The Pompey Chimes Forum

Following Michael Eisner's interview in The News yesterday, outlining his vision for the club, our members have asked us to comment on our current position.

In any process such as this, confidentiality and trust are paramount, so the PST Board and the Club have fully respected the request from Tornante for confidentiality around their bid for Portsmouth Football Club. Further public comment from anyone on specific details of any offer would therefore be inappropriate at this stage.

It is important to reiterate that the PST is a democratic organisation, owned and run by our members. It is not run for profit - but to promote the best interests of the club and the community it serves. Therefore, we must fully understand the terms of any offer before our members can decide whether it is acceptable.

This includes issues relating to the preservation of the club’s heritage and culture as well as the economic details of the bid.

There is still much to be understood in any ownership debate before it can be properly assessed. Once the full terms of any offer, economic and otherwise, are published and communicated, it is clearly for the PFC shareholders (48% of which are represented by the PST on behalf of its Community Shareholders) to decide whether to accept the bid.

In the view of the PST Board, the time may well be right for external investment in PFC. External investment (and potentially new ownership) should be properly considered, on merit according to certain key criteria. Over the last two weeks we have consulted with our membership via a questionnaire. Over 2,200 people responded and we are clear that we have been representing their wishes in our discussions to date.

We proposed a timetable to Tornante (yesterday) for Mr Eisner to speak to our shareholders and provide more details of his bid yesterday and are currently waiting for feedback on this.

A PST spokesperson commented; "After many years of neglect and mismanagement from previous 'wealthy owners', Portsmouth Football Club is debt free, doing well on and off the field, and is an attractive proposition for investment. Supporter ownership has stabilised the club, and now the fans who own the club must decide whether the current takeover bid is right for the club.

We have invited Mr Eisner to meet our shareholders and outline his plans. Given our recent history, we hope Mr Eisner and his team will understand and respect our need for transparency, detail, and clear legal commitments to protect the club. Ultimately, it is for our fans, the people who saved the club and now own the club, to decide on its future but they can only make that decision on an informed basis.

We look forward to considering any detailed offer and welcome the continued dialogue”

Selsey Bill wrote:........Given our recent history, we hope Mr Eisner and his team will understand and respect our need for transparency, detail, and clear legal commitments to protect the club. Ultimately, it is for our fans, the people who saved the club and now own the club, to decide on its future but they can only make that decision on an informed basis.

We look forward to considering any detailed offer and welcome the continued dialogue”

I like that bit. He has to be made aware that we've been shafted more than once and it has to stop!

Having said that you don't want the guy to be totally hamstrung at every turn. He has to have some freedom and I guess you have to respect him not wanting a bunch of fans in the boardroom. But some clear lines and fail-safes need to be drawn up.

Earl Grey wrote: Having said that you don't want the guy to be totally hamstrung at every turn. He has to have some freedom and I guess you have to respect him not wanting a bunch of fans in the boardroom. But some clear lines and fail-safes need to be drawn up.

This matter of Eisner wanting his own board seems to be the most contentious issue with regards to his bid. I do appreciate why this makes our fans nervous, but as a business owner I completely get his point. I'd be the same if I was investing a huge lump of my own money.

Selsey Bill wrote:

Earl Grey wrote: Having said that you don't want the guy to be totally hamstrung at every turn. He has to have some freedom and I guess you have to respect him not wanting a bunch of fans in the boardroom. But some clear lines and fail-safes need to be drawn up.

This matter of Eisner wanting his own board seems to be the most contentious issue with regards to his bid. I do appreciate why this makes our fans nervous, but as a business owner I completely get his point. I'd be the same if I was investing a huge lump of my own money.

I'm not entirely sure our board are THAT business savvy, it is my understanding that we made a loss of over £400k last year and that we paid out over £175k in agents fees? This is by far the highest amount in league 2.

Chiswick Blue wrote:I'm not entirely sure our board are THAT business savvy, it is my understanding that we made a loss of over £400k last year and that we paid out over £175k in agents fees? This is by far the highest amount in league 2.

They made a cash profit but a paper loss.

Seeing as the PST own 48% of the club does that mean any potential sale will see members of the PST being paid for their share?

Sam_Brown wrote:Seeing as the PST own 48% of the club does that mean any potential sale will see members of the PST being paid for their share?

I am sure that was part of a statement by Eisner as part of the buyout. I would wish that any potential return of share fees would have the opportunity to be put in a bank account for the future, even though we hope it is never needed. Maybe, at some future point, it could be used as a scholarship to help kids at a grassroots level who hope to get into our academy.

uspompeyfan wrote:

Sam_Brown wrote:Seeing as the PST own 48% of the club does that mean any potential sale will see members of the PST being paid for their share?

I am sure that was part of a statement by Eisner as part of the buyout.

It was but it isn't in Eisner's gift. Any decision on income will be decided by the PST board should the shareholders vote for the sale.

Lost in Transportation wrote:

uspompeyfan wrote:

Sam_Brown wrote:Seeing as the PST own 48% of the club does that mean any potential sale will see members of the PST being paid for their share?

I am sure that was part of a statement by Eisner as part of the buyout.

It was but it isn't in Eisner's gift. Any decision on income will be decided by the PST board should the shareholders vote for the sale.

So, if I understand this correctly, PST would get 48% of the proceeds of the sale and then the PST board would decide what to do with their shareholders' stakes?

While I'm on here, the value of the club is definitely greater now than it was when we put the money up. I'd expect my share value to be rather more than the £1000 I paid for it. AT that time we had considerable football debts and were flirting with relegation from the football league.

<dj.> wrote:So, if I understand this correctly, PST would get 48% of the proceeds of the sale and then the PST board would decide what to do with their shareholders' stakes?

Yes but in reality they are 99.9% likely to pass money back to the shareholders.

<dj.> wrote:While I'm on here, the value of the club is definitely greater now than it was when we put the money up. I'd expect my share value to be rather more than the £1000 I paid for it. AT that time we had considerable football debts and were flirting with relegation from the football league.

Yes it is but that's the PST shareholding in PCFC that's increased in value rather than your shareholding in the PST.

The PST has a policy of 2% above base-rate for returns on PST community shares. That would mean a maximum return of approx. £1,100 to you if you hold a £1,000 share in the PST. If Eisner hypothetically paid £1,500 a share for PCFC shares and the PST paid the maximum to its shareholders then it would have over a million in the bank afterwards.

The decision though is more about the future investment in the football club by Eisner's investment vehicle. That's the choice in front of the shareholders.

Lost in Transportation wrote:That would mean a maximum return of approx. £1,100 to you if you hold a £1,000 share in the PST. If Eisner hypothetically paid £1,500 a share for PCFC shares and the PST paid the maximum to its shareholders then it would have over a million in the bank afterwards.

The decision though is more about the future investment in the football club by Eisner's investment vehicle. That's the choice in front of the shareholders.

Anyone who entered into a syndicate (like me) where everyone chipped in £50 (or whatever) had to have a nominated person to own that share ('blitzoid' in my syndicate's case).

So that person will now get £1000+ back for their £50 input!!!

blitzoid! where's my £50+ ?

We'll let you cream off a small percentage for admin costs

Lost in Transportation wrote:

<dj.> wrote:So, if I understand this correctly, PST would get 48% of the proceeds of the sale and then the PST board would decide what to do with their shareholders' stakes?

Yes but in reality they are 99.9% likely to pass money back to the shareholders.

<dj.> wrote:While I'm on here, the value of the club is definitely greater now than it was when we put the money up. I'd expect my share value to be rather more than the £1000 I paid for it. AT that time we had considerable football debts and were flirting with relegation from the football league.

Yes it is but that's the PST shareholding in PCFC that's increased in value rather than your shareholding in the PST.

The PST has a policy of 2% above base-rate for returns on PST community shares. That would mean a maximum return of approx. £1,100 to you if you hold a £1,000 share in the PST. If Eisner hypothetically paid £1,500 a share for PCFC shares and the PST paid the maximum to its shareholders then it would have over a million in the bank afterwards.

The decision though is more about the future investment in the football club by Eisner's investment vehicle. That's the choice in front of the shareholders.

That's very helpful info, LiT and definitely the first time I've heard it. I'm aware the real decision is about future investment. To be honest, I pretty much wrote off that £1000 when I handed it over, so I'll need to be very sure about the integrity of any bid for PFC and the likely benefits for the club before it gets my support.

Earl Grey wrote:Anyone who entered into a syndicate (like me) where everyone chipped in £50 (or whatever) had to have a nominated person to own that share ('blitzoid' in my syndicate's case).

So that person will now get £1000+ back for their £50 input!!!

blitzoid! where's my £50+ ?

We'll let you cream off a small percentage for admin costs

Blitzoid also has the syndicate's vote as well as to whether or not to accept the deal. I do feel for the syndicates' nominated person in this situation.

<dj.> wrote:That's very helpful info, LiT and definitely the first time I've heard it. I'm aware the real decision is about future investment. To be honest, I pretty much wrote off that £1000 when I handed it over, so I'll need to be very sure about the integrity of any bid for PFC and the likely benefits for the club before it gets my support.

Its not just the PST shareholders who don't have their shares represented by the club's value, the presidents are in the same boat. Its not an easy decision this.

Lost in Transportation wrote: Blitzoid also has the syndicate's vote as well as to whether or not to accept the deal. I do feel for the syndicates' nominated person in this situation.

I agree, it is almost a lose lose for the head of the syndicate. In any larger group, there will always be a difference of opinion and they will upset someone.
It seems the polarization of ideas appears in every facet of life is increasing.