Club debt rises to £163.8 million!!!

Banks of the Croal wrote:

Magoo ... Catering Manager.

What a brilliant idea. Get rid of everyone by food poisoning.   

Banks of the Croal wrote:

Breadman... Chairman.

Natasha ... Manager.

Scott ... Assistant Manager.

Doffy ... Head Coach.

Angry Dad ... Fitness Coach and Head of Security.

Wander ... Public Liaison Manager.

RT... Deputy Public Liaison Manager

Karly ... Press Spokesman.

Magoo ... Catering Manager.

BWFC71 ... Transport Coordinator

Boltonbonce... New Announcer.

Culcheth White ... Head of Ticketing and Media.

Are you all behind me fellow nutters. 

I have some issues with this.

Scott shouldn't be anywhere near a responsible role, I see him more as the guy who picks up the rubbish after a game or even a chubby Reebok Rebel.

Angry Dad is the biggest bullshitter in the country, he would be much more suited to taking Phil Gartside's role of Chairman.

Doffcocker as head coach? The guy knows less about football than Magoo. I see doffcocker more as catering staff, pulling the beers.

Once these adjustments are made I am committed to the plan.

Banks of the Croal wrote:RIGHT, all this debt talk was really making me despair.

So this afternoon, while every fucker else was getting pissed.

I decided to prepare, a plan and a Cunning one at that.

All Nutters, those with the balls to execute this plan (Nat is also welcome) i really hope she will be involved, as she will have a major role to play, if all goes well.

I'm planning to storm The Reebok after the game against Blackpool, take it by surprise, not many people,fans, Police and hopefully Stewards about.

Then install a new Crack Management and Financial Team

Breadman... Chairman.

Natasha ... Manager.

Scott ... Assistant Manager.

Doffy ... Head Coach.

Angry Dad ... Fitness Coach and Head of Security.

Wander ... Public Liaison Manager.

RT... Deputy Public Liaison Manager

Karly ... Press Spokesman.

Magoo ... Catering Manager.

BWFC71 ... Transport Coordinator

Boltonbonce... New Announcer.

Culcheth White ... Head of Ticketing and Media.

Are you all behind me fellow nutters. 

Only if I can be in charge of club finances!!

rammywhite wrote:

Only if I can be in charge of club finances!!

I think you would be better suited to being one of the guys who holds the big flags.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

rammywhite wrote:

Only if I can be in charge of club finances!!

I think you would be better suited to being one of the guys who holds the big flags.

OK-I know my place. in fact I've always fancied doing that

So basically, our next set of accounts for 2013/14 have to show no more than a £8 million loss? Otherwise, we are going to be hit with the FFP rules, which could mean a transfer embargo and possible fines, depending on the size of the losses.

This would be quite a remarkable turnaround by the club, if we get anywhere near an £8 million loss, especially with the loss in revenue and we still have a higher annual wage bill than Swansea City who play in the Premiership.

Let's just hope Eddie & gartside know what they're doing!

scottjames30 wrote:Amos, are you ok ?

I am fine, just ever so miffed pissed off that whenever Sluffy gets a chance he has a sly dig at me or basically tells everyone I am a mental-case, especially when it comes to the speculation of the club's finances.

Thing is, if he had read the full accounts, like I did, then he would have come to the same conclusions as what I and a couple of others had done, but instead slags me off as not knowing what I am talking about, but, at the same time, agrees with the others!!!!

Anyway that was 2013... this is 2014 onwards and upwards bygones and all that!!!!

Culcheth_White wrote:
Let's just hope Eddie & gartside know what they're doing!

At least they know who they owe the millions to - unlike some!

  

Culcheth_White wrote:So basically, our next set of accounts for 2013/14 have to show no more than a £8 million loss? Otherwise, we are going to be hit with the FFP rules, which could mean a transfer embargo and possible fines, depending on the size of the losses.

This would be quite a remarkable turnaround by the club, if we get anywhere near an £8 million loss, especially with the loss in revenue and we still have a higher annual wage bill than Swansea City who play in the Premiership.

Let's just hope Eddie & gartside know what they're doing!

The way I have read it is that the "club" (Bolton Wanderers Football & Athletic Company Limited - reg at coyshse:00043026)is a subsidiary of Burnden Leisure PLC(reg at coyshse:00335699) and as such also has its own set of accounts would be able to have a debt of up to £8million which would be very separate from any debt that the "Parent Company" (Burnden Leisure PLC) would have. But due to many agreements and facilities such as Cross Guarantees, Directors Guarantees etc etc etc any extra debt that the "club" would make above and beyond that £8million wwouldd be transferred to the debt on the "Parent Company".

Also, after viewing the Companies House, online, it has shown that Burnden Leisure has had 19 different lending facilities from various people and companies and that all but 3 have been satisfied - therefore (without being able to check due to Data Protection laws and taking a practical view) the current credit rating of the club and/or Parent Company is actually pretty high (i.e. good).

But as I say all the information, both yesterday lunchtime and this morning, that I have condensed into and made for better, and easier, reading that what it seems like are all in the accounts which can be read via PDF format from the club website!!!

Yes there are other variations to take into account but that would bore the readers who have no interest on how financial statements/accounts are created, but in general we are still in good shape and seem to be building a more solid base for the next set off accounts (end of year June 2014 - probably released next December).

Lets not forget that these set of results are up to the end of June 2013 9and not December as it was only publicly released in December) and as such the directors were aware of what the accounts were like over the summer and up to the closure of the summer transfer window, in September! Therefore it is business as usual!!!

Sluffy wrote:

Culcheth_White wrote:
Let's just hope Eddie & gartside know what they're doing!

At least they know who they owe the millions to - unlike some!

  

To Moonshift investments and NOT Eddie Davies, legally speaking!!!

Although after some research guess who owns Moonshift?  Yes one and only Eddie Davies!!!  So he has more money than some would think (or read via 4-4-2)!!!

Basicall speaking Moonshift is acting as go-between between Burnden Leisure (and its 4 subsidiaries) and Eddie Davies - very akin to how CLS works between investors and major financial institutions in the FX market! (http://www.cls-group.com/Pages/default.aspx)

bwfc71 wrote:

Culcheth_White wrote:So basically, our next set of accounts for 2013/14 have to show no more than a £8 million loss? Otherwise, we are going to be hit with the FFP rules, which could mean a transfer embargo and possible fines, depending on the size of the losses.

This would be quite a remarkable turnaround by the club, if we get anywhere near an £8 million loss, especially with the loss in revenue and we still have a higher annual wage bill than Swansea City who play in the Premiership.

Let's just hope Eddie & gartside know what they're doing!

The way I have read it is that the "club" (Bolton Wanderers Football & Athletic Company Limited - reg at coyshse:00043026)is a subsidiary of Burnden Leisure PLC(reg at coyshse:00335699) and as such also has its own set of accounts would be able to have a debt of up to £8million which would be very separate from any debt that the "Parent Company" (Burnden Leisure PLC) would have.  But due to many agreements and facilities such as Cross Guarantees, Directors Guarantees etc etc etc any extra debt that the "club" would make above and beyond that £8million wwouldd be transferred to the debt on the "Parent Company".

Also, after viewing the Companies House, online, it has shown that Burnden Leisure has had 19 different lending facilities from various people and companies and that all but 3 have been satisfied - therefore (without being able to check due to Data Protection laws and taking a practical view) the current credit rating of the club and/or Parent Company is actually pretty high (i.e. good).

But as I say all the information, both yesterday lunchtime and this morning, that I have condensed into and made for better, and easier, reading that what it seems like are all in the accounts which can be read via PDF format from the club website!!!

Yes there are other variations to take into account but that would bore the readers who have no interest on how financial statements/accounts are created, but in general we are still in good shape and seem to be building a more solid base for the next set off accounts (end of year June 2014 - probably released next December).

Lets not forget that these set of results are up to the end of June 2013 9and not December as it was only publicly released in December) and as such the directors were aware of what the accounts were like over the summer and up to the closure of the summer transfer window, in September! Therefore it is business as usual!!!

How confident are you BWFC71 that we won't be affected by the FFP rules? Would you say, we really shouldn't be worrying?

Culcheth_White wrote:

bwfc71 wrote:

Culcheth_White wrote:So basically, our next set of accounts for 2013/14 have to show no more than a £8 million loss? Otherwise, we are going to be hit with the FFP rules, which could mean a transfer embargo and possible fines, depending on the size of the losses.

This would be quite a remarkable turnaround by the club, if we get anywhere near an £8 million loss, especially with the loss in revenue and we still have a higher annual wage bill than Swansea City who play in the Premiership.

Let's just hope Eddie & gartside know what they're doing!

The way I have read it is that the "club" (Bolton Wanderers Football & Athletic Company Limited - reg at coyshse:00043026)is a subsidiary of Burnden Leisure PLC(reg at coyshse:00335699) and as such also has its own set of accounts would be able to have a debt of up to £8million which would be very separate from any debt that the "Parent Company" (Burnden Leisure PLC) would have.  But due to many agreements and facilities such as Cross Guarantees, Directors Guarantees etc etc etc any extra debt that the "club" would make above and beyond that £8million wwouldd be transferred to the debt on the "Parent Company".

Also, after viewing the Companies House, online, it has shown that Burnden Leisure has had 19 different lending facilities from various people and companies and that all but 3 have been satisfied - therefore (without being able to check due to Data Protection laws and taking a practical view) the current credit rating of the club and/or Parent Company is actually pretty high (i.e. good).

But as I say all the information, both yesterday lunchtime and this morning, that I have condensed into and made for better, and easier, reading that what it seems like are all in the accounts which can be read via PDF format from the club website!!!

Yes there are other variations to take into account but that would bore the readers who have no interest on how financial statements/accounts are created, but in general we are still in good shape and seem to be building a more solid base for the next set off accounts (end of year June 2014 - probably released next December).

Lets not forget that these set of results are up to the end of June 2013 9and not December as it was only publicly released in December) and as such the directors were aware of what the accounts were like over the summer and up to the closure of the summer transfer window, in September! Therefore it is business as usual!!!

How confident are you BWFC71 that we won't be affected by the FFP rules? Would you say, we really shouldn't be worrying?

To be fair I am slightly worried as FFP is primarily based upon "club" income and "club" outgoings which there is a difference of about £25-30 million in these accounts (up to end June 2013) and it is this bit that cannot be "manipulated" to become the debt of the "parent company" (but again there are many factors to take into account as its not as simple as income vs outgoing).

If anything information would be required from the quarterly and half-yearly accounts (which should be ready to read in the next 3 and 6 months) to see if we are going to be okay, or not, come the FFP rules.

Who is Bolton's Director of Finance? Is it Magoo?

Reebok Trotter wrote:Who is Bolton's Director of Finance? Is it Magoo?

No, he's making the sandwiches.

I'm flattered by Banks' proposal.

Whittam, I'm the voice of many people on here. We often read words to the effect of spot on doffcocker, agree 100%, bravo doff. I can't remember the last time somebody gave that much credit to your work.

doffcocker wrote:I'm flattered by Banks' proposal.

You're flattered about being made my assistant? At least you know your place doffcocker.

Under me.

Natasha Whittam wrote:
At least you know your place doffcocker.

Under me.

I thought that was Nuggy's role.

doffcocker wrote:

I thought that was Nuggy's role.

As you are an avid follower of my work you know full well we are no longer together. Having your fanny burnt off tends to cause friction in relationships.

This is going to be long and boring to some- but its about the clubs latest Accounts. I've been through them this morning with a fine tooth comb - and there are a lot of interesting things in there. Forgive me if this is a bit technical- but I'll make it as easy as I can.
 I'll give you just a few:

1) It cost us £2.3 m to get rid of Coyle and his mates

2) It has cost us £2.7 m in wages to loan some of our players out 

3 As regards whether we'll continue- the best evidence for me is that the auditor (Deloitte) makes no reference to any going concern issues at all in their auditors Report. They gave a clean report. Deloitte are no mugs (I worked for one of their competitors KPMG for years) - and they will have looked at this very carefully as its so easy to get sued if they get it wrong.

4) However the Directors go on at great length about the business as a 'going concern' in three places in the Accounts. They are clearly concerned and have drawn up serious looking contingency plans if we hit the cash flow skids

5)Gartside has seen his remuneration fall from over £800k to just over £400k. He's sharing our pain!!

6)There has to be a real issue about the FFP rules. A few years ago Portsmouth tried it on by separating loans between the football club and their holding company and the FA would have none of it. Look where they are now. Gartsides main tactic would be securitisation of season ticket sales- selling future receipts that we pay (probably for the next 5 years) to a finance company- and recognising much of the income now. Highly suspicious- Glasgow Rangers tried it- and look how much good it did them

7) Ownership of the club is really murky ( as BWFC71 correctly points out). Note 33 says its 95% owned by Fildraw- a Bermudan company. I've tried this morning to get data on them and failed- but I'll keep on trying.
However the loans are made by Moonshift which Eddy clearly owns ( with a beneficial interest- so there's something murky there). But Gartside says in the Directors Report that Eddy is the 'principal' shareholder in Burnden Leisure!!
I smell a rat here and I think we might still be in trouble. The accounts state that all plans are based on promotion in 13/14- so this season has already been written off  by the Board.

I could go on with about 20 more significant points from the accounts but I suspect you're bored already.

But, talking professionally, there are a lot of things in the Accounts which are hair raising.
Unlike what happens on the pitch.
Lecture over- but I for one have concerns about the future

Thanks Rammy for your analysis. Like you I am seriously worried about the possible impact of the FFP rules. To quote the BBC report:

"With Financial Fair Play if they continue to make the losses they have made this year they will fall foul of the new regulations. The regulations allow for about another £4-5m loss and this year they have made £50m."

And as for Owen, talk about a gift that keeps on giving. £2.3m just to get rid of the useless bastard! It couldn't have cost us more to get rid of him earlier, so why did Gartside not do it? Reluctance to admit he got it wrong is my guess.