Home
Selling Zach Clough was a bitter pill to swallow for Wanderers fans this week but if it gives some respite to the continual sense of financial instability, most seem prepared to accept it.
Running the club in its current state is a frighteningly costly business and while losing a key asset just hours before the transfer window closed makes Phil Parkinson’s squad significantly weaker in a footballing sense, at least the remaining players and the staff stand a better chance of their wages being paid on time in the months to come.
The continual anxiety, which rises as each pay day approaches every month, has become tiresome and has gradually eroded spirits right around the club.
Issues between Ken Anderson, Dean Holdsworth and their creditors have suddenly become the talking point again, much to the detriment of the team itself. This has to stop if the club is to have the best chance of promotion to the Championship.
Parkinson and his coaching staff have worked miracles holding things together thus far. But their patience must be wearing thin too.
The sale of Clough sparked a predictably angry reaction from some supporters. The fee – which depending on your source ranges from £2.5million to £3m plus bonuses – seems low for a player of that standard, and more so when you reflect on Anderson’s December pledge that it would take an exceptional bid to force the club into letting their top players go.
Much like Rob Holding last summer, fans feel short-changed that one of the most promising players to emerge from the academy in decades has moved on without a significant fee.
And with losses running at £800,000 a month, according to recent estimates, it does not take a mathematician to work out that the profit won’t last long.
It might, however, buy some time for Parkinson to concentrate efforts on the final push, surely a vital exercise if Wanderers are going to repair themselves financially in the summer.
In that period one would hope some of the funding problems which have stemmed from the complicated and unpredictable relationship between major shareholders Anderson and Holdsworth will have been sorted.
If not, this will have all been for nothing.
Supporters are rightly giving Anderson credit for attempting to keep them informed on matters large and small, via his regular columns on the official website and in the programme.
For years we complained that Wanderers’ finances remained hidden under lock and key with little explanation given for decisions taken in the boardroom.
Now, things have gone a complete 180. Every conceivable detail is out there in the open – and with the overdue accounts due to hit the public domain soon, there is plenty more where that came from.
This made the Whites a sitting duck in the final few days of the window, as you could see from the derisory offers for Josh Vela and Mark Beevers from Wigan and Scunthorpe respectively.
I would certainly not advocate a return to the bad old days at Bolton, where owners cut off the channels of communication. That only serves to distance the gap between ‘the club’ and its fans. But my view – for what it is worth – is that we try and be more selective.
For the last two years Wanderers followers have been put through a crash course in economics, it would be nice to get back to a footballing discussion and allow Parkinson and his staff every opportunity to galvanise a squad now missing the proven quality of Clough and Sammy Ameobi.
Before that, however, I believe the club owes a proper explanation to supporters about the circumstances of Clough’s sale, and why the stance changed so dramatically in a few short weeks.
To go so quickly from 'not for sale' to ushering the homegrown youngster through the door in the final few hours on Tuesday must have been a difficult decision.
But the explanation offered thus far by the chairman has been unusually vague. Anderson claims the club had "several bids" but that the club held out for the best offer they could.
If the money gained from Clough was as necessary as it was being made out - what has changed in the six weeks between him assuring supporters at the Q&A, and the manager, that the club would not 'cash in' on their young stars and now?
Anderson had said there could be difficult decisions ahead, and this may be one of them. If the situation at board level has got to the stage where this was the only option, then fans deserve to know. I think most would be quite understanding, in fact.
Once those loose ends are tied up, maybe then we can get back to the business of being a football club in the short term at least?
Source
Running the club in its current state is a frighteningly costly business and while losing a key asset just hours before the transfer window closed makes Phil Parkinson’s squad significantly weaker in a footballing sense, at least the remaining players and the staff stand a better chance of their wages being paid on time in the months to come.
The continual anxiety, which rises as each pay day approaches every month, has become tiresome and has gradually eroded spirits right around the club.
Issues between Ken Anderson, Dean Holdsworth and their creditors have suddenly become the talking point again, much to the detriment of the team itself. This has to stop if the club is to have the best chance of promotion to the Championship.
Parkinson and his coaching staff have worked miracles holding things together thus far. But their patience must be wearing thin too.
The sale of Clough sparked a predictably angry reaction from some supporters. The fee – which depending on your source ranges from £2.5million to £3m plus bonuses – seems low for a player of that standard, and more so when you reflect on Anderson’s December pledge that it would take an exceptional bid to force the club into letting their top players go.
Much like Rob Holding last summer, fans feel short-changed that one of the most promising players to emerge from the academy in decades has moved on without a significant fee.
And with losses running at £800,000 a month, according to recent estimates, it does not take a mathematician to work out that the profit won’t last long.
It might, however, buy some time for Parkinson to concentrate efforts on the final push, surely a vital exercise if Wanderers are going to repair themselves financially in the summer.
In that period one would hope some of the funding problems which have stemmed from the complicated and unpredictable relationship between major shareholders Anderson and Holdsworth will have been sorted.
If not, this will have all been for nothing.
Supporters are rightly giving Anderson credit for attempting to keep them informed on matters large and small, via his regular columns on the official website and in the programme.
For years we complained that Wanderers’ finances remained hidden under lock and key with little explanation given for decisions taken in the boardroom.
Now, things have gone a complete 180. Every conceivable detail is out there in the open – and with the overdue accounts due to hit the public domain soon, there is plenty more where that came from.
This made the Whites a sitting duck in the final few days of the window, as you could see from the derisory offers for Josh Vela and Mark Beevers from Wigan and Scunthorpe respectively.
I would certainly not advocate a return to the bad old days at Bolton, where owners cut off the channels of communication. That only serves to distance the gap between ‘the club’ and its fans. But my view – for what it is worth – is that we try and be more selective.
For the last two years Wanderers followers have been put through a crash course in economics, it would be nice to get back to a footballing discussion and allow Parkinson and his staff every opportunity to galvanise a squad now missing the proven quality of Clough and Sammy Ameobi.
Before that, however, I believe the club owes a proper explanation to supporters about the circumstances of Clough’s sale, and why the stance changed so dramatically in a few short weeks.
To go so quickly from 'not for sale' to ushering the homegrown youngster through the door in the final few hours on Tuesday must have been a difficult decision.
But the explanation offered thus far by the chairman has been unusually vague. Anderson claims the club had "several bids" but that the club held out for the best offer they could.
If the money gained from Clough was as necessary as it was being made out - what has changed in the six weeks between him assuring supporters at the Q&A, and the manager, that the club would not 'cash in' on their young stars and now?
Anderson had said there could be difficult decisions ahead, and this may be one of them. If the situation at board level has got to the stage where this was the only option, then fans deserve to know. I think most would be quite understanding, in fact.
Once those loose ends are tied up, maybe then we can get back to the business of being a football club in the short term at least?
Source
