What are we here for?

238 posts
Sun Tzu
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3996
Joined: 08 Oct 2008 10:00

Re: What are we here for?

by Sun Tzu » 30 Jun 2009 17:38

Wax Jacket LOLZ

let's be honest, PFC > RFC at the mo

we were top dogs in the South for one season and it was quaLOLity. still. better being 2nd than 3rd downwards.


Aren't Pompey and Saints currently in a race to see who can go out of business first ?

Pompey are in a right mess, their supposed buyer looks like a fraud, they have a paper thin squad, they can't get a ground sorted.

I'm not sure about the 'top team south of London bit, has as much relevance to us as Aberdeen being top team north of Loch Ness !

User avatar
Thaumagurist*
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3539
Joined: 01 Feb 2008 16:15
Location: We must now face the long dark of Exeter.

Re: What are we here for?

by Thaumagurist* » 30 Jun 2009 17:39

holsgrove breaks a leg what, like the 5-0 defeats under the hapless bullivant


I don't remember many of those 5-0 defeats under Bullivant, but I do remember us losing 6-1 at Tranmere. What other 5-0 defeats were there?!? :roll:

LoyalRoyalFan But who would buy the club?


I have absolutely no idea. Since he said he would like to sell the club, it hasn't been a quick sale, has it?

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: What are we here for?

by Ian Royal » 30 Jun 2009 17:43

Mr Irascible As I was saying before I was so rudely interrupted!

Where in the objectives of the club do ambition, promotion, entertainment etc stand? If our only aim on business is to make the profits then, as a long standing and (one would have thought) valued customer where does the club deliver to me?

Being a fan is a highly emotional attachment and one that can cost a lot in terms of time and money...but if our only aim is to be a trader of players then what I am expecting to see this season...a team of players with maybe some future ahead of them...if sold to the highest bidder when they reach a higher standard?

I am becoming a bit disillusioned...we lost our place at the top table through complacency...will we spend the next few years in the Div2/Div 3 levels of the past.

I think it is time to hear from the board about their true mission!



I suspect profits are very far from our current ambitions. Breaking even would be nice. Entertainment will be just under success I imagine seeing as it's what brings in the paying punters.

I suspect both come below long term security and maintaining our current status though.

For someone who's been around a while you see to find it remarkably easy to forget that we're barely into double figure seasons in tier 2 for our history.

Carlin20
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: 04 May 2008 16:25

Re: What are we here for?

by Carlin20 » 30 Jun 2009 17:48

Sun Tzu
Wax Jacket LOLZ

let's be honest, PFC > RFC at the mo

we were top dogs in the South for one season and it was quaLOLity. still. better being 2nd than 3rd downwards.


Aren't Pompey and Saints currently in a race to see who can go out of business first ?

Pompey are in a right mess, their supposed buyer looks like a fraud, they have a paper thin squad, they can't get a ground sorted.

I'm not sure about the 'top team south of London bit, has as much relevance to us as Aberdeen being top team north of Loch Ness !


Pompey in a right mess?

Southampton yes.

Pompey, far from it, debts down to 30 million now and in the prem'. The club is one of the most stable clubs in the prem'. Sold 80 millions worth of player alone in the last year or so. Buyer a fraud? Stop reading the press.

All is fine at Pompey.

I think it's more of a will Reading or southampton go out of business first?

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: What are we here for?

by Ian Royal » 30 Jun 2009 17:49

Unless something crashes in football and most clubs go out of business Sainits will be decades ahead of Reading in the going bust stakes.


Carlin20
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: 04 May 2008 16:25

Re: What are we here for?

by Carlin20 » 30 Jun 2009 17:50

Ian Royal Unless something crashes in football and most clubs go out of business Sainits will be decades ahead of Reading in the going bust stakes.


No, they won't

papereyes
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6027
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 18:41
Location: “The mother of idiots is always pregnant”- Italian proverb

Re: What are we here for?

by papereyes » 30 Jun 2009 17:51

I think it's more of a will Reading or southampton go out of business first?



:|

I think we can happily fall third in that two horse race, tbh.

PS

The Guardian It was the very best of days to be a Portsmouth fan. On 17 May 2008 at ­Wembley Nwankwo Kanu's first-half goal against Cardiff City was enough to win the FA Cup and take the old ­trophy back to Fratton Park for only the second time.

It was Portsmouth's first piece of major silverware since consecutive league championships in 1949 and 1950, an achievement of which Alexandre Gaydamak, the club's Franco-Russian owner, could be justly proud.

Only 13 months later Gaydamak wants out and Portsmouth FC find themselves at a crossroads. In one direction lies continued success at the highest level of English football, and a new stadium hosting World Cup football in 2018. In the other lies trouble and uncertainty. Neighbours Southampton provide an all too relevant warning of what might happen if the club cannot find a buyer.

The heart of that FA Cup-winning team has been sold, along with many other first-team regulars. There is a crippling debt of at least £60m. And the club are palsied by the ongoing saga of a mooted takeover by Sulaiman al-Fahim, the colourful Dubai-based businessman. The deal is unlikely to be concluded before mid-July, at which point there will be only four weeks to go until the new season starts.

"I'm very concerned because nothing seems to be happening at all," said Harry Garcia, the 82-year-old lifelong fan who helped save the club from going bust in 1976. "There's hardly anyone there, it seems the best players have gone."

At that time the £35,000 Garcia helped to raise through the SOS Pompey appeal was enough to prevent extinction: now it would not pay a week's wages for some of the highest earners.

At least the wage bill has gone down, though. Portsmouth have only 17 senior outfield players, plus three goalkeepers, barely enough for a complete match-day squad. Of the team that triumphed at Wembley Lassana Diarra, Sulley Muntari, Glen ­Johnson, Pedro Mendes and Milan Baros have departed, along with other key performers Sean Davis and Jermain Defoe. Djimi Traoré has also gone, along with five other squad players.

Peter Crouch, the club's record £9m signing, and central defender Sylvain Distin have both recently voiced their disquiet at the club's predicament and may also depart. Both have been targeted by rival Premier League clubs. Portsmouth's instability is also evident in the status of Paul Hart, the temporary manager who is still unsure about his future.

If the playing numbers are down, the situation in the boardroom is no different. Portsmouth have, effectively, only two board members – Gaydamak, who by his own admission knows little about football, and the executive chairman, Peter Storrie.

Storrie is on a salary of £1.23m, which is the third highest for such a role in the Premier League, behind only Peter Kenyon of Chelsea, and Manchester United's David Gill.

As the summer rolls on, with clubs busy recruiting for the new season before the transfer window closes on 1 September, Portsmouth's dealings have been almost entirely one-way. They have sold Johnson, Davis and Traoré, with more to follow. Only Aaron Mokoena, a journeyman defensive player, has arrived, on a free from Blackburn. This all heightens the importance of Fahim's proposed takeover.

"In trouble," is the verdict of Howard Frost, sports editor of the local paper, the News, when asked what position the club could be left in. "It's so important – the defining point of whether Pompey are battling relegation or in mid-table next season. If he [Fahim] doesn't take over, by mid-July you're going to have a situation where there's no manager, hardly any, if any, new signings, and an unbelievably small squad. There is the fear that they would have to battle on next season with the squad they have now."

For Storrie, though, it is business as usual. "It's about being proactive while we await the outcome of due diligence," he said. "There is still plenty of work going on behind the scenes in the search for new players. The scouts have been looking for a long while and we have players lined up.

"They will not all come at once. I would have thought it'll be around about when pre-season starts in a few weeks time. But I can assure fans we are being as productive as possible."

Fahim has so far made an erratic stab, at best, of staying on-message and portraying a consistent public persona since he announced his intent at the end of last month. The sheikh, who brokered the buy-out of Manchester City last summer before being sidelined by the new owner, Sheikh Mansour, because of his extravagant promise to sign Cristiano Ronaldo, Fernando Torres, Dimitar Berbatov and others, has contradicted himself over who is backing the Portsmouth deal, and whether they will pass the Premier League's "fit and proper person" test.

Storrie recently denied any involvement in the takeover by Sir Dave Richards, chairman of the Premier League, and Thaksin Shinawatra, the disgraced former Thailand prime minister and ex-Manchester City owner.

Fahim has also been the focus for disgruntled ­customers of Hydra Properties, the Abu-Dhabi real estate business from which he was recently removed as chief executive – a coincidence of timing, according to his ­spokesman.

None of this, of course, will matter to Portsmouth supporters if Fahim does take charge – he is yet to submit the paperwork for the Premier League's approval – and maintains his promise to make the club a force. ­"Everything I have seen makes me sure that we can build a great football club in the years to come," Fahim said when he first voiced his interest. "Portsmouth has incredible history, and its fans are some of the most loyal in the world of football.

"I look forward not just to working with them, but listening to their views on how they want to take the club forward. I am the investor, but this is their club and their community – and it is a privilege to be taking charge."

When precisely this will be is unclear, even to Fahim and his advisers. The likeliest time would be towards the end of July. The Premier League say they have sent out the relevant forms, and while no deadline has been set for dealing with those documents, it is in Fahim's interest to act while due diligence is still being carried out on the club's finances, as the League say they would take two weeks to complete their "fit and proper person" inquiries and issue approval.

Should the deal fall through for any reason, Portsmouth will have very little time in which to build a stronger squad. When asked what the club's Plan B was, Storrie declined to comment.

Paul Banks of the Portsmouth official supporters' club surely speaks for all Pompey mushes when he says: "We're just hoping everything does come to fruition. A few of us had the pleasure of meeting him and he put over a good impression."

Fahim was not a fan of football as a child and is hoping to make serious money from Portsmouth. How he does so from a club with the Premier League's smallest ground – and the only one with no executive boxes – is a challenging question. But football supporters are, by definition, optimistic souls. As Banks adds: "It's very difficult. All we can do is hope."

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: What are we here for?

by Ian Royal » 30 Jun 2009 17:52

Carlin20
Ian Royal Unless something crashes in football and most clubs go out of business Sainits will be decades ahead of Reading in the going bust stakes.


No, they won't



Well that in depth and highly intellectual argument blows my view based on reality out of the water completely.

Carlin20
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: 04 May 2008 16:25

Re: What are we here for?

by Carlin20 » 30 Jun 2009 17:53

Papereyes, you're talking shi*.

That article is inaccurate and a while ago.

Pompey's debt is categorically been stated at 30 million.

No ifs, buts or maybes. That is a fact.


holsgrove breaks a leg
Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 18:43

Re: What are we here for?

by holsgrove breaks a leg » 30 Jun 2009 17:55

Thaumagurist*
holsgrove breaks a leg what, like the 5-0 defeats under the hapless bullivant


I don't remember many of those 5-0 defeats under Bullivant, but I do remember us losing 6-1 at Tranmere. What other 5-0 defeats were there?!? :roll:

LoyalRoyalFan But who would buy the club?


I have absolutely no idea. Since he said he would like to sell the club, it hasn't been a quick sale, has it?


take out the goal scored against tranmere and include a goal scored against stockport and its all square now :wink:

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: What are we here for?

by Ian Royal » 30 Jun 2009 17:59

Carlin20 Papereyes, you're talking shi*.

That article is inaccurate and a while ago.

Pompey's debt is categorically been stated at 30 million.

No ifs, buts or maybes. That is a fact.



Bought any players since? Got a new owner? How about a new stadium?

You're such a massive moron, even by Pompey standards, you actually defend your hated rival and think they've got less chance of going bust than us. Despite them starting next season (if they're lucky) with no owner and probably -27 points. In League 1.

papereyes
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6027
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 18:41
Location: “The mother of idiots is always pregnant”- Italian proverb

Re: What are we here for?

by papereyes » 30 Jun 2009 18:00

Carlin20 Papereyes, you're talking shi*.


No I'm not. I think it is extremely unlikely that Reading will go bankrupt in the near future. Southampton are on the brink. So any 'race' is rather dominated by them.What I have said is pretty uncontroversial. Reading are in significantly less danger of going under than Southamption and, at a push, a similar risk as Portsmouth. I would suggest a milder risk but others can argue that point more strongly.

Carlin20 That article is inaccurate and a while ago.


If you disagree with the article, then say the article, not me.
It is also an article dated Sunday 28th June - so by 'a while' you mean 2 days.

Pompey's debt is categorically been stated at 30 million.
No ifs, buts or maybes. That is a fact.


That article disagrees with you on that point. Get in touch with http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/jamiejackson, the author of the article.
I shall assume you don't disagree with any other point in that article.
Last edited by papereyes on 30 Jun 2009 18:10, edited 1 time in total.

Carlin20
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: 04 May 2008 16:25

Re: What are we here for?

by Carlin20 » 30 Jun 2009 18:03

Ian Royal
Carlin20 Papereyes, you're talking shi*.

That article is inaccurate and a while ago.

Pompey's debt is categorically been stated at 30 million.

No ifs, buts or maybes. That is a fact.



Bought any players since? Got a new owner? How about a new stadium?

You're such a massive moron, even by Pompey standards, you actually defend your hated rival and think they've got less chance of going bust than us. Despite them starting next season (if they're lucky) with no owner and probably -27 points. In League 1.


I'm not defending no-one. Won any trophies yet buddy? Got a new owner?

Don't listen to what you read in the papers, the previous accounts published were without the sales of Diarra, Defoe, Muntari, Johnson etc . 80 million right there.

Despite a number of difficult times for clubs, all clubs will be fine. Think what you want, but Pompey's mild 30 million is a small drop in the ocean compared too the majority of prem clubs except Stoke, Hull, Birmingham and Burnley who've little or no debt.

Papereyes, papers do not like Pompey COS OF redknapp. We know this. Don't read and believe their sh*te. :


papereyes
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6027
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 18:41
Location: “The mother of idiots is always pregnant”- Italian proverb

Re: What are we here for?

by papereyes » 30 Jun 2009 18:06

Here's another article, suggesting that the debt is more than £30 million.

David Conn, by the way, is a bit of an expert on football finances but he gives his email so if you have a complaint with him, you know where to go.

David Conn, of the Guardian In the face of all the questions being asked of Sulaiman al- Fahim's proposed Portsmouth takeover, particularly the rumours, flatly denied, that Thaksin Shinawatra is behind it, the club and Fahim are holding firm. The due diligence – inspection of the books and the business – is going perfectly well, they say, and the deal is on course to complete next month. Portsmouth will then move on to their third overseas owner in just four years, with Fahim following Alexandre Gaydamak and Milan Mandaric into the boardroom at Fratton Park.

Fahim's spokesman, Ivo Ilic Gabara, emphasised that the deal "will comply with Premier League rules". They now require shareholders with 10% or more of a club to be named – only those with 30% or more, and directors, have to pass the "fit and proper person" test. "Al Fahim Asia Associates, the body negotiating to buy Portsmouth, has from the beginning been aware of the need to inform the Premier League of investors with more than 10% of the shares," Gabara said. "Thaksin Shinawatra, as he has stated, has never been involved."

Thaksin's participation has been rumoured from the beginning because the introduction of Fahim to Portsmouth was made by Pairoj Piempongsant, a deal-maker based in Dubai and Bangkok, who was for years an adviser to Thaksin. Pairoj was a Manchester City director while Thaksin owned the club, and last August he found Thaksin the deal to sell City to Sheikh Mansour of Abu Dhabi, in which Fahim acted as Mansour's representative.

When Fahim, a Dubai property developer, declared he was bidding for Portsmouth, and Pairoj's involvement emerged, the rumours fired up that Thaksin, believed to live mostly in Dubai now, and who was paid £150m for City in that country, must be behind it.

Thaksin was passed "fit and proper" to buy City in June 2007 despite longstanding human rights abuse allegations and corruption charges against him, and with his assets frozen by the Thai authorities. But after being convicted of those offences in Thailand, he would no longer pass and has been refused entry to the UK. Thaksin himself declared this week, on the Arabian Business website, that he is close to Fahim and has given advice over the Portsmouth bid, but is not involved himself.

"As a result of the [Manchester City] sale, I naturally became acquainted with Dr Sulaiman al-Fahim," Thaksin wrote. "He is a businessman I greatly admire, and ... I consider him a close friend. Earlier this year he told me he was looking to invest in a Premier League club himself. I gave him some advice and wished him well – that was the end of the conversation. It is correct that some of my associates may have helped with the introductions for Dr Sulaiman. Why not? I know a lot of people in soccer, and was more than happy to pass on any contacts I could. That doesn't make them investors. Again, I am not involved, nor are my associates."

The Premier League chairman, Sir Dave Richards, has been challenged over why he met Fahim privately before the Champions League final in Rome on 29 May, apparently to give advice about the takeover. The Premier League, however, has said there was nothing irregular in this, and last week a more formal meeting was held between Fahim's representatives, Richards and Mike Foster, the league secretary.

Gabara stated this week that Pairoj is not an investor, nor are any of the Abu Dhabi royal family, which could have posed a problem given Mansour's ownership of City. Fahim, as yet, has not named the potential investors, however, fuelling the speculation.

Al Fahim stated initially that his newly formed vehicle, Al Fahim Asia Associates, would buy Portsmouth, and that the money "has been raised through the network of Falcon Equity from Asian and Middle Eastern investors." Falcon Equity is an investment fund based in the low tax financial centres of Switzerland and Jersey, of which Al Fahim himself is the non-executive chairman.

After that, he said that Al Fahim Asia Associates will, in fact, be providing the money itself and Falcon are acting only as advisors. Yesterday Holger Heims, Falcon's managing partner, confirmed that.

"Sulaiman Al Fahim will be raising the money," said Heims. "We are not raising a fund to buy the club. The finance at many Premier League clubs is in flux at the moment, and we are advising particularly on how Portsmouth will be financed after the takeover."

Heims said, too, that the Premier League rules will be complied with.

The League insists it does not simply accept bare declarations about who clubs' owners are, and will insist on convincing proof.

Yet the focus on whether Pompey's proposed new owners are "fit and proper", while important, is a sideshow from the central issue, which is why Premier League clubs are continually up for sale. The test is narrow anyway, barring people from being football club directors or 30% shareholders if they have an unspent criminal conviction. It very rarely applies: Thaksin is freakishly unusual to be rich enough to invest in a club, and have recent convictions.

Portsmouth are for sale because it was running at a huge loss, £17m last year, to pay millionaire wages to players Harry Redknapp wanted but the club could not otherwise afford. Peter Crouch complained over the weekend about where the club is heading, with Redknapp, Lassana Diarra and Jermain Defoe all gone, but Crouch, bought for £9m from Liverpool last July, was himself one of Pompey's galácticos.

Gaydamak funded the overspending, with £28m in loans, according to the chief executive, Peter Storrie, but the owner was hit by the economic crisis last year and could no longer fund the shortfalls. Loans and overdrafts owed to Barclays and Standard banks had risen to £44m by 31 May last year, and Standard Bank's £20m facility was due for repayment this summer. With Gaydamak at his limit, Diarra and Defoe were sold in January to begin balancing the books; the club was facing a summer reckoning. "We've lived beyond our means," Storrie acknowledged of the period which furnished Redknapp with a side to win the 2008 FA Cup. "We were overstretched, particularly with only 20,000 fans in our stadium. It was a risk, but that's what the Premier League is all about, trying to do better."

Storrie said he knew Pairoj through City, approached him once Gaydamak's fortune crunched, then Pairoj introduced Storrie to Fahim, in Dubai, as long ago as February. At the time, when Pompey sacked Tony Adams as manager, they were just one point above the relegation zone. Storrie admitted that had they dropped out of the Premier League, the banks would have wanted their full loans repaid.

"Things were very worrying and bleak," Storrie accepted plainly. Fahim, he said, had been waiting to see if they would stay up, and was unlikely to buy if they did not. Storrie insisted, however, that had they been relegated, Pompey would not have collapsed into administration, but only by selling all their major players. Having survived, even if Fahim had not moved in, Storrie said Portsmouth would have had to sell just one player to reduce the debts – yesterday's £18.5m agreement with Liverpool over Glen Johnson will ease the pressure. Gaydamak, he added, is writing off around £15m of his loans and will take a price for the club lower than he paid, to cut his losses.

If the due diligence goes well, and Fahim and any co-investors have the money, and they satisfy the Premier League's rules, then Portsmouth will change hands again. Another owner will provide wherewithal to allow the club to live beyond its natural means. Relegation, as Mike Ashley is finding out at Newcastle, is football's equivalent of a merry‑go-round crashing through the floor. But even within the Premier League, the music may just stop one of these days.

david.conn@guardian.co.uk


That article suggests that the players are being sold to keep the wolves from the door. Maybe you need a wheeler-dealer manager like Harry R. to come in and save the day?

Portsmouth are for sale because it was running at a huge loss, £17m last year, to pay millionaire wages to players Harry Redknapp wanted but the club could not otherwise afford.


Oh.


It was the NotW which suggested that the debt was as large as £60 million. I can believe that it might have been half that a year ago but we appear to have gone through a 'credit crunch'.




I actually have no problem with Portsmouth. They're a bit local, I like the city. I just find Harry Redknapp to be an absolute cunt who wrecks clubs before moving on.

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: What are we here for?

by Ian Royal » 30 Jun 2009 18:06

Same ones we had last time you tried sparring with me.

Don't need one thanks, ours is happy to stick around for the time being. Not that he'll turn down someone minted with the clubs best interests at heart.

Ahh bless, the papers don't like you!

User avatar
Hoop Blah
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13937
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:00
Location: I told you so.....

Re: What are we here for?

by Hoop Blah » 30 Jun 2009 18:07

Carlin20 ....the previous accounts published were without the sales of Diarra, Defoe, Muntari, Johnson etc . 80 million right there.


Hmmm....

earlier Carlin20 Pompey's debt is categorically been stated at 30 million.

No ifs, buts or maybes. That is a fact.


So which is it? Have the accounts been released to state the now £30m, or do they pre-date all those sales going back the last financial year?

I only ask because until the accounts have been released the debt can't really have been 'categorically stated' as anything can it?

User avatar
Thaumagurist*
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3539
Joined: 01 Feb 2008 16:15
Location: We must now face the long dark of Exeter.

Re: What are we here for?

by Thaumagurist* » 30 Jun 2009 18:08

Carlin20 I'm not defending no-one.


So who are you defending if you're not defending no-one? (You realise you've done a double negative there?)

Carlin20 Won any trophies yet buddy?


*SIGH* Yes, we have

Carlin20 Got a new owner?


We don't need one at the moment.
Last edited by Thaumagurist* on 26 Jun 2010 04:24, edited 1 time in total.

papereyes
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6027
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 18:41
Location: “The mother of idiots is always pregnant”- Italian proverb

Re: What are we here for?

by papereyes » 30 Jun 2009 18:09

Papereyes, papers do not like Pompey COS OF redknapp. We know this. Don't read and believe their sh*te. :


Erm. You do know that he's friends with a large number of reporters. Its how stories of him wanting players get so much traction so quickly.

He has the ear of a significant number of tabloid sports reporters and uses them to 'tap players up' on his behalf.
I thought that was common knowledge.

Its why the papers don't touch him over his many dodgy deals. He's good chat and good copy.

Don't listen to what you read in the papers, the previous accounts published were without the sales of Diarra, Defoe, Muntari, Johnson etc . 80 million right there.


Post them. Given the last year - and the last posted accounts would be a year old (Deloitte, for example, has only just done the 07-08 season's financial review) - I can imagine that they'd be out of date.

Carlin20
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: 04 May 2008 16:25

Re: What are we here for?

by Carlin20 » 30 Jun 2009 18:10

Hoop Blah
Carlin20 ....the previous accounts published were without the sales of Diarra, Defoe, Muntari, Johnson etc . 80 million right there.


Hmmm....

earlier Carlin20 Pompey's debt is categorically been stated at 30 million.

No ifs, buts or maybes. That is a fact.


So which is it? Have the accounts been released to state the now £30m, or do they pre-date all those sales going back the last financial year?

I only ask because until the accounts have been released the debt can't really have been 'categorically stated' as anything can it?


You guys are clutching at straws. You obviously dislike to Pompey mainly, and slighty Southampton.

Read what you want, believe what you want, redknapp has not wrecked Pompey at all. I do not know Peter Storrie directly, however I do know someone who has contact with him on a regular basis and the debt is 30 million which is partly owed to an African bank. The debt is sustainable too.

Think what you want, but I know the truth :D

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: What are we here for?

by Ian Royal » 30 Jun 2009 18:12

A friend who is in the know.

Oh that source of information is impeccable. :lol:

238 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Elm Park Kid, Google Adsense [Bot], Hove Royal, Lower West, Mid Sussex Royal, RG30, Sutekh, Tinpot Royal, Vision, WestYorksRoyal and 323 guests

It is currently 19 Sep 2024 18:16