Gemmel Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Looks like the extradition could take a while: Yep it absolutely will take a while. It will be dragged out over months, before he is sent back. But it doesn't really matter one way or the other. He is ultimately nothing to do with them anymore. The administrator owns his company and even he he gets off, he wont be putting anymore money into that cesspit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andysstuff Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Looks like the extradition could take a while: http://twitter.com/#!/pn_Rory_McKeown sorted into order So no extradition until the end of May at the earliest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 with no actual convictions it was difficult to fail the FaPPT BUT....the football authorities have clearly dropped a clanger. The league accepted the new owners as they had a guarantee - from a bank already refused UK trading by the FSA. Lampitt told the league that these people were fine, that may have helped. It's not the league's fault, but they could have taken action. Chanrai thought he had offloaded a rabid pup, but they paid him with half a bucket of sh!t - so no one has come out smelling of roses. The more I see of this latest low, the more Lampitt looks responsible. He and Cotterill spawned the great quality over quantity debacle, he welcomed the new owners, and he allowed overspending to continue with debt looming. He is Storrie's lovechild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamsaint Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 presumably all the players they bought were on instalments. which means that if the sell them at a loss, they will still have outstanding liabilities on them as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Looks like the extradition could take a while: http://twitter.com/#!/pn_Rory_McKeown sorted into order Still cant believe Rory is reporting that without any wry remarks. Top pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigShadow Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 The extradition is just a sideshow anyway. The damage has been done - AND I still don't understand all these claims that PFC is a much more attractive prospect than six months ago. Surely they have even more debt now than they did when CSi 'bought' them - Interest owed to Chinny plus Vlad's £10m loan only adding to the creditors down there. Actually - I do understand it - its Storrie-time - Lampitt/AA Style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporate Ho Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 So you are explicitly endorsing operating your club using dirty money stolen from regular people... typical. No, ****tard, read what I actually wrote. I said he couldn't expect PFC to pay stolen money back to HIM. What is it with your obsession with Moneyfields as well? Was it some rough boys from Copnor who gave you a wedgie and scarred you for life? If you didn't keep on insisting that your hatred for us is because of the poor charities and hospitals I might believe you more. Just be honest about it instead of all the hand wringing hypocrisy Inextricably..... ....Linked. What Ho! Inextricably linked "as one economic entity". There's no doubt CSI and Pompey are linked is there you idiot. The point is whether, like you and SLH, the club is the only asset. Seeing as Antonov apparently paid £30m for the WRC rights we're clearly not. Try and keep up I fear this report does appear to contradict Ho's claim that 5 million of the 10.8 went to Chainrai as part of the payment for buying the club. Ho wrong, who would have thought it? "Sources close to Chainrai claim he is still owed £12million from the CSI sale" http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Portsmouth-will-not-be-docked-points-after-parent-company-enters-administration-says-Football-League-article836217.html What a shame. Corp has made his 3 posts today. I was hoping that he would answer the question that I keep on asking: If Pompey were financially sound at the time of winning the FA Cup in 2008 as he keeps alleging, why were they unable to pay sol Campbell his win bonus?? Funny how he never answers that one isn't it? Never seen you ask it before. the simple answer is because the money wasn't due to him until later (July 2009 if I remember correctly) by which time we WERE in financial touble. The club - probably 10mil or so to pay off chanrai? (how much is still owed to him?) 10 mil to CSI Pay off gaydamrk - how much is owed to him as a creditor? Pay off Gaydamrk/Chanrai for any land they own around the ground after the above payments are made... may be nothing, not sure what the current contracts include + knowledge of 16 mil in total CVA payments due + currently running at a loss with existing squad 3-4 mil a year would be my guess? I've edited FC's post as I've never liked Tolstoy, especially on football forums. Ref what it would cost, I'd expect any potential buyer to suggest paying the £10.8m "loan" Antonov made to PFC straight to Chainrai as the purchase price. CSI owe him the money after all and that would kill two birds with one stone. CVA is lrgely covered by parachute payments and the land around the stadium is only an issue if the owner (whoever it might be) wants to enlarge/ develop the ground. As for the losses, I'm told the accounts Lampitt's going to publish in Feb show we made a loss of £1m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Inextricably linked "as one economic entity". There's no doubt CSI and Pompey are linked is there you idiot. The point is whether, like you and SLH, the club is the only asset. Why do you keep peddling this? Yes, the other companies weren't huge, but Saints were not Southampton Leisure Holdings only asset. There were other companies not linked to football. Many of the CSI companies have been created suspiciously recently and/or are tiny with negligible incomes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Depressed of Shirley Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 No, ****tard, read what I actually wrote. I said he couldn't expect PFC to pay stolen money back to HIM. What is it with your obsession with Moneyfields as well? Was it some rough boys from Copnor who gave you a wedgie and scarred you for life? If you didn't keep on insisting that your hatred for us is because of the poor charities and hospitals I might believe you more. Just be honest about it instead of all the hand wringing hypocrisy Inextricably linked "as one economic entity". There's no doubt CSI and Pompey are linked is there you idiot. The point is whether, like you and SLH, the club is the only asset. Seeing as Antonov apparently paid £30m for the WRC rights we're clearly not. Try and keep up "Sources close to Chainrai claim he is still owed £12million from the CSI sale" http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Portsmouth-will-not-be-docked-points-after-parent-company-enters-administration-says-Football-League-article836217.html Never seen you ask it before. the simple answer is because the money wasn't due to him until later (July 2009 if I remember correctly) by which time we WERE in financial touble. I've edited FC's post as I've never liked Tolstoy, especially on football forums. Ref what it would cost, I'd expect any potential buyer to suggest paying the £10.8m "loan" Antonov made to PFC straight to Chainrai as the purchase price. CSI owe him the money after all and that would kill two birds with one stone. CVA is lrgely covered by parachute payments and the land around the stadium is only an issue if the owner (whoever it might be) wants to enlarge/ develop the ground. As for the losses, I'm told the accounts Lampitt's going to publish in Feb show we made a loss of £1m I love it when you tell us what you "heard". We can now expect the losses to be at least £11m judging by past experience of your "contact". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Actually Chanrai has been pretty smart here. Through the sale of PFC and subsequent taking of a charge on CSI, he has "moved" his debt further up the chain where more assets exist. Now he has the benefit of WRC as well as any sale price they rustle up from PFC. But conversely, although more assets exist, so there is also the possibility of more secured creditors, plus the complication that several of those assets of Antonovs are being seized by the Government of Lithuania. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 If Pompey were financially sound at the time of winning the FA Cup in 2008 as he keeps alleging, why were they unable to pay sol Campbell his win bonus?? Never seen you ask it before. the simple answer is because the money wasn't due to him until later (July 2009 if I remember correctly) by which time we WERE in financial touble. That's a peculiar arrangement....win a game in May 2008, get paid a bonus for doing so in July 2009....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 There's no doubt CSI and Pompey are linked is there you idiot. The point is whether, like you and SLH, the club is the only asset. Or more to the point, one WAS an asset (SFC) and the other isn't anywhere close to being an "asset" per se (PFC) So, you're right, PFC can hardly be conceived to be a sole asset of CSI when it's not an asset full-stop..... ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Ah the wages, for the highest paid XI in the football league. No doubt their wage bill is more than they can afford, but I can't believe it's greater than West Ham's. I wonder if it's even more than ours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jez Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 No doubt their wage bill is more than they can afford, but I can't believe it's greater than West Ham's. I wonder if it's even more than ours? I've seen holepuncture mention this repeatedly. I'd like to see proof/workings/some link or something just so I can point it out to my skate colleagues after we beat them when they go on about how expensive our squad was to assemble, or whatever excuse they may use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 No, ****tard, read what I actually wrote. Now, now, don't get so stroppy. "Sources close to Chainrai claim he is still owed £12million from the CSI sale" http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Portsmouth-will-not-be-docked-points-after-parent-company-enters-administration-says-Football-League-article836217.html In what way does that link back your suggestion that Chanrai was paid £5m out of the £10.8m that Antonov put into the blackhole? As for the losses, I'm told the accounts Lampitt's going to publish in Feb show we made a loss of £1m lol, did you hear this from the same source as all of your other garbage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holepuncture Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Currently in court three waiting for Vladimir Antonov and Raimondas Baranauskas. Antonov and Baranauskas are both in court three. Defence seeking to submit evidence from witnesses and experts. Claim the expropriation of assets was politically motivated. Judge John Zani agrees to hold a review hearing on January 30th. Vladimir Antonov has spoken to me after the court hearing. I asked him about the future of Portsmouth Football Club. His answer was: 'Everything will be fine. Play up Pompey.' He confirmed to me that he will not be attending the match on Sunday. #Pompey He addressed the press. Mr Antonov said: 'This is a political case and we are going to prove it. That's all I am saying on the matter.' To clarify the outcome of today's hearing: Mr Antonov and Mr Baranauskas will return to court for a review hearing on January 30th. They will then return to court on March 22nd and 23rd to cover the preliminary issues of the case. A hearing will then be held between 8th and 18th of May to cover 'substantive issues'. I dont buy all this political nonsense, that is just a smokescreen... great news that this will drag on for the whole season, CSI in administration, assets frozen, funding stream dry all season for the skates... more pressure to sell sell sell to any person of dubious nature in lampitts massive queue of investors! The extradition is just a sideshow anyway. The damage has been done - AND I still don't understand all these claims that PFC is a much more attractive prospect than six months ago. Surely they have even more debt now than they did when CSi 'bought' them - Interest owed to Chinny plus Vlad's £10m loan only adding to the creditors down there. Actually - I do understand it - its Storrie-time - Lampitt/AA Style. its just a load of spin to help to and punt the carcass to some deluded mug No, ****tard, read what I actually wrote. I said he couldn't expect PFC to pay stolen money back to HIM. What is it with your obsession with Moneyfields as well? Was it some rough boys from Copnor who gave you a wedgie and scarred you for life? If you didn't keep on insisting that your hatred for us is because of the poor charities and hospitals I might believe you more. Just be honest about it instead of all the hand wringing hypocrisy Its nothing personal Corporate, I just want to see the skates blown off the face off the planet as they are criminals, nothing more nothing less. I am yet to be challenged in pompey, I have always been very well looked after, although there was that one time with the blonde from milton where I learnt that you must always wrap up if your going undercover... everythings so dirty in pompey. Moneyfields is in my opinion your best bet from here, it is my recommendation to you as a skate. As for the losses, I'm told the accounts Lampitt's going to publish in Feb show we made a loss of £1m Or more to the point, one WAS an asset (SFC) and the other isn't anywhere close to being an "asset" per se (PFC) So, you're right, PFC can hardly be conceived to be a sole asset of CSI when it's not an asset full-stop..... ;-) Absolutely, as Ho has pointed out, they are a still a loss making entity even with £10.2 million chucked in this year alone - they are a liability not an asset! No doubt their wage bill is more than they can afford, but I can't believe it's greater than West Ham's. I wonder if it's even more than ours? last year they had the highest paid XI in the the football league... this year they are the second biggest spenders second only to Leceister according to CSIs '5 months in' report... shortly before Vlad was arrested in the street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 As for the losses, I'm told the accounts Lampitt's going to publish in Feb show we made a loss of £1m You missed of ' a month' from the end of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 That's a peculiar arrangement....win a game in May 2008, get paid a bonus for doing so in July 2009....? Unless they were operating insolvently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Absolutely, as Ho has pointed out, they are a still a loss making entity even with £10.2 million chucked in this year alone last year they had the highest paid XI in the the football league... this year they are the second biggest spenders second only to Leceister according to CSIs '5 months in' report... shortly before Vlad was arrested in the street. CSI put out a report saying "Good news everyone, only Leicester are spending more than us"? That's incredible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 That's a peculiar arrangement....win a game in May 2008, get paid a bonus for doing so in July 2009....? very peculiar, unless corp is suggesting that the monies owed to scumball were not as a result of the 2008 season, but in fact the 2009 season. That might explain it. Is that what you meant corp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamesaint Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Never seen you ask it before. the simple answer is because the money wasn't due to him until later (July 2009 if I remember correctly) by which time we WERE in financial touble. Post 45780 on 12/12/11 and post 45727 on 9/12/11 amongst other places Corp. I always knew you were one eyed but didn't realise you were blind as well. How come Sol was only due his win bonus in July 2009 when you won the cup in May 2008?? I know that you like to pay wages late at Pompey but that is ridiculous!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 CVA is lrgely covered by parachute payments and the land around the stadium is only an issue if the owner (whoever it might be) wants to enlarge/ develop the ground. As for the losses, I'm told the accounts Lampitt's going to publish in Feb show we made a loss of £1m Ummm!!......are you sure Ho Ho Ho, you're not due another payment until next season, straight from Mr Lampitt himself, and the first payment (at last) is due when my fishy friend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 I've edited FC's post as I've never liked Tolstoy, especially on football forums. Ref what it would cost, I'd expect any potential buyer to suggest paying the £10.8m "loan" Antonov made to PFC straight to Chainrai as the purchase price. CSI owe him the money after all and that would kill two birds with one stone. CVA is lrgely covered by parachute payments and the land around the stadium is only an issue if the owner (whoever it might be) wants to enlarge/ develop the ground. As for the losses, I'm told the accounts Lampitt's going to publish in Feb show we made a loss of £1m Very droll troll... translates as you cant answer the rest with a straight face... but I think you are missing a few things here.... Any potentila buyer cannot GIVE the moent direct to Chanrai - afterall he does not own the club, but is merely a preferred creditor of CSI to the tune of anywhere betwen 12 or 7 mil depending on which source you belive.. so first up, Pompey OWE 10.8 mil or whatever to CSI's administrtaors which I guess will be called in at some point - cant pay it? whats new... so it counts as a debt in pompeys books + plus any currrent losses + the 16,8 mil CVA (irrespective of whether covered by 2 more parachute payments or not). NOte if you cant pay back CSI, with no facility in place to cover the hole you are infact trading insolvently again... so I guess it depends firstly on how quickly AA wants that for CSI -(such a conflict of interest must surely come to the attention of someone soon? no? but even you must see its dodgy morally/ethically surely?) So AA needs to flog the carcus with 11 mil of debt owing + 17 CVA and with player contracts in place which are ensuring you are making a loss - but will be interesting to know whetehr as a secured creditor, IF Chinny dont get his full return, whether he keeps the title deeds to the crumbling wreck that is Fratton Park ... maybe, maybe not who knows. Anyway I digress and I know have a short attention span - what else can he sell to make up the numbers - what else in the CSI portfolio has any income of worth, either way chinney needs 17 mil or he holds on to Fratton park - cant see him handing it all over for 20p in the pound... Ok I am completely mad I want to buy pompey waht is it really going to cost me... well maybe I can do a deal with AA - maybe buy the club for £1 and then pay back CSI 10.8 mil - which as you have observed all goes to chinney... but hangon chinney is still owed 2 or 7 mil by CSI so what price .... yes youve guessed hold on to Fratton park deeds - which makes a 10 mil purhase price a little low.... So lets round it up to £17 mil to get a loss making club - at which point because I am sensible I will sell the players with big contracts as I cant afford them.... now this may actually make a loss as I will have to pay off their contracts many of which are nice an new ££££ so lets add another 5 mil or so - so 25 mil will get me the full club, the ground and teh players I cant sell just to break even with the possibilty of relegation to the third tier - with a third tier stadium and third tier support - nah, my prose, posts etc mught be dull, long winded etc,, but I aint that stupid - better pray mate that some gullable **** is out there with more money than sense... its your only hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruffalo Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Then again, the players on [over] inflated salaries might not want to be sold if it meant taking a wage cut. I wonder how many would follow a similar path to Brown & Hughes and simply see out the remainder of their contracts instead.. Of course, all of the above may be largely moot unless poor old Po**ey manages to find someone willing to invest cash enough to keep the life-support machine running beyond January 2012.. Tickety, tick, tick, tock.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 As for the losses, I'm told the accounts Lampitt's going to publish in Feb show we made a loss of £1m But thats not credible is it? There is no way that PFC's real income (tickets, tv rights merchandising and pies) from gates around 14,000 is nearly paying for a playing staff on legacy premiership wages when Saints aren't breaking even when debt free, crowds of c24,000 and many players on legacy lg1 wages. There may have been some smart accountancy portraying owners loans and charges against assets as 'income' or order to balance the books temporarily - but that just makes the club even more unattractive to any purchaser with half a brain, not more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningtonCrescent Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Maybe AA is praying that the plucky little club can beat their neighbours at the weekend - then he can tout the club around the far east/russia as being one "on the up - having just beaten the side at the top of the league"...... Or maybe he'll just be outside FP signing autographs..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Maybe AA is praying that the plucky little club can beat their neighbours at the weekend - then he can tout the club around the far east/russia as being one "on the up - having just beaten the side at the top of the league"...... Or maybe he'll just be outside FP signing autographs..... struggle with this why should AA be there , the football club is not in administration apparently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 just got 40/1 on us beating the Skates 4-1 - that would be my perfect day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 The fact that chinny hasn't recieved a penny for the club from the russians, is an intresting twist. When he left the club the last time, he had culled the squad to five players and just decided not to pay ben haim at all. Between then and now, the club has additional debt of ten million, outstanding payments on players bought (Confirmed by lumpitt) a sizeable wage bill and neither secured or unsecured creditors have been paid a penny. Oh and theres just two parachute payments left (If they havent asked for another advance). The guarantee from bank snoras isnt worth the paper its written on, so it's hard to see how Chinny is going to get his money back. Anybody who buys the club, will do so for about a pound and then take ownership of their liabilities. (That will entice many wierdos and tyre kickers) so there's no money coming to chinny from that. But then chinny owns the stadium, so he doesnt have to deal if he doesn't want to. which leaves two revenue streams. The squad (Sell any player with a resale value) or sell the land, but then you go back to square one, as to buy the club with all it's liabilities wont generate any hard cash for chinny. I dont think it was just the lithuainians that antonov burnt,.... Chinnys in the poo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 The fact that chinny hasn't recieved a penny for the club from the russians, is an intresting twist. When he left the club the last time, he had culled the squad to five players and just decided not to pay ben haim at all. Between then and now, the club has additional debt of ten million, outstanding payments on players bought (Confirmed by lumpitt) a sizeable wage bill and neither secured or unsecured creditors have been paid a penny. Oh and theres just two parachute payments left (If they havent asked for another advance). The guarantee from bank snoras isnt worth the paper its written on, so it's hard to see how Chinny is going to get his money back. Anybody who buys the club, will do so for about a pound and then take ownership of their liabilities. (That will entice many wierdos and tyre kickers) so there's no money coming to chinny from that. But then chinny owns the stadium, so he doesnt have to deal if he doesn't want to. which leaves two revenue streams. The squad (Sell any player with a resale value) or sell the land, but then you go back to square one, as to buy the club with all it's liabilities wont generate any hard cash for chinny. I dont think it was just the lithuainians that antonov burnt,.... Chinnys in the poo And yet..... It's not chinny's club! He has a charge over CSI now, not PFC. And as the corpse keeps on telling us, CSI and PFC and not [economically] intrinsically linked. Therefore Chinny has no say whatsoever with what PFC do with players, shirts that look like a bell end or anything else related to the inbreds. He is probably pulling the strings of that muppet AA though, but since PFC are not in administration the club should be being run by the existing management structure.... It's all a bit messy, but I'd much rather have clampitt in charge of the club, wearing his clown nose and shoes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 And yet..... It's not chinny's club! He has a charge over CSI now, not PFC. And as the corpse keeps on telling us, CSI and PFC and not [economically] intrinsically linked. Therefore Chinny has no say whatsoever with what PFC do with players, shirts that look like a bell end or anything else related to the inbreds. He is probably pulling the strings of that muppet AA though, but since PFC are not in administration the club should be being run by the existing management structure.... It's all a bit messy, but I'd much rather have clampitt in charge of the club, wearing his clown nose and shoes Who are?...........step up AA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint si Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-16226301 Both were bailed by magistrates in Westminster with a preliminary hearing in March and a longer case in May. Good news! Who would buy the club while this shadow looms over them? The longer they're in limbo, the harder it will be to keep going... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 And therein lies the problem with the Fit and Proper Persons test/Owners and Directors test/whatever it's called this week. Pompey fans can complain that the Premier League and Football League should have stopped the succession of dodgy owners from taking over, but as you rightly say, nothing had been proven against any of them at the time of them buying the club. Ultimately, the issue is that once a club is known to have had one dodgy owner, nobody reputable would realistically want to touch the club with a bargepole. How do they know that what they're being presented with in terms of the accounts is actually a true reflection? They simply wouldn't take that risk. The easiest way for the League to get themselves out of this awkward situation would be to take the current opportunity to slap them with a hefty punitive points penalty. That way they slide down the divisions and become less and less attractive to that type of owner in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 Having a license to own a club (that could be revoked) would be a good idea would it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 That would only make it harder for dodgy or full on corrupt owners to come in. Doesn't sound like something the FL or PL would be interested in. I see your point. Doesn't seem like they are trying very hard does it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Halo* Posted 16 December, 2011 Share Posted 16 December, 2011 What a fantastic quote from Andronikou in the previously linked Guardian article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/dec/15/portsmouth-players-pay-andrew-andronikou) Regarding the players' salaries Andrew Andronikou, who is the joint administrator of Convers Sports Initiatives (CSI), the company which owns Portsmouth, and who handled the club's administration last year, said: "There is no problem currently – the players will be paid this month but beyond that into January and the new year, who knows?" Who knows? No, no, really; there's no problem at all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Munster Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 My God THEY ARE SAVED! Clearly. AA is a GENIUS Really? Jeez, thanks for letting us know Now then, let's see. Bail out an insolvent country, buy their assets on the cheap. Or pour money into bailing out an insolvent football club? poopey - The Greece of the Football League. Neither one took the actions they should have, and both lived in give us money la la land. Oi, Phil, any Greeks reading this thread are likely to be very offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarehamRed Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 Superb, needs bringing up to date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 Having a license to own a club (that could be revoked) would be a good idea would it not? It wouldn't change a thing. To all intents and purposes, someone like Antonov would still be granted a licence, and that licence would only be revoked once it was too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merovingian Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 morning guys - looking forward to tomorrow ? Just popped on to say the tit on your main board who posted that he has tickets in our family end has been outed on pompeyonline and prolly other PFC boards now, considering some of our lot are idiots he ought to be very careful how he behaves in there, it might be family but theres plenty of rough in there Hope tomorrow is a good game either way and of course it could be the last time we ever play you in this form Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericofarabia Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 Shame the money is running out ... the new toilets would have looked good - trouble is too many people would have been going in there for a . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericofarabia Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 It wouldn't change a thing. To all intents and purposes, someone like Antonov would still be granted a licence, and that licence would only be revoked once it was too late. Surely the club sould be doing it's own research, not just relying on the OK from Fl / PL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 Mero, yes, anyone who thinks they can sit in an opposition part of the ground for this game is a bit bonkers. The only consolation to us if the result goes wrong tomorrow is the thought of your youth team coming to St Marys in April. You won't go bust, AA won't allow it, even if every sensible legal view in the land is that you are totally insolvent. Feel free to be ashamed should Lampitt sanction another spell of overspending in January - it's time for pfc2012 to be born - a club with a clean slate and a wish to compete on a level playing field at whatever level that means. Give the club back to the few and earn some street cred from the rest of football. In the meantime, let's hope the club that has cheated it's way through the last decade finds Karma knocking on the front door at 1pm tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 It wouldn't change a thing. To all intents and purposes, someone like Antonov would still be granted a licence, and that licence would only be revoked once it was too late. To take the licence analogy a bit further maybe they could say that any new owner has a probationary period of say a year or so and during that time the club will be under increased scrutiny with someone from the league in place actually at the club to make sure that nothing untoward was happening. (Yes I know people like Ho go on about the scrutiny that pompey were under and that this still happened but I don't think the FA/League/whoever have someone in their employ actually at FP instead they just have to cast their eyes over whatever the club is forced to send them which is, I suspect a fraction of all the financial information they have). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 morning guys - looking forward to tomorrow ? Just popped on to say the tit on your main board who posted that he has tickets in our family end has been outed on pompeyonline and prolly other PFC boards now, considering some of our lot are idiots he ought to be very careful how he behaves in there, it might be family but theres plenty of rough in there Hope tomorrow is a good game either way and of course it could be the last time we ever play you in this form Nice to see a sane Pompey fan on here every now and again... All the best after tomorrow Mero - I reckon you probably think the same. Every club has kn0bheads in their number, let's hope they all behave tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 Nicked from another thread...I always knew I loved Spike Milligan for a reason.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 I always liked Milligan. I took my first girlfriend (now my wife) to see him in 'Son of Oblomov' in 1966. She has come to appreciate his sense of humour, if not mine. We actually like Portsmouth, but we don't have to live there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suewhistle Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 just got 40/1 on us beating the Skates 4-1 - that would be my perfect day. You'll be hacked off if we win 6-0 then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 17 December, 2011 Share Posted 17 December, 2011 You'll be hacked off if we win 6-0 then? Not really...any win down there tomorrow will do fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts