Bolton Wanderers Football Club Fan Forum for all BWFC Supporters.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Bolton Wanderers Banter » Latest BWFC Accounts - Year ended 30th June, 2020

Latest BWFC Accounts - Year ended 30th June, 2020

+7
luckyPeterpiper
Cajunboy
Feby
boltonbonce
Ten Bobsworth
Sluffy
BoltonTillIDie
11 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

Go down  Message [Page 6 of 10]

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I thought the possible financial implications of this might interest you Bob?

FV are going to need all the money they can get, Sluffy, and then some.

Still the great mass of Wanderers fans on t'internet are convinced its going to be reet even though most of 'em haven't a clue of the financial challenges lying in wait.

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:FV are going to need all the money they can get, Sluffy, and then some.

Still the great mass of Wanderers fans on t'internet are convinced its going to be reet even though most of 'em haven't a clue of the financial challenges lying in wait.

Yes, I've been following you on TW.

I have history with that site and was sacked as a mod for basically saying I wanted to mod the site fairly and equally to everyone (and not letting some of their inner circle on there do as they please - which they were!) and sometime after banned from there after I'd asked their Admin repeatedly if I could advertise Nuts which was a new forum we had started at the time and after a week of waiting for an answer did so and was banned in minutes of doing so!

I can't say I've ever liked TW much, it seems to me to be a collection of university immature types with that sort of humour and entitlement that seems to me to go with it, but who now are grown men with good jobs, as opposed to the 'earthy' blue collar types, from which I come from, which is prevalent over on WW, of which I have more in common, except I don't care much for the abuse or hatred that some/many have on there.

WW has been a far better site for my money of the two, over the years.

Even saying that I've never really fit well on that site either, I much prefer a site that is basically honest and fair - but you would never know that with the accusations and abuse I've faced over the years, firstly at Burnden Aces and since then here on Nuts, from more than a few, about how I run the site is not to their satisfaction as it stops THEIR fun (irrespective of what damage it causes to the rest of the site and the enjoyment of all the other posters).

Hey ho, such is life and as I state often, we are only on an internet forum - it isn't REAL - although I suspect to a few it really is...!

Anyway I was surprised at the question you asked Dave (even I had a good idea what the answer was) so I suspect you were just testing his knowledge to see how good he might be.

Seems I did have the correct view of Worthy - see what I mean about the university humour type/childish replies you've had from him - and I don't doubt he really is a successful accountant in real life!

Why do people behave like that just because it's social media - I just don't get it?

Anyhow I'm surprised that neither Dave or Worthy have twigged that there are only two places a £8.1m purchase of intellectual property can be bought from and that is (in respect of the club - it's name, history, branding, etc) from the Administrator, or if it is in respect of something not of the club - something new like say a purchase of a copywrite for say a Moneyball programme or Eddie's Kettle patent - then that would be to a third party.

If the money had gone to the Administrators then that would have had to go into the pot to pay off unsecured creditors - and that didn't happen - so it didn't go there.

If then it was a £8.1m new purchase then the accounts would be required to show details of such in the notes - they don't, so it didn't go there either.

So the money didn't leave the club as such as in a new 'entity' being acquired.

So it MUST have been for something else that had already been paid for as part of the purchase of the club and the most obvious thing would be a redefining of Administration costs as intellectual property - as I've explained above in one of my previous posts on this thread.

So FV haven't paid out Administration costs AND bought £8.1m of intellectual property as well, they've paid out once and reclassified that in their opinion the Administration costs are what they view as being intellectual property!

I've no idea if I am correct about this but then again I'm no accountant like they are either.

I'm happy to wait until you have the time to reveal all to find out if I was on the right lines or not.

BoltonTillIDie

BoltonTillIDie
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

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

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

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

Yes, I've been following you on TW.

I have history with that site and was sacked as a mod for basically saying I wanted to mod the site fairly and equally to everyone (and not letting some of their inner circle on there do as they please - which they were!) and sometime after banned from there after I'd asked their Admin repeatedly if I could advertise Nuts which was a new forum we had started at the time and after a week of waiting for an answer did so and was banned in minutes of doing so!

I can't say I've ever liked TW much, it seems to me to be a collection of university immature types with that sort of humour and entitlement that seems to me to go with it, but who now are grown men with good jobs, as opposed to the 'earthy' blue collar types, from which I come from, which is prevalent over on WW, of which I have more in common, except I don't care much for the abuse or hatred that some/many have on there.

WW has been a far better site for my money of the two, over the years.

Even saying that I've never really fit well on that site either, I much prefer a site that is basically honest and fair - but you would never know that with the accusations and abuse I've faced over the years, firstly at Burnden Aces and since then here on Nuts, from more than a few, about how I run the site is not to their satisfaction as it stops THEIR fun (irrespective of what damage it causes to the rest of the site and the enjoyment of all the other posters).

Hey ho, such is life and as I state often, we are only on an internet forum - it isn't REAL - although I suspect to a few it really is...!

Anyway I was surprised at the question you asked Dave (even I had a good idea what the answer was) so I suspect you were just testing his knowledge to see how good he might be.

Seems I did have the correct view of Worthy - see what I mean about the university humour type/childish replies you've had from him - and I don't doubt he really is a successful accountant in real life!

Why do people behave like that just because it's social media - I just don't get it?

Anyhow I'm surprised that neither Dave or Worthy have twigged that there are only two places a £8.1m purchase of intellectual property can be bought from and that is (in respect of the club - it's name, history, branding, etc) from the Administrator, or if it is in respect of something not of the club - something new like say a purchase of a copywrite for say a Moneyball programme or Eddie's Kettle patent - then that would be to a third party.

If the money had gone to the Administrators then that would have had to go into the pot to pay off unsecured creditors - and that didn't happen - so it didn't go there.

If then it was a £8.1m new purchase then the accounts would be required to show details of such in the notes - they don't, so it didn't go there either.

So the money didn't leave the club as such as in a new 'entity' being acquired.

So it MUST have been for something else that had already been paid for as part of the purchase of the club and the most obvious thing would be a redefining of Administration costs as intellectual property - as I've explained above in one of my previous posts on this thread.

So FV haven't paid out Administration costs AND bought £8.1m of intellectual property as well, they've paid out once and reclassified that in their opinion the Administration costs are what they view as being intellectual property!

I've no idea if I am correct about this but then again I'm no accountant like they are either.

I'm happy to wait until you have the time to reveal all to find out if I was on the right lines or not.
Its difficult to piece together, Sluffy, and the The Wanderer's mob don't really want any of it it pieced together. They don't want any of the opinions they've previously forcibly voiced re-examined.

£7.3m on  running costs is a lot of money for a League 1 or 2 club  but we can now see how the cost has been carved up between the different company accounts. A few thousand for the holding company, which doesn't do very much, might seem OK, but £500k? I don't think so.

But we also don't know where this money has gone to.

The £8.1million is on top and that seems to relate to the costs of the Administration process. Its a very large sum but who got what and to what extent does it include trading losses during the period of administration? That's were the Administrators Statements come in but following them is a laborious and time-consuming process.

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Its difficult to piece together, Sluffy, and the The Wanderer's mob don't really want any of it it pieced together. They don't want any of the opinions they've previously forcibly voiced re-examined.

£7.3m on  running costs is a lot of money for a League 1 or 2 club  but we can now see how the cost has been carved up between the different company accounts. A few thousand for the holding company, which doesn't do very much, might seem OK, but £500k? I don't think so.

But we also don't know where this money has gone to.

The £8.1million is on top and that seems to relate to the costs of the Administration process. Its a very large sum but who got what and to what extent does it include trading losses during the period of administration? That's were the Administrators Statements come in but following them is a laborious and time-consuming process.

Yes, there seems to be plenty on social media who don't like to be seen to be wrong.

I know there's plenty on here believe that to be true of me but in all honesty that simply isn't the case, I'm more than happy to be shown to be wrong - if for no other reason than I've learned something I didn't know previously.

I tend, if people actually paid attention to what I actually do post, to link to things to back up what I've said, or state something like 'I understand' or 'I believe' or even 'I guess' when I'm expressing an opinion.

I am the type of person who will often do a little bit of 'homework' before I post, just to make as sure as I can that what I go on to say is as correct as I can find it to be.

Tbh I don't think the likes of Worthy (I don't really know much about Dave - didn't even realise until your recent posts on TW that he was an accountant - although as I say I'm not really a regular visitor on that forum for some years now) is the type to worry too much about what he's posted in the past as his mates on TW would believe him any day rather than the likes of you or I.

Again it is the craziness of social media that people believe some random strangers more so than other random strangers simply because of their internet 'persona', which if anybody has learnt anything by now about social media, is that quite often many people tend to act in a different way on there than how they are in real life!

I don't know what it is - Stockholm syndrome or something like that (although Stockholm syndrome is actually now being considered more media made up than an actual sort of psychosis) and that a member of their 'social media tribe' is somehow more believable than anyone else no matter what?

Again I simply don't get it?

Back in the day most peoples equivalent to social media were the regulars in the pub, or the people you worked with and you quickly sussed out the ones who talked crap and the ones you avoided the best you could. These days on social media people can't seem to differentiate anymore?  It's as though they can't seem to read people and instead trust what they say is true and reject anyone else, simply because they've made their minds up over someones internet persona and not the content of what others might say - even if they are right?

Anyway it is what it is.

As for the accounts - yes £7.3m does seem a heck of a lot of money for a period of Administration  particularly when you look at the Admins Trading Account statement for the club for the period under the Administration 13th May 2019 to 16th January 2020, which shows only a loss of £1.1m (see appendix 3a of 27th Jan, 2020 Admins report - the very last page of the document)

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

The Admin fees for the club is shown on page 15 (or if you prefer p22 of 31 - Appendix 1) under Remuneration and totals (just) £1.2m.

I guess you can add on fees for Legal fees (p6) which shows an amount to SHL for £700k and Agents fees - shows a company called CLL charged a further £700k.

I also found something that rang a vague bell with me in that FVWL were making payments on account of the purchase of £155k per month (p4 - Receipts) - now iirc weren't they doing that over (was it?) a 10 month period but if memory serves didn't they agree to defer it for a number of months due to the effect of Covid?  

I wonder however if six payments (Jan - June 2020?) from FVWL of £155k pm is somehow included in the £7.3m figure?

If so that's another £1m towards that total?

Also I suppose even though FVWL bought the club in January they would still be liable (at least FV would) for ongoing Liquidation costs, although I can't imagine them to be massively high?

And finally on p2 assets purchased it lists 'goodwill' and 'intellectual property' - although there is no valued set against them (and the hotels goodwill and intellectual property was listed at just £1 each!).

If I have any other thoughts I'll add them on if and when they pop into my head!

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

Thanks for the interest, Sluffy.

Can I just correct one thing. The £7.3m is the annual administrative cost of running the club and hotel. Direct costs and interest took the total annual club and hotel costs to £14.3million in 2019/20.

Do you recall a member of the audience at the Trial of the Unibol 4 (May 2019 iirc) ask Terrence Rigby how the club spent its £14million income. Rigby replied, at best unhelpfully, 'You'll have to draw your own conclusions'.

Well we now know that in 2019/20 under FV the total income shrank to £10.4million and total costs were £14.3million. Hence the big loss that has wiped out all the share capital and left the club and hotel with debts of £30million.

We don't have any detail on what's comprised in the £7.3m  running costs (its actually £7.4m rounded) but do know that they have been split:
                          £'millions
Football                4.8
Hotel                    2.1
Holding company   0.5

You might expect the holding company to maybe account for a few thousand, but a few hundred thousand is surprising.

Then on top of all this there is the £8.1million spent on 'intellectual property'. This is clearly connected to the acquisition of the assets from the Administrators and is a major factor in the size of the FV debt.

The only clues we've got on the composition of the £8.1million paid out are in the Administrators and Liquidators Statements. Going through these is like treading through treacle, but it is a lot of money.

Isn't it interesting though that The Wanderer's gang should be so vehemently hostile to any perusal of the numbers. What do they say about leopards and spots?

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

I've now had a billet-doux from Tangodancer the All Powerful. Apparently some gentle ribbing about Alma Cogan not being able to tell a waltz from a tango has sent him into sabre-rattling mode.

Its like being savaged by Craig Revel Horwood, darling.

Sad

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I've now had a billet-doux from Tangodancer the All Powerful. Apparently some gentle ribbing about Alma Cogan not being able to tell a waltz from a tango has sent him into sabre-rattling mode.

Its like being savaged by Craig Revel Horwood, darling.

Sad
I never liked her. Anti Eskimo. I don't like that sort of thing. Shocked

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
I never liked her. Anti Eskimo. I don't like that sort of thing. Shocked
Don’t mention that to Tangodancer, Boncey. He’s still recovering from his sense of humour by-pass. The op was a 100% success but it’s left him in a right old mood.

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I've now had a billet-doux from Tangodancer the All Powerful. Apparently some gentle ribbing about Alma Cogan not being able to tell a waltz from a tango has sent him into sabre-rattling mode.

Its like being savaged by Craig Revel Horwood, darling.

Sad

He's a weird one, he really is.

I guess he is now in his late seventies/early eighties, iirc correctly he was a blue collar worker during his life (nothing wrong with that, my father was a builder and my mam worked in the mills) but he somehow must have thought he missed his calling in life which was to be a writer (nothing wrong in that either).

He even wrote a book once and paid for it to be published but it was excruciating to read - he used to put up chapters on the site!

If you notice his posts they are mostly written in a very peculiar style indeed.

I think being a mod on there helps to keep him going but he's never had the brains or touch to be any good at it and as far as I know he's the last one left on there.

He will ban you there is no doubt about that if the others demand your head.

And they will sooner or later too - that's how they are on sites like TW and WW.

As for the accounts, thanks for your reply.

I was really playing about to try and pin down some one off costs that led to the £7.4m total, but as you say it does seem to be a very meaty total.

I agree with what you said on TW about is it not normal for someone with an interest in BWFC and finance not want to look at the accounts and understand them - indeed I've said the same myself previously, so I too can't understand why they don't and my thinking is more to do with not being inquisitive enough, rather than 'protecting' what the might have said earlier.

Dave for instance more or less said, I can understand the pieces of the jigsaw but unless someone (from inside the club) shows me the picture on the box, then he can't go any further in solving the puzzle.

I guess you and I have the inquisitive nature to try at least to solve the puzzle by thinking more around the problem than waiting to see the box picture.

I once had a deputy and was asked what his capability was, and replied that he was very good in travelling in a straight line, and if he was walking along a road he would go for miles but if a pothole appeared in front of him he would simply stop, he didn't have the capacity or the imagination to think of a way of getting around or over it.

Dave (in what he said) brought me in mind of my one time deputy - he's accepted that he can't go no further - and maybe you can't - but he and my deputy never seemed to consider giving it a try anyway?

I've no reason to doubt that Dave and Worthy aren't both good at their jobs but neither seem to have shown a 'nose' to sniff things out further - Worthy certainly put a huge amount of blame on Anderson - but then again most did including the posters claiming to be real life accountants on WW too.

I can't understand why non of them seemed to delve further into things - which sort of suggests we are the 'exceptions' and the are the 'rule'.

I guess these things come natural to us and doesn't to most other people?

It is what it is though, and as my dad used to tell me if you want something doing then you've got to do it yourself!

I don't really think anyone else on the various forums have both the knowledge and interest to look beyond what it is put in front of them in terms of the accounts.

They don't even seem to have their professional interest or general curiosity perked when someone like yourself raises interesting points, such as what is this apparent payment of £8.1m for intellectual property?

I wonder why, simple question in respect of what roughly is a quarter of the clubs entire debt yet none of them seem remotely bothered about???

You'd think they would?

None so deaf and all that I guess?

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

You'll probably remember me, Sluffy, describing forums as being like car boot sales. Most of what you see is worthless garbage but occasionally you come across something of interest. I've not really changed my views on that much tbh.



Last edited by Ten Bobsworth on Sat Jul 24 2021, 06:56; edited 1 time in total

BoltonTillIDie

BoltonTillIDie
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Think we need a new thread do discuss other forums and their posters

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Think we need a new thread do discuss other forums and their posters

Feel free to start one if you want.

We post here and not other forums because we like this place better than theirs - the same is obviously true for wherever they choose to post.

There's nothing I would say on here that I wouldn't say on their forums or indeed to their faces - I'm not abusive to anyone on the internet or in real life and I'm genuine and honest.

If people don't like what I say then that's their problem, I got 'sacked' as a mod on TW because I told them that I would mod everyone equally and fairly, even their mates who thought the rules didn't apply to them and I got banned from WW because I called out someone threatening a bloke in his seventies - yet I'm the one they perceived to be out of order both times - doesn't that tell you something about their values?

I might well not be everyone's cup of tea and I write a lot of words - big deal - does that really merit abuse from anyone?

I don't take social media seriously - clearly many do.

I'll just laugh at the ones who get their knickers in a twist over nothing much, written on a tiny (and let's face it meaningless) internet footy forum by some random old bloke like me.

And they think I'm the one with issues...!!!

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Nat can be the Nuts shrink. We need her help.

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

I post on here because Nuts isn't controlled by potty-mouthed, opinionated, ageing adolescents who haven't grown up and never will grow up. Also because there's a bit of humour in Nuts not infrequently led by Boncey who will often find something interesting or amusing to lighten the mood.

I'll return to comments on FV accounts in due course but first here's something that came to mind whilst contemplating the empire of Tango the Omnipotent:



 Heil Tango!



Last edited by Ten Bobsworth on Sat Jul 24 2021, 09:10; edited 1 time in total

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

Seeing how the Unibol and hotel are only worth £3million and the 'intellectual property' worth £10million, I was wondering if Auntie Sharon might draw up a 'credible business plan' and toddle off to Lombard to see how much they'd lend on it.

She could take 'credible business plan' expert, Terrence Rigby, with her to answer any questions those nice folk at Lombard might want to ask.

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

Heil Tango!

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

They're looking for a new hotel general manager. Maybe I should go for it. What could possibly go wrong?

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:They're looking for a new hotel general manager. Maybe I should go for it. What could possibly go wrong?
They could appoint Tango the Magnificent instead.
 
Heil Tango!  

No

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I post on here because Nuts isn't controlled by potty-mouthed, opinionated, ageing adolescents who haven't grown up and never will grow up. Also because there's a bit of humour in Nuts not infrequently led by Boncey who will often find something interesting or amusing to lighten the mood.

I'll return to comments on FV accounts in due course but first here's something that came to mind whilst contemplating the empire of Tango the Omnipotent.

Thanks for the kind endorsement of the site and the modding of it and I agree entirely with the humour and Bonce, we have on here that really is our diamond that shines through and sparkles for us when it isn't buried under the ceaseless game playing and agendas at work that we've suffered through in recent years but I think you may have the wrong end of the stick with Tango.

He's not a leader, or controller as such, a bloke with the username of Zulu was the 'enforcer' and hardliner if you will.

The leadership set up was initially 'Bench' (who was the founder of the site), then the likes of 'Warthog', Zulu and later on 'Mummy' and 'Soldier' were added

Tango was really the 'nice but dim' type one that was asked to mod early on and now remains the only one left standing from all that crowd.

He doesn't know any other way to mod other than stick to what has gone on before and also aims to please the few posters that they have left on there.

I think he took it as some form of personal honour to be given a role of a mod - he is certainly not a leader or deep thinker and is generally out of his depth with anything other than the simplest tasks demanded of his role on there.

I'm not trying to belittle him in my critique, just telling it as it is.

Fwiw Bench asked me to be a mod on his site early on and I found myself in the company of Warthog, Zulu and Tango (Bench not being the hands on type didn't really get involved and left the site sometime later).

I was somewhat taken aback to find when I was given mod powers on that site that the hidden section behind the public forum was a place not only where the mod team inhabited but also a 'clique' of favoured posters too - several of them ripping to pieces and laughing at their fellow posters behind the scenes yet being nicey-nicey and 'matey' to them on the open forum.

I didn't like to two face-ness and duplicitous of this and how some of them behaved on the public forum themselves - it was really a two-tier hierarchy - most people having to comply with the site rules yet at the same time some of the clique and their mates didn't!

As you may imagine I instantly became unpopular with some when I laid out that I would be modding everyone equally irrespective of what privileges they believed they had on the forum.

I requested a separate modding part of the forum where decisions could be made openly and away from other peoples prying eyes and attempted influence.

I only lasted about a week or so before I found my mod powers removed and received a pm from one of them telling me that that was done because I 'wasn't one of them!'.

Indeed I wasn't!

I quickly became persona non grata after that and shortly afterwards left the site and joined the fledgling Burnden Aces.

Tango is really a relic from the past and isn't an authoritarian figure as such.

He can't manage people or has leadership qualities so his default position is to ban any newcomer that rocks the boat on that site - he will ban you because he simply doesn't know what else to do if people take against you on the public forum.

I also don't think he is not in the best of health these days and that the site is irrationally important to him (it's probably all he's got outside of his family) and will protect it in the best way he can.

He's no dictator as such.

He's never been a big fan of me since my brief time as a mod and was one of those objecting to a separate standalone mod section because he didn't want to upset his perceived mates in the clique who strongly objected to my attempted  removal of their interference with the honesty and integrity in the fair and equal running of the site to all.

All water under the bridge now of course.

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:They're looking for a new hotel general manager. Maybe I should go for it. What could possibly go wrong?
I see that Swindle Town have got a new owner. He's an Aussie that says his business is turning over $200m a year. He's just appointed one of Swindle's ST board as CEO.

Clemente Giovanni Bruno Morfuni is also a director of a company called Swinton Reds 20 Ltd. The other director is Swindle Town's previous owner, Lee Power

I do hope that Shazza doesn't follow suit with this Hotel Manager job. Sluffy will know but doesn't one of the ST board own a pie shop?

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 6 of 10]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

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