Bolton Wanderers Football Club Fan Forum for all BWFC Supporters.

You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Bolton Wanderers Banter » Football Ventures Share Ownership.

Football Ventures Share Ownership.

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 00:23

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
Just for the record a confirmation document listing the share ownership for FV dated 10th Jan, 2020, was filed at Companies House today listing the current shareholders as follows (note that there are 2,750,00 pound shares issued in the company)

Sharon - 1,500,000
Mike James - 500,000
Jeff Thomas - 500,000
Nick Luckock - 250,000

(So all the shares seem to be accounted for)

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

It would seem that no changes have been listed in respect of FV (Whites) subsidiary companies (the football club and the Hotel) so I assume everything is still the same for them, namely it is FV (Whites) that is stated to be the ones with 'significant control' of the business.

So on the face of it, it would appear that as it stands at the moment Sharon has enough shares to out vote everyone else if she wishes to.


PS - good of Iles to do an article in the paper and tweet it to his adoring followers about how today was the first year anniversary of the pointless protest march against Anderson outside the Reebok (it influenced absolutely nothing in respect to what was to come) yet completely missed the first year anniversary of the incorporation of Football Ventures (Whites) - on the 11th January, of the company and people who went on to save the club from the very real possibility of extinction.

Well done Marc.

Rolling Eyes

2Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 01:54

wanderlust

wanderlust
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Just for the record a confirmation document listing the share ownership for FV dated 10th Jan, 2020, was filed at Companies House today listing the current shareholders as follows (note that there are 2,750,00 pound shares issued in the company)

Sharon - 1,500,000
Mike James - 500,000
Jeff Thomas - 500,000
Nick Luckock - 250,000

(So all the shares seem to be accounted for)

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

It would seem that no changes have been listed in respect of FV (Whites) subsidiary companies (the football club and the Hotel) so I assume everything is still the same for them, namely it is FV (Whites) that is stated to be the ones with 'significant control' of the business.

So on the face of it, it would appear that as it stands at the moment Sharon has enough shares to out vote everyone else if she wishes to.


PS - good of Iles to do an article in the paper and tweet it to his adoring followers about how today was the first year anniversary of the pointless protest march against Anderson outside the Reebok (it influenced absolutely nothing in respect to what was to come) yet completely missed the first year anniversary of the incorporation of Football Ventures (Whites) - on the 11th January, of the company and people who went on to save the club from the very real possibility of extinction.

Well done Marc.

Rolling Eyes

Grind that axe.

As an aside I actually think the protest march was significant inasmuch that Anderson finally realised that the game was up and he needed an exit.

3Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 02:47

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Just for the record a confirmation document listing the share ownership for FV dated 10th Jan, 2020, was filed at Companies House today listing the current shareholders as follows (note that there are 2,750,00 pound shares issued in the company)

Sharon - 1,500,000
Mike James - 500,000
Jeff Thomas - 500,000
Nick Luckock - 250,000

(So all the shares seem to be accounted for)

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

It would seem that no changes have been listed in respect of FV (Whites) subsidiary companies (the football club and the Hotel) so I assume everything is still the same for them, namely it is FV (Whites) that is stated to be the ones with 'significant control' of the business.

So on the face of it, it would appear that as it stands at the moment Sharon has enough shares to out vote everyone else if she wishes to.


PS - good of Iles to do an article in the paper and tweet it to his adoring followers about how today was the first year anniversary of the pointless protest march against Anderson outside the Reebok (it influenced absolutely nothing in respect to what was to come) yet completely missed the first year anniversary of the incorporation of Football Ventures (Whites) - on the 11th January, of the company and people who went on to save the club from the very real possibility of extinction.

Well done Marc.

Rolling Eyes

Grind that axe.

As an aside I actually think the protest march was significant inasmuch that Anderson finally realised that the game was up and he needed an exit.

Well seeing that the club had no money to honour its commitments to buy  Doidge and Mathews as per their loan/sale agreements that kicked in at the beginning of that January and led to the FA banning them from playing in the FA Cup, FGR's Vance throwing his toys out of his pram and hoicking Doidge back to Forest Green, the EFL having to step in a pay Norwich what they were due for Mathews from their payment to clubs due in mid January, the 'Kangaroo court' public meeting at Victoria Hall in which McGinlay called for the club to be put into Administration (not having the foggiest what that would mean) - and his subsequent banning from the Reebok, The manager and coaching staff not being paid, staff wages being outstanding causing some to even have to visit food banks, etc, etc, etc - ALL taking place BEFORE the protest march took place - then I strongly suggest Ken Anderson knew exactly what the future was going to bring - you didn't have to be as clever as Einstein to work out that the club had run out of money and was in desperate financial trouble - thus making the march an absolute waste of time.

In fact look at the comments both on social media and in the BN comments section and read for yourself what the general perception of the events twelve months on are now - mainly utter embarrassment - and a general call for Iles to stop his hatred and move on like the vast majority of us already have - AND what Sharron has repeatedly asked us all to do.

As for grinding an axe, what would you consider more important, marking the first anniversary of Sharon setting up the company that would save us or marking the first anniversary of Iles mates publicly protesting against his personal nemesis Ken Anderson and achieving precisely nothing more than would have automatically happened if the protest hadn't been held at all?

Trust Iles to pick the wrong horse in a two horse race yet again!

Have you noticed yet that Sharon - like Anderson before her, and Gartside before him and Eddie before him do not grant Iles interviews with themselves?  

I don't think that is pure coincidence, especially with him being so esteemed in his field and all that!

4Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 08:33

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
The protest wasn't pointless or a waste of time, how else are fans able to get their point across about what a mess KA was making of the club? And why would anyone celebrate the setting up of FV at that time? They didn't take charge of the club until months later.

Kenocchio was a disaster for our club and the history books will reflect that, and yet Sluffy still thinks he's done nothing wrong and the major villain in his eyes is a football reporter with the local paper  Rolling Eyes

5Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 09:03

Ten Bobsworth


Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Just for the record a confirmation document listing the share ownership for FV dated 10th Jan, 2020, was filed at Companies House today listing the current shareholders as follows (note that there are 2,750,00 pound shares issued in the company)

Sharon - 1,500,000
Mike James - 500,000
Jeff Thomas - 500,000
Nick Luckock - 250,000

(So all the shares seem to be accounted for)

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

It would seem that no changes have been listed in respect of FV (Whites) subsidiary companies (the football club and the Hotel) so I assume everything is still the same for them, namely it is FV (Whites) that is stated to be the ones with 'significant control' of the business.

So on the face of it, it would appear that as it stands at the moment Sharon has enough shares to out vote everyone else if she wishes to.


PS - good of Iles to do an article in the paper and tweet it to his adoring followers about how today was the first year anniversary of the pointless protest march against Anderson outside the Reebok (it influenced absolutely nothing in respect to what was to come) yet completely missed the first year anniversary of the incorporation of Football Ventures (Whites) - on the 11th January, of the company and people who went on to save the club from the very real possibility of extinction.

Well done Marc.

Rolling Eyes

I suspect this was all agreed on or about 10 January 2020, Sluffy. Companies have 14 days to file a PSC (Persons with Significant Control) notice and none's been filed yet.

But good luck to Sharon, she'll need the patience of a saint to put up with the pot-stirring menace that Iles is.

6Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 09:46

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:The protest wasn't pointless or a waste of time, how else are fans able to get their point across about what a mess KA was making of the club? And why would anyone celebrate the setting up of FV at that time? They didn't take charge of the club until months later.

Kenocchio was a disaster for our club and the history books will reflect that, and yet Sluffy still thinks he's done nothing wrong and the major villain in his eyes is a football reporter with the local paper  Rolling Eyes

Eh??

Seems you've missed the point entirely!

Iles wrote an article on the FIRST ANNIVERSARY of the protest march and NOTHING about the FIRST ANNIVERSARY of FV being set up which preceded the march some several days early. I said nothing about celebrating FV's establishment at the time - you've clearly not read what I wrote and totally confused yourself about that!!!

As for the fans getting their point across about Anderson - to whom were they doing so? The players? The manager? The press and media? The EFL? The club staff? The clubs unpaid suppliers? Vince at FGR? Who???

Everybody KNEW already!!!

So what really was the point?

Also you are most certainly not alone still in not understanding the legal separation between an individual and an incorporated company that they may own. You may well hate Anderson (plenty do) but that doesn't mean he's acted illegally in what he's done.

To date - and despite forensic examination of BWFC's accounts by a platoon of accountants - Anderson has not been charged with doing anything at all!

Iles wrote his article on the anniversary of the protest because of his own personal involvement/hatred of Anderson - the march achieved nothing other than people having a strop in public together on the night - not that it was a watershed moment or some significant moment in Anderson going - the financial die had been cast months before that. A vastly more significant anniversary to celebrate however, the incorporation of the company that ultimately SAVED our club was however overlooked completely by Iles.

Wouldn't an article commemorating how Football Ventures came about, the people that have been involved with it, how the club was saved and what plans they have for the future, in the year they have been in existence have been a more positive and relevant read than looking back in anger on an event that achieved nothing much more than a load of people having a big moan on the night a year ago?



7Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 10:01

wanderlust

wanderlust
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Just for the record a confirmation document listing the share ownership for FV dated 10th Jan, 2020, was filed at Companies House today listing the current shareholders as follows (note that there are 2,750,00 pound shares issued in the company)

Sharon - 1,500,000
Mike James - 500,000
Jeff Thomas - 500,000
Nick Luckock - 250,000

(So all the shares seem to be accounted for)

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

It would seem that no changes have been listed in respect of FV (Whites) subsidiary companies (the football club and the Hotel) so I assume everything is still the same for them, namely it is FV (Whites) that is stated to be the ones with 'significant control' of the business.

So on the face of it, it would appear that as it stands at the moment Sharon has enough shares to out vote everyone else if she wishes to.


PS - good of Iles to do an article in the paper and tweet it to his adoring followers about how today was the first year anniversary of the pointless protest march against Anderson outside the Reebok (it influenced absolutely nothing in respect to what was to come) yet completely missed the first year anniversary of the incorporation of Football Ventures (Whites) - on the 11th January, of the company and people who went on to save the club from the very real possibility of extinction.

Well done Marc.

Rolling Eyes

Grind that axe.

As an aside I actually think the protest march was significant inasmuch that Anderson finally realised that the game was up and he needed an exit.

Well seeing that the club had no money to honour its commitments to buy  Doidge and Mathews as per their loan/sale agreements that kicked in at the beginning of that January and led to the FA banning them from playing in the FA Cup, FGR's Vance throwing his toys out of his pram and hoicking Doidge back to Forest Green, the EFL having to step in a pay Norwich what they were due for Mathews from their payment to clubs due in mid January, the 'Kangaroo court' public meeting at Victoria Hall in which McGinlay called for the club to be put into Administration (not having the foggiest what that would mean) - and his subsequent banning from the Reebok, The manager and coaching staff not being paid, staff wages being outstanding causing some to even have to visit food banks, etc, etc, etc - ALL taking place BEFORE the protest march took place - then I strongly suggest Ken Anderson knew exactly what the future was going to bring - you didn't have to be as clever as Einstein to work out that the club had run out of money and was in desperate financial trouble - thus making the march an absolute waste of time.

In fact look at the comments both on social media and in the BN comments section and read for yourself what the general perception of the events twelve months on are now - mainly utter embarrassment - and a general call for Iles to stop his hatred and move on like the vast majority of us already have - AND what Sharron has repeatedly asked us all to do.

As for grinding an axe, what would you consider more important, marking the first anniversary of Sharon setting up the company that would save us or marking the first anniversary of Iles mates publicly protesting against his personal nemesis Ken Anderson and achieving precisely nothing more than would have automatically happened if the protest hadn't been held at all?

Trust Iles to pick the wrong horse in a two horse race yet again!

Have you noticed yet that Sharon - like Anderson before her, and Gartside before him and Eddie before him do not grant Iles interviews with themselves?  

I don't think that is pure coincidence, especially with him being so esteemed in his field and all that!

I totally get it that you don't rate Iles' journalism and I think we can all agree it's neither particularly insightful or investigative, but do you really need to have a go at him in EVERY post in which you mention his name?

IMO he produces the kind of local rag pap that is geared to his target audience and is no different from a hundred other local rag sports journalists around the country.

8Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 10:03

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Ok so i misread the part about the anniversary, fair enough.

As for the demonstration. yes everyone with an interest in BWFC would know what was happening, the point of it was to bring it to a wider audience. The people who turned up for it were and still are passionate about the club so why wouldn't they want to protest? 

As for your irrrational hatred of Iles, i read rhe BN online every day and he has done plenty of articles about FV and as far as i can remember has never been critical of them.

As for that crook Anderson (and yes he is a crook i don't care what you say), the less his name is mentioned on here and in general the better. Why you still defend him is laughable and ridiculous.

9Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 10:08

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I suspect this was all agreed on or about 10 January 2020, Sluffy. Companies have 14 days to file a PSC (Persons with Significant Control) notice and none's been filed yet.

But good luck to Sharon, she'll need the patience of a saint to put up with the pot-stirring menace that Iles is.

Is my thinking correct in that if the shares have been allocated as shown that this implies that Sharron has put in £1m of her own money to purchase the unallocated shares that were shown in September?

Presumably if so all this was pre-planned and agreed in advance one would assume?

As for Iles, as you can see from above, he has his admirers on here too!

10Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 10:44

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Ok so i misread the part about the anniversary, fair enough.

As for the demonstration. yes everyone with an interest in BWFC would know what was happening, the point of it was to bring it to a wider audience. The people who turned up for it were and still are passionate about the club so why wouldn't they want to protest? 

As for your irrrational hatred of Iles, i read rhe BN online every day and he has done plenty of articles about FV and as far as i can remember has never been critical of them.

As for that crook Anderson (and yes he is a crook i don't care what you say), the less his name is mentioned on here and in general the better. Why you still defend him is laughable and ridiculous.

I thought you were the one with a social conscience, one of those who believed that a person was innocent until proven guilty?

I'd be obliged if you can give just one example where Anderson has broken any law or regulation whilst he was at the club.

What you can't but you are publicly calling him a crook (based solely on the hearsay of others)?

Yet I'm the one who is being ridiculous?

Going back to the march - leading up to it the BBC held that public meeting involving the likes of Iles, McGinlay, Dearden and Tetlow all being on the panel talking about the crisis at the club and Anderson ownership.  We also had Vince having his public condemnation of Anderson over the Doidge (non) transfer.  Iles and the ST had got together and had the two Baronesses publicly criticising how Anderson was running the club.  There were articles already in the national press about what was happening at the club under Anderson (David Conn in the Guardian for example). Twitter 'influencers' such as the self important Kieran Maguire had written articles he linked to implying Anderson was dishonest - so who was this wider audience that was somehow missing out that the march was attempting to get the message too?

There wasn't one - everybody with any passing interest in Bolton at all already knew what was happening and as I've said nothing new was achieved from it - so much so that the planned follow up protest at the next home game was quickly shelved because of the complete lack of apathy resulting from the original one not achieving anything such as getting Anderson leaving the club/or putting his hand in his pocket and paying the bills  as many seemed to thing would happen (showing once again how many people simply did not understand how companies and the people who own companies are separate legal entities to each other).

The march achieved nothing in reality than people having a good strop on the night.

As for Iles criticising FV?

Again what are you on about?

I've not suggested he should have - I don't know why you've got the impression I've suggested otherwise???

11Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 11:56

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
I'm not biting anymore Sluffy. if you truly believe that KA is innocent and did nothing to line his own pocket and almost put us out of business then you carry on.

12Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 12:02

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I'm not biting anymore Sluffy. if you truly believe that KA is innocent and did nothing to line his own pocket and almost put us out of business then you carry on.
Wise move. Best to leave the room.

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

13Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 12:34

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I'm not biting anymore Sluffy. if you truly believe that KA is innocent and did nothing to line his own pocket and almost put us out of business then you carry on.

I'll let the law decide if he's done anything illegal and not those on social media, thank you very much.

14Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 13:14

Ten Bobsworth


Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I suspect this was all agreed on or about 10 January 2020, Sluffy. Companies have 14 days to file a PSC (Persons with Significant Control) notice and none's been filed yet.

But good luck to Sharon, she'll need the patience of a saint to put up with the pot-stirring menace that Iles is.

Is my thinking correct in that if the shares have been allocated as shown that this implies that Sharron has put in £1m of her own money to purchase the unallocated shares that were shown in September?

Presumably if so all this was pre-planned and agreed in advance one would assume?

As for Iles, as you can see from above, he has his admirers on here too!

Not quite.

If you recall a PSC notice was filed on 12 Sept 2019 declaring that there was no PSC at that time. i.e. 25% of the shares or more.

Therefore at that time there must have been a minimum of five shareholders with no-one holding as many as 500,000 shares of the £1,750,000 shares issued.

I suspect there may have been six. But no matter, Nick Mason and Keith Harris remain as chargeholders but not shareholders. We might see a bit more about that in the coming days but its unlikely that there will be any cogent explanation in the BN.

I think most of us could accept that KA is hard-nosed, thick skinned and sharper than most. But isn't that what the club needed to steer a way through the stormy seas of 2016 and 2017?

His achievements far exceeded expectations with the club staving off all manner of financial threats whilst regaining and holding on to Championship status. It was never pretty but it kept the academy going, the club permanent staff in employment, avoided points penalties and, for the first time in years, achieved a real profit for the club when KA persuaded Cardiff City to part with £6m for the limited talents of G Madine whilst also persuading Blumarble to accept £1m less than Dean Holdsworth had committed the club to pay.

I suspect that the players were egged on by bystanders to go on strike in the summer of 2018 in order to teach KA a lesson for treating the ST and the BN with the disdain he did and this really poisoned the whole atmosphere. The financial hump was still there and the only way it could be overcome was new money from somewhere. It didn't happen.

Anyone running an insolvent business runs significant personal risks. KA was in that position and knew it and there's no shortage of aggrieved personages who would love to nail him if they can get him on anything. So far they haven't.

15Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 14:03

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I suspect this was all agreed on or about 10 January 2020, Sluffy. Companies have 14 days to file a PSC (Persons with Significant Control) notice and none's been filed yet.

But good luck to Sharon, she'll need the patience of a saint to put up with the pot-stirring menace that Iles is.

Is my thinking correct in that if the shares have been allocated as shown that this implies that Sharron has put in £1m of her own money to purchase the unallocated shares that were shown in September?

Presumably if so all this was pre-planned and agreed in advance one would assume?

As for Iles, as you can see from above, he has his admirers on here too!

Not quite.

If you recall a PSC notice was filed on 12 Sept 2019 declaring that there was no PSC at that time. i.e. 25% of the shares or more.

Therefore at that time there must have been a minimum of five shareholders with no-one holding as many as 500,000 shares of the £1,750,000 shares issued.

I suspect there may have been six. But no matter, Nick Mason and Keith Harris remain as chargeholders but not shareholders. We might see a bit more about that in the coming days but its unlikely that there will be any cogent explanation in the BN.

I think most of us could accept that KA is hard-nosed, thick skinned and sharper than most. But isn't that what the club needed to steer a way through the stormy seas of 2016 and 2017?

His achievements far exceeded expectations with the club staving off all manner of financial threats whilst regaining and holding on to Championship status. It was never pretty but it kept the academy going, the club permanent staff in employment, avoided points penalties and, for the first time in years, achieved a real profit for the club when KA persuaded Cardiff City to part with £6m for the limited talents of G Madine whilst also persuading Blumarble to accept £1m less than Dean Holdsworth had committed the club to pay.

I suspect that the players were egged on by bystanders to go on strike in the summer of 2018 in order to teach KA a lesson for treating the ST and the BN with the disdain he did and this really poisoned the whole atmosphere. The financial hump was still there and the only way it could be overcome was new money from somewhere. It didn't happen.

Anyone running an insolvent business runs significant personal risks. KA was in that position and knew it and there's no shortage of aggrieved personages who would love to nail him if they can get him on anything. So far they haven't.

Thanks Ten Bob but I still can't seem to grasp it.

I fully understand the reasoning why there must have been five or more shareholders based on the Sept statement but the January statement seems to contradict this by stating the people who were shareholders or ceased to be shareholders since the last confirmation statement amounted to just the four currently listed plus Parminder Basran, who only held a single share in any event?

I'm obviously missing/not understanding something or another?

Not that it matters really, it's just that I'm not exactly sure what it all means?

I'm assuming the unallocated million shares have now been allocated as shown but does this mean they have also been paid up (if so has Sharon put £1m of her own money into the club or not?) and if they aren't paid up would that effect  the voting rights?

I'm sure whatever the case is though that the four of them are on the same page so to speak and not trying to plunder the club as Holdsworth seem to do with the BM loan and all it entailed (again absolutely no article from Iles into what Holdsworth got up to! - funny that).

Iles was clearly at the forefront of what was going on with the preseason unofficial strike and rushed to print the story whilst the Scottish club we were due to play did the decent thing and made some excuse why the game was off and did not mention a strike at all at the time.

Anyway we are stuck with the esteemed one as our local papers reporter as yet again although there were massive stories to tell (he was covering Bury's demise at the time as well remember) and plenty to get his teeth into, again didn't do anything like enough to even get nominated to be on the Northwest's Sports Journalist of the year - let alone win it!

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

Lucky us to still have him then!

16Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Wed Jan 22 2020, 14:56

Ten Bobsworth


Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I suspect this was all agreed on or about 10 January 2020, Sluffy. Companies have 14 days to file a PSC (Persons with Significant Control) notice and none's been filed yet.

But good luck to Sharon, she'll need the patience of a saint to put up with the pot-stirring menace that Iles is.

Is my thinking correct in that if the shares have been allocated as shown that this implies that Sharron has put in £1m of her own money to purchase the unallocated shares that were shown in September?

Presumably if so all this was pre-planned and agreed in advance one would assume?

As for Iles, as you can see from above, he has his admirers on here too!

Not quite.

If you recall a PSC notice was filed on 12 Sept 2019 declaring that there was no PSC at that time. i.e. 25% of the shares or more.

Therefore at that time there must have been a minimum of five shareholders with no-one holding as many as 500,000 shares of the £1,750,000 shares issued.

I suspect there may have been six. But no matter, Nick Mason and Keith Harris remain as chargeholders but not shareholders. We might see a bit more about that in the coming days but its unlikely that there will be any cogent explanation in the BN.

I think most of us could accept that KA is hard-nosed, thick skinned and sharper than most. But isn't that what the club needed to steer a way through the stormy seas of 2016 and 2017?

His achievements far exceeded expectations with the club staving off all manner of financial threats whilst regaining and holding on to Championship status. It was never pretty but it kept the academy going, the club permanent staff in employment, avoided points penalties and, for the first time in years, achieved a real profit for the club when KA persuaded Cardiff City to part with £6m for the limited talents of G Madine whilst also persuading Blumarble to accept £1m less than Dean Holdsworth had committed the club to pay.

I suspect that the players were egged on by bystanders to go on strike in the summer of 2018 in order to teach KA a lesson for treating the ST and the BN with the disdain he did and this really poisoned the whole atmosphere. The financial hump was still there and the only way it could be overcome was new money from somewhere. It didn't happen.

Anyone running an insolvent business runs significant personal risks. KA was in that position and knew it and there's no shortage of aggrieved personages who would love to nail him if they can get him on anything. So far they haven't.

Thanks Ten Bob but I still can't seem to grasp it.

I fully understand the reasoning why there must have been five or more shareholders based on the Sept statement but the January statement seems to contradict this by stating the people who were shareholders or ceased to be shareholders since the last confirmation statement amounted to just the four currently listed plus Parminder Basran, who only held a single share in any event?

I'm obviously missing/not understanding something or another?

Not that it matters really, it's just that I'm not exactly sure what it all means?

I'm assuming the unallocated million shares have now been allocated as shown but does this mean they have also been paid up (if so has Sharon put £1m of her own money into the club or not?) and if they aren't paid up would that effect  the voting rights?

I'm sure whatever the case is though that the four of them are on the same page so to speak and not trying to plunder the club as Holdsworth seem to do with the BM loan and all it entailed (again absolutely no article from Iles into what Holdsworth got up to! - funny that).

Iles was clearly at the forefront of what was going on with the preseason unofficial strike and rushed to print the story whilst the Scottish club we were due to play did the decent thing and made some excuse why the game was off and did not mention a strike at all at the time.

Anyway we are stuck with the esteemed one as our local papers reporter as yet again although there were massive stories to tell (he was covering Bury's demise at the time as well remember) and plenty to get his teeth into, again didn't do anything like enough to even get nominated to be on the Northwest's Sports Journalist of the year - let alone win it!

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

Lucky us to still have him then!
You are right in that its not entirely clear.  The September document referred to the allotment of £1,749,994 fully paid shares and a further £1m on which nothing had been paid. These added to the 6 fully paid shares referred to in the 2 July statement make a total share capital of £2,750,000.

Are they all fully paid now? Probably but we don't know for sure.

That's just the share capital, of course, and it isn't a lot but we can be sure that it has been agreed that Sharon should be and is the controlling party of FV. That must have entailed some share transfers.

Iles is quite competent on footie reporting but he seems to want to make the news not just report it and to do both in accordance with his personal prejudices usually based on ignorance of facts and financial realities.

You might have noticed that, on the anniversary of the death of Eddie Davies, his widow arranged for the publication of a memoriam in Isle of Man newspapers. Nothing in Bolton where most of 'Eddie's fortune' had been spent.



Last edited by Ten Bobsworth on Thu Jan 23 2020, 08:40; edited 1 time in total

17Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Thu Jan 23 2020, 08:36

Ten Bobsworth


Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
Apologies for duplication.



Last edited by Ten Bobsworth on Thu Jan 23 2020, 09:40; edited 1 time in total

18Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Thu Jan 23 2020, 08:56

Ten Bobsworth


Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
I see, Sluffy, that I have not quite answered your question about whether the £1m of allotted, but not paid for, shares carried voting rights.

Its all a bit technical but I think the normal rule would be that they did carry voting rights. So, if the £1m unpaid shares had previously been allotted to Sharon, she would have been a PSC at the time that there was a declaration that there was no PSC.

Nowt to worry about in any of this but it is nice to know who exactly is in legal control and Marc Iles and his fan club need to know who is personally responsible for unpaid bills.

Next time he organises a lynch mob, they at least need to know who to lynch.

19Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Thu Jan 23 2020, 13:07

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
A lynch mob? Hmm. Interesting.

20Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Thu Jan 23 2020, 13:12

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Don't interrupt the grown ups on this thread Boncey, us children should be seen and not heard.

21Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Thu Jan 23 2020, 14:40

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I see, Sluffy, that I have not quite answered your question about whether the £1m of allotted, but not paid for, shares carried voting rights.

Its all a bit technical but I think the normal rule would be that they did carry voting rights. So, if the £1m unpaid shares had previously been allotted to Sharon, she would have been a PSC at the time that there was a declaration that there was no PSC.

Nowt to worry about in any of this but it is nice to know who exactly is in legal control and Marc Iles and his fan club need to know who is personally responsible for unpaid bills.

Next time he organises a lynch mob, they at least need to know who to lynch.

Thanks for the fuller explanation Ten Bob - it does tie up a number of loose ends.

Ignore the childish comments above, whether their authors accept it or not Iles is quite clearly can be classed an 'influencer' on social media in regards to Bolton Wanderers and substantial number of people who follow him take everything he says, including his thoughts and opinions, as facts and the truth.

They take no account of his personal biases and dislikes in how he manipulates the crowd to his point of view regardless if it is the right one or not.

It seems given a choice between believing what Iles says and those few people who clearly can disprove what he has said with facts, they still believe Iles and mock or abuse those who have questioned him.

Fwiw Iles isn't even highly regarded in his own field of Sports Journalism even within the confines of this region.  You would think with all the juicy story's to be had with Anderson, Vince/Doidge non payment, players strikes games off, players strikes refusing to train, players strikes refusing to get on the coach to away matches, players terminating their contracts, fans protest march, public meeting at the Victoria Hall with club legend McGinlay calling for Administration, the ST's public meeting where board members stated that FV, Mike James and EDT were no good, Administration, 15 point penalty and two year embargo, separate Administration for the hotel (and thus two sets if Administrators with conflicting aims) the attempted sale of the club - FV walks away, sale of the club - Bassini buys it - or not? Bassini at the Reebok as the owner, some randoms wanting to buy the hotel - thus stopping the overall sale to FV, Bassini court order to stop the sale of the club to FV whilst he takes Anderson to court, EFL lets Bolton play whilst in Admin, Bury thrown out of the league, starting the season with the kids,finally sale of the club to FV, future plans for the club by new owners, influx of new players on last day of transfer window, Peter Kenyon's involvement?, no further points deduction resulting from the player strikes, and loads and loads of other story's to numerous to mention, Iles didn't even reach the shortlist for his category!

North West finalists - Sports Journalist
Jon Colman – News & Star/Cumberland News
Tom Evans – Liverpool Echo
Chris Hall – ITV Granada Reports
Matt Jones – Radio City
Matt Scrafton – The Blackpool Gazette

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

His professional peers don't rate him.

Neither do I.

22Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Thu Jan 23 2020, 14:46

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Don't interrupt the grown ups on this thread Boncey, us children should be seen and not heard.
Private threads might be an idea. Invitation only. Very Happy

23Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Thu Jan 23 2020, 15:42

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
You really are a very pompous and patronising man Sluffy, it just makes me laugh now. 

I'm off now to join the rest of the sheep who can't think for themselves.

24Football Ventures Share Ownership. Empty Re: Football Ventures Share Ownership. on Fri Jan 24 2020, 09:52

Ten Bobsworth


Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Don't interrupt the grown ups on this thread Boncey, us children should be seen and not heard.
Don't take it personally, Norpig. The majority of Berni Madoff's clients thought Harry Markopolos was crying wolf until they finally figured out that Bernie wasn't the cat's pyjamas.

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum