legal absolute.

 

Let's face it, we'd hate it if she'd made her judgement last week only for them to drag it all out via an appeal.

 

I see your point now re evidence.....

 

Regardless of HMRC having overwhelming

evidence..The good lady was giving The PFC the chance to prove they were not trading whilst insolvent.....

 

The report with all the facts and any other further HMRC evidence will almost certainly activate the Winding up application on behalf of the

HMRC.

 

As you say with everything laid on the table..The good lady has also given PFC enough time/opportunity/rope to defend or hang themselves and would normally negate

any possible appeal....... Would they be allowed?

 

But we all know Mr Storrie.......Surprised he was not Robbed of his 50 million cash takeover monies, when he was leaving St Marys on Saturday.....:smt066

 

Now that would have been a story to tell at the local cop shop:smt033

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the crucial thing is this. At last week's hearing, both HMRC and the Registrar said, to paraphrase, that they BELIEVED the company to be trading whilst insolvent. But a judgement can't be given on a belief. It has to be based on FACT.

 

This is why the club (through Vantis) have been given a week to produce the SoA - to prove, one way or another, whether this belief, is in fact, fact.

 

Had she adjudged them to be insolvent based on belief, she would have been laying herself open to challenge. This way, she ensures that they swing based on a legal absolute.

 

Let's face it, we'd hate it if she'd made her judgement last week only for them to drag it all out via an appeal.

 

Thanks, that's kind of my point, its more the legal process they have to go through to make it official, rather than the need to actually eliminate any doubt. How can they prove they are not insolvent? Surely the non-payment of the HMRC bill can be nothing but insolvency? Just trying to understand what options they have of getting out of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Er, how do you figure that out? You would have to be deluded to describe that as Saints cheating. There would be a genuinely fair and logical argument for us going through in their place. Will never happen though and most likely they'll just give the bye to Birmingham.

 

Well firstly (as someone else mentioned) we could be the only club to progress in the cup after actually losing the tie. I'm sure there are plenty of people who would question the legitimacy of our victory if we got all the way to Wembley after losing the game against Portsmouth - even if they later left the competition.

 

Secondly, I was pointing out that if Portsmouth were to drop out of the cup, there are a few clubs who could request the right to be reinstated - not just us. After all, if they are written completely out of the league table, then why not the cup? If a game against Blackburn in the league is deleted from the record books then why not also the cup game against Coventry?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well firstly (as someone else mentioned) we could be the only club to progress in the cup after actually losing the tie. I'm sure there are plenty of people who would question the legitimacy of our victory if we got all the way to Wembley after losing the game against Portsmouth - even if they later left the competition.

 

Secondly, I was pointing out that if Portsmouth were to drop out of the cup, there are a few clubs who could request the right to be reinstated - not just us. After all, if they are written completely out of the league table, then why not the cup? If a game against Blackburn in the league is deleted from the record books then why not also the cup game against Coventry?

would it not be fair to say the timeline when they were brought to task was when it went to court and it was pointed out about their insolvency?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well firstly (as someone else mentioned) we could be the only club to progress in the cup after actually losing the tie. I'm sure there are plenty of people who would question the legitimacy of our victory if we got all the way to Wembley after losing the game against Portsmouth - even if they later left the competition.

 

[B]Secondly, I was pointing out that if Portsmouth were to drop out of the cup, there are a few clubs who could request the right to be reinstated - not just us. After all, if they are written completely out of the league table, then why not the cup? If a game against Blackburn in the league is deleted from the record books then why not also the cup game against Coventry?[/QUOTE][/b]

 

And that is the rub :

 

Should Pimpley go to the wall and proven to have been illegally trading for sometime then the decision for the FA is clear - Brum get a bye into the semi's.

Coventry, Sunderland and ourselves would all have a case to be re-instated and some sort of play-off between the 3 of us is just not feasible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
would it not be fair to say the timeline when they were brought to task was when it went to court and it was pointed out about their insolvency?

 

Possibly, although it might be more accurate if the SoA points to an actual date (or period) when the insolvency is likely to have begun. It's stretching to Storrieish proportions to make out that they only became insolvent in the court room when the registrar said they might be insolvent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst there is loads that we dont understand or even know about, the one things that keeps digging at me, is why they never tried the Administration route. The gamble they took going to court was massive and still is. Whatever way you dress it up it looks like a liquidated club is worth more to Chainrai, than one in administration. Whether he gets to keep the ground (I assume he will) just how much is that worth? It can't be close to the 18 million he lent them can it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Possibly, although it might be more accurate if the SoA points to an actual date (or period) when the insolvency is likely to have begun. It's stretching to Storrieish proportions to make out that they only became insolvent in the court room when the registrar said they might be insolvent.

Yep that is fair, the fact that the result was made null and void would be enough compensation to most, although I wonder if Claims Direct may be able to draw me a bit of dosh for the psycological damage seeing the Pompey fans celebrating, wherras if they had not had their illigally fielded players I would have been able to express my excitement......I can feel a depression coming on and those scars are going to have trouble to heal unless the correct medication is applied eg £10k

Link to post
Share on other sites
Over-optimism is a terrible thing - one to two k I think he meant

Actually 5-6k in the Conference is probably realistic considering your fanbase last time you were in the lower reaches. You'd be on a par with Luton & Oxford, maybe just above the likes of Cambridge, York, Wrexham & Mansfield. There are plenty of formerly well-established league teams in the Conference. (In fact I'm pretty certain I have seen us play Luton & Oxford in the old first division & the others in the old second division, so Poopey wouldn't sit that out of place amongst them.)

 

Right. If we are in Blue Square division whatever, are playing absolute ******** even at that level, with zero investment, no ex players who would do a good job at that level and with no apparent hope at all of ever escaping upwards, our absolute bare minimum might be around 5-6k.

 

In reality, we would almost certainly have good money (at that level) invested from local business and the community, we'd be able to buy good quality players at that level and we'd very soon be playing attractive, winning football.

 

In this scenario, ground capacity and sensible ticket pricing permitting, we'll pull in somewhere between 8-12k as an educated guess, with more for games against teams at the top of the league and the odd 16-18k for boxing day games and F.A. cup games against higher league opposition.

 

But I still don't think it will come to that. If it does, we'll survive. Sadly for the more twisted of you on here, I can promise you one absolute copper bottomed certainty- they'll ALWAYS be a Pompey, and however low we go, we WILL come back.......

Link to post
Share on other sites
Whilst there is loads that we dont understand or even know about, the one things that keeps digging at me, is why they never tried the Administration route. The gamble they took going to court was massive and still is. Whatever way you dress it up it looks like a liquidated club is worth more to Chainrai, than one in administration. Whether he gets to keep the ground (I assume he will) just how much is that worth? It can't be close to the 18 million he lent them can it?

 

Precisely, I know I'm getting cynical at my age but it's almost as if Storrie wants them to be liquidated

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})