Bolton Wanderers Football Club Fan Forum for all BWFC Supporters.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Supporters Trust letter to the Football league

+10
JAH
observer
Chairmanda
BoltonTillIDie
Boggersbelief
gloswhite
whatsgoingon
Sluffy
Natasha Whittam
Norpig
14 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Reply to topic

Go down  Message [Page 4 of 5]

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

Fabians Right Peg wrote:
Sluffy wrote:
Does it to you?
That is my main issue here mutual trust relies on speaking directly to individuals involved, not running off to third parties, publishing private correspondence or demanding answers where you rightly point out you are not in a position to demand things.

In terms of what Anderson and holdsworth are doing to disenfranchise fans, they may have done nothing that has made the situation worse, yes wages are being paid, however they are taking a lot of time resolving the issues that exist like the accounts and embargos.

Yes they may have answered the steering groups questions partly,  however there is a view that they can answer questions until the cows come home, what is needed are actions that show the club is moving in the right direction.  For now I am personally willing to give the new owners more time, however that will wear thin as it has with others already.

The timing of the letter is wrong, the ST needs to be holding regular meetings with the owners, build a relationship and work with them. This letter makes that almost impossible.

So we end up with Owners that appear to be failing to take any action to deal with the current issues and a supporters trust that has completely isolated itself from those owners and is fast ruining any chance of being a credible voice for the fans.

Not a great start to a new era.

'Appear to be failing' or 'working on the issues in financial confidence' - which one is it do you think - as we only know the ST's take on things!

As I said above Holdsworth and Anderson are well within time to successfully fulfil all their financial obligations and who are we to know that this isn't exactly what they are doing and will achieve?

It would appear to me the interim leadership of the ST are agitating the situation for some reason best known to themselves, which is deliberately leading them and the yet to be elected ST board into direct conflict with Holdsworth and Anderson (or maybe they are being played perhaps by one of the partners against the other as Birch played them previously?).

Either way there appears no need for it and it clearly it is damaging for the establishment of mutual trust between the two.

All the more curious that the former Interim Chair of the ST Richard Hurst (who was brought in for corporate skills and expertise) seems to have disappeared from the scene without a word being said?

scottjames30

scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

I'm loving life though, it's good at the min.

Fuck them off Sluffy.

Fabians Right Peg

Fabians Right Peg
Andy Walker
Andy Walker

Sluffy wrote:
'Appear to be failing' or 'working on the issues in financial confidence' - which one is it do you think - as we only know the ST's take on things!

As I said above Holdsworth and Anderson are well within time to successfully fulfil all their financial obligations and who are we to know that this isn't exactly what they are doing and will achieve?

It would appear to me the interim leadership of the ST are agitating the situation for some reason best known to themselves, which is deliberately leading them and the yet to be elected ST board into direct conflict with Holdsworth and Anderson (or maybe they are being played perhaps by one of the partners against the other as Birch played them previously?).

Either way there appears no need for it and it clearly it is damaging for the establishment of mutual trust between the two.

All the more curious that the former Interim Chair of the ST Richard Hurst (who was brought in for corporate skills and expertise) seems to have disappeared from the scene without a word being said?

I believe that the answers fall somewhere in the middle ground as is usually the case, I think issues between Holdsworth and Anderson are hindering decision making and progress in dealing with the financial mess the club is in, as well as appointing the new manager, from my reading it seems Anderson is using his promised finance as leverage against Holdsworth.

Being in time and to fulfil their obligations is fine, but leaving submitting accounts until the eleventh hour does not instil a lot of confidence for either the fans or prospective investors.

As for motives, perhaps there are none and it is just inexperience, or the ST are meeting with complete resistance from the new ownership, unlikely but possible.

The steering group does appear to be breaking up perhaps a letter to supporters direct may answer a few of our questions?

Guest


Guest

I like the letter when it says they have been in charge 11 weeks and they haven't got the embargo lifted or filed accounts, forgetting the fact it took them 10 weeks to set up a bank account.

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

Fabians Right Peg wrote:
Sluffy wrote:
'Appear to be failing' or 'working on the issues in financial confidence' - which one is it do you think - as we only know the ST's take on things!

As I said above Holdsworth and Anderson are well within time to successfully fulfil all their financial obligations and who are we to know that this isn't exactly what they are doing and will achieve?

It would appear to me the interim leadership of the ST are agitating the situation for some reason best known to themselves, which is deliberately leading them and the yet to be elected ST board into direct conflict with Holdsworth and Anderson (or maybe they are being played perhaps by one of the partners against the other as Birch played them previously?).

Either way there appears no need for it and it clearly it is damaging for the establishment of mutual trust between the two.

All the more curious that the former Interim Chair of the ST Richard Hurst (who was brought in for corporate skills and expertise) seems to have disappeared from the scene without a word being said?

I believe that the answers fall somewhere in the middle ground as is usually the case, I think issues between Holdsworth and Anderson are hindering decision making and progress in dealing with the financial mess the club is in, as well as appointing the new manager, from my reading it seems Anderson is using his promised finance as leverage against Holdsworth.

Being in time and to fulfil their obligations is fine, but leaving submitting accounts until the eleventh hour does not instil a lot of confidence for either the fans or prospective investors.

As for motives, perhaps there are none and it is just inexperience, or the ST are meeting with complete resistance from the new ownership, unlikely but possible.

The steering group does appear to be breaking up perhaps a letter to supporters direct may answer a few of our questions?

Well if we accept that there is some form of 'battle' going on between the two owners why can't we equally accept that they found more skeletons in the accounts than they were prepared for and it is taken them longer than expected to sort out the financial problems they took on?

I don't know that to be true but I nor anyone else not in the know doesn't know if that is false either!

Until financial deadlines and payments have been missed I would have thought it would be reasonable to accept the owners are going about their business in a fit and proper manner - even though that would not be a popular view by some on here.

As for the ST's Steering Group breaking up (I know for a fact one of them has already left without any apparent announcement being made) I would have thought it incumbent of the ST itself (under its well trumpeted 'transparency' banner it proclaims to be - keeping people up to date and informed - unlike previous owners!) to at least inform its membership that its head, Richard Hurst the Interim Chair had apparently left!

And if he hasn't why then did Bridge sign the letter to the PL in the capacity of the 'Interim Chair'?

What is going on?

Is the ST not practising what it preaches then?





JAH

JAH
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly

Did you join the ST Sluffy?

scottjames30

scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Fuck him off Sluffy.

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

JAH wrote:Did you join the ST Sluffy?

Did you post your agenda in full yet?

JAH

JAH
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly

I'm not getting into an argument with Kevin Keyboard Warrior at this time of night on a school night. Some of us have proper jobs we have to be up early for in the morning, besides I'm too fucking old and too fucking tired. Night night.

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

my plan worked then i see  Twisted Evil

whatsgoingon

whatsgoingon
Frank Worthington
Frank Worthington

I think a lot of this is down to the fact that the season is over and post season boredom is creeping in and people are reading between the lines on everything, I too have participated questioning both the ST and the owners.
However looking at things logically, from the ownerships point of view it is becoming increasingly apparent there are a few unpleasant surprises arising, a recent one being the Spearing and Wellington money. These are things that under normal circumstances good due diligence would pick up, however the amateurish (or was it clever/devious) way Eddy sold the club changing terms and generally distracting from issues like this means things would be missed usually to the detriment of the buyer. 
That said everything appears to be getting paid despite people questioning them, regarding the embargo and accounts you would have to say these extra costs have to be factored in before forecasts can be made so lets see what happens. Regarding the manager there appears to be indecision but the managerial merry-go round is in full swing at the moment so maybe patience is the right way, they are obviously not convinced by anyone sufficiently yet so the fact that new candidates are appearing on the market almost daily means we may be prudent to hang on, as an extra bonus we aren't paying any extra wages before we shed a load of flotsam and jetsam at the end of June. So despite things being stirred up against them there isn't anything that is pointing to the fact that we have dodgy owners and we are in the shit as some are trying to convince us.
Regarding the ST I think most people are in agreement that is principle it is a good thing, people also seem to be in agreement that the questions they are asking are relevant but after that it becomes a bit of a marmite situation of either very pro or very anti, but while I tend to be in agreement that they are overstepping the mark and appear to be power crazed, it is new territory to them and mistakes will be made. 
The fact that they are trying to get answers to questions really they have no given right to know the answers to and the clumsy way they are going about getting them can only be detrimental to the relationship between the club and the ST, so they need to think before they go charging in headlong. If I was one of the owners I wouldn't be in any rush to sit down and try and get the ST on board, my back would be up and I would treat them with the contempt they appear to hold the owners in, so if the ST wants to play a part in the club they need to start changing direction otherwise they are going to be pushed further and further away and will hold no value to anyone.



Last edited by whatsgoingon on Wed Jun 01, 2016 10:15 am; edited 1 time in total

Guest


Guest

whatsgoingon wrote:I think a lot of this is down to the fact that the season is over and post season boredom is creeping in and people are reading between the lines on everything, I too have participated questioning both the ST and the owners.
However looking at things logically, from the ownerships point of view it is becoming increasingly apparent there are a few unpleasant surprises arising, a recent one being the Spearing and Wellington money. These are things that under normal circumstances good due diligence would pick up, however the amateurish (or was it clever/devious) way Eddy sold the club changing terms and generally distracting from issues like this means things would be missed usually to the detriment of the buyer. That said everything appears to be getting paid despite people questioning them, regarding the embargo and accounts you would have to say these extra costs have to be factored in before forecasts can be made so lets see what happens. Regarding the manager there appears to be indecision but the managerial merry-go round is in full swing at the moment so maybe patience is the right way, they are obviously not convinced by anyone sufficiently yet so the fact that new candidates are appearing on the market almost daily means we may be prudent to hang on, as an extra bonus we aren't paying any extra wages before we shed a load of flotsam and jetsam at the end of June. So despite things being stirred up against them there isn't anything that is pointing to the fact that we have dodgy owners and we are in the shit as some are trying to convince us.
Regarding the ST I think most people are in agreement that is principle it is a good thing, people also seem to be in agreement that the questions they are asking are relevant but after that it becomes a bit of a marmite situation of either very pro or very anti, but while I tend to be in agreement that they are overstepping the mark and appear to be power crazed, it is new territory to them and mistakes will be made. The fact that they are trying to get answers to questions really they have no given right to know the answers to and the clumsy way they are going about getting them can only be detrimental to the relationship between the club and the ST, so they need to think before they go charging in headlong. If I was one of the owners I wouldn't be in any rush to sit down and try and get the ST on board, my back would be up and I would treat them with the contempt they appear to hold the owners in, so if the ST wants to play a part in the club they need to start changing direction otherwise they are going to be pushed further and further away and will hold no value to anyone.
:clap:

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Paragraphs, paragraphs, paragraphs.

whatsgoingon

whatsgoingon
Frank Worthington
Frank Worthington

Natasha Whittam wrote:Paragraphs, paragraphs, paragraphs.
pedant

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

If you want to be taken seriously on this site you need paragraphs in your long posts.

It took LPP two years to gain a little bit of respect on here.

whatsgoingon

whatsgoingon
Frank Worthington
Frank Worthington

Couple more paragraphs in there for you,

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

whatsgoingon wrote:I think a lot of this is down to the fact that the season is over and post season boredom is creeping in and people are reading between the lines on everything, I too have participated questioning both the ST and the owners.

However looking at things logically, from the ownerships point of view it is becoming increasingly apparent there are a few unpleasant surprises arising, a recent one being the Spearing and Wellington money. These are things that under normal circumstances good due diligence would pick up, however the amateurish (or was it clever/devious) way Eddy sold the club changing terms and generally distracting from issues like this means things would be missed usually to the detriment of the buyer. 

That said everything appears to be getting paid despite people questioning them, regarding the embargo and accounts you would have to say these extra costs have to be factored in before forecasts can be made so lets see what happens. Regarding the manager there appears to be indecision but the managerial merry-go round is in full swing at the moment so maybe patience is the right way, they are obviously not convinced by anyone sufficiently yet so the fact that new candidates are appearing on the market almost daily means we may be prudent to hang on, as an extra bonus we aren't paying any extra wages before we shed a load of flotsam and jetsam at the end of June. So despite things being stirred up against them there isn't anything that is pointing to the fact that we have dodgy owners and we are in the shit as some are trying to convince us.
Regarding the ST I think most people are in agreement that is principle it is a good thing, people also seem to be in agreement that the questions they are asking are relevant but after that it becomes a bit of a marmite situation of either very pro or very anti, but while I tend to be in agreement that they are overstepping the mark and appear to be power crazed, it is new territory to them and mistakes will be made. 
The fact that they are trying to get answers to questions really they have no given right to know the answers to and the clumsy way they are going about getting them can only be detrimental to the relationship between the club and the ST, so they need to think before they go charging in headlong. If I was one of the owners I wouldn't be in any rush to sit down and try and get the ST on board, my back would be up and I would treat them with the contempt they appear to hold the owners in, so if the ST wants to play a part in the club they need to start changing direction otherwise they are going to be pushed further and further away and will hold no value to anyone.

Great post mate.

I don't go along with all of it but it is reason and mostly fair - although I can accept anyone making a mistake or misjudgement I feel that some of the lengths the Steering Group has gone to - going to the FL first rather than even speaking to the owners for instance - as been done with clear and predetermined purpose and is not just some accidental error to simply wave away.

I rather feel the die has been cast now with the antagonism agitated against the owners by the Steering Group now being a factor in the on going relationship between the two at least for the foreseeable future and I don't honestly think that will change whilst the activists on the Steering Group retain power and influence within the ST (and I don't simply mean being elected to office or not).

I think I speak for most of us mate when I say your reasoned contribution to Nuts have made the place a better place for all our enjoyment and long may you stay around (paragraphs do make you easier to read though!).

whatsgoingon

whatsgoingon
Frank Worthington
Frank Worthington

After writing this I read an interesting article on the Bolton News where Anderson was talking about the ST, specifically about potential academy contributions (which I personally feel would be a great use for the money this year and would certainly get me to put a tenner in).
In it he states he will work with them to the best of his ability so may be the damage isn't as great as it might be, although given that potential funding is there it makes sense to be politic in these circumstances.
I think that the steering group needs to be sorted quickly, it needs to be completely transparent and moving forward someone with experience in communication and building relationships needs to be a priority appointment.
The people presently in charge do in my opinion deserve credit for getting the thing up and running, but if it is to have any credence the right people with business sense and maturity need to be elected otherwise it could become another BWSA with lots of opinions and no voice.

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

The article is already on Nuts -

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

The interesting thing about it is the final paragraphs where once again the Steering Groups antagonism towards the owners is showing and they are looking for conflict rather than resolution - whilst the future of the academy for next season (only several weeks off now) hangs in the balance.

If the ST DOESN'T want to put money into the academy then fair enough BUT why then ask the question in its members survey that they are using as the mandate for the ST (which I believe is a wrong thing to do anyway but that's a different debate for another day) - the results show overwhelming support to do so - and hold an earlier meeting with the owners PROPOSING contributing to the academy in the first place only to point blank shut the door on the idea now?

Surely the way to go would have been to TALK with the owners to find some suitable and mutually beneficial way to bring this about - maybe by obtaining contractual assurances on ring fencing any donations from the ST to the academy directly?

With so many financial and legal experts on the Steering Committee one would have thought some form of positive action could have been achieved for the benefit of the academy players surely?

Seems to be the Steering Group is sticking to its confrontational stance with the new owners even if it impacts negatively on the immediate future of the kids in the academy and probably even the club itself.

So much for their pledge of 'building mutual trust' between each other!

whatsgoingon

whatsgoingon
Frank Worthington
Frank Worthington

My reading of the last but one paragraph is that they are in agreement with the idea but want to use it to strong-arm the owners into divulging all the financial details which they seem to think they're entitled to, which again points to an arrogance and abuse of position.
I personally don't think there is a sophisticated agenda, I just think they're drunk on power.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 4 of 5]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Reply to topic

Permissions in this forum:
You can reply to topics in this forum