Accounting Geniuses

Which scenario is better for the ED family?

a.     Get the best price for the club? (Say 30 million quid)

b.     Go into administration and dump the club taking a 180 million quid loss?

c.      Dump the club, take the 180 million quid loss and keep the land in Burnden Leisure?

d.      Get the best price for the club while keeping the land in Burnden Leisure?

e.      Some other accounting formula you can think of?

Obviously the answer to this may foretell where the fortunes of the Wanders may be.

A.

They will do C and make us rent the stadium back

JAH wrote:They will do C and make us rent the stadium back

Except they won't lose the £180 million as they'll have approaching that in asset value.

I'm interested to see what kind of deal they propose in terms of rental. Will they tie BWFC into a contract or will they set rents too high so we end up playing home matches in say Macclesfield or Bury?

we lack the info to answer your question Obs. Without knowing the group structure, where they have tax liabilities they could offset against any capital loss, or un capitalised gains etc, as far as the family is concerned, I don't know what the best financial structure would be. On another thread I had a bit of a rant about separating the asset from the playing team, and am sure that is not best for the club irrespective of whether it works for the Davies family.

Chairmanda wrote:we lack the info to answer your question Obs. Without knowing the group structure, where they have tax liabilities they could offset against any capital loss, or un capitalised gains etc, as far as the family is concerned, I don't know what the best financial structure would be. On another thread I had a bit of a rant about separating the asset from the playing team, and am sure that is not best for the club irrespective of whether it works for the Davies family.

Of course you are right as I tried to simplify the choices.  The question is how far will Eddie go to allow the team to have a fighting chance in the second half of the season.  Will we be able to loan a couple of good players to help us climb out of the bottom?  We did it before after horrible first halves... but now we need to be able to spend to stay up.  I hope we will be able to beat the drop... a goalscorer would be nice (like Juke and ALF)... and one really nifty defender like Dawson can turn it around for you.  Sure, they may not be top players, but we need a little help to turn it around.  I hope Eddie gives us a nice Christmas present and allows us a future in this league.

observer wrote:

Chairmanda wrote:we lack the info to answer your question Obs. Without knowing the group structure, where they have tax liabilities they could offset against any capital loss, or un capitalised gains etc, as far as the family is concerned, I don't know what the best financial structure would be. On another thread I had a bit of a rant about separating the asset from the playing team, and am sure that is not best for the club irrespective of whether it works for the Davies family.

Of course you are right as I tried to simplify the choices.  The question is how far will Eddie go to allow the team to have a fighting chance in the second half of the season.  Will we be able to loan a couple of good players to help us climb out of the bottom?  We did it before after horrible first halves... but now we need to be able to spend to stay up.  I hope we will be able to beat the drop... a goalscorer would be nice (like Juke and ALF)... and one really nifty defender like Dawson can turn it around for you.  Sure, they may not be top players, but we need a little help to turn it around.  I hope Eddie gives us a nice Christmas present and allows us a future in this league.

Full circle. It will all come down to the takeover deal - whenever/if that happens.

Came across this today so I thought I'd post it here. Apologies if it's already been done in the past as it's a good few months old.

 Bolton – Mystery loans  Bolton Wanderers comes in second place in our offshore league. Bolton is mid-table when compared against some of the Premier League giants in the amount of finance coming from offshore in pure volume terms. It has a total of £151,305,000 in finance coming from offshore, putting it in 6th place in terms of volume.  However, that finance is hard to trace. The owner of Bolton Wanderers Football and Athletic Company Limited as stated in the accounts is Burnden Leisure PLC. The Fildraw Private Trust, owns 95% of Burnden which is based in Bermuda. The Bolton website states that the majority shareholder of Bolton Wanderers Football and Athletic Club Limited is Eddie Davies OBE & CBE.   Technically speaking, this is incorrect, Mr Davies may be the beneficiary of the trust that owns Bolton’s parent. But the majority shareholder is Burnden Leisure Limited.   To complicate things further most of the finance doesn’t come from Fildraw, but from Moonshift Investments Limited. Online forums state that Moonshift is registered in the British Virgin Islands, but the Offshore game team could not find any official record confirming this.   It is also frequently stated in online forums that Moonshift is “owned” by Eddie Davies. In reality, the annual accounts of Burnden Leisure simply state that Eddie Davies has “a beneficial interest” in Moonshift. In other words, he does have some rights to profit from the company, but nowhere does it state that he is the owner of the company.6 From what is written in the accounts, it is perfectly possible that another person altogether controls Moonshift.  In total Bolton has £151,305,000 in loans from Moonshift Investments Limited. This is the entire amount of finance that comes from offshore as the shareholder funds of Burnden Leisure Limited are negative. The liabilities of the club in terms of loans and other payments they need to make are greater than the assets of the club.   Bermuda and the British Virgin Islands are two of the most notorious of the Caribbean Secrecy Jurisdictions. Bermuda has one of the highest secrecy scores in the FSI at 80, and the BVI 66.   Bolton provides the perfect example about how ownership can be, complicated and obscured by offshore. The shares of Burnden Leisure PLC are majority owned not by a person but by a trust. That trust is controlled by a company, the Fildraw Private Trust company, again not by a person. Bermuda does not have a public register of directors or shareholders. Instead these records are held by the company themselves. So we do not know who directors of the Fildraw Private Trust Company are. In reality it is incredibly difficult if not impossible to know who are the real human beings controlling the company and the club.

26 Eddie Davies is the beneficial owner of the Fildraw trust, but that does not mean he has any say in how the trust is managed or run. Trusts are a mechanism by which day to day control of assets is separated from the people that benefit from a company.   The money, in the form of loans, comes from another unknown party Moonshift. Bolton find themselves in a position where they are entirely dependent on loans from an offshore company about which next to nothing is known about, and controlled by a company about which we also know very little.

Geez 58, have you ever heard of paragraphs?

I've copied and pasted it. That's as far as I go I'm afraid. 

I can't provide the link for this for some reason but if you Google this - final offshore game report pdf - and download it, it might be of interest to some on here who can be arsed reading it.

Very interesting mate thank you.

I can't link direct either (I think because it is a pdf we are trying to link to?) but if anyone is interested like I was, they can get to it via the 'home' site of the report - by clicking on their pdf link.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I've thought this before:

Fildraw isn't a million miles away from Phildraw.

Hmmmm........

Not sure if I'm missing the point here, but isn't the report speculating on who actually loaned BWFC the money - loans that it is universally agreed will be written off?

If so, it doesn't matter who any of these tosspots are because once we're in administration or have a new owner, they will have no further interest in BWFC.

Or a meringue?

I think the salient point to be taken from that piece is that ED doesn't own Bolton.

He's just a front.

And all this talk of how he's invested his own kekkle (Bolton spelling) money is clearly bollocks.

So I'm taking it as one on the eye for the prick I've been arguing with on the BN forum for weeks who thinks that we should be erecting a bronze statue to the man and renaming Bolton Daviestown for the way he's happy to write off "£180 million of his own money" and thus safeguard the club's future.

So I feel vindicated.

And ace.

wanderlust wrote:Not sure if I'm missing the point here, but isn't the report speculating on who actually loaned BWFC the money - loans that it is universally agreed will be written off?

If so, it doesn't matter who any of these tosspots are because once we're in administration or have a new owner, they will have no further interest in BWFC.

Or a meringue?

They could easily write ninety percent of the loans off as part of an admin deal then simply buy the club for a quid (remember Ken Bates at Leeds) then sell it onto someone else at a vast profit using someone like Dean Holdsworth as a figure head for the fit and proper persons test. I'm really not sanguine about the fact we don't know the names of the businesses or people who have allegedly loaned us money. I'd hate to see us going down the same road as Leeds and Portsmouth. I fear we might be about to do just that.

Breadman wrote:I think the salient point to be taken from that piece is that ED doesn't own Bolton.

He's just a front.

And all this talk of how he's invested his own kekkle (Bolton spelling) money is clearly bollocks.

So I'm taking it as one on the eye for the prick I've been arguing with on the BN forum for weeks who thinks that we should be erecting a bronze statue to the man and renaming Bolton Daviestown for the way he's happy to write off "£180 million of his own money" and thus safeguard the club's future.

So I feel vindicated.

And ace.

Yeah but...

If it's not his money, how can he say he's writing the loan off?

Would it work if I say I'm writing off the HMRC bill?

luckyPeterpiper wrote:

wanderlust wrote:Not sure if I'm missing the point here, but isn't the report speculating on who actually loaned BWFC the money - loans that it is universally agreed will be written off?

If so, it doesn't matter who any of these tosspots are because once we're in administration or have a new owner, they will have no further interest in BWFC.

Or a meringue?

They could easily write ninety percent of the loans off as part of an admin deal then simply buy the club for a quid (remember Ken Bates at Leeds) then sell it onto someone else at a vast profit using someone like Dean Holdsworth as a figure head for the fit and proper persons test. I'm really not sanguine about the fact we don't know the names of the businesses or people who have allegedly loaned us money. I'd hate to see us going down the same road as Leeds and Portsmouth. I fear we might be about to do just that.

But we are going down the road of Leeds and Portsmouth - this is it - you're in it.



There will be a last minute deal, either before we go into admin or before club is closed for good.

wanderlust wrote:

Breadman wrote:I think the salient point to be taken from that piece is that ED doesn't own Bolton.

He's just a front.

And all this talk of how he's invested his own kekkle (Bolton spelling) money is clearly bollocks.

So I'm taking it as one on the eye for the prick I've been arguing with on the BN forum for weeks who thinks that we should be erecting a bronze statue to the man and renaming Bolton Daviestown for the way he's happy to write off "£180 million of his own money" and thus safeguard the club's future.

So I feel vindicated.

And ace.

Yeah but...

If it's not his money, how can he say he's writing the loan off?

Would it work if I say I'm writing off the HMRC bill?

You know my position on this already.

There is no £180 million debt - it's a made up figure that they've come up with through amortisation and writing money off against god only knows what.

(I can hear Rammy slamming his head into his desk at this point.)

I'm not saying Moonshift haven't put anything into the club but I do think they've had it back in spades (during the Sky TV years) and now that they're squarely responsible for funding the day to day running of the club, the wheels have come off.

Whoever's in charge of the South American drug cartel behind Davies has said "Oi, Gringo! No mas dinero!"

So the club's up for sale.

Because those Colombians don't mess about.

Has anybody seen Gartside recently....?

Nah, thought not.

He's in a shallow grave somewhere just outside Medellin because he "displeased" the Big men.