Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga


Fitzhugh Fella

Recommended Posts

Benjii, as I said earlier, is it really the role of a judge to decide whether an action brought before him will result in that party being materially worse off?

 

Yes, in this case, of course it is. The ground for the appeal (or at least part of it) in this area is that the appellant has been materially prejudiced. IMO they may be materially prejudiced by the FCR but you can see why it's arguable, at least, that they haven't been by the disallowed voting rights as the only options are CVA or bust.

 

I imagine the judgment will offer some dicta around the FCR but say that ruling on its legality is outside the scope of the case. I think it's clear that all unsecured creditors are unfairly and materially prejudiced by the FCR but that's not the Skate's fault.

 

Returning to image rights... I'm sure HMRC haven't shot their load with respect to any wrongdoing...

 

I think that's my third of the day so toodle-pop all!

 

COYRAWM tomorrow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

too add to the shame Chainrai has said he is considering buying the club and he will finance cotterill to get PFC back into the prem according to radio solent

 

would rather that tosser fook off back to where he came from, we need to shed our club of the disease and take the shame and do things properly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

too add to the shame Chainrai has said he is considering buying the club and he will finance cotterill to get PFC back into the prem according to radio solent

 

would rather that tosser fook off back to where he came from, we need to shed our club of the disease and take the shame and do things properly

 

At least one of you can see this all for what it really is.

 

If your club achieve any kind of success in the near future it will surly be leaving a bad taste in the mouths of a few of you.

 

I didnt want you gone but I didnt want you to get bail out after bail out from every direction. Im not supprised HMRC didnt bother to appeal. They must think that no matter what the case is someone will side with pompy and give them a leg up.

 

Im still stunned

Link to comment
Share on other sites

too add to the shame Chainrai has said he is considering buying the club and he will finance cotterill to get PFC back into the prem according to radio solent

 

would rather that tosser fook off back to where he came from, we need to shed our club of the disease and take the shame and do things properly

 

As much as I hate pompy I like the fact that their is an understanding that BC is not good for the game. I think the fact he has said that after others get the 20% is of poor taste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Cotterill: 'I think this week they are liable to be more lenient because it's coming to a league game. Whereas trying to get people registered for a friendly, with all due respect, is not really at the top of their priorities.

 

'We just need them to be fair. We have got ourselves into this mess, it's not anybody else's fault, we are not looking to blame anyone or anything like that.

 

'It's just that we are going to need some leeway to sort it out because it's impossible to sort out as it stands.

 

'The competition won't be fair, which is what we say we strive for in our country

 

Sorry, but I've now got to the point where I'm actually laughing at the situation rather than being angry about it. Time to forget about the whole thing and switch attention to the start of the season tomorrow me thinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

too add to the shame Chainrai has said he is considering buying the club and he will finance cotterill to get PFC back into the prem according to radio solent

 

would rather that tosser fook off back to where he came from, we need to shed our club of the disease and take the shame and do things properly

 

I'm sure the PL will welcome you back with open arms :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could say the same about any NPC club.

 

yes but he has the squad basics to compete very well in the CCC especially by adding players like Sonko etc. it is similar to our plan at SMS.

BC has the money to play and even if he loses he still has the first dibs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Chinnery is unsure whether he'll take over or not, how can P*mpey guarantee the FL that they'll be able to fulfill all fixtures and finish the season?

 

He surely has 25 hours and 15 minutes to decide. (or 6 hours as the Championship starts tonight)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I've now got to the point where I'm actually laughing at the situation rather than being angry about it. Time to forget about the whole thing and switch attention to the start of the season tomorrow me thinks.

 

Me too. It stinks but lets get back to concentrating on Saints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, any hopes that Chanrai will look to 'invest' in PFC to try to restore the club's Premier League status look doomed. The club management team has been instructed to develop a 'break-even' budget for the coming season.

 

Impossible, hilariously so!

You couldn't run a car on their projected income without the Sky money - they will need another 28% loan from the puppet master before October and we will be on the way to administration once again, it'll just be a matter of time.

 

Go on Cotterill you old squad-fiddler, sign Marlon King just in case there are any supporters out there that don't despise the club yet - he deserves it, everyone should be given a 14th chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even writing off 80% of the unsecured debt and taking remaining parachute payments into account, it really would be a **** poor investment.

 

He has lent them £17m (excluding interest) so far, and paid himself back £4m (?). There are god knows how much secured debt that needs paying off (£38m??), and £20m odd of unsecured (now that most has been written off). Then £50m odd would be needed to build a stadium (one has to be built soon as the dump is falling down) although this could be postponed for a few years. New players are needed desperately, probably 7 or 8, and lets call that another £20m. Then it is a question of what income there is likely to be against what he can pay himself back while keeping the club solvent. QED **** poor investment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following on from the shock of yesterday we are presented by a whole new set of circumstances.

 

I am not sure it has ever been proved that BC or AG actually injected all the funds they claimed to have into PCFC that appear as loans on the balance sheet.

 

Hypothetically, Just suppose a slightly shady character domiciled overseas owes some money to a business colleague, his assets are frozen so tells him to 'lend' £15m to his company and take a secured charge against its prime 'asset', the current 'owner' will then default on an agreement and that company then passes beneficially to the business colleague who is free to to withdrwa Premier League payments and cash sale amounts for player sales in January against his 'loan'. Then if the club gets placed into administration (with a helpful creditor being made to look the bad guy) said business colleague is guarenteed a pay out as a secured creditor due to parachute payments.

 

Effectively business colleague gets paid, no risk to him. He can then sell a football club as a going concern. Hell he might even team up with an old buddy so they can package the stadium and land together and sell for a few million quid....

 

This would then mean the figures on paper are fairly meaningless, it is all about the flow of cash.

 

All hypothetically of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following on from the shock of yesterday we are presented by a whole new set of circumstances.

 

I am not sure it has ever been proved that BC or AG actually injected all the funds they claimed to have into PCFC that appear as loans on the balance sheet.

 

Hypothetically, Just suppose a slightly shady character domiciled overseas owes some money to a business colleague, his assets are frozen so tells him to 'lend' £15m to his company and take a secured charge against its prime 'asset', the current 'owner' will then default on an agreement and that company then passes beneficially to the business colleague who is free to to withdrwa Premier League payments and cash sale amounts for player sales in January against his 'loan'. Then if the club gets placed into administration (with a helpful creditor being made to look the bad guy) said business colleague is guarenteed a pay out as a secured creditor due to parachute payments.

 

Effectively business colleague gets paid, no risk to him. He can then sell a football club as a going concern. Hell he might even team up with an old buddy so they can package the stadium and land together and sell for a few million quid....

 

This would then mean the figures on paper are fairly meaningless, it is all about the flow of cash.

 

All hypothetically of course.

 

Aye, I believe this was first hinted at on page 10 or so of this here thread about a year ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pompey expect to have sealed the departures of eight of their squad by the start of next week.

Danijel Subotic, Gael Nlundulu and Jordan Hughes are close to having their contracts cancelled by mutual consent.

 

Gautier Mahoto, who had joined SC Bastia in January only for the switch to be scrapped later in the season over red tape, is also expected to go.

 

Meanwhile, Marlon Pack and Nadir Ciftci are pencilled in to continue their footballing education at Cheltenham.

 

Steve Cotterill anticipates their loan deals being finalised by the start of next week.

 

Completing the eight are Perry Ryan and Ellis Martin, who are lined up for loan spells at Southern League premier division side Salisbury City.

 

The exits – both permanent and temporary – will give boss Cotterill room for manoeuvre with regards to new additions, with the Football League ready to grant special dispensation to help him fill the minimum squad number of 20.

 

Cotterill said: 'There is a compromise agreement sorted and Subotic will be leaving the club.

 

'Subotic, Hughes, Nlundulu and Mahoto are hopefully signing those agreements before the end of the week and they are all on our squad list.

 

'It doesn't matter whether you've got Subotic, Pele or whoever down, the Football League just see a name and number.

 

'There could also be another four of the young boys going out on loan.

 

'Pack and Ciftci could be going to Cheltenham, while Perry Ryan and Ellis Martin could be going to Salisbury.

 

'We have got to create more than one space

 

FMPR! Fancy pouring vinager on an open wound,,,,,,Nawty Boiy,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much longer is this transfer window open, and how much more do they need to raise to honour the CVA?

 

Given it would appear that the Administrator is both architect and arbitrator of his own CVA then who's to say that it might just get 'signed off' as honoured regardless of how much money changes hands? All pure guesswork and supposition on my part of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes but he has the squad basics to compete very well in the CCC especially by adding players like Sonko etc. it is similar to our plan at SMS.

BC has the money to play and even if he loses he still has the first dibs.

 

So do Burnely, Forest, Leeds etc so your point is redundant as they could all chuck a couple of million at it.

 

Simple truth is that it's not going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do Burnely, Forest, Leeds etc so your point is redundant as they could all chuck a couple of million at it.

 

Simple truth is that it's not going to happen.

 

Look VFTT let me live in my world of conspiracy and fantasy. Lol

Tell me when the real world has anything to do with anything Pompey during this escapade

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hypothetically, Just suppose a slightly shady character domiciled overseas owes some money to a business colleague, his assets are frozen so tells him to 'lend' £15m to his company and take a secured charge against its prime 'asset', the current 'owner' will then default on an agreement and that company then passes beneficially to the business colleague who is free to to withdrwa Premier League payments and cash sale amounts for player sales in January against his 'loan'. Then if the club gets placed into administration (with a helpful creditor being made to look the bad guy) said business colleague is guarenteed a pay out as a secured creditor due to parachute payments.

 

Effectively business colleague gets paid, no risk to him. He can then sell a football club as a going concern. Hell he might even team up with an old buddy so they can package the stadium and land together and sell for a few million quid....

 

This would then mean the figures on paper are fairly meaningless, it is all about the flow of cash.

 

All hypothetically of course.

 

Such an operation seems so far-fetched that I cannot believe that it would ever get past the regulating bodies of the Football Association, or even the appropriate tax authorities. There would be almost certainly a court case and the operators of such a scheme couldn't possibly have a hope of winning that, could they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look VFTT let me live in my world of conspiracy and fantasy. Lol

Tell me when the real world has anything to do with anything Pompey during this escapade

 

We all know that they should have been killed in Feb' and while we are all disappointed about yesterday it's more of an interlude than the end of the saga.

Edited by View From The Top
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Q1/ Does anybody have anymore info on the reports that they used an unlicensed agent Chris LeBesque in the Diarra deal ?

Are the FA looking in to it ? or has AA paid him off out of petty cash to keep him out of the cva?

 

Q2/ When they were using Fuglers (Mark Jacob) Client Account to act as their Bank Account, I was led to believe that this was in breach of FA rules ? Could somebody point me at the section in the FA Rule Book this relates to ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to wind us up

posted 1 Hour Ago

 

We've got some half priced cracked ice

And miles and miles of carpet tiles

TV's, deep freeze and David Bowie LP's

Pool games, gold chains, wosnames

And at a push

Some Trevor Francis track-suites

From a mush in Shepherds Bush, Bush, Bush,

Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush

 

 

No income tax no VAT..PFC beat HMRC,blue and white, rich or poor

We'll cut prices at a stroke

 

Play Up PFC..We Beat HMRC

Viva Admin Andy

Long live Admin Andy

C'est magnifique Admin Andy

Magnifique Admin Andy

 

 

add comment

 

I prefer this...

 

Stick a pony in me pocket

I'll get the suitcase from the (cara)van

Cause when you want the best'uns

But you don't ask questions

Then sister/mother I'm your man....

 

Cause where the money comes from is a mystery

It's like the changing of the owners,

British Virgin Islands by the sea

Here's the one that's driving me berserk

Why should we pay taxes while we work?

 

La la la la la....

 

No income tax, No VAT

No money back, no guarantee

Black or White, Rich or Poor

Skates'll rip you off more and moooooorrrreee......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer this...

 

Stick a pony in me pocket

I'll get the suitcase from the (cara)van

Cause when you want the best'uns

But you don't ask questions

Then sister/mother I'm your man....

 

Cause where the money comes from is a mystery

It's like the changing of the owners,

British Virgin Islands by the sea

Here's the one that's driving me berserk

Why should we pay taxes while we work?

 

La la la la la....

 

No income tax, No VAT

No money back, no guarantee

Black or White, Rich or Poor

Skates'll rip you off more and moooooorrrreee......

 

Your wasted posting on here :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be rude not to (sorry Lennon and McCartney)

 

 

 

Let me tell you how it will be

20p for you, the rest for me

'Cause you're the taxman,

Yeah, you're the taxman

 

Should 20p appear too small

Be thankful or you'll get f**l all

'Cause you're the taxman,

Yeah, you're the taxman

 

We made the PL feel the heat

Conned the FL nice and sweet

In High Court we lied through our teeth

Our whole existence is to cheat

Taxman

 

'Cause you're the taxman,

Yeah, you're the taxman

 

Don't ask me what I want it for

All our money is offshore

'Cause you're the taxman,

yeah, you're the taxman

 

Now my advice for those who whine

Justice Mann has done us fine,

'Cause you're the taxman,

yeah, you're the taxman

And you're working for no one but me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be rude not to (sorry Lennon and McCartney)

 

 

 

Let me tell you how it will be

20p for you, the rest for me

'Cause you're the taxman,

Yeah, you're the taxman

 

Should 20p appear too small

Be thankful or you'll get f**l all

'Cause you're the taxman,

Yeah, you're the taxman

 

We made the PL feel the heat

Conned the FL nice and sweet

In High Court we lied through our teeth

Our whole existence is to cheat

Taxman

 

'Cause you're the taxman,

Yeah, you're the taxman

 

Don't ask me what I want it for

All our money is offshore

'Cause you're the taxman,

yeah, you're the taxman

 

Now my advice for those who whine

Justice Mann has done us fine,

'Cause you're the taxman,

yeah, you're the taxman

And you're working for no one but me

 

 

Class act

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You sort of hope it is the start of karma being played out....

 

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/frattonlatest/Blades-to-sign-Jordan.6461238.jp

 

Goalkeeper Jamie Ashdown has signed his contract, though, and will start at Coventry once, if as expected, the Football League ratify his arrival.

 

Sorry, not had time to ratify his arrival, too busy chatting to some interesting people from the PL, sure you must have someone else to play in goal??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ruling by UNJust Mann is available for viewing

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2010/2013.html

 

1/ In point 1 I'm not sure the Judge should be concerned with

at least playing without a significant points penalty

 

2/ It looks as if the Judge was taken in by

the only potential purchaser of the club is said to intend to pull out if the matter is not resolved (in favour of the CVA)

esp when Comical Andy was telling that bloke from NZ to go away. Which implies to me that THEY DIDN'T WANT another buyer confusing their master plan to con the Judge.

 

3/ From memory between the 1st (1 Oct) and 2nd (23 Dec) Winding orders didn't they make changes to the ownership of the slum, I bet HMRC regret reaching that agreement on the 3 Nov now.

 

13/ ??

It has voiced the complaint before me that the technique of making sure that companies exit administrations via a CVA deprives it of the opportunity of challenging the rules;

 

and

I am told that the Premier League has applied to strike them out on the basis that it is inappropriate to debate the point in the abstract and other than in the context of a real insolvency and real payments made

 

16/

The rest was paid to the client account of solicitors acting for the club (Messrs Fuglers), who themselves then paid football creditors (and others).
Isn't this against FA Rules ?

 

33/

Only one creditor other than HMRC voted against the proposal (in the sum of about £450,000) and he has now apparently decided that he is a football creditor (and so would presumably vote the other way if the vote were taken again).
Thick Skates couldn't get all their troops to view the same way !

 

40/

HMRC mounts its application under 5 heads. I set them out (paraphrased) in this paragraph as they appeared in Mr Mitchell's skeleton argument, though they became modified during the course of argument.

 

i) The CVA unfairly prejudices the interests of HMRC because it commits the club to an exit route of a CVL which will result in the complete loss of valuable claims under s 127 of the Insolvency Act. The claims in question are in relation to payments made to football, and possibly other, creditors of the club in the period since the presentation of the currently suspended petition.

ii) There was a material irregularity in the CVA proposal because creditors were misled as to the amount of assets that would be available on a liquidation. The proposal omitted any reference to the section 127 recoveries, and to the availability of other moneys which would be available to the club in liquidation from parachute payments.

iii) The CVA unfairly prejudices HMRC because it approves payments already made to football creditors in full and the payment of further sums, in full, to football creditors.

iv) There was a material irregularity at the meeting in the chairman's allowing football creditors to vote notwithstanding the fact that they, unlike the other creditors, would be receiving payment in full (from Premier League moneys). If the football creditor votes are disallowed then, it is said, HMRC had more than 25% of the vote and would have been able to block the CVA.

v) The chairman was wrong to refuse to allow HMRC to vote its full claimed debt.

 

I haven't got time to go through the rest this evening but on first reading UNJUST MANN seems to take everything that the CHEATS say as Gospel and questions HMRC figures.

He appears to be VERY ONE SIDED with his comments e.g.

94.iv) The present purchaser is the only one who progressed materially beyond the level of a mere expression of interest.

IMO UNJUST is completely in love with Comical_Andy and believes every word he says!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been looking through the CVA doc and various sources to try to get my head round all the figures. I've been trying to guage whether the accepted CVA will work or not, especially given the shortfall in player sales. Fill in the blanks if you know them...

 

HMRC Tax Liability

 

I'm a little unclear as to what the exact figures are here. From what I can gather:

Winding Up Order (Feb): £12.1m (£6.8m VAT + Surcharges, £5.3m PAYE & NI) Link

First UHY Report (19 April): £17.1m Source (Page 10)

UHY CVA Document (28 May): £35.3m Source (Page 17)

Final admitted amount: £24m of £37m, with £13m image rights not admitted Link

 

I believe the increases were due to accumulating tax liabilities (and fines from HMRC?), along with the infamous £13m of image rights. I'm not sure of the discrepancy between the £35.3m in the CVA document and the £37m being reported from the court case.

 

Now HMRC will get 20p in the pound on their £24m. What happens if they take the image rights case to court and win? Will they get the full £13m back (which Pompey will have to find) or will it still be 20p in the pound? I suspect the latter, and in fact the last link gives a quote from HMRC talking about "the decision to reduce the amount of our claim for voting purposes".

 

Total value of liabilities

 

That last link also says that the total "No" votes is 18.63%. Assuming this is all related to the £24m from HMRC (I think there were a couple of very minor creditors that also voted no, but insignificant), that would make the total creditors eligable to vote £129m. If anyone else voted no then that amount would have to be higher.

 

In the CVA proposal document (page 10), it states the total value of unsecured creditors is £106m. Page 17 confirms that this includes the increased claim from HMRC from £17.1m to £35.3m, of which we know only £24m was allowed. Subtracting off the £11m difference from £106m (I know reports said image rights were £13m, but that's based off a total figure of £37m) gives total unsecured creditors, per CVA doc, of £95m.

 

It's worth noting here that the accepted £24m, even without the disputed image rights, would be just over 25% of the £95m (depending on rounding since it is very close). However as mentioned above the total admitted votes were £129m. So from somewhere a staggering £34m of additional unsecured creditors were found. Presumably this is the players (eg Kevin Prince Boateng) who were voting on behalf of the remaining wages left on their contracts, which is frankly ridiculous.

 

Total to be paid under CVA

 

It's difficult to know where to start for this one. Per the CVA document (page 10), here were the calcs...

 

Total unsecured creditors: £106m

...less Football Creditors: £22m

Revised balance: £83m

 

@ 20 pence in the pound: £16.5m

 

Therefore the amounts to be paid are £22m + £16.5m = £38.5m

 

However if the tax liability is reduced by £13m, then @ 20p in the pound this amount can be reduced by £2.6m. If there are an additional £34m of unsecured creditors (see above) then @ 20p in the pound this amount could be £6.8m higher - or even more if they are football creditors.

 

My guess would be the final CVA amount will be pretty close to what was given in the report, meaning the profile of the amounts allowed for voting and the profile of the amounts to be paid under CVA are wildly different - but then we knew that didn't we!

 

Parachute Payments

 

It's been widely reported that clubs will be receiving £48m of parachute payments: £17m in first year, £15m in second year and £8m in third and fourth years.

 

However it was also revealed in court that they have had some of this advanced. This bit I'm struggling a little bit to get straight, but here are the facts as given by Pompey's QC in court (from same link as above):

 

£11m parachute payment in Jan

£1.5m payment in Feb

£1.7m payment after went into admin

 

This is where things get a bit hazy. This report by Martin Samuel claimed that on 12 Feb, Richard Scudamore was trying to convince the 19 other clubs to agree to give Pompey the £11m advance. But the QC said this had already been paid in Jan! Further, reports in March had the Premier League denying they would advance their parachute payments.

 

What I do remember is that in January the Premier League diverted £7m of Sky broadcast revenue directly to football creditors rather than pay it to Portsmouth directly. I think maybe this is what the QC was referring to, and it has been erroneously labelled at Parachute Payments, which they are not. I'm really not sure tho.

 

The Samuel report continues, saying that the league had already advanced "about £2m" to all it's members which was "not due for another 2 months". This would seem to correspond to the £1.5m Feb payment mentioned by the QC. The Guardian report yesterday would seem to confirm this happened in Feb.

 

The Guardian report then goes on to say "A further sum is believed to have been paid up front to Pompey once their relegation was confirmed." It's not clear whether this was the £1.7m or the £11m. Again my guess would be it's the £1.7m, but I'm not sure whether it came from parachute payments, or an advance of other payments from the Premier League, such as their £800k of prize money for finishing bottom. Since they were in administration by this point I think the Premier League were more relaxed about intervening by making payments early.

 

 

 

 

Why is this important? Well I'm unclear as to how much of the £48m parachute payments has already been taken up front. Given the above it might appear not very much. Matt Slater disagrees

 

The biggest tranche of the first annual "parachute payment" from the Premier League was due at Fratton Park on Thursday but that £9m (much of the rest has been spent already) will be transferred directly to UK football creditors by the Premier League. This should leave Pompey debt-free on that front.

 

And he is right. When we look at the cash-flow projections in the CVA Document (Appendix 8), we can see they are due to get the following amounts from the Premier League each August:

 

2010: £9m

2011: £7m

2012: £6.5m

2013: £6.5m

 

 

As an aside, it's worth noting that in the same line item ("Premiership / Championship") they receive payments of £1.5m every November and March, which I'm assuming are payments made by the Championship to each of their clubs. This report seems to indicate that Championship clubs receive on average £2.4m per year, depending where they finish (not to be confused with the solidarity payments from the Premier League of a similar amount, which Pomey will not be eilgable for as they have parachute payments - also confirmed in that report). Seeing as they are budgeting £3m per season, I do hope their future solvency is not hinging on them finishing in the top half of the table each year!

 

Comparing those amounts to what we would expect (£17m yr 1; £15m ; £8m ; £8m), gives a difference of:

 

2010: £8m

2011: £8m

2012: £1.5m

2013: £1.5m

 

a total of £19m reduction from their parachute payments.

 

 

 

I'm unsure how this reconciles at the moment...

  • Does it relate to the money already advanced to them? But that doesn't seem to add up to the figures we have seen.
  • Could it relate to the football creditors, who get the first slice at this money? Well, the figures are about right, but the cashflow statement already has football creditors being paid £19.6m in year 1 as an outflow and that would be double counting if it were also deducted from the cash inflow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Player sales

 

 

The CVA document cashflow projections gives player sales of:

 

£14m in this transfer window

£4.5m in January 2011

£8m in August 2011

£1.25m in each of the following 2 transfer windows

 

There is no budget to sign any players (with transfer fees)

 

Currently they have sold

(some of these are undisclosed fees, so may not be exact)

 

Nadir Belhadj: £3.5m Link

Papa Bouba Diop: £750k Link

Florent Cuvelier: Nothing? Link

Lennard Sowah: Free Link

Luke Wilkinson: Nothing? Link

 

That's just over £4m

 

Players likely to be sold

KP Boateng: around £5-6m ? various

Utaka: £1m ? Link

 

Probably won't be sold

Nugent: £2m Link

Mokoena: £1.5m (complete guess)

Ritchie: £0.2m Link

 

 

Basically I think they could get close to their first £14m target in this window if they sold everyone now, but how they hope to get any more in future is beyond me.

 

 

 

 

 

Right, that's enough for now. I'm gonna post this before I manage to delete it. I may look more into this later. I'm interested further in the Chanrai loan and the supposed 28% interest due on it, and whether they'll ultimately be able to make their CVA payments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ruling yesterday has given every single club the green light to totally take the ****** now, and this is the least I expect from teh skates. The next few weeks are critical for the Football League...will they show some balls or roll over? I suspect they may show some balls, but the skates are clearly going to carry on trying to take the ******...why wouldn't they?

Well, it depends if any brown envelopes have been given to certain persons in power, or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have the nucleus, and a good manager add a few faces and they could be a force in a league that is quite average.

If Chanrai feels like a gamble and throws a few million at it , he could get back to PL riches. masterstroke or what

I believe that's his plan. If it weren't, why bother hiring a decent manager, and try (and succeed) in sliming around the transfer embargo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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