Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella,
in Golden Posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

Gemmel

Gemmel

Posted
Posted
Our debts were incurred mainly by paying players more than we could afford were they? I thought they were mainly incurred by having a couple of owners approved by the PL who loaned the club money at high interest rates and who didn't pay the tax man. Surely that's where most of our "debts" (I use the term advisedly because I don't believe we really owe the likes of Chainrai, Gaydamak, Fahim etc anything at all). Our "debt" of £120m that you guys refer to here includes around £20m to Chainrai. That's for the "loan" that Faraj defaulted on which saw Chainrai take the club in lieu of payment. As that happened, I'm not sure how we still owe him £20m. So that's £20m off the total. There's another £35m in "debt" that we owe Gaydamak for the land around the ground. We only owe this figure because that's what he valued it at when he sold the club to Fahim. Given how dodgy that deal was I fail to see how that "debt" can be accepted as real either. So that's already £55m off the real debt total. We still owe some money in transfer payments but those will be paid in full. The money we owe to the tax man is a very poor show admittedly but the £38m constantly quoted on here is incorrect as it included the image rights payments. Whatever your thoughts on the fact of it being an admitted tax dodge, the fact is that it was viewed as legal by the courts (and your own accountants will be exploiting loopholes to save your club paying various forms of tax so let's not get on our high horses eh?). The fact that we owed the tax money any money is very poor but they cut their own noses off to spite their face as we offered at least half of what we owed back in January which they refused to accept deciding to go to court to try and win it all - which then backfired on them. We had very little to no tax arrears when Gaydamak was in charge and the lack of payments only mounted up under two owners the PL passed as fit and proper, one of whom passed that test when his brother showed the PL his passport as proof of suitability for ownership.

 

So, please explain how our debts are mainly the fault of mainly paying ridiculous salaries we couldn't afford

 

Fook me corp, ive been on here for years and reading your posts back in the old Saintsforever days. You always came across as a half intelligent skate, but it you genuinely believe or think that then your in trouble.

 

Very poor. Don't try harder, just give up and dont post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saintjay77

saintjay77

Posted
Posted
Our debts were incurred mainly by paying players more than we could afford were they? I thought they were mainly incurred by having a couple of owners approved by the PL who loaned the club money at high interest rates and who didn't pay the tax man. Surely that's where most of our "debts" (I use the term advisedly because I don't believe we really owe the likes of Chainrai, Gaydamak, Fahim etc anything at all). Our "debt" of £120m that you guys refer to here includes around £20m to Chainrai. That's for the "loan" that Faraj defaulted on which saw Chainrai take the club in lieu of payment. As that happened, I'm not sure how we still owe him £20m. So that's £20m off the total. There's another £35m in "debt" that we owe Gaydamak for the land around the ground. We only owe this figure because that's what he valued it at when he sold the club to Fahim. Given how dodgy that deal was I fail to see how that "debt" can be accepted as real either. So that's already £55m off the real debt total. We still owe some money in transfer payments but those will be paid in full. The money we owe to the tax man is a very poor show admittedly but the £38m constantly quoted on here is incorrect as it included the image rights payments. Whatever your thoughts on the fact of it being an admitted tax dodge, the fact is that it was viewed as legal by the courts (and your own accountants will be exploiting loopholes to save your club paying various forms of tax so let's not get on our high horses eh?). The fact that we owed the tax money any money is very poor but they cut their own noses off to spite their face as we offered at least half of what we owed back in January which they refused to accept deciding to go to court to try and win it all - which then backfired on them. We had very little to no tax arrears when Gaydamak was in charge and the lack of payments only mounted up under two owners the PL passed as fit and proper, one of whom passed that test when his brother showed the PL his passport as proof of suitability for ownership.

 

So, please explain how our debts are mainly the fault of mainly paying ridiculous salaries we couldn't afford

 

OK most of that is just not worth debating with you as you obviously have your eyes wide shut on the matter but to be fair on the Tax man, HMRC was hardly going to accept even a half payment when in a seperate battle they are fighting to regain there status as a secured creditor to entitle them to 100% of what they are owed. As long as they are out of that loop there will be plenty of clubs that will line up to take the P out of them and write off large amounts of debt at the expence of NHS, Schools and public service. Had they have taken the 50% payment that you say they were offered then they would stand no chance in winning a future battle for 100%.

 

Pompey at the mo have shown the way to dump an unbelievable amount of debt and sling 2 fingers up at the league. I wonder if there are any other clubs that will be looking to use the same model in the future?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted (edited)
Quick question my little scumlettes. On the subject of Kitson and Lawrence, what's the difference between paying two decent players £20K a week each or taking on four less able players at £10K a week. What's the financial impact on the overall budget?

 

 

11 x £10k x 52 = £5,720,000

 

9 x £10k x 52 + 2 x £20k x52 = £6,760,000

 

So the answer to your question is £1,040,000

 

ETA - then you need to add NI contributions to that so the figure would be higher.

Edited by angelman
adding
Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
Our debts were incurred mainly by paying players more than we could afford were they? I thought they were mainly incurred by having a couple of owners approved by the PL who loaned the club money at high interest rates and who didn't pay the tax man. Surely that's where most of our "debts" (I use the term advisedly because I don't believe we really owe the likes of Chainrai, Gaydamak, Fahim etc anything at all). Our "debt" of £120m that you guys refer to here includes around £20m to Chainrai. That's for the "loan" that Faraj defaulted on which saw Chainrai take the club in lieu of payment. As that happened, I'm not sure how we still owe him £20m. So that's £20m off the total. There's another £35m in "debt" that we owe Gaydamak for the land around the ground. We only owe this figure because that's what he valued it at when he sold the club to Fahim. Given how dodgy that deal was I fail to see how that "debt" can be accepted as real either. So that's already £55m off the real debt total. We still owe some money in transfer payments but those will be paid in full. The money we owe to the tax man is a very poor show admittedly but the £38m constantly quoted on here is incorrect as it included the image rights payments. Whatever your thoughts on the fact of it being an admitted tax dodge, the fact is that it was viewed as legal by the courts (and your own accountants will be exploiting loopholes to save your club paying various forms of tax so let's not get on our high horses eh?). The fact that we owed the tax money any money is very poor but they cut their own noses off to spite their face as we offered at least half of what we owed back in January which they refused to accept deciding to go to court to try and win it all - which then backfired on them. We had very little to no tax arrears when Gaydamak was in charge and the lack of payments only mounted up under two owners the PL passed as fit and proper, one of whom passed that test when his brother showed the PL his passport as proof of suitability for ownership.

 

So, please explain how our debts are mainly the fault of mainly paying ridiculous salaries we couldn't afford

 

You numb-nut. Total and utter dinlo.

 

Where do you think all the money received in loans went? It went on players and their wages.

 

Where do you think the tax liabilities came from? They came from player's wages.

 

You didn't go around taking loans for the sake of it - you took them to pay players.

 

God, you're an idiot as well as an unpleasant turd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/Hermann-agrees-new-deal.6594617.jp

 

http://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/squad/first-team.aspx

 

I am still cannot work out how, in a transfer embargo, they can now have 21 registered players!

 

I believe, and I might be wrong, that Ellis Martin and Pete Gregory are first year pros and they have exemption from the 20 man squad rule? That's what my skate mate told me anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
the colonel

the colonel

Posted
Posted
FFS Corp Ho, that post is probably even more embarrassing that your posts on the Toilet Bowl harbour stadium, on Maradona becoming manager, on Requelme signing, on Pompey Village, on the Tipner stadium, and on the sheer wealth of your new owner.

 

You really have made a habit out of embarassing yourself.

 

He is a tit we all know he's a tit but I hope he doesn't ever stop posting on here because of all the shiitt in the world you can alway guarantee Ho can brighten the day and bring laughter with his little titbits!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saintjay77

saintjay77

Posted
Posted

 

I love how they slate him in the comments. There is no-one sniffing round interested in buying the club. Chainrai only wants it to get his money out of it and the only offer they have is this lad. Fair enough slate him if there were a queue of wealthy buyers but itdoesnt strike me as a time to be choosey!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gemmel

Gemmel

Posted
Posted

 

Ok if Tom Lever puts 16 million on the table to buy the club from the administrators, doesnt andriod have to listen? I'm pretty sure Chanari is just retaking control and not paying anything for it......isnt android duty bound to take the best offer?

 

If chanarai takes control for nothing and then sells the club on straight away, does that mean the adminsistrators have been errrr. whats the word ........

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crab Lungs

Crab Lungs

Posted
Posted

Horrible club, horrible fans and should have gone out of business a long, long time ago. Reading those ungrateful little turds lay in to their ONLY concrete investment hope riles me, so much so as I do hope they finally get what they have long deserved - extinction. (and that wouldn't even matter to the creditors awaiting their money back as, let's face it, Portsmouth have no intention of paying them any money back anyway).

 

Cheating, lying filth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_John

Saint_John

Posted
Posted
anyone know when the tax evasion court cases involving 'arry/Storrie/MM are?

 

Jack, my understanding is :-

They were due in court in mid-Sept for "plea", however a week before that date the solictors for the 3 went to court and attempted to get the charges thrown out.

A new 2 day appearance at Southwark Court Court to hear the case that "there is no charge to answer" will be held on November 25 and 26 2010.

If the judge accepts that there is a case to be heard, the 5 day Court Case will be heard on 16th May 2011 (after the end of the season).

 

My understanding (correct me if I am wrong) is that all 3 are charged with regard to the transfer of Faye,

Redknapp is jointly charged with Milan Mandaric, the former chairman of Portsmouth City Football Club, following an investigation by the City of London Police and HM Revenue & Customs."

The charges concern two payments totalling £183,000 from Mr Mandaric to Mr Redknapp via a bank account in Monaco, evading the tax and national insurance contributions due between April 1, 2002 and November 28, 2007.

Storrie was charged with concealing a signing-on fee for Faye by paying it into the midfielder's bank account last November.

 

but that only MM and Storrieteller are charged with Berkovic final payoff.

It is alleged that between January 1, 2005, and November 28, 2007, in his position as club chief executive, he arranged a termination payment to Berkovic via the account of Medellin Enterprises Ltd, a company registered in the British Virgin Islands, causing the failure of the club to operate PAYE and account for income tax and National Insurance contributions in respect of the payment.

 

IMO even if they manage to get the case thrown out in November, I believe they have broken FA rules with regard to these payments by not going though the books (just like luton).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JackFrost

JackFrost

Posted
Posted
Jack, my understanding is :-

They were due in court in mid-Sept for "plea", however a week before that date the solictors for the 3 went to court and attempted to get the charges thrown out.

A new 2 day appearance at Southwark Court Court to hear the case that "there is no charge to answer" will be held on November 25 and 26 2010.

If the judge accepts that there is a case to be heard, the 5 day Court Case will be heard on 16th May 2011 (after the end of the season).

 

My understanding (correct me if I am wrong) is that all 3 are charged with regard to the transfer of Faye,

 

 

 

but that only MM and Storrieteller are charged with Berkovic final payoff.

 

 

IMO even if they manage to get the case thrown out in November, I believe they have broken FA rules with regard to these payments by not going though the books (just like luton).

 

Thanks for that,

 

So it looks like they won't get any potential points deductions until the end of the season

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saint lard

saint lard

Posted
Posted
Quick question my little scumlettes. On the subject of Kitson and Lawrence, what's the difference between paying two decent players £20K a week each or taking on four less able players at £10K a week. What's the financial impact on the overall budget?

 

Our debts were incurred mainly by paying players more than we could afford were they? I thought they were mainly incurred by having a couple of owners approved by the PL who loaned the club money at high interest rates and who didn't pay the tax man. Surely that's where most of our "debts" (I use the term advisedly because I don't believe we really owe the likes of Chainrai, Gaydamak, Fahim etc anything at all). Our "debt" of £120m that you guys refer to here includes around £20m to Chainrai. That's for the "loan" that Faraj defaulted on which saw Chainrai take the club in lieu of payment. As that happened, I'm not sure how we still owe him £20m. So that's £20m off the total. There's another £35m in "debt" that we owe Gaydamak for the land around the ground. We only owe this figure because that's what he valued it at when he sold the club to Fahim. Given how dodgy that deal was I fail to see how that "debt" can be accepted as real either. So that's already £55m off the real debt total. We still owe some money in transfer payments but those will be paid in full. The money we owe to the tax man is a very poor show admittedly but the £38m constantly quoted on here is incorrect as it included the image rights payments. Whatever your thoughts on the fact of it being an admitted tax dodge, the fact is that it was viewed as legal by the courts (and your own accountants will be exploiting loopholes to save your club paying various forms of tax so let's not get on our high horses eh?). The fact that we owed the tax money any money is very poor but they cut their own noses off to spite their face as we offered at least half of what we owed back in January which they refused to accept deciding to go to court to try and win it all - which then backfired on them. We had very little to no tax arrears when Gaydamak was in charge and the lack of payments only mounted up under two owners the PL passed as fit and proper, one of whom passed that test when his brother showed the PL his passport as proof of suitability for ownership.

 

So, please explain how our debts are mainly the fault of mainly paying ridiculous salaries we couldn't afford

 

:facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saintjay77

saintjay77

Posted
Posted

So the FL have ratified a take over today(Leicester). I guess that means Pompey dont have to actually wait until the next FL meeting to get things all sorted and embargo lifted??? They have those 4 things all cleared up now so surly its just a case of making a phone call or sending a fax right? Any min they will announce its all OK now right?

 

Hreidarsson signed today according to the SSN ticker thingy earlier. No mention of it on the SSN site yet. Is that subject to the FL saying yes also?

 

If they can afford to agree another (probably) over cva budget contract how come they havent get there arses out of admin so they can go on and bring in loads more players?

 

Are we waiting for them to implode or are they really going to stick at it in Admin making the right noises until they know if they are in with a shout of going up or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcjwills

mcjwills

Posted
Posted
So the FL have ratified a take over today(Leicester). I guess that means Pompey dont have to actually wait until the next FL meeting to get things all sorted and embargo lifted??? They have those 4 things all cleared up now so surly its just a case of making a phone call or sending a fax right? Any min they will announce its all OK now right?

 

Hreidarsson signed today according to the SSN ticker thingy earlier. No mention of it on the SSN site yet. Is that subject to the FL saying yes also?

 

If they can afford to agree another (probably) over cva budget contract how come they havent get there arses out of admin so they can go on and bring in loads more players?

 

Are we waiting for them to implode or are they really going to stick at it in Admin making the right noises until they know if they are in with a shout of going up or not?

 

Would that be the same phone or fax that they used to send the wages to the bank last year :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saintjay77

saintjay77

Posted
Posted
Would that be the same phone or fax that they used to send the wages to the bank last year :lol:

 

Well with all the sorting out they have done and the fact that they found out it doesnt work too good I was presuming they had got it all fixed by now and be ready to come out of admin with the blink of an eye! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wes Tender

Wes Tender

Posted
Posted

Having read the latest contributions from the Ho, I'm wondering whether they were just wind-ups, or whether he/she really can be that thick to post such drivel. It wasn't necessary to demolish it with a counter argument as I note that several posters have already done a fine job of exposing it for the gormless rambling that it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mack rill

mack rill

Posted
Posted
Horrible club, horrible fans and should have gone out of business a long, long time ago. Reading those ungrateful little turds lay in to their ONLY concrete investment hope riles me, so much so as I do hope they finally get what they have long deserved - extinction. (and that wouldn't even matter to the creditors awaiting their money back as, let's face it, Portsmouth have no intention of paying them any money back anyway).

 

Cheating, lying filth.

 

A Crabby Am i right in thinking us the blue few are not on your Crimbo list,

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rallyboy

rallyboy

Posted
Posted

I think I'd like to see the debate between just our Few visitors on here - Ho putting the case that the club didn't overspend on players and wages and that it was just an unfortunate knock on effect of the world banking crisis that made the club steal from charities etc...with no explanation offered as to why they continue to do so.

 

So is that a commonly-supported theory down east?

Is Ho on a wind-up?

Or is he noisily typing away in Broadmoor just to blot out the noise of god whispering in his ear telling him to burn things?

 

He can't be that thick surely, my money's on a poorly-presented wind-up.

 

And why can't they pay off the promised small amounts before taking on more wages?

Crooks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mack rill

mack rill

Posted
Posted
So the FL have ratified a take over today(Leicester). I guess that means Pompey dont have to actually wait until the next FL meeting to get things all sorted and embargo lifted??? They have those 4 things all cleared up now so surly its just a case of making a phone call or sending a fax right? Any min they will announce its all OK now right?

 

Hreidarsson signed today according to the SSN ticker thingy earlier. No mention of it on the SSN site yet. Is that subject to the FL saying yes also?

 

If they can afford to agree another (probably) over cva budget contract how come they havent get there arses out of admin so they can go on and bring in loads more players?

 

Are we waiting for them to implode or are they really going to stick at it in Admin making the right noises until they know if they are in with a shout of going up or not?

 

Why the feck would we want to rush out of Admin?,,,,,,,,We are winning games,Scoring a sh*t load of goals, Leggin it up the table, Welcoming decent players to the party,and we don't have to fork out to creditors until we do,,,,,Jollies all round. Oh Corp what bait you usin,,,,,,cus there biting!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ericofarabia

ericofarabia

Posted
Posted
Still in admin then and still Chinny is slipping used bundles under the table to android to fund the whole f@cking circus. And this weekend they play Hull City who are only 30Mill in debt - and are playing the kids. Talk about good v evil. Hope the fish botherers lose and Lawrence breaks his leg.

 

This must be the highlight of the season for their 256 travelling supporters. A weekend in in a fishy mecca! This is like a lads weekend in Ibiza or Amsterdam for them. :poundit:

 

I.m still amazed at how quickly Hull spunked away 2 seasons worth of mega bucks so quickly though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted

I've had a really nice day out today - I went sailing.

 

We took a few beers and there were lots of cute chicks in Bikinis and the sun shone

 

We stopped off in the Palm Island for a swim.

 

It was nice and cool and relaxing.

 

Found a whole load of dead fish floating in the sea.

 

I think it is a sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tamesaint

Tamesaint

Posted
Posted
Having read the latest contributions from the Ho, I'm wondering whether they were just wind-ups, or whether he/she really can be that thick to post such drivel. It wasn't necessary to demolish it with a counter argument as I note that several posters have already done a fine job of exposing it for the gormless rambling that it is.

 

Be careful !! He still has a post available today (pocket money doesn't stretch that far these days so he cannot afford a fiver to join) & I confidently expect a finely honed respose that will floor the sceptics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept