UK time is: 00:36:57
Vital Login
Social Login

Choose your club

Other Sites

Network Navigation

Vital Partners

'If It's Football, It's Vital'

An error of judgement or stringing the fans along?



Andronikou : An error of judgement or has he simply been stringing the fans along?

Andrew Andronikou has been consistently confident in his assertions that the CVA would be agreed by Creditors at the all-important meeting on June 17th. And of course, such assertions would have been well received by fans in light of the implications should the CVA not be agreed to the required level of 75%.

A further points deduction of -17 points could be imposed for 2010/11 leaving the club with an uphill task to win around 70 points on the pitch, to even survive and avoid the drop into League 1. And this would be additional to the financial burden that would be placed to meet the requirements of the Creditors. Parachute payments, money from TV rights, Season Ticket funds and money obtained from the sales of players; most of this would be used more to eliminate the demons of the past rather than satisfying the financing of the future.

So has Mr. Andronikou genuinely considered everything before claiming that a successful result at the CVA is just around the corner or has he simply not anticipated that he could be challenged and indeed competed with by another? I'll be honest; it didn't cross my mind that this sort of thing could happen. In my ignorance I believed that an Administrator gets appointed and he has ultimate, exclusive and unchallenged authority to get the job done within the rules of the process concerned. If we believe the latest reports, it would appear that this is not the case.

Griffins, a professional insolvency firm, has emerged with what they feel is a better alternative to that being proposed by UHY Hacker Young, the firm that Andronikou works for. Griffin's claim that Andronikou's offer of 20 pence in the could in fact be nearer 99 pence in the which obviously, under the circumstances, would represent a major result for the Creditors involved. The 99 pence scenario would depend on Gaydamak dropping his 32M claim on the club and Griffin's believe that there is a strong argument for him to do that and by doing so he could avoid losing an even larger sum of money if a liquidator became involved and investigated his part in the running of the club and subsequently found evidence of wrong-doing. But even without Gaydamak writing his 32M off, Griffin's state that the offer to Creditors should be around 65 pence in the . That's more than three times the offer put forward by Andronikou and appears to be a no-brainer for those owed money by the Club. And as it's the Creditors choice and not the Administrator's how and when the club emerges from Administration, Andronikou's power and role in the future of Pompey is now being severely tested.

Suddenly it's a competition between two insolvency firms with one seeing an opportunity to wrestle clients away from another busily working at trying to retain them. It is certainly a healthy situation for the Creditors but once again the ultimate punishment will be applied to those that remain at the club and those that come in and attempt to rebuild it rather than those guilty of creating the mess in the first instance.

As for the points deduction system; what is that all about? How does it help anybody and how does it act as a deterrent in any way? A new owner will hopefully come in, a new management team and, for the most part, a squad of new players - yet they could start the season with a penalty, for doing what? And if it happens again, what will the perpetrators care? In the same way as Gaydamak, Al Faraj and others have flown the nest and left the debris behind them then so would anybody else. A deduction of points is nothing more than the football authorities beating those clubs that it chooses with a stick and for that they gain little respect.

On the other hand, the stick that Griffin's are now waving at both Gaydamak and Andronikou should be taken seriously as it's potential impact is direct and, few could argue, properly targeted. June 17th 2010 was always going to be a big day for Portsmouth Football Club - it may have just got bigger.

Written by Dave_S139.

The views within this article are the views of the individual who wrote and submitted this piece, sometimes solely theirs. They are not necessarily shared by the Vital Pompey Site Journalists.

Join the Vital Pompey Debate

Trust
The Journalist

Writer: pompeyrug Mail feedback, articles or suggestions

Date:Tuesday June 8 2010

Time: 6:19PM

Your Comments

Good stuff, Dave, difficult subject.
007
A nice summary. Still makes me worry, though. As you say, the administrator is the administrator, isn't he?
uktony
Dave_s again assumes the fault is all AA's. The tax on image rights decision ( which has not been proven will decide if HMRC have either 21% which makes their objection irelevant or 30% which makes their objection disastrous. So Dave_S why would AA consider HMRC to be on side originally? Well possibly because HMRC informed to the BBC, SSN, 5live and at least two nationals that they would accept the CVA proposal. Cmon Dave_S last month you cut n paste the SOS article and it was the Admin says nothing now because you ( nor I ) know everything about administrative law, and someone has come in with a flimsy base case, the man has led you on a personal merry dance; which is it?
russellm
I'm wondering why it's another interesting but subjective, selective article
russellm
Yes, well put Dave. The first points deduction I can understand (Leicester, Lineker and co got away with robbery), but how can we have a second points penalty for essentially the same offence - being in administration? At this stage everything's out of the club's hands and controlled by the administrator.
PFCblue
Yes Tony he has ALL the facts to hand and Griffin are guessing. I have read the full Griffin document and the figures for running the club are worrying to say the least. Annual wages of 2.5m of 25 players would mean ALL of our existing squad would leave I suggest.
eastneydave
Frightening stuff all this talk, so lets have a think about it, Anyone ever heard of a 2nd Administration company taking over from the first because they promise a better pence in the pound to the creditors? To me this is real **** stirring, trying to split the vote on the 17th June to ensure the CVA fails to go through, thus forcing another 15 to 20 point deduction and chaos onto the football club and certain relegation next season, and then relegation again and again the following years because all the club revenue is given to the creditors, whilst non is used to maintain a team with a fighting chance of staying up, PFC will be non league after 3 years under an alternative CVA agreement. The timing of the statement makes me question the motives of the other insolvency firm. and I wonder who is pulling the strings, the revenue perhaps? A scummer even? whoever it is, the outcome is not an alternative CVA, but liquidation of the club. Any creditor voting aginst the CVA hoping to get more is voting for the Liquidation of PFC. With so few season tickets sold so far, just over a 1000 at last count, I doubt now if another season ticket is sold until the CVA outcome is known. I shudder to think what the crowd level will be next season if the CVA does'nt go through, one thing is for sure without a decent crowd next season, PFC may as well resign from the league now cos they cannot fund a team or staff unless we recruit from the job centre and pay the minimum wage. There is the chance of a new owner taking over at Pompey if the current proposed CVA is voted through, Absolutely no chance of new owners if the CVA is rejected or if the Alternative CVA sees the light of day, without new owners, its only a matter of time before PFC is liquidated. what worries me is why there has been no statement regarding the Alternative CVA from AA or Balram Chanrai, Scary times indeed.
doggo
Frightening stuff all this talk, so lets have a think about it, Anyone ever heard of a 2nd Administration company taking over from the first because they promise a better pence in the pound to the creditors? To me this is real **** stirring, trying to split the vote on the 17th June to ensure the CVA fails to go through, thus forcing another 15 to 20 point deduction and chaos onto the football club and certain relegation next season, and then relegation again and again the following years because all the club revenue is given to the creditors, whilst non is used to maintain a team with a fighting chance of staying up, PFC will be non league after 3 years under an alternative CVA agreement. The timing of the statement makes me question the motives of the other insolvency firm. and I wonder who is pulling the strings, the revenue perhaps? A scummer even? whoever it is, the outcome is not an alternative CVA, but liquidation of the club. Any creditor voting aginst the CVA hoping to get more is voting for the Liquidation of PFC. With so few season tickets sold so far, just over a 1000 at last count, I doubt now if another season ticket is sold until the CVA outcome is known. I shudder to think what the crowd level will be next season if the CVA does'nt go through, one thing is for sure without a decent crowd next season, PFC may as well resign from the league now cos they cannot fund a team or staff unless we recruit from the job centre and pay the minimum wage. There is the chance of a new owner taking over at Pompey if the current proposed CVA is voted through, Absolutely no chance of new owners if the CVA is rejected or if the Alternative CVA sees the light of day, without new owners, its only a matter of time before PFC is liquidated. what worries me is why there has been no statement regarding the Alternative CVA from AA or Balram Chanrai, Scary times indeed.
doggo
All i did was hit refresh and it sent it again sorry folks
doggo
As far as i'm aware, Pompey won't necessarily be deducted points even if the CVA is not agreed. The points deduction only comes in if a club tries to exit administration without a CVA. So, in theory, the club could just remain in administration and not be deducted points.
pros7
Russell, to be fair, most of us Pompey fans are not experts in insolvency law, and the gist of Dave's article, as I read it, was to say, I don't understand this, is this what this means? I also am surprised to see a second 'administrator' come in and offer a rival deal - and I don't understand on whose authority they are able to do this. Can I join in? I think it all boils down to not being able to get blood out of a stone - if the club can't afford to pay, the creditors get nothing, and AA's proposal offers a chance of cutting their losses and getting something, realistically. It all boils down to trouble though, and I'm worried about this. That's why I haven't renewed my season ticket yet. Doesn't mean I won't be going through the turnstiles one way or another next season though, assuming I have some turnstiles to go through, that is, or any team left to watch. Don't think that just because there's only been 1000 season tickets sold so far that only 1,000 people are going to show up.
tracyc
The way this is going, it makes me wonder if we might not be better off with the old 'Plan B' proposal - start the club afresh in the lower leagues. If we're going to end up there anyway. I'd rather do so with a completely new, fresh, squeaky clean company than the old stinking rotting one we've been left with now. But we're not there just yet.
tracyc
tracyc ; Precisely right in what you say. I didn't appreciate that an appointed administrator could be challenged and effectively overturned by another. Amazing. russell : I think it remains to be seen whether it's a merry dance or not. It's simply a worrying time for the club and most of all quite confusing for the fans. And by the way, there was no cutting or pasting of any other article. In fact, I've never even read an SoS Pompey article or any other fans websites articles since MyPompey closed. My thoughts and opinions, which is all any of us have, are entirely based on what I see (on SSN), what I read (in The News and The Guardian) and what I hear occasionally on the radio. Nothing more. What I now notice is that we won't suffer a points deduction in 2010/11 but will incur one should we still be in administration in a year's time. That at least buys a little bit of time.
Dave_S139
tracyc ; Precisely right in what you say. I didn't appreciate that an appointed administrator could be challenged and effectively overturned by another. Amazing. russell : I think it remains to be seen whether it's a merry dance or not. It's simply a worrying time for the club and most of all quite confusing for the fans. And by the way, there was no cutting or pasting of any other article. In fact, I've never even read an SoS Pompey article or any other fans websites articles since MyPompey closed. My thoughts and opinions, which is all any of us have, are entirely based on what I see (on SSN), what I read (in The News and The Guardian) and what I hear occasionally on the radio. Nothing more. What I now notice is that we won't suffer a points deduction in 2010/11 but will incur one should we still be in administration in a year's time. That at least buys a little bit of time.
Dave_S139
 

Have Your Say

Log in...
with your social network     OR     with your Vital account
Have your say
Click here to suggest an article
Click here to suggest a poll

Vital Members League (view all)

1. pompeyrug 84
2. eastneydave 31
3. storagematt 31
4. cornypomp 30
5. gentleman jim 19
6. Emsworthianblue 19
7. Jimsmithswig 17
8. mslorna48 15
9. Copnor43 11
10. PFCblue 6

League Results (view all)

League Table (view table)

Team P W D L GD Pts
11. Accrington 21 9 3 9 -3 30
12. Cambridge 21 8 5 8 7 29
13. Stevenage 21 8 4 9 -1 28
14. Portsmouth 21 7 6 8 -1 27
15. Wimbledon 21 7 6 8 -3 27
16. Mansfield 21 7 5 9 -8 26
17. Oxford 21 6 7 8 -3 25

Breaking League News

City Ladies Reserves held
York : 21/12/2014 18:52:00
Coker Chuffed To Be Back
Southend : 21/12/2014 18:01:00
Archer Heading Back To Spurs
Northampton : 21/12/2014 17:24:00
Waterfall Would Love To Stay
Mansfield : 21/12/2014 17:17:00
Hartlepool Dismiss Evans Reports
Hartlepool : 21/12/2014 17:11:00

Current Site Poll (view all polls)

MOTM v Cheltenham?
Suggested By:  pompeyrug
Jones 0%
Devera 0%
Robinson 0%
Whatmough 0%
Butler 0%
Bean 0%
Hollands 0%
Wallace 100%
Atangana (84) 0%
Holmes 0%
Taylor 0%
Sub - Barcham (84) 0%