Portsmouth fc

[reading_fan]

Which means they'll get hit for another 10 points next season

[cmonurz]

I am no fan of Chainrai at all, but can anyone summarise a situation where Pompey owe him £12m, and yet a court may force him to sell Fratton Park, which he owns as security against that debt, for only £3m?

[Terminal Boardom]

I am no fan of Chainrai at all, but can anyone summarise a situation where Pompey owe him £12m, and yet a court may force him to sell Fratton Park, which he owns as security against that debt, for only £3m?

As Chainrai would be a creditor, wouldn't he be eligible for a %age of the £12m owed? £3m = 25p in the £ if I am not mistaken. All that is needed now os for the fake sheikh to reappear and 'Arry Redknapp return to the club for the farce to be complete.

[PieEater]

As I understand it Chainrai will be forced to sell at the fair market value, his tie on the ground far exceeds that value. The court case is to decide what the value should be. He has been offered £3m to avoid taking it to court, which he refused, he will lose the difference.

I think the most probable outcome is that the court will say £3m is fair and force him to accept. His aim is to minimise his losses, his best bet for that is to take over the club (via Harris?) and milk it for all he can to get his money back. Liquidation won't suit him either.

[Barry the bird boggler]

Ground may only be worth £3m, but I wonder what the land upon which it is sitting is worth?

Possibly not a lot as there could be a caveat attached to it saying it can only be used for sporting purposes.....

[cmonurz]

I can understand Chainrai getting only a % of the £12m back if the club is liquidated. I think the bit of the law I don’t understand, and it’s probably more from a footballing perspective, is that Portsmouth may end up paying him only a fraction of what he is owed, and then just carry on business, and carry on generating money, with no obligation to him at all.

[Terminal Boardom]

I can understand Chainrai getting only a % of the £12m back if the club is liquidated. I think the bit of the law I don’t understand, and it’s probably more from a footballing perspective, is that Portsmouth may end up paying him only a fraction of what he is owed, and then just carry on business, and carry on generating money, with no obligation to him at all.

My understanding is that if liquidated, it ceases to be. Whatever assets exist will be quickly signed over to the new Limited Company which would be completely debt free. Chainrai, and all existing creditors of the current PFC would get nothing.

[PieEater]

I can understand Chainrai getting only a % of the £12m back if the club is liquidated. I think the bit of the law I don’t understand, and it’s probably more from a footballing perspective, is that Portsmouth may end up paying him only a fraction of what he is owed, and then just carry on business, and carry on generating money, with no obligation to him at all.

Forget Chainrai, what about the other £100m they've written off via administration including a sizeable amount to the taxpayer and other unsecured creditors are being offered 1% of what they're due. It's what administration allows you to do, write off a very large percentage of your debts and carry on as a phoenix club. The only caveat is that there are new owners to screw it up next time.

If liquidated there's firesale to settle creditors and they die.

It's likely the ground will still be worth close to £3m even on liquidation. The other land around the ground is owned by someone else (who I think is part of the PST)

[Alexander Litvinenko]

I can understand Chainrai getting only a % of the £12m back if the club is liquidated. I think the bit of the law I don’t understand, and it’s probably more from a footballing perspective, is that Portsmouth may end up paying him only a fraction of what he is owed, and then just carry on business, and carry on generating money, with no obligation to him at all.

Forget Chainrai, what about the other £100m they've written off via administration including a sizeable amount to the taxpayer and other unsecured creditors are being offered 1% of what they're due. It's what administration allows you to do, write off a very large percentage of your debts and carry on as a phoenix club. The only caveat is that there are new owners to screw it up next time.

If liquidated there's firesale to settle creditors and they die.

It's likely the ground will still be worth close to £3m even on liquidation. The other land around the ground is owned by someone else (who I think is part of the PST)

Don't forget that it was Chainrai who benefited from previous administrations, so there's a form of natural justice that he'll only get what is a realistic valuation of the land, rather than the inflated value he's claiming in order to try and make out of the whole exercise.

As to PST and the supporters, they just want to know what's happening so they can move forward, and most would be equally happy with liquidation or administration. Either way they can start again and put the greed and stupidities of past owners behind them.

[Franchise FC]

Don't forget that it was Chainrai who benefited from previous administrations, so there's a form of natural justice that he'll only get what is a realistic valuation of the land, rather than the inflated value he's claiming in order to try and make out of the whole exercise.

As to PST and the supporters, they just want to know what's happening so they can move forward, and most would be equally happy with liquidation or administration. Either way they can start again and put the greed and stupidities of past owners behind them.

I may simply be having a senior moment, but aren't they still in administration.
The PST need either acceptance of their offer or liquidation - what have I missed ?

[PieEater]

I think Dirk meant exit from administration.

The ground purchase is another step towards it.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

Don't forget that it was Chainrai who benefited from previous administrations, so there's a form of natural justice that he'll only get what is a realistic valuation of the land, rather than the inflated value he's claiming in order to try and make out of the whole exercise.

As to PST and the supporters, they just want to know what's happening so they can move forward, and most would be equally happy with liquidation or administration. Either way they can start again and put the greed and stupidities of past owners behind them.

I may simply be having a senior moment, but aren't they still in administration.
The PST need either acceptance of their offer or liquidation - what have I missed ?

Yeah, sorry - sloppy writing there. They just want to know what's happening - whatever it it.

[Royal Monk]

This from another forum ....

Mr Blackmore please consider this.... you are correct that from a non-footballing perspective the Football Creditors Rule is unfair and when a business fails, administrators and liquidators should be able to ensure all creditors get an equal share of any monies offered by purchasers as part of the CVA.

But the football creditors rule has to remain until clubs cannot be trusted to only buy and pay players wages that are sustainable and ensure a fair competition... in Portsmouth's case they have already diluted the amount owed to players, and thus shows they gained an unfair competitive advantage and did not even have to pay for it - how can this be fair? How can it be justified without considerable punishment? How will you stop clubs from risking all if they know that when it comes down to it, a CVA of 0.2 p in pound will get them out the hole and any success achieved along the way will be in the record books no matter how tarnished it is? Come on, you tell me?

The only reason why this is now rearing its head again, is because it appears the PST can't afford the agreed repayment or schedule, already substantially reduced through compromise agreements with players... The club have cheated the game, cheated the creditors... and yet no one points out the simple facts this case. £120mil of debt from administration 3 years ago, which after football creditors paid was diluted to 20mil and not a penny paid..... second Admin in 2 years £68 mil of debt, likely to be diluted to 12 mil or so if the court agree to PFKs valuation of fratton at 3 mil.... now the PST want to further change the terms on the compromise agreements with players.... and quite rightly the PFA is defending its members - yet fans of that club refuse to accept that the club has in anyway benefitted on the field through this cheating... You and other Journo's need to wake up and see what this is really about and its not rivalry

Its the cheating and implication for football that makes fans angry. Its the rivalry that makes us now laugh at their predicament and enjoy the schardenfreude - you would do well to note the difference.

[Badger Finger]

This from another forum ....

Mr Blackmore please consider this.... you are correct that from a non-footballing perspective the Football Creditors Rule is unfair and when a business fails, administrators and liquidators should be able to ensure all creditors get an equal share of any monies offered by purchasers as part of the CVA.

But the football creditors rule has to remain until clubs cannot be trusted to only buy and pay players wages that are sustainable and ensure a fair competition... in Portsmouth's case they have already diluted the amount owed to players, and thus shows they gained an unfair competitive advantage and did not even have to pay for it - how can this be fair? How can it be justified without considerable punishment? How will you stop clubs from risking all if they know that when it comes down to it, a CVA of 0.2 p in pound will get them out the hole and any success achieved along the way will be in the record books no matter how tarnished it is? Come on, you tell me?

The only reason why this is now rearing its head again, is because it appears the PST can't afford the agreed repayment or schedule, already substantially reduced through compromise agreements with players... The club have cheated the game, cheated the creditors... and yet no one points out the simple facts this case. £120mil of debt from administration 3 years ago, which after football creditors paid was diluted to 20mil and not a penny paid..... second Admin in 2 years £68 mil of debt, likely to be diluted to 12 mil or so if the court agree to PFKs valuation of fratton at 3 mil.... now the PST want to further change the terms on the compromise agreements with players.... and quite rightly the PFA is defending its members - yet fans of that club refuse to accept that the club has in anyway benefitted on the field through this cheating... You and other Journo's need to wake up and see what this is really about and its not rivalry

Its the cheating and implication for football that makes fans angry. Its the rivalry that makes us now laugh at their predicament and enjoy the schardenfreude - you would do well to note the difference.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

This from another forum ....

Mr Blackmore please consider this.... you are correct that from a non-footballing perspective the Football Creditors Rule is unfair and when a business fails, administrators and liquidators should be able to ensure all creditors get an equal share of any monies offered by purchasers as part of the CVA.

But the football creditors rule has to remain until clubs cannot be trusted to only buy and pay players wages that are sustainable and ensure a fair competition... in Portsmouth's case they have already diluted the amount owed to players, and thus shows they gained an unfair competitive advantage and did not even have to pay for it - how can this be fair? How can it be justified without considerable punishment? How will you stop clubs from risking all if they know that when it comes down to it, a CVA of 0.2 p in pound will get them out the hole and any success achieved along the way will be in the record books no matter how tarnished it is? Come on, you tell me?

The only reason why this is now rearing its head again, is because it appears the PST can't afford the agreed repayment or schedule, already substantially reduced through compromise agreements with players... The club have cheated the game, cheated the creditors... and yet no one points out the simple facts this case. £120mil of debt from administration 3 years ago, which after football creditors paid was diluted to 20mil and not a penny paid..... second Admin in 2 years £68 mil of debt, likely to be diluted to 12 mil or so if the court agree to PFKs valuation of fratton at 3 mil.... now the PST want to further change the terms on the compromise agreements with players.... and quite rightly the PFA is defending its members - yet fans of that club refuse to accept that the club has in anyway benefitted on the field through this cheating... You and other Journo's need to wake up and see what this is really about and its not rivalry

Its the cheating and implication for football that makes fans angry. Its the rivalry that makes us now laugh at their predicament and enjoy the schardenfreude - you would do well to note the difference.

All the fans I know agree don't dispute that the club benefited through cheating from its previous owners. But what would you like them to do now - say "Yes, it's a fair cop, guv'nor, we don't deserve to exist any more, we'll just walk away from the club we've supported all our lives"?

The big problems is that the owners who did the damage have now fucked off - so who are you actually punishing? Or did you want the supporters not to cheer or celebrate when their club won things - even if it was with money they shouldn't have had?

[SPARTA]

This from another forum ....

Mr Blackmore please consider this.... you are correct that from a non-footballing perspective the Football Creditors Rule is unfair and when a business fails, administrators and liquidators should be able to ensure all creditors get an equal share of any monies offered by purchasers as part of the CVA.

But the football creditors rule has to remain until clubs cannot be trusted to only buy and pay players wages that are sustainable and ensure a fair competition... in Portsmouth's case they have already diluted the amount owed to players, and thus shows they gained an unfair competitive advantage and did not even have to pay for it - how can this be fair? How can it be justified without considerable punishment? How will you stop clubs from risking all if they know that when it comes down to it, a CVA of 0.2 p in pound will get them out the hole and any success achieved along the way will be in the record books no matter how tarnished it is? Come on, you tell me?

The only reason why this is now rearing its head again, is because it appears the PST can't afford the agreed repayment or schedule, already substantially reduced through compromise agreements with players... The club have cheated the game, cheated the creditors... and yet no one points out the simple facts this case. £120mil of debt from administration 3 years ago, which after football creditors paid was diluted to 20mil and not a penny paid..... second Admin in 2 years £68 mil of debt, likely to be diluted to 12 mil or so if the court agree to PFKs valuation of fratton at 3 mil.... now the PST want to further change the terms on the compromise agreements with players.... and quite rightly the PFA is defending its members - yet fans of that club refuse to accept that the club has in anyway benefitted on the field through this cheating... You and other Journo's need to wake up and see what this is really about and its not rivalry

Its the cheating and implication for football that makes fans angry. Its the rivalry that makes us now laugh at their predicament and enjoy the schardenfreude - you would do well to note the difference.

All the fans I know agree don't dispute that the club benefited through cheating from its previous owners. But what would you like them to do now - say "Yes, it's a fair cop, guv'nor, we don't deserve to exist any more, we'll just walk away from the club we've supported all our lives"?

The big problems is that the owners who did the damage have now fucked off - so who are you actually punishing? Or did you want the supporters not to cheer or celebrate when their club won things - even if it was with money they shouldn't have had?

No Mr Bond, I expect the club to die!

[cmonurz]

^that, really.

It's not a viable business. Moreover it in an insolvent company that has spent millions of pounds in pursuit of football trophies at the expense of local businesses who have been left out of pocket. The continued appetite to sustain football clubs that have operated with disregard for their fans and their creditors is misplaced in (IMHO) the myth that these clubs are the cornerstones of their communities.

Pompey took a business risk that failed miserably. They should not be further propped up to deliberately take the same risks again.

[SPARTA]

It's hard on the fans, but the club has to be held accountable, and in this instance liquidated. A phoenix club should be created, and with their support it would be back in the Football League inside 10 years. I don't think the past owners should be allowed to walk away scott free either. I don't know enough to offer a valuable enough opinion, but if they're crooked and it can be proved, bang them up! Make it harder for these types to buy a football club and do what they've done at Pompey and other clubs.

[Royal Monk]

Porstmouth are still living beyond their means . The High Net Worth supporters have pumped in over £1 million pounds in the last 4 months.
When will the spending stop FFS , they havent learnt a thing over the past 3 years.
They collected money for charity AND KEPT it , they have NOT PAYED A SINGLE PENNY of the first CVA ( over £120 million original debt).They have £68 million owing on this cva .....
but they have promised to pay .2p in the pound ... bollox to that , if you were owed £1million pounds you would get back £2000

THEY DO NOT DESERVE TO CONTINUE

[soggy biscuit]

Any idea what the highest wage paid at Pompey is at the moment?