I'm just playing with numbers here, trying to make things add up in my mind.
My start point is that the accounts state there is £6m goodwill at the start of FV's ownership - and my understanding is that is basically the amount more than the total assets purchased are valued at - yes?
Ok the books say fixed (tangible) assets came to £12.5m - let's leave that there for now.
The amount FV appeared to have paid in total is £29.5m (if the blurry line in the hotel Administrators report is a confirmation as such - I don't know?).
If it is (?) then £29.5m - £6m = £23.5m
This being the case then the £12.5m of tangible assets shown plus the £10m of intellectual property (which no one seems to know what exactly that is, adds up to £22.5m.
£1m short of the supposed purchase price less £6m for 'goodwill'.
Now let us pretend this 'goodwill' is in fact the cost of the clubs losses during the period of Administration.
The club accounts show that to be £7.3m (p11 of 37).
The £22.5m plus the £7.3m = £29.8m - which is more or less what the blurry line total was.
Let us for argument sake say FV are 'claiming; they've 'paid' £8m (£7.3m plus the deficit for the hotel whilst in Administration (£350k ? - p5 of 29 Bolton Whites Hotel Ltd) to 'save' the club and thus all the intellectual property that comes with it.
That would I guess explain why they've 'paid' £8m 'for' the intellectual property but there being no note of what they've actually purchased (and from whom?) for that amount - and would also explain why the Administrators don't have a further £8m pounds available to them to pay the unsecured creditors (if it had been paid to them for that reason?
If you put all that together and they actually paid something like £29.5m for everything (? the blurry line amount?).
Then what the accounts state £6m goodwill, £10m intellectual property and £12.5m tangible assets kind of makes some sense when perhaps without this (shall we call it) 'sleight of hand' with the figures one might have expected to see the accounts to have shown something like perhaps £27m of tangible assets purchased and say a further £2.5m more in excess of the 'goods' due to the trading deficit during the Administration period.
The rearranging of the numbers under the various headings to make the tax position more favourable to the business - is simply what the accountants have done - the overall total being the same whichever way you slice it.
To kind of verify this (in my own mind at least), the assets in Administration had charges on them of £5.5m (PBP), £2.5m (Warburton), £3.5m unsecured creditors and a claimed £17.5m (EDT) which amounts to - £28.5m - which the Administrators had to deal with.
Again very similar to the amount paid(?) and the total for all the assets (£16m intangible, £12.5 tangible).
(The £5m for KA and £12.5m of EDT's claim were struck out by the Administrator - but certainly EDT believed it to be real!).
I know I've not put up an irrefutable case but it does in my mind kind of like gives some explanation of things, such as the 'missing' £8.1m purchase of intellectual property and broadly how the headline numbers kind of match, whichever way you report them.
Best I've got so far and more than happy to be put straight by others about all of this.
Just to clarify a bit as I seem to be saying the £8m trading loss is both counted as intellectual property AND goodwill - which of course is double counting it.
What I'm meaning is that on one hand FV have paid more for the combined assets because they had the trading debt to settle when the club was in Administration too.
They've done that by writing down their valuation of what they bought to be £12.5m for tangible assets (the stadium/hotel is only worth - on paper at least - what someone will pay for it - and FV says they value them at £12.5m) they believe (or at least in my model above) that the trading loss of £8m under Administration equated to the purchase of intellectual property and that the remainder of what they paid amounted to an additional £2m worth of intellectual property with the rest being set against the goodwill category (£3.5m of which would be for settling the unsecured creditors).
Furthermore I guess - in a few years time they can seek a revaluation of the ground, hotel, etc and add back a 'windfall' of several millions more to the tangible assets - if they wished to do so?
I hope people can follow my logic on all of this!
And I'm not guaranteeing it isn't all without flaws either - just me thinking aloud really.