quayside

I'm not suggesting you are doing anything? All I'm saying is none of us can accurately determine the clubs accounts based on what I believe to be a PR exercise. Quayside's figures seem sensible; however there does not appear any provision for monies received in players sales. If we add the players sales to Quayside's figures then the club is breaking even (even if we are plucking figures, albeit sensibly, out of the air). I'm very interested to see the accounts to see exactly where the money is all going. I had assumed that any profits made on transfers were netted off against the "other costs". Don't forget that cash received on a player sale does not all equal profit, there are costs attached to some of the players - Martins for example still had time left on his contract so there was an unamortised amount of his original transfer fee to offset against the fee we received for him, Duff was the same. And, of course, as I said earlier and others have repeated, this is all about cash not profit or loss.

In 2008 we had income of £100 million, wages of £70 million and other costs of £50 million. All of which added up to a loss of £20 million. Supposing now our income is £50 million, our wages are £40 million it would all depend on what our other costs are. These other costs include the running costs of SJP, amortisation of players transfer fees, profits/losses on selling players etc. If we've cut these costs by 40% (to £30 million) the club is still losing £20 million a year. Sounds plausible imo. But the key thing is what the cash requirements are, the profit or loss is irrelevant. And in any case whatever has happened will be fully revealed when the accounts are published. From what I've seen so far one of the few things the club don't lie about is the finances.

Stories about Ashley pumping cash in are just that though, leaked by Derek the Liar no doubt. I don't think the club's debt is anywhere near what it was. the money brought in from transfers and saving from the wages coupled with high attendances mean the club could run itself this season (not beyond unless we go up). We can all speculate on the club finances but none of us know for sure what the economics of our current set up are. I could well believe he's had to provide some more funding, despite transfers and the wage bill cut. And FWIW, despite the other falsehoods, whenever Ashley has been rumoured to have stuck money into the club it's been found to be true when the accounts have been published. But in any case we'll know a little bit more when the 2009 accounts are published shortly, although we'll have to wait another year for the 2010 finances.

we'll find out in the accounts. When they are eventually released. Are they overdue? Wouldn't surprise me if so. Must be filed before the end of March. But they will cover the year to end of June 2009 meaning that the current situation won't be revealed until the 2010 accounts are filed next year.

The only reason? Like things were going swimmingly under Shepherd, either financially or on the field? Why do you think the Halls were so keen to bail out? That's got nothing to do with it. The reason we are in the Championship comes back to every decision that Ashley made from post-Allardyce onwards. the reason we are in the championship is because we have been poorly run since 2004. Agree 100%

The point is that it was a f*cking sight better than many were predicting. No one of any significance left and without doubt the players who came in have made the squad stronger. The Ashley is out to wreck the club deliberately/is asset stripping/couldn't give a sh1t about the team brigade haven't got much of a shout right now. Of course the debate about why the club is where it is won't go away but it's done now. And btw what business did we miss out on? Robbie Keane? Gudjohnsen? Maxi Rodrigeuz? Adam Johnson? I'm sure they were all gagging to join us...

Aye, keeping thinking that Could be that "attitude" issues will develope after a while, he has a bit of previous in this area I think. We haven't had much of that sort of stuff from any of our players for a little while so we're overdue - mind you Barton has been out of the picture for several months.

and brummie always laid into Reo-Coker as well which I didn't think was 100% warranted. Maybe it takes relegation and spending 6ok a week on other teams cast-offs to appreciate players values with a level head. I appreciate you all want him to do well, but honestly, trust me, he's f***ing s****. You think Milner's crosses hit the first man all the time, at least he tried to get a cross in, Routledge is useless, if he can't knock it past the defender and beat him for pace, he hasn't got a f***ing clue. What's more, he's got a dreadful attitude, slouches around doing nothing and hiding from the ball. When Marlon signed for you, I was quite honest in saying I tohught he'd do well at that level. Routledge won't though. He's not good enough. Sorry. As for NRC, can't pass three yards, blissfully unaware of the game going on around him, runs into brick walls. Has the first touch of a rapist. Routledge is worse, though. hmm Ah, there you go. My mistake. Don't worry about it, calling how a player will respond to a new environment is a dark art. There was hysterical amusement from a few on here when you paid £12m for Milner but he looks well worth every penny of that this season.

Yup apparently he was beyond sh1t in both games he played for Villa.......

Our Toni Jimenez was born in England. He has certainly been involved in football agency. He was Babayaro's agent and he has done a lot of business in Spain.

Is that for real or is his brother a different Toni Jimenez to the one who worked here?

Does that mean that the new owner is now personally liable for their debts? If he is, no wonder he's trying to offload it to someone else ASAP. The new owner may not be a director in which case he's only liable for the money he's paid for his shares. This liability for trading whilst insolvent falls on the directors, and normally any director at risk will transfer every asset he's got to his wife in the months leading up to something like this. Pretty sure Peter Storrie is a director, but he's always been whiter than white so there's probably no problem........ They are playing the emotional blackmail card and pulling on the heart strings by talking about the devastating effect on the fans, and the its true the effect will be devasatating. But the problem here is that HMRC don't really give a sh*t about being the villains that bring the club down and the emotional defence is irrelevant. They have no customers in the commercial world, no business reputation at stake etc. They are just collecting money for the Exchequer owed by a business thats been run piss poorly.

I'm not an expert on insolvency (thank God) but as I understand it the claim from HMRC cannot result in an administrator being appointed because only a creditor who has a floating charge can petition for an administrator to be appointed. And HMRC does not have such a charge on money owed, it is simply a preferred creditor (top of the list I think) that can call for a winding up so that assets are liquidated to settle its debt. So yes your image of the players being auctioned off to generate cash for HMRC isn't far off. Another serious point here is the fact that the club is without doubt trading whilst insolvent, which can be a criminal act. Pompey spokesman has denied they are insolvent. Thats alright then The definition of insolvency is not being able to meet your debts as they fall due btw, so why are they in court and why weren't the players paid on time etc etc. Well, exactly. If the spokesman had admitted that the club was insolvent then the directors are immediately liable. They are gambling on some backer coming along and bailing them out of this.

I'm not an expert on insolvency (thank God) but as I understand it the claim from HMRC cannot result in an administrator being appointed because only a creditor who has a floating charge can petition for an administrator to be appointed. And HMRC does not have such a charge on money owed, it is simply a preferred creditor (top of the list I think) that can call for a winding up so that assets are liquidated to settle its debt. So yes your image of the players being auctioned off to generate cash for HMRC isn't far off. Another serious point here is the fact that the club is without doubt trading whilst insolvent, which can be a criminal act. Pompey spokesman has denied they are insolvent. Thats alright then The definition of insolvency is not being able to meet your debts as they fall due btw, so why are they in court and why weren't the players paid on time etc etc.

I'm not an expert on insolvency (thank God) but as I understand it the claim from HMRC cannot result in an administrator being appointed because only a creditor who has a floating charge can petition for an administrator to be appointed. And HMRC does not have such a charge on money owed, it is simply a preferred creditor (top of the list I think) that can call for a winding up so that assets are liquidated to settle its debt. So yes your image of the players being auctioned off to generate cash for HMRC isn't far off. Another serious point here is the fact that the club is without doubt trading whilst insolvent, which can be a criminal act.

If the winding up petition is carried through there aren't going to be administrators around trying to sell off as much of the club as they can to repay the debts, the club will simply cease to exist. No 9 point penalty, no fire sale of their assets, they're just gone. And apparently every match they have played this season will be null and void, and the Premiership table recalculated with points and goals the other teams have scored from matches against Portsmouth deducted.

Tribal football is a notoriously reliable source and has never been known to get the facts wrong

From birth, there wasn't any choice. It's never been boring, although it does feel like a life sentence at times....

And clueless tbh. Only got the right side out there because of injuries to Collocini, Enrique, S Taylor, Butt and Smith.

A central midfield without Butt and Smith is what people have been calling for, it's taken injuries to get us there. Should be interesting...

He's got a better track record than Terry. With him it was only shagging grannies and, to be fair to the lad, he always paid good money for it.

Not average for this league though. How many other Championship sides have a collection of defenders that cost £15-£20 million and a collection of midfielders that cost £15-£20 million? If you're trying to say that the midfield isn't average then got to say you're wrong. On price they're worth more than most, but on ability they're shizzite. The midfield certainly look poor a lot of the time - but are they really that bad or is the manager not getting it right either with his team selection or with his tactics? BTW I don't claim to know the answer to that question.

Not average for this league though. How many other Championship sides have a collection of defenders that cost £15-£20 million and a collection of midfielders that cost £15-£20 million?

Do cornrows count as a perm? If so Cort, Ranger, Carroll....

This. Not sure why though, think it might be reflex. I wouldn't worry. We've got a long history of getting the very best out of our defenders.