Generic clubs in financial crisis Thread

[Uke]

And the accountants make cash again...

Accountants Hacker Young, who handled Pompey's administration in 2010, have been named to handle CSI's insolvency.

They get their full fee of course!

[Mr Angry]

Surely the FA bear some responsibility having allowed CSI to purchase Pompey after the new, sooper doopah Fit & Proper test (when they were clearly neither?)

BBC report makes even worse reading for Pompey fans;

"Antonov, who last week was arrested in an inquiry into asset stripping, secured the sale of Portsmouth from Hong Kong businessman Balram Chainrai, director of Sports Holdings (Asia) Ltd in June. Portpin is another Chainrai company.

Chainrai first took over at Fratton Park in February 2010, placing Portsmouth in administration after initially investing £17m in the club, and "reluctantly" assuming control when previous owner Ali Al Faraj defaulted on loan payments due to him.

Portsmouth were consequently deducted nine points on their way to relegation from the top flight.

Last week Portsmouth's former owners Portpin Ltd re-emerged as an interested party in the club's future after filing a charge at Companies House over the parent company making it a secured creditor over CSI".


So if I get this right, Pompey were sold in June by a bloke who had put them into administration, to CSI who are now in administration, and an interested party in buying Pompey is in fact, owned by the same bloke who put Pompey into admistration previously.

You really couldn't make it up.

The FA and the Football League have to act DECISIVELY this time, otherwise they will be seen to be completely incapable of running football properly and Pompey's owners will clearly be seen to be taking the piss; at the very least Pompey should get an immediate 10 point deduction (if not a 30 point one due to the short gap between administrations) and there is no way Balram Chainrai or any person associated with him should be allowed anywhere near an English football club ever again.

[Barry the bird boggler]

This is one to watch, no doubt they'll get out of it again though....

[Mr Angry]

Usually the same; the assets are worth less than the costs of sorting out the mess, so the creditors get nothing.

There was a case yesterday; a company went under owing its creditors £5.5M; the administrators have published their bills for sorting out the mess.....£8M.

[Mr Angry]

This is one to watch, no doubt they'll get out of it again though....

If they do then teams like ours may as well pack it in; whats the point of playing by the rules when you then see other clubs who have acted almost certainly illegally (as EiL said - wonder how Antonov's money was laundered????), get away with it?

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

This is one to watch, no doubt they'll get out of it again though....

If they do then teams like ours may as well pack it in; whats the point of playing by the rules when you then see other clubs who have acted almost certainly illegally (as EiL said - wonder how Antonov's money was laundered????), get away with it?

Abso-bloody-lutely.

As much as I don't want to hurt my club, it's one of the reasons why I will not pay to watch football anymore.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

Usually the same; the assets are worth less than the costs of sorting out the mess, so the creditors get nothing.

There was a case yesterday; a company went under owing its creditors £5.5M; the administrators have published their bills for sorting out the mess.....£8M.

Farepak, sold christmas club savings accounts, but thats ok cos it was poor people who lost the money.

[exileinleeds]

Usually the same; the assets are worth less than the costs of sorting out the mess, so the creditors get nothing.

There was a case yesterday; a company went under owing its creditors £5.5M; the administrators have published their bills for sorting out the mess.....£8M.

Farepak, sold christmas club savings accounts, but thats ok cos it was poor people who lost the money.

It will be again.

Chanarai- the bloke who put Pompey in admin for £120m - is a secured creditor...he will get the money he is owed. The creditors who reluctantly accepted £0.20- spread over 5 years for the rest of the £120m (including us, dear taxpayer) will not now get that either. The bloke who royally screwed the creditors last time, got well paid for it, will now complete the money disappearing act....getting well paid for it. Again.

An astonishing act, which, were I a cynic, would suggest a massive fraud. People should go to jail.

I am actually beginning to feel sorry for Pompey fans. Even being thick ignorant chavs, doesn't mean they deserve have the club they love screwed over quite so royally.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

So, what happens if Pompey are now unable to meet the terms of the CVA?

[exileinleeds]

So, what happens if Pompey are now unable to meet the terms of the CVA?

They go into administration and hope someone comes along to buy them.

I can see a potential problem- CSI own several sporting "enterprises," not just PFC. It will be argued that they are not intrinsically linked (the problem that Southampton had when their parent company went into administration).

I will put money on a 10pts deduction (unlike the 25 which they should get).

Previous Creditors who bailed them out last time by agreeing to 20p/£ over 5 years, will not see a penny.

The money men, accountants, lawyers and crooks will get their money. All nice and clean.

St Johns Ambulance will not.

[Barry the bird boggler]

I'm sure I've seen somewhere that the argument over the football creditors rule (the piece of idiocy whereby football creditors are paid back in full and everyone else gets to scrabble about for next to nothing) is due to go to the high court imminently to decide whether it should be "repealed" or not. Anyone got the full SP on this?

[roadrunner]

I am actually beginning to feel sorry for Pompey fans. Even being thick ignorant chavs, doesn't mean they deserve have the club they love screwed over quite so royally.

Tough shit. They're happy to flaunt their FA Cup success, so deal with it.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

10 pts? 25 pts? Just take a leaf out of the Football Conference book and kick the offenders out of the league.

[Svlad Cjelli]

I'm sure I've seen somewhere that the argument over the football creditors rule (the piece of idiocy whereby football creditors are paid back in full and everyone else gets to scrabble about for next to nothing) is due to go to the high court imminently to decide whether it should be "repealed" or not. Anyone got the full SP on this?

I think there is a court case pending, but in any case The DCMS enquiry has said this must go - if football doesn't scrap it then the government will legislate it away.

Interestingly, part of the Pompey settlement is that creditors owed less than £10k (I think - it was some small amount) will be paid in full, with those owed higher sums getting just a percentage. This has resulted in companies scrambling to reduce how much they are owed as 100% of £10k is worth more than 20% of £49,999.

BTW, this is all actually theoretical, as they've not actually been paid any settlement money yet.

[Barry the bird boggler]

BBC OS

Administrator Andrew Andronikou does not believe Portsmouth will be hit by a points deduction.

Pompey's owners Convers Sport Initiatives entered administration on Tuesday leading to the club's owner Vladimir Antonov stepping down.

Andronikou acted as an administrator at Pompey last year and has now been appointed to a similar role with CSI.

"I can't see how the club can be deducted points. There's no football debts," he told BBC Radio Solent.

"What the club need now is someone to come in with the necessary resources to take the club forward."

Last week, Antonov and his business partner Raimondas Baranauskas appeared in court in connection with the alleged asset stripping of a bank in Lithuania.

Prosecutors in Lithuania want to question Antonov and Baranauskas as part of an investigation into claims involving Snoras Bank.

There were concerns that Pompey could be given a points deduction following the precedent set by south coast rivals Southampton in 2009.

Portsmouth's plight
•Pompey are in 19th position in the Championship with 20 points from 18 games. A 10 point deduction would leave them at the foot of the table, 10 points off safety.

Then, the Saints' parent company, Southampton Leisure Holdings (SLH), went into administration and an independent investigation by the Football League found the club and SLH were "inextricably linked as one economic entity".

Southampton were subsequently deducted 10 points.

Despite downplaying the chances of the club being dealt a points penalty, Andronikou acknowledged that it is now important for the club to find new investment.

"We need to find a purchaser to put funds into the club around the new year," he added.

"Our remit really is to find a new owner. Historically in every club's cash-flow profile the end of the season is the most gruelling so it's important to get something sorted for then."

The Fratton Park side became the first Premier League club to enter administration in 2010 and were consequently deducted nine points on their way to relegation from the top flight.

[Svlad Cjelli]

A better analysis of it : http://footballmanagement.wordpress.com/2011/11/29/pompey-and-the-potential-for-points-deduction/

[Ian Royal]

Looks like no Points deductions for what's happened so far is quite likely, but if they don't get new money soon, they'll end up in Admin themselves anyway.

Chanrai back in charge for another 6 months, before flogging them off to someone else dodgy?

[Yellowcoat]

BTBB is right in that 'the football creditor rule' is being tested in the High Court at the moment. It will be interesting to see the ruling on that (HMRC are currently still making their case).

[exileinleeds]

BTBB is right in that 'the football creditor rule' is being tested in the High Court at the moment. It will be interesting to see the ruling on that (HMRC are currently still making their case).

It is so beautifully Machiavellian in it's timing.

Whilst one sincerely hopes that judges are independent of government...a cynic might think that some are more independent than others. Yet in this case, it would be hard to argue that it would undoubtedly be in favour of us, the taxpayer, if HMRC wins this case. Judges, we trust are of utter integrity, who interpret the law fairly, blindly and without prejudice.

Someone other than me can look up the salary of a high court judge. Probably several £000,K less than they earned as a barrister. Do they all think that fair? Do they all have the same point of view? Would judgement be the same if Schards or St Pauli were on the bench? Would one of them be corruptable.

It is a dreadful thought. British Courts cannot be compromised and corrupt. Can they?

It is not like they are politicians.
Or Journalists.
Or Senior Police Officers.
Executives of FTSE companies.

I have no idea who the judge is...but the UK is already considered a tax haven- for those who do not want to declare income or pay tax. Our regulations are so lax that it is a good place to have money- even money to lose/launder....and where better to move millions than in Football....
Say a little prayer that the judge pays his taxes. Is honest. That his pay is frozen, he will have to work longer, he gets no increments, and his wife reads the DM.

[Yellowcoat]

The judge in question is David Richards. See what you can find out about him?