Important questions asked by BWFCST

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

I agree that these are important, but also think they are diving into some detail before asking the vision...what league do the new owners (I know they aren't yet, but its shorthand) aim to be in, given answer to question 1, what financial resources do they have and how does that meet that leagues' criteria, are they committed to staying at the Macron, will they reinvest in the academy, what is there 10 year business plan?

Not saying the questions as posed by BWFCST aren't valid, but they are ones focused on the elements others will be scrutinizing (such as league, HMRC, ED) and don't address imo the basis of what do you want to do with BWFC. That is what the majority of fans, those who they aim to represent, want to know first.

I got as far as the first question before I started laughing:

"Who are the individuals behind the corporate vehicles being used to bid for the club?"

This question is being posed by the unelected Steering Group on behalf of the ST who have, as yet, not held any elections to establish a mandate and were, until recently, being backed in their spurious bid to acquire the club by an un-named group of "local businesses and high net worth individuals".

Oh, the irony.......

You coud pretty much put all those questions with minor editing to the "Supporter's Trust" itself. I doubt you'd get any sort of satisfactory answer.

fair point, Breaders and LPP. I think the timing of this is a bit suspect tbh, things appear unstable to say the least, and if there were hoardes of bidders I would understand it more, unless of course this is a plan to show there are no decent answers, and ST steps in (i've been following your work too closely Mr Breadman!)

I think those are a good/clever set of questions because the answers to them will define the scope and capability of the new owners as well as giving an insight into their capacity and willingness to take the club forward. They open the door to getting at the answers we need I.e how deep the austerity will cut and when will  Deano's lot bale.

I have been a supporter of the trust as an idea and still am , however this stinks of sour grapes by a group of individuals that may well have an agenda.

They need to stick to doing what is necessary and set the trust up, have elections etc.

They have very much brought this on themselves, by asking for preferred bidder status when they where clearly not in a position to. They can't now act as an independent representative of the fans, which is what they should have been focusing on, until it was clear that there was no other option.

Very poor judgement from the steering group.

Self righteous pap from a group that make the illuminati look like a family off gogglebox

I could say loads of stuff about this but best keep them to myself for fear of pissing off those who see the ST as some sort of panacea for everything that is currently wrong with the club.

One thing I will say though is why they feel the right to demand any answers from anyone in the first place?

The ST, despite anything they might think, have no 'ownership' no matter how small of Bolton Wanderers FC.

They are a best a yet to be constituted pressure group, who have held no elections, agreed no democratic manifesto and the only remit they have, is to work to bring about the ST's founding AGM.

Why the hell should anyone tell them anything - and why do they feel they have the right to know?

They are a bunch of unelected random blokes with a shared interest in football and acting wildly beyond any agreed terms and conditions the Steering Group was set up to do.

If I were Holdsworth or whoever eventually ends up owning the club I certainly not want them within a million miles of how I run MY business.


A minor point that also I find baffling is that this and most of the other recent 'announcements' issued by the ST have been put out under the name of the Tea Boy, Jamie. Now I'm sure Jamie is a wonderful person doing a great job but wherever I have worked any announcements have always been put out in the name of the most senior officer of that organisation, to give weight and gravitas to the contents of the document.

Is Jamie simply knocking up stuff like this himself and doing his own thing, if not why isn't the Chair of the Steering Group, or the Financial accountant or Barrister got their names associated with the statements and why they being issued under the name of the web designer?

Are the Chair, accountant, barrister, etc, keeping a discreet distance from having their names too closely attached to what is going on?

If so I don't blame them!

All seems to lack any professionalism at all to me, let alone openness and accountability from those who are asking these questions of others.

Living the Dream is jamie. He wanted the LOV gig before manning got it so is making up for it with utter nonsense that, if he has been given the go ahead to publish with the knowledge of the others, is just absolutely shameful. What little holdsworth did want them involved, if he is eventually named owner, should have just evaporated with that. It was like reading a manifesto brought to you by the monster raving looney party.

Sluffy wrote:I could say loads of stuff about this but best keep them to myself for fear of pissing off those who see the ST as some sort of panacea for everything that is currently wrong with the club.

One thing I will say though is why they feel the right to demand any answers from anyone in the first place?

The ST, despite anything they might think, have no 'ownership' no matter how small of Bolton Wanderers FC.  

They are a best a yet to be constituted pressure group, who have held no elections, agreed no democratic manifesto and the only remit they have, is to work to bring about the ST's founding AGM.

Why the hell should anyone tell them anything - and why do they feel they have the right to know?

They are a bunch of unelected random blokes with a shared interest in football and acting wildly beyond any agreed terms and conditions the Steering Group was set up to do.

If I were Holdsworth or whoever eventually ends up owning the club I certainly not want them within a million miles of how I run MY business.


A minor point that also I find baffling is that this and most of the other recent 'announcements' issued by the ST have been put out under the name of the Tea Boy, Jamie.  Now I'm sure Jamie is a wonderful person doing a great job but wherever I have worked any announcements have always been put out in the name of the most senior officer of that organisation, to give weight and gravitas to the contents of the document.

Is Jamie simply knocking up stuff like this himself and doing his own thing, if not why isn't the Chair of the Steering Group, or the Financial accountant or Barrister got their names associated with the statements and why they being issued under the name of the web designer?

Are the Chair, accountant, barrister, etc, keeping a discreet distance from having their names too closely attached to what is going on?

If so I don't blame them!

All seems to lack any professionalism at all to me, let alone openness and accountability from those who are asking these questions of others.

I can understand some of this but it goes to the point that they haven't constituted the trust properly yet, If they had 5000 paid up members, who had elected a board and that board had put the questions forward then they would be lauded for championing the club and supporters.

Yes Holdsworth may not like it, but I sense it's a bit of a no win situation for the ST when viewed through your eye's, if they are too close to the owners something is going on, if they ask too many questions they are burning bridges and marginalising themselves with the owners.

My view is that if they had set it up right which, most would say they have made a pigs ear of, then they would have every right to ask these questions, and if Hooldsworth is a businessman he would have the sense to realise that relationships between organisations happen on many levels, with power and influence swapping sides depending on issues and circumstance.

Innocent enough set of question which most fans would like to hear the answer to from SS although I agree with Manda's OP in that they should also be asking about intentions for BWFC.

Good to see Johnny and Sluffy slating a kid again by the way, all author means is who's been into the CMS and posted it (you know, doing the technical role he's assigned?), clearly a set of questions that the ST have agreed amongst themselves.

these are the sort of questions we all want answers to, whether it comes from the ST or not surely? I want to know who the money men behind Holdsworth are as i'm sure so do lot of other fans otherwise what's really changed from the last owners?

bwfc1874 wrote:Innocent enough set of question which most fans would like to hear the answer to from SS although I agree with Manda's OP in that they should also be asking about intentions for BWFC.

Good to see Johnny and Sluffy slating a kid again by the way, all author means is who's been into the CMS and posted it (you know, doing the technical role he's assigned?), clearly a set of questions that the ST have agreed amongst themselves.

Clearly eh?  You dont know that for sure.  So you should say you think, or in my opinion.  you dont have the facts like none of us do.  So shush.

Don't get brave Johnny. It's clear to anyone with a modicum of common sense that this article isn't just Jamie acting off his own back and the big difference between my assumption and yours is that mine doesn't involve digging into a young guy who's gone out of his way to address head on the utter pap spouted by some on here.

bwfc1874 wrote:Don't get brave Johnny. It's clear to anyone with a modicum of common sense that this article isn't just Jamie acting off his own back and the big difference between my assumption and yours is that mine doesn't involve digging into a young guy who's gone out of his way to address head on the utter pap spouted by some on here.

get brave?  really?  shitting it 74.  At the end of the day whether it is jamie on his own or the group as a whole, they need to address the same questions directed at themselves.  "don't get brave johnny!" is your most patronising post yet.  i love it when you make yourself look a dick.  makes my job easier.

Just letting you know when you need to calm down, no need to tell me to shush simply for pointing out how unfair you're being. You should focus on that and admit you've been ridiculous rather than my throw away comment.

bwfc1874 wrote:Just letting you know when you need to calm down, no need to tell me to shush simply for pointing out how unfair you're being. You should focus on that and admit you've been ridiculous rather than my throw away comment.

see you only talk of the personal.  i have also talked about the questions but you choose to ignore that to try and further your personal insults.  don't worry about me being calm, i'm very calm.  thanks for your concern though

bwfc1874 wrote:Good to see Johnny and Sluffy slating a kid again by the way, all author means is who's been into the CMS and posted it (you know, doing the technical role he's assigned?), clearly a set of questions that the ST have agreed amongst themselves.

I don't often 'bite' but what a load of bollocks.

Any official announcement from any organisation is issued under the authority of the most senior person involved.

That doesn't mean the most senior person involved has to 'send' it out themselves, more often than not it is done by one of their staff BUT it still goes out in 'their name'.

I'm old enough to remember when people actually 'signed off' such official announcements, to show it was the 'official' position of that organisation and not that of someone acting without authority or permission.

This procedure is still adhered to in the social media age and any formal notifications of public bodies (of which the ST purports to be) are sent out 'in the name' of the most senior authorised officer involved.

How difficult would it have been for the Chair, Accountant, or the Barrister of the Steering Group to 'hit' the 'send' button and issue the statement themselves, or ask Jamie to issue it under their name?



It is blatantly obvious from your postings on this thread that you are more concerned with obtaining personal reactions from others rather than anything else.

I've bitten once today, I won't be biting again.

I didn't think I needed to keep making the same point Johnny, you're a grown man I'm sure you understood what I wrote the first time. 

But if you insist I'll go again, at the end of the day these questions are relevant, they could go deeper but they're questions that we as fans do want answers to, so to criticise them for that just says to me you're looking for something to criticise rather than being objective about it and then to get personal about the guy posting it is just embarrassing. Whatever your thoughts on the ST there are some good intentions behind it and some of the Steering Group, so give jamie a break.

Norpig wrote:these are the sort of questions we all want answers to, whether it comes from the ST or not surely? I want to know who the money men behind Holdsworth are as i'm sure so do lot of other fans otherwise what's really changed from the last owners?

The ST wont even tell us who THEIR money men are - the 30 businesses who would fund the ST Preferred Bidder status they applied for!

Nothing is going to change mate because unless you are some altruistic self publicising millionaire or similar then most investors want to keep a very low profile indeed and keep their PRIVATE financial affairs limited to themselves and their accountants.