Pannu or Guardian who do you believe?
9March 27, 2013 by jwkelly2012
Although most Bluenoses are busy asking “where has all the money gone” this article doesn’t really tell us anything more than we already knew.
The ‘Landan’ Guardian seems to take great joy in delivering our next piece of depressing news. It could well be true but in this piece i’m going to play the role of a bluetinted devil’s advocate.
The Guardian states that it has seen internal documents and that Pannu claimed by email to Birmingham City finance staff that Yeung had given him complete sole authority over the club, and they stress that at the time Pannu was not even a director.
It’s True, he wasn’t a director but that doesn’t mean Yeung hadn’t given him
control of the club.
The Guardian then reveals that Pannu had a 10% deal in place with the club for extra earnings and profits and was requesting that 300,000 should be paid to him.
Personally if I could get a Barrister to act on my behalf for 10% of winnings I’d be a happy man. This seems to me to be a good deal struck by Yeung, bit of an ‘injury lawyers 4 u’ deal where if you don’t win you don’t pay.
As it was, Pannu won the club £3.1 Million compensation of which the club had to pay £310,000 he let the club off win 10K and then paid tax on the earnings, not exactly cloak and daggers, shame we didn’t have to pay him £1 mil commission I say.
It is being claimed by The Guardian that Steve Mcmanaman has stated that “This is the first I’ve heard of this 10% arrangement” .
I’ve sat through a few Board meetings myself and can quite comfortably say that I have certainly ‘missed’ things that have been said in them, let’s hope for Steve Mcmanaman’s sake that someone doesn’t produce the minutes.
The Guardian then says that it asked Pannu about his 10% payment and whether he had formal authorisation for it and whether Yeung has the authority to bestow such control. The Guardian said Pannu declined to answer.
Earlier in the piece they said that Pannu had produced a document signed by Yeung that stated “I hereby certify,” it said, “that I authorize Mr Peter Pannu, the Acting Chairman of BCFC, to enter into, execute, deal in or with any contracts in relation to loan agreements, property deals, and any businesses deals [sic], any financial arrangements, in relation to the football club whilst in the capacity as Acting Chairman or Vice Chairman.”
Surely they didn’t need him to answer
The next paragraph talks of contradicting emails where the lawyers say Pannu was appointed acting Chairman in Oct 2010 but the email of authorisation from Yeung was in June 2010.
I read that as AUTHORISATION was in June 2010 but then APPOINTED chairman in Oct 2010. Seems straight forward to me.
The truth will all come out once the eagerly awaited sale is completed.
KRO
Keep Backing The Shirt
Made In Brum 
Seems like the Guardian are not very complimentary about all things Birmingham City at the moment has PP threatened to sue them lol
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/mar/27/birmingham-city-wembley-relegation
Instead of being grateful that the financial shambles that has taken place over the last three years at Blues is making the national news, you denigrate the article.
We can only hope that the Guardian goes on to query what the motive was when CY & PP were involved in buying Blues? Where are the Birmingham themed sports bars, the TV deals, the young asian talent, the football x-factor competitions?
Compared to Blackburn, Portsmouth and a few other clubs, the questionable actions by the owners of Blues have received relatively little media.
We are not having a go at the journalist and like any other bluenose welcome and encourage any journalist that is prepared to dig deep to try and unearth what is really going on. Blues are on a a bit of a roll at the moment and negativity rubs off – we did say that we playing the role of a bluetinted devil’s advocate. The story itself isn’t anything new but whether the authority was given correctly may be the bigger story behind it . KRO
I would think, any thing written by a national newspaper, in relation to Yeung and especially now,Pannu’s financial dealings at BCFC,would help clarify that the dealings have been legal and above board.
Anything that tries to find out what is going on with the financial side has to be a good thing i think.Lets face it theres not going to be much positive news to come from it so any negative spin they put on it is going to make more of an headline than any good news.
Got to be honest any news thats making the national papers and making the muppets in charge feel uneasy is good for the club
but the point is Yeung can’t tell someone to run BCFC he has to go through BIHL board which owns BCFC, Yeung is not the owner, just a major shareholder.
The Football League and FA should be asking similar questions and also why Pannu would pay PAYE on £457000 which was supposed to be other peoples expenses??
While what Pannu as done is not good for the Club’s finances unfortunately he hasn’t done anything illegal, something similar to a lot of Bankers just played the system to his advantage. Hopefully all will change soon then we can start questioning the next owners, its Blues we know that will be the case whoever they are.