Joined: Feb 20 2007 Posts: 10540 Location: Hunting Gopher
Andy Gilder wrote:You don't get how this works, do you?
In no other line of business when you enter administration are you allowed to pay 100% of your liabilities to some creditors based on what industry they are in but 10% to others. Why should football be any different?
As a non-preferential creditor HMRC won't "eventually get its money". The administrator will make whatever distribution it can as agreed at the creditors meeting, then that's it. You can whistle for the rest of what you're owed as the company disappears and any subsequent "Portsmouth FC Limited 2010" that takes over running the club does so without any of the historic debt of the old business.
If HMRC are owed £10m, but only get paid £1m as a non-preferential creditor that's £9m gone missing out of the exchequer. The likelihood is that instead of going into the public purse where it was supposed to go that money will instead be sat in the Swiss bank account of some very rich footballers and their agents.
Tell me again why that's ok?
Football is only different because of the increased potential for the domino effect putting so many other clubs out of business. The rule that needs to be changed is how much transfer debt they are allowed to rack up and needs to be looked at by FIFA. Until then though, having other clubs as preferential creditors is the best answer to a poor situation.
They may not get THAT money, but they'll continue to get money in from Portsmouth's future trading, and those of the other English clubs concerned. If Portsmouth went completely I very much doubt there'll be able to be a replacement for future revenue to HMRC. What I meant by them nearly always getting their money is that they will be around long enough to recoup it. Other clubs may not.
carl_spackler wrote:They may not get THAT money, but they'll continue to get money in from Portsmouth's future trading, and those of the other English clubs concerned. If Portsmouth went completely I very much doubt there'll be able to be a replacement for future revenue to HMRC. What I meant by them nearly always getting their money is that they will be around long enough to recoup it. Other clubs may not.
I never said it was right, I said it makes sense.
What would make sense would be for the footballing powers that be to scrap the ridiculous preferential creditors rule, and any club going into admin to be forced to find a suitable solution for all creditors, including HMRC (ie you and me the taxpayer).
Once one club were unable to do that and went bust there would have to be a sea change in how clubs were governed, which would prevent them running up these tax debts they couldn't pay in the future, and stop the country being cheated out of the tax revenues it is owed.
ash4hullfc wrote:I don't know why you think the Ben Arfa rumour is so silly. I've been following the story closely and from what I can gather, he does prefer to come to us. We've definitely made at least one bid for him so it's not out of the question for us to sign him.
Ashley has already used all of his SportsDirect gift vouchers to bring Perch in, so can't see much more activity for us lot unless the players are available on loan or free transfer/pocket money sums.
Joined: Aug 05 2002 Posts: 14094 Location: He can smoke a pound in a single bound!
carl_spackler wrote:Football is only different because of the increased potential for the domino effect putting so many other clubs out of business. The rule that needs to be changed is how much transfer debt they are allowed to rack up and needs to be looked at by FIFA. Until then though, having other clubs as preferential creditors is the best answer to a poor situation.
They may not get THAT money, but they'll continue to get money in from Portsmouth's future trading, and those of the other English clubs concerned. If Portsmouth went completely I very much doubt there'll be able to be a replacement for future revenue to HMRC. What I meant by them nearly always getting their money is that they will be around long enough to recoup it. Other clubs may not.
I never said it was right, I said it makes sense.
You think the Football League would continue a team down for the rest of time?
What about the rest of the creditors? The window cleaners, et al. Who cares if they go bust as long as the football clubs are ok.
I'm not Jesus Christ, I've come to accept that now.
[quote][b]XBrettKennyX wrote:[/b] Once more the anti SC brigade, purposely or otherwise fail to see the point.
Joined: Feb 20 2007 Posts: 10540 Location: Hunting Gopher
Billinge_Lump wrote:You think the Football League would continue a team down for the rest of time?
?
No. They'll simply promote from below. There'll be no new business entity created to make up the numbers though.
Billinge_Lump wrote:What about the rest of the creditors? The window cleaners, et al. Who cares if they go bust as long as the football clubs are ok.
Who's said that then?
A CVA/Liquidation or the like always mean some suffer. All I'm saying is the logical thing to do is try to minimise the repurcussions. Making other football clubs and players preferential creditors is an attempt to do this.
I think people are perhaps only looking at this in terms of the high end of football and having their view biased by the obscene amounts of money and the rich seemingly getting looked after. The thing is, if you look at how lower-league clubs can be affected by situations like this, the current practice could be a godsend.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
?
