A
debenture is just a mortgage by another name. Portpin loaned Pompey
£6m on October 6th 2009. They took a charge on Fratton Park for £7m,
which is the oft referred to value in the Land Registry. (That doesn't
mean it's worth £7m, it just means it secured up to £7m of loans). Source: Companies House
In
January 2010 Portpin took a further charge on "all the assets, monies
and enterprise of Portsmouth Football Club" to the value of £17m, so
effectively Portpin were claiming to have loaned a further £11m in
November and December. Source: Companies House
For
the purposes of this article, I'm not going to dispute that, as no one
has ever produced audited accounts to prove it one way or the other.
It
would seem to me the biggest problem with the charge comes when
Portpin 'bought' Pompey out of administration in October 2010. It's
complicated so stick with me.
At that time, Pompey were in administration and for sale.
Portpin
bought Pompey from administration in October 2010 and my understanding
is paid for the club by swapping it for their debenture. The
alternative would be Portpin would have been given the club for free. In
other words, it's a bit like you not paying your mortgage (in this
case PFC hasn't kept up its loan repayments) and the bank (in this case
Portpin) takes your house in return.
Portpin
had already taken (or in effect been paid back by PFC) £4m in February
2010, and Andrew Andronikou agreed with representatives from the Pompey
Virtual Alliance at a meeting in April 2010 that this needed to be
deducted from the £17m debenture, leaving "around £12.8m, call it £13m"
to quote Andronikou.
So Portpin effectively
swapped their debenture on Portsmouth City Football Club Ltd for the
assets of PCFC Ltd, ie they repossessed it. So what assets did PCFC Ltd
have, what was it worth?
Well, Fratton Park at their security valuation of £7m – Source: Title Number: HP375034.
He
also inherited the debt from Miland Property to PFC2010 Ltd of around
£4m - this was the entry in the books which Miland should have, but did
not, pay for the land around the ground. Any outstanding debt is an
asset, and there is an ongoing investigation into this transaction by
Baker Tilly aimed at recovering the money for PFC2010 Ltd.
After paying the CVA there was a further £2m of excess parachute payments. This is an asset of the new company.
All
player contracts are an asset of the new company. Let’s be
ultra-conservative here and value them at £2m. This doesn't include
possible transfer fees.
Then add in £500,000 for
the fixtures and fittings of Fratton Park, logo, intellectual
property, TV rights payments - again an ultra-conservative valuation.
I've even decided to omit the revenue from 10,000 season tickets,
running into millions, from this equation.
So add that up. Assets of PFC2010 Ltd in October 2010 were conservatively around £15.5m.
So
in return for a charge of £13m, Andrew Andronikou it appears sold all
the assets of Portsmouth City Football Club Ltd to Portpin's new
company, PFC 2010 Ltd in return for the debenture.
The
question then, is if the value of the assets (£15.5m) exceeded the
value of the charge, (£13m), why would there still be a charge of £17m?
Surely, Portpin should have been paying an extra £2.5m cash to own PFC
2010 Ltd, not keeping £17m of secured debt?
Roll forward to January 26th 2011, and the Transfer of fixed and floating charge of 7th January 2010 to PFC2010 Ltd. Source Companies House.
The
whole £17m Portpin charge which should, in my view, no longer exist,
is transferred from oldco, (PCFC Ltd) to newco, (PFC2010 Ltd) by Andrew
Andronikou, and accepted by whoever on the board of PFC 2010 Ltd
thought accepting £17m of debt for apparently nothing was a good idea.
The board of PFC 2010 Ltd at the time included Deepak Chainrai and Levi
Kushnir, who coincidentally are directors of Portpin. No doubt they
excused themselves from the transaction owing to the apparent conflict
of interest.
So what we have here is the
equivalent of a bank repossessing your house, selling it for above
market value and then telling you that you still owe them the entire
amount of the mortgage which is now secured on your new house.
As
the tale winds on it becomes more inexplicable. CSI Ltd bought Pompey,
and when CSI was put into administration, by Portpin, Portpin created a
new charge of £17m on CSI Ltd, while maintaining the old one on PFC
2010 Ltd. Source: Companies House
It's
no wonder the judge was perplexed. I'm perplexed. So the new deal seems
to be that the Football League are allowing Portpin only £5m of
secured debt, which is still not bad considering PFC apparently don't
owe them anything.
If you look back at the October 2010 transaction in the light of the Football League’s ruling, the only way it makes sense is if PCFC Ltd had no assets at all, no stadium, players, contracts etc. But if that is true, how can you transfer secured debt to a company with no assets? Either PCFC Ltd had enough assets to pay off the charge when Portpin took us out of administration, or no assets at all and therefore nothing to secure the new charge in January 2011.
Portpin have agreed
to pay unsecured creditors of PFC 2010 Ltd and PCFC Ltd a total of
£500,000. Now CSI Ltd are owed £10m....by PFC 2010 Ltd, in return for
all those players CSI bought that PFC couldn’t afford.
As
creditors of newco, CSI get 2p in the pound as opposed to £0.04p in
the pound for oldco. So of that £500k, CSI will get £200,000. Portpin
are the secured creditors of CSI. So that £200k will go from Portpin to
CSI to Portpin again.
Moreover, Portpin have
made an offer to pay the creditors, but that offer apparently includes
no new money coming into the club, just old debt. So who will pay the
£500k? Portsmouth Football Club apparently. Once we pay the £500k from
our revenues to our creditors it will, if Portpin's bid is correct, go
down in the books as a debt PFC owes to....Portpin.
So the net effect will be that in paying CSI £200k PFC will be giving £200k to Portpin but still owe them £500k plus interest.
All
of the above is complex and for all I know is entirely legal and above
board. The forthcoming Baker Tilly report should answer at least part
of that question.
Portpin's PR company was contacted and given the opportunity to review, comment upon and correct any inaccuracies in this article. A spokesman said: 'Portpin decline to comment on this story.'
Micah Hall is a Portsmouth supporter who blogs regularly at FansNetwork (access an archive of his work here) (He’s on Twitter here)
Find out more about the Pompey Supporters’ Trust
No comments:
Post a Comment