dubai_phil Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 You been to the golf this weekend Phil? Luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuukkkkkkkkkkkkkee Out stalking the fit chicks (Ladies Tour) from Thursday onwards, thinking of taking Michelle Wie/Melissa Reid out to Ravi's for a curry & the Seaview. Will probably get left having a Magners with Laura Davies (again) Oh & Munster - he's WAY too smart for that, although Wycombe Wanderers (home town) may be in with a shout of a bob or two Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporate Ho Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Full frontal Lobotomy would be a start I took your advice and had the lobotomy done Dubya. I now find that all I can talk about is how ****ing great I am, my much younger Polish girlfriend, how I'm best buddies with everyone in the field of sports and journalism and golf. Weird Oh, and about CSI having an £8m budget for Pompey this season i As for turnover ratio etc you really are stupid, so in those terms Rochdale could go out and buy star players and use the same excuse. If you have 20k gates then you can only budget to those incomings, it is like having the income of a Robin Reliant that has failed the MOT and then go out and buy a Ferrari by deceiving an old lady/charity/local business to get it. Nick Nack, are you really that dim? The reason Rochdale can't do it is because they didn't have a turnover of £70m which Pompey did the year we won the cup. That's because what we paid players wasn't just based on gate income, it was based on TV money as well. Do Rochdale have a turnover of £70m a year? I've posted this David Conn article before (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/jun/03/english-premier-league-debt) but read it an tell me Pompey weren't doing anything the majority of other PL clubs were doing the year we won the cup. Our debts were £58m, on a par or less than at least half the clubs in the division and our wages as a ratio of our turnover were roughly the same or less than many clubs. So if that gave us an unfair advantage in the cup the year we won it also gave those other teams the same unfair advantage. So why didn't they win it? Because, like I keep saying, they didn't get the luck of the draw like we did. That's it. Plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 I took your advice and had the lobotomy done Dubya. I now find that all I can talk about is how ****ing great I am, my much younger Polish girlfriend, how I'm best buddies with everyone in the field of sports and journalism and golf. Weird Oh, and about CSI having an £8m budget for Pompey this season Nick Nack, are you really that dim? The reason Rochdale can't do it is because they didn't have a turnover of £70m which Pompey did the year we won the cup. That's because what we paid players wasn't just based on gate income, it was based on TV money as well. Do Rochdale have a turnover of £70m a year? I've posted this David Conn article before (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/jun/03/english-premier-league-debt) but read it an tell me Pompey weren't doing anything the majority of other PL clubs were doing the year we won the cup. Our debts were £58m, on a par or less than at least half the clubs in the division and our wages as a ratio of our turnover were roughly the same or less than many clubs. So if that gave us an unfair advantage in the cup the year we won it also gave those other teams the same unfair advantage. So why didn't they win it? Because, like I keep saying, they didn't get the luck of the draw like we did. That's it. Plain and simple. Ho Ho Ho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Ho, what's CSI's football budget for 2012? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holepuncture Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 another monumentous week for the skates as Vlad faces his destiny - a European Arrest Warrant, to be extradited to Lithuania to explain why he stole £300m of the Lithuanian publics life savings and pensions. All the information in the public domain would suggest he is guilty as hell and is looking at some considerable charges. It will be interesting if he manages to delay it by lodging an appeal, or whether the judge will just pull the trigger and send the mafia homeward bound. I dont buy the arguments that he wont get a fair trial, that its political or that he would be in danger in Lithuania - it is a European Union member state and also a NATO member, his human rights will be absolutely fine I have no worry of that and neither should he. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporate Ho Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Ho, what's CSI's football budget for 2012? £8m. According to Dubya it can't change from one year to the next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Oh, and about CSI having an £8m budget for Pompey this season Nick Nack, are you really that dim? The reason Rochdale can't do it is because they didn't have a turnover of £70m which Pompey did the year we won the cup..... Our debts were £58m, on a par or less than at least half the clubs in the division and our wages as a ratio of our turnover were roughly the same or less than many clubs. Point number one - ffs give it a rest. He said £8m & it turned out to be £10m - in the greater scheme of Pompey's criminality it is insignificant. Point number two - turnover is not the same as income. And debts of 80% of turnover are not sustainable. Others dealt with theirs, yours just grew and grew. (And before you start nit-picking - your debts were 82.86% of turnover) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Point number one - ffs give it a rest. He said £8m & it turned out to be £10m - in the greater scheme of Pompey's criminality it is insignificant. Point number two - turnover is not the same as income. And debts of 80% of turnover are not sustainable. Others dealt with theirs, yours just grew and grew. (And before you start nit-picking - your debts were 82.86% of turnover) Point number 1 I quoted their F1 budget. I then asked if ANYONE could find any other information relating to a new budget. After one week I asked again. Nobody found a different figure so I said in that case we will assume this is what the figure is. the troll then went off on one to show he had done CSE Business Studies And anyway, at this point we do not know how the 10.8 was broken down. There could have been many variables included in the lump dumped on the club, not least they could have included all their initial legal and agent costs and costs of acquisition. Still, it upset the troll, he was convinced at that time that they were going to get all of Vlad's 300 mil, poor little lamb, no wonder he got so upset Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Ho Ho Ho...during your 'FA Cup winning season' what was the top attendance at Nottarf for a league game? Tell us that...then look at the team you had playing that day - and at their wages for a week. That will tell whether you were living within your means or not. Very simples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 A little gem to look forward to on Wednesday at 1pm ladies and gents...direct from the Snooze's Neil Allen on Twitter... 'David Lampitt will be taking part in a News web chat on Wednesday at 1pm. Be sure to get your questions in! #Pompey' :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruffalo Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Interesting article about Vlad and his 'operations' here - http://tinyurl.com/bntgvoa. Reading between the lines, it seems there could be some very big-hitters amongst the people he has [allegedly] robbed over the years. He must be very used to sleeping with one eye open.. 'David Lampitt will be taking part in a News web chat on Wednesday at 1pm. Be sure to get your questions in! #Pompey' :lol: Date duly logged in diary.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holepuncture Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Interesting article about Vlad and his 'operations' here - http://tinyurl.com/bntgvoa. Reading between the lines, it seems there could be some very big-hitters amongst the people he has [allegedly] robbed over the years. He must be very used to sleeping with one eye open.. Date duly logged in diary.. http://www.businessinsider.com/vladimir-antonov-puts-the-uk-government-in-a-hot-spot--what-future-in-merry-england-for-russian-asset-strippers-money-launderers-2011-12 Excellent link Gruffalo, your fine work on this thread of late should be commended. One of the 'sources' in the article supports my view that Vlad will run off to Panama: According to the source close to Antonov’s banking operations, “I hear that all his roofs – both the red one and the criminal one – have abandoned him. So plastic surgery looks unavoidable. The guy will not take chances. For him reputation means nothing, so there is no upside in the court defence.” more talk of him being a mafia gangster: “The burn has never come so close to his skin. He is scared to death to come back to Eastern Europe, and most of all to Russia, because he owes plenty of money to dozens of people, some of whom may be tough guys. Oh dear Vladdy, it aint just the saints that are coming for you, the russian mafia are out in force and hot on your tail. Yet more links to Sergei Polansky which ties into the rumafia claims. I believe they exchanged cash for over valued shares in operations such as polanskys Mirax group and listed them as overvalued shareholdings amd assets to satisfy the Snoras balance sheets... it was a front for getting the clean money away from the Lithuanian public: Moscow media have been reporting that the missing money may include accounts in Snoras and Krajbanka belonging to Deripaska’s Basic Element holding, Suleiman Kerimov’s Nafta-Moskva, Sergei Polonsky’s Mirax group, Gazprom, and a Moscow car dealer called Major Auto. In addition, one individual depositor in five at the two banks is reported to be Russian, Here is my favorite gem from this article: In 2006, he engaged in a verbal clash with Andrei Kozlov, then deputy chairman of the Central Bank of Russia; although he threatened Kozlov, he had nothing to do with the September 2006 assassination of Kozlov. The subsequent approval in 2007 by the Central Bank of the merger of Antonov’s Conversbank with Investbank (Kaliningrad) Sorry what is that? More russian mafia work going on right there... The author wont put his name to it, but thats a pretty huge hint that Vlad has assassinated or organised an assassination... So will the UK courts regret granting him bail? Has he changed his appearance and off to Panama he goes? I think plastic surgery could be well on the cards, he is capable of robbing from the russian mafia syndicates and stealing an entire nations savings so why on earth not? I reckon he has a haven ready and waiting out there somewhere, here is an interesting link which was hotlinked into the original article where the author listed Vlads business/crime interests... strange how the author didnt name this one but referred to it as 'elsewhere': http://www.westindiespower.com/about_exec.asp "Prior to his association with WIPH Mr. Isaac was the Managing Director of the Bank of Nevis." Vlad owned the Bank of Nevis I believe. Only Pompey, how they get mixed up with these sorts eh?! Roll on the court appearance, sweepstake on his attendence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 I think that article's not quite right in terms of "condition-free bail" - both Antonov and the other fella have to report to a local police station either every day or every other day, and their passports have been surrendered, so it would be a proper smuggle job to get them out of the country before their extradition trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 I think that article's not quite right in terms of "condition-free bail" - both Antonov and the other fella have to report to a local police station either every day or every other day, and their passports have been surrendered, so it would be a proper smuggle job to get them out of the country before their extradition trial. Antonov won't see the New Year, in my opinion.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holepuncture Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 I think that article's not quite right in terms of "condition-free bail" - both Antonov and the other fella have to report to a local police station either every day or every other day, and their passports have been surrendered, so it would be a proper smuggle job to get them out of the country before their extradition trial. I cant see that being much of a problem, im sure he has plenty of forged documents and passports... I mean he has a record of submitting false and misleading documents to the FSA... with a bit of plastic surgery anythings possible - he could even bung some security and customs officials to blag him onto a private plane to panama Antonov won't see the New Year, in my opinion.... it is reported the russian mafia have been mustling in down the south UK, including Antonov and his mob, do you think it may go down this route?: Or do you think he will escape on NYE? Or perhaps some concrete boots, from his own collection? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Antonov won't see the New Year, in my opinion.... Could be touch & go who pops first Vlad or the few Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporate Ho Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Point number one - ffs give it a rest. He said £8m & it turned out to be £10m - in the greater scheme of Pompey's criminality it is insignificant. Point number two - turnover is not the same as income. And debts of 80% of turnover are not sustainable. Others dealt with theirs, yours just grew and grew. (And before you start nit-picking - your debts were 82.86% of turnover) 1. Give it a rest? Dubya banged on and on and on and on and on and on and on about his "discovery" of their budget. Now he's been made to look a complete tool (once again - remember he confidently told us Antonov owned SAAB) I'm supposed to forget it? Like you lot would if I'd said something similar? People still have a pop at me years after for things I never even said in the first place. 2. Except in this case our "income" was £70.6m. Read the David Conn report I posted the link to. £51m from TV money alone. Then read what kind of debts other PL clubs had at the same time. Sustainable, maybe not. Out of the ordinary for clubs around us - absolutely not Point number 1 I quoted their F1 budget. I then asked if ANYONE could find any other information relating to a new budget. After one week I asked again. Nobody found a different figure so I said in that case we will assume this is what the figure is. the troll then went off on one to show he had done CSE Business Studies And anyway, at this point we do not know how the 10.8 was broken down. There could have been many variables included in the lump dumped on the club, not least they could have included all their initial legal and agent costs and costs of acquisition. Still, it upset the troll, he was convinced at that time that they were going to get all of Vlad's 300 mil, poor little lamb, no wonder he got so upset 1. But now we have foun differently, haven't we Dubya? And no matter how it was broken down, whether some was paid up front for the club or any other reason, their budget was clearly more than £8m. Let's face it, they paid that before the season was half over so your brilliant corporate mind was about as wrong as it could be. 2. I thought we'd get all of Antonov's £300m did I? That must be why I posted all the time that they'd clearly said they weren't going to spunk millions on players but build the club slowly (even slower now of course!!!!!!). Stop trying to save face and admit you look a complete cock (yet again) you muppet Ho Ho Ho...during your 'FA Cup winning season' what was the top attendance at Nottarf for a league game? Tell us that...then look at the team you had playing that day - and at their wages for a week. That will tell whether you were living within your means or not.. You seem to be finding it hard to understand that our gate income was only part of our income. Read the article by David Conn that breaks down our £70m+ income that year - £12m gate receipts, £50m+ Tv money + sponsorship + commercial. Do you not understand this? In 2006, he engaged in a verbal clash with Andrei Kozlov, then deputy chairman of the Central Bank of Russia; although he threatened Kozlov, he had nothing to do with the September 2006 assassination of Kozlov. The subsequent approval in 2007 by the Central Bank of the merger of Antonov’s Conversbank with Investbank (Kaliningrad) Sorry what is that? More russian mafia work going on right there... The author wont put his name to it, but thats a pretty huge hint that Vlad has assassinated or organised an assassination PMSL. That's so typical of this thread. So the article clearky states he had nothing to do with it but you feel it says he did it or organised it. Then it becomes enshrined as fact on here. You're a mentalist, aren't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 1. Give it a rest? Dubya banged on and on and on and on and on and on and on about his "discovery" of their budget. Now he's been made to look a complete tool (once again - remember he confidently told us Antonov owned SAAB) I'm supposed to forget it? Like you lot would if I'd said something similar? People still have a pop at me years after for things I never even said in the first place. 2. Except in this case our "income" was £70.6m. Read the David Conn report I posted the link to. £51m from TV money alone. Then read what kind of debts other PL clubs had at the same time. Sustainable, maybe not. Out of the ordinary for clubs around us - absolutely not 1. But now we have foun differently, haven't we Dubya? And no matter how it was broken down, whether some was paid up front for the club or any other reason, their budget was clearly more than £8m. Let's face it, they paid that before the season was half over so your brilliant corporate mind was about as wrong as it could be. 2. I thought we'd get all of Antonov's £300m did I? That must be why I posted all the time that they'd clearly said they weren't going to spunk millions on players but build the club slowly (even slower now of course!!!!!!). Stop trying to save face and admit you look a complete cock (yet again) you muppet You seem to be finding it hard to understand that our gate income was only part of our income. Read the article by David Conn that breaks down our £70m+ income that year - £12m gate receipts, £50m+ Tv money + sponsorship + commercial. Do you not understand this? PMSL. That's so typical of this thread. So the article clearky states he had nothing to do with it but you feel it says he did it or organised it. Then it becomes enshrined as fact on here. You're a mentalist, aren't you? Oh Ho.... Shall I ask you again? You were paying ridiculous wages (and bonuses no doubt) on an average attendance of less than 20k. It was NEVER sustainable regardless of the TV income. You were, as you are now, being bankrolled by someone else, whether it be Gaydamak, the good old British Taxpayer, Terry the Builder, St Johns Ambulance, or Mr Antonov. It was always going to end in tears unless you got lucky in getting a stadium built that let you progress as we did. Saintly wannabes indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 (edited) Ho getting increasingly touchy. Edit - glad you posted a link to the David Conn article. It includes this narrative: "Pompey illustrate why every middling football club is begging for a takeover. Having overstretched to furnish Harry Redknapp with the formidable squad that won the FA Cup last season, the owner, Alexandre Gaydamak, has been hit by the recession and can no longer fund the club. Lassana Diarra and Jermain Defoe had to be sold in January to reduce bank borrowings, debts grew to around £65m, and Portsmouth were preparing to tighten belts until the chief executive, Peter Storrie, shook hands with Sulaiman Al Fahim. Fratton Park now expects it to rain oil money." So even in your most successful year in decades you still had to sell players to get cash in and even then your debts still grew. rain oil money - lol Edited 12 December, 2011 by anothersaintinsouthsea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Corp, for income you forgot to add the amount retained from wilful non-payment of VAT and PAYE. Remind me, how much was it now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Corp, for income you forgot to add the amount retained from wilful non-payment of VAT and PAYE. Remind me, how much was it now? No fear, the way they're heading they'll be lucky to hit the VAT barrier soon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Just a thought, but shall we bring our own on Sunday?! Found them on the web under 'Fratton Park Executive Club' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamesaint Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 So if that gave us an unfair advantage in the cup the year we won it also gave those other teams the same unfair advantage. So why didn't they win it? Because, like I keep saying, they didn't get the luck of the draw like we did. That's it. Plain and simple. You keep on saying the same old carp but you still do not answer the question: If as you "keep saying" , you were financially solvent when you won the FA Cup , why were you unable to pay Sol his win bonus ?? Why did he have to sue you to get what was legally his?? Is it because the answer would contradict the carp that keeps pouring out of you ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Hilarious... From the Snooze coverage of Reg Varney's knee... 'Just found this! CRISIS-club Portsmouth could be set for a cash injection from the wealthy owners of Italian side Udinese. The Pozzo family will decide early next year whether or not to get on board at Fratton Park. Pompey are still waiting to find out whether they will be docked 10 points after Convers Sports Initiatives, the club’s parent company, entered administration last month. So the news of the Italians’ interest will serve as a timely boost for Portsmouth fans – and boss Michael Appleton. In the 2009-2010 season, Portsmouth became the first Premier League club to go into administration and the nine-point penalty helped relegate them to the Championship. Talent The FA have previously indicated clubs whose parent companies enter administration will be docked points. If that is the case following CSI’s problems, their Championship status could now be in jeopardy. The Pozzo family, however, has a reputation for turning clubs around by unearthing some of the best young talent and selling them for huge sums. Barcelona paid £30million for Chilean forward Alexis Sanchez in the summer, while Napoli splashed out £13m for Switzerland midfielder Gokhan Inler. One option is that the Pozzo family become shareholders of Portsmouth. Giampaolo Pozzo has owned Udinese since 1986. He and his son, Gino, have interests in Spanish sides Granada, Cadiz and Tenerife.' It's the hope that will kill 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eling-saint Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Talk about not being able to organise a **** up in a brewery, snippet from The Poopey press officer!!!! You couldn't make it up The new urinals in lower south family section caused a problem for the youngsters as they were too high and these need to be adjusted as soon as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Talk about not being able to organise a **** up in a brewery, snippet from The Poopey press officer!!!! You couldn't make it up The new urinals in lower south family section caused a problem for the youngsters as they were too high and these need to be adjusted as soon as possible. ONE big project all year, ONE. And they screwed THAT up. Just imagine them trying to put together even proper PLANS for a real stadium (to share with Havant & Waterlooville) It would take decades (And at that rate 60 owners) And the seats would be facing outwards Classic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Talk about not being able to organise a **** up in a brewery, snippet from The Poopey press officer!!!! You couldn't make it up The new urinals in lower south family section caused a problem for the youngsters as they were too high and these need to be adjusted as soon as possible. Just exactly, how high are these holes in the ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaz Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Hilarious... From the Snooze coverage of Reg Varney's knee... 'Just found this! CRISIS-club Portsmouth could be set for a cash injection from the wealthy owners of Italian side Udinese. The Pozzo family will decide early next year whether or not to get on board at Fratton Park. Pompey are still waiting to find out whether they will be docked 10 points after Convers Sports Initiatives, the club’s parent company, entered administration last month. So the news of the Italians’ interest will serve as a timely boost for Portsmouth fans – and boss Michael Appleton. In the 2009-2010 season, Portsmouth became the first Premier League club to go into administration and the nine-point penalty helped relegate them to the Championship. Talent The FA have previously indicated clubs whose parent companies enter administration will be docked points. If that is the case following CSI’s problems, their Championship status could now be in jeopardy. The Pozzo family, however, has a reputation for turning clubs around by unearthing some of the best young talent and selling them for huge sums. Barcelona paid £30million for Chilean forward Alexis Sanchez in the summer, while Napoli splashed out £13m for Switzerland midfielder Gokhan Inler. One option is that the Pozzo family become shareholders of Portsmouth. Giampaolo Pozzo has owned Udinese since 1986. He and his son, Gino, have interests in Spanish sides Granada, Cadiz and Tenerife.' It's the hope that will kill 'em. Thats the same Udinese who reported Skates and took them to court over unpaid Sulley Muntari transfer fee. Never gonna happen. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1244980/Portsmouth-transfer-embargo-battle-takes-blow-Udinese-court-unpaid-Sulley-Muntari-debts.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alehouseboys Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 I'm sure somebody said the other day that the skates only had 300 at Burnley on Saturday, this cannot be true as Fred Dinenage's Meridian has just reported that the "travelling ARMY" had to wait until stoppage time for the goal, it must surely have been 3,000 or even more likely 30,000. Sleeping Gnats...I mean Giants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyinthesky Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Ah well it seems we may have a better idea who was one of Pompey's previous owners. Step forward Mazher Mahmood, otherwise known as the 'Fake Sheikh, from that well respected publication the NOTW Fits in very well with all the intrigue down the road Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint in Paradise Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 "Getting away with it" seems to apply to people as well as that club. In the article quoted by Gruffalo "But there may also be a problem for the Lithuanian Government in having Antonov returned to face trial in case his testimony becomes a domestic embarrassment. Thus, the Lithuanian and British Governments may quietly decide to leave a backdoor open for Antonov to slip away." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 1. 2. Except in this case our "income" was £70.6m. .... £51m from TV money alone. Can somebody tell me if TV money really was £51million a season in 2007. I can't remember but it seems a huge amount to me. (I'm not accepting Ho's word for it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Can somebody tell me if TV money really was £51million a season in 2007. I can't remember but it seems a huge amount to me. (I'm not accepting Ho's word for it.) Once again Ho is talking complete bollix! http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/europe/7903417.stm The clubs occupying the Premier League during the 2007/2008 season received a guaranteed £22.8m from TV revenue. On top of that clubs were paid prize money relative to their final position in the league and, if that was not enough, the 20 clubs received income from the live matches in which they were featured. Unsurprisingly, title winners Manchester United came out on top with £49.3m. So, unless they finished higher than Man Utd - not possible! - then they did not earn £51m in tv revenue! Another one claims the average to be £28m per club.... We could of course solve all the arguments by looking at the accounts, oh, but yeah, they didn't bother to file any did they Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 LOL at Corp Ho thinking pompey's spending was sustainable. I bet he genuinely couldn't understand why clubs like Blackpool didn't buy players like James, Defoe, Crouch and Campbell when they were in the Premier League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Thanks for that. I really don't have the time or the stamina to keep countering his trollish revisionism. You know some 'fact' is wrong but it is an old troll's trick to dress up made-up numbers as detailed statistics to baffle us lesser motals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingbattigger Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 According to this report http://soccerlens.com/20072008-premier-league-tv-revenue/7415/ Portsmouth got £40.4 million in 2007-2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 According to this report http://soccerlens.com/20072008-premier-league-tv-revenue/7415/ Portsmouth got £40.4 million in 2007-2008 So in reality, income of £40.4 million, debt of £58 million. What would Mr Micawber say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 more bad news for the few - OWNERS of caravans and trailers have been barred from keeping them on the side of the road in an effort to tackle parking congestion. Portsmouth City Council has ruled that leaving non-motorised vehicles parked on roads for long periods of time is an ‘unreasonable use of the public highway’. The council has identified 50 caravans, boats, horseboxes and trailers whose owners will now be issued notices letting them know they must be moved within 28 days. 50 caravans? That's their entire travelling support since Dale Farm was cleared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 LOL at Corp Ho thinking pompey's spending was sustainable. I bet he genuinely couldn't understand why clubs like Blackpool didn't buy players like James, Defoe, Crouch and Campbell when they were in the Premier League. An increasing number on here are starting to think Corp Ho is Peter Storrie. If he isn't Storrie was definitely his maths teacher at one point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfc1971 Posted 12 December, 2011 Share Posted 12 December, 2011 Can anyone dig out any info to see if this has any links to our fishy friends down the road ? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2073258/Twitter-rumour-sparks-10-000-strong-rush-Latvian-bank.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 13 December, 2011 Share Posted 13 December, 2011 1. Give it a rest? Dubya banged on and on and on and on and on and on and on about his "discovery" of their budget. Now he's been made to look a complete tool (once again - remember he confidently told us Antonov owned SAAB) I'm supposed to forget it? Like you lot would if I'd said something similar? People still have a pop at me years after for things I never even said in the first place. Tiresome little man, Ho. In Phil's defence, not that he needs it, you're dead right. Antonov doesn't own SAAB, and never did. His long-term buddy & partner Victor Muller does. Muller bought SAAB using a $116m personal loan which he got from Antonov the day before he bought SAAB, money which Antonov pilfered from Bank Snoras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 13 December, 2011 Share Posted 13 December, 2011 Tiresome little man, Ho. In Phil's defence, not that he needs it, you're dead right. Antonov doesn't own SAAB, and never did. His long-term buddy & partner Victor Muller does. Muller bought SAAB using a $116m personal loan which he got from Antonov the day before he bought SAAB, money which Antonov pilfered from Bank Snoras. So with all the proceedings going on, if the bank look to recover money from Antonov they could look to call in the loan that helped buy SAAB and in turn put the company that Antonov "doesn't own" back in the poop. This £70 mil that ho keeps banging on about, could that figure have been fed to Conn based on fishy accounting? Storrie magicing up some figures to make it look like everything is ok? Or we're any proper accounts filed around that time to confirm there was £70 mil income that year? The way ho tells it I find it really hard to understand how they lost so much when they were making more than losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 13 December, 2011 Share Posted 13 December, 2011 Can anyone dig out any info to see if this has any links to our fishy friends down the road ? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2073258/Twitter-rumour-sparks-10-000-strong-rush-Latvian-bank.html Tried this, but got 'page no longer exists' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingbattigger Posted 13 December, 2011 Share Posted 13 December, 2011 Can anyone dig out any info to see if this has any links to our fishy friends down the road ? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2073258/Twitter-rumour-sparks-10-000-strong-rush-Latvian-bank.html A quick perusal doesn't show any links but I'm short of time, the bank concerned is Swedbank (used to be Hansa). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 13 December, 2011 Share Posted 13 December, 2011 So with all the proceedings going on, if the bank look to recover money from Antonov they could look to call in the loan that helped buy SAAB and in turn put the company that Antonov "doesn't own" back in the poop. This £70 mil that ho keeps banging on about, could that figure have been fed to Conn based on fishy accounting? Storrie magicing up some figures to make it look like everything is ok? Or we're any proper accounts filed around that time to confirm there was £70 mil income that year? The way ho tells it I find it really hard to understand how they lost so much when they were making more than losing. The figures quoted by the many reporters/analysts are all questionable IMO ! The fact is that when they negotiated (manipulated?) the CVA, the final amount was £130 million - this was the figure which enabled them to avoid being liquidated therefore we must take it as the definitive bottom line !! Having won the FA cup in May 2008 and being issued with a winding up order in Dec 2009 (18 months!) you have to conclude that they traded whilst insolvent during this period ! This is why we call you cheats and liars Mr Ho and all of your long winded denials only serve to make you come across as the thickest of the thick Skates !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 13 December, 2011 Share Posted 13 December, 2011 A quick perusal doesn't show any links but I'm short of time, the bank concerned is Swedbank (used to be Hansa). There was a run on Swedbank in Latvia at the weekend apparently - all tied up with the state (Latvia) taking over Krajbanka http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20111212-703129.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holepuncture Posted 13 December, 2011 Share Posted 13 December, 2011 There was a run on Swedbank in Latvia at the weekend apparently - all tied up with the state (Latvia) taking over Krajbanka http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20111212-703129.html Vlads robbery is spreading far and wide, could he cause the collapse of all Eastern European banking? Shame on you, Portsmouth Football Club, shame on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 13 December, 2011 Share Posted 13 December, 2011 As an aside: http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20111212-703129.html Saab share dealing suspended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carljack Posted 13 December, 2011 Share Posted 13 December, 2011 As an aside: http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20111212-703129.html Saab share dealing suspended. Unpaid charities now peoples life savings at risk,the stench is so overpowering the FA and Football League really should be the subject of a Full Public enquiry,Sleezeballs the lot of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgiesaint Posted 13 December, 2011 Share Posted 13 December, 2011 So with all the proceedings going on, if the bank look to recover money from Antonov they could look to call in the loan that helped buy SAAB and in turn put the company that Antonov "doesn't own" back in the poop. Saab are pretty much in the poop anyway, they have less than a week to save themselves from bankruptcy http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16074685 and this bit of news from Holland won't help them either... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16148023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts