I'm genuinely gutted for Bury. It's a sad state of affairs

Just listened to the Bury North MP on Radio 5live. He was saying the ground has been mortgaged with 130% interest loans payable to offshore lenders, loans of almost 200% interest taken out by the current and previous owners and that Dale has refused to compromise on his need for a profit and all loans/mortgages taken on in full from any deal - which is why C&N have pulled out

bfcmik wrote:Just listened to the Bury North MP on Radio 5live. He was saying the ground has been mortgaged with 130% interest loans payable to offshore lenders, loans of almost 200% interest taken out by the current and previous owners and that Dale has refused to compromise on his need for a profit and all loans/mortgages taken on in full from any deal - which is why C&N have pulled out

If this is the case I don’t think anyone will take it on...what is it with these owners getting loans at those rates, and how on earth did they pass any ‘fit and proper’ test before getting ownership in the first place. Real mess

That’s the thing. Dale didn’t pass the fit and proper person test but he bought the club anyway. It shows the EFL have no authority whatsoever.

I think Mr Dale will need to watch his back in the not to distant future.

murky business at some football clubs. very bad news for the genuine supporters.

Perhaps it's time to change Bolton Wanderers name to Barnstoneworth United then sense can prevail

Update from Bolton just now:

Discussions are ongoing with all parties and a further statement will be issued later this evening.

bfcmik wrote:Just listened to the Bury North MP on Radio 5live. He was saying the ground has been mortgaged with 130% interest loans payable to offshore lenders, loans of almost 200% interest taken out by the current and previous owners and that Dale has refused to compromise on his need for a profit and all loans/mortgages taken on in full from any deal - which is why C&N have pulled out

If that is true then the Bury MP should be raising it with his bosses that the EFL need investigating for negligence and the complete mismanagement of the league. An independent enquiry with a full set of recommendations about how football finances need to be overseen in the future might not save Bury or Bolton but it should stop it happening again.

TVC15 wrote:If that is true then the Bury MP should be raising it with his bosses that the EFL need investigating for negligence and the complete mismanagement of the league. An independent enquiry with a full set of recommendations about how football finances need to be overseen in the future might not save Bury or Bolton but it should stop it happening again.

I always thought the basic assumption with any business is that the directors and their accountants have the company's best interests at the forefront. Whilst there is some supervision it is generally of a light touch. If we start with the premise that all directors and accountants are crooks it requires tougher, more intrusive and costly governance.

Clearly things have gone wrong at both clubs but in each case there is a long recent history of financial problems which I would suggest these loans and changes of ownership were, in theory at least, attempts to find solutions.

Our club had to sell it's ground in order to survive not so long ago. It was a risky strategy but luckily worked out. It may not have done.

Rightly or wrongly, i can't help thinking some of our handier elements might have persuaded a Dale type to either not come near, or leave pretty sharpish.

Or am i wrong?

Unless they could muster up enough Money for the current owners/ administrators to make a profit and satisfy the Leagues needs the fans have no way of doing anything positive apart from what they are doing with cleaning the Stadium etc. I guess we would be the same in that position sadly.

They need to go!

People who do not understand or appreciate what football clubs mean to Joe Public, regardless of size or location, should stay out of football. Its an ego trip for some who are clueless.

I'm sorry but this has gone on far too long....they need to be made an example of....

bfcjg wrote:Taken from the Guardian nearly ten years ago. Barry Kilby's words of warning to horseface were so prophetic. Thank goodness he ignored them.

Unsurprisingly, Coyle's departure has left a trail of bitterness at Burnley. Barry Kilby, their disappointed chairman, clearly feels Coyle had his head turned by Gartside's overtures and today suggested that Bolton's higher budget for salaries and transfers may not prove quite as attractive as it seems. "I told Owen they have £44m of bank debt but we have none," Kilby said.

"I think Bolton can say a lot of tempting things to attract Owen Coyle but whether they can deliver on them I think history will tell. But Owen wanted to work with a bigger budget and he obviously felt they had a better chance of staying up than Burnley. Owen's mindset is that he doesn't want to risk being in the Championship.""

Just been listening to Susan on 5 Live saying that limits should be put clubs playing budgets - mind boggles

Chester Perry wrote:Just been listening to Susan on 5 Live saying that limits should be put clubs playing budgets - mind boggles

Dear oh dear

Hipper wrote:I always thought the basic assumption with any business is that the directors and their accountants have the company's best interests at the forefront. Whilst there is some supervision it is generally of a light touch. If we start with the premise that all directors and accountants are crooks it requires tougher, more intrusive and costly governance.

Clearly things have gone wrong at both clubs but in each case there is a long recent history of financial problems which I would suggest these loans and changes of ownership were, in theory at least, attempts to find solutions.

Our club had to sell it's ground in order to survive not so long ago. It was a risky strategy but luckily worked out. It may not have done.

Depends completely on the nature of the business.
Look at banks for example - the absolute opposite of light touch and that’s because of the scandals of mismanagement of the banks in the 2007 / 2008 period. The governance and oversight they have been under since is incredible.
For me football is now at the point where you cannot trust owners or boards to manage their own finances. There is too much money and temptation at stake.

Chester Perry wrote:Just been listening to Susan on 5 Live saying that limits should be put clubs playing budgets - mind boggles

Very helpful comment from a one time Bolton 'Legend' ....
Sure the Shysters words have gone down very well.

I think it's more an issue that clubs are becoming increasingly over reliant on an owner's personal wealth and then when the plug is pulled then the club starts to flounder.
There should be stricter rules on how much clubs can 'borrow' from their owners but there are people on here who'd tell you that isn't fair and owners should be allowed to do what they want with their money etc despite the inevitable chaos it brings.

That's despite financial meltdowns at places like Leeds and Portsmouth, then Wolves, even Liverpool came extremely close to going bang before Fenway took over.

Certainly outside the PL there should be tight controls on clubs spending and I'd even consider making relegation clause in contracts a must.

TVC15 wrote:Depends completely on the nature of the business.
Look at banks for example - the absolute opposite of light touch and that’s because of the scandals of mismanagement of the banks in the 2007 / 2008 period. The governance and oversight they have been under since is incredible.
For me football is now at the point where you cannot trust owners or boards to manage their own finances. There is too much money and temptation at stake.

The reason for that though is that banks are so fundamental to the economy - too big to fail.

Football clubs, corner shops etc. are not.

As long as there is not an epidemic of failed clubs I can't see too much heavy legislation coming in. Sure there will be some, but like FFP it will be easily sidestepped.

This Bolton fan gets it

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... l-gartside" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One relatively easy way to stop clubs going bust would be to put limits on their debt. Only solvent clubs could survive, and clubs that went into debt would have to pay it back within a year or else be relegated. (Clubs which are insolvent now could perhaps be told to pay back one tenth of the debt each year for ten years, say.)

This wouldn't stop owners pouring huge sums into their clubs and so it wouldn't level the playing field. But what it would do is to stop owners lending their clubs money and running them into the ground like Bolton. They would have to put the money in as share capital which they can't take back out of the club (except under restrictive laws of the land, including the law that after the withdrawal, the company must still be solvent now and for the foreseeable future).

Chester Perry wrote:This Bolton fan gets it

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... l-gartside" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some of the gripers on here during transfer windows need that tattooing on their heads.
We need the dry powder store.

Hipper wrote:The reason for that though is that banks are so fundamental to the economy - too big to fail.

Football clubs, corner shops etc. are not.

As long as there is not an epidemic of failed clubs I can't see too much heavy legislation coming in. Sure there will be some, but like FFP it will be easily sidestepped.

Yep but they did fail - and plenty went bust.
I think comparing football clubs to corner shops in terms of their importance to the economy (let alone the community) is way off the mark.
When you say there is not an epidemic of failed clubs do you realise how many clubs have gone into administration ? If more than 50% of businesses in any other sector or industry went into administration my guess would be that it would be described as an epidemic and there would be much tighter controls and governance.
To be honest i’m not really sure where you are coming from. Are you seriously saying that there should not be tighter governance and control over football clubs, their owners and their financial management ?

I only used banks as an example of heavy governance of a sector - I never said football clubs should be controlled and audited as much as banks but it can’t / shouldn’t carry on as it has been.

Tricky Trevor wrote:Some of the gripers on here during transfer windows need that tattooing on their heads.
We need the dry powder store.

Of course we need a dry powder store, but there's a realistic and optimum level of powder that is required to be kept within.

Then parachute payments and relegation clauses come in to play.

Any residue is then utilised in a meaningful manner to ensure relegation is avoided in the first place.

Royboyclaret wrote:Of course we need a dry powder store, but there's a realistic and optimum level of powder that is required to be kept within.

Then parachute payments and relegation clauses come in to play.

Any residue is then utilised in a meaningful manner to ensure relegation is avoided in the first place.

How on earth do you ensure relegation is avoided?

ClaretTony wrote:How on earth do you ensure relegation is avoided?

I think you knew exactly the point I was making.

ClaretTony wrote:How on earth do you ensure relegation is avoided?

Sean Dyche.

I can’t understand why anyone would feel bad about either club going under. Everyone gloats when their rivals get relegated, and people lose their jobs when this happens. But for some reason people are feeling sorry for these clubs, which simply can’t be sustained

claret2018 wrote:I can’t understand why anyone would feel bad about either club going under. Everyone gloats when their rivals get relegated, and people lose their jobs when this happens. But for some reason people are feeling sorry for these clubs, which simply can’t be sustained

I think the sympathy is for the genuine fans of those clubs. I remember the summer of 1986 when we thought we might be gone. We had a share issue and people agreed to buy them. The club took the money and then left everyone hanging on for news. It was horrible.

claret2018 wrote:I can’t understand why anyone would feel bad about either club going under. Everyone gloats when their rivals get relegated, and people lose their jobs when this happens. But for some reason people are feeling sorry for these clubs, which simply can’t be sustained

rivalry is all well and good , but football fans can recognise how it must feel for true supporters elsewhere whose club means everything to them.
They will have had dad's uncles, grandads steeped in the respective teams histories. They will have had decades in some instances of attending games.
I have no affinity with these teams particularly, but i can certainly understand how hard it must be for them right now.

All is I can say anyone who feels no sympathy for the clubs stalwarts, really should go for empathy training.

A great piece from FourFourTwo on the debacle - long though

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/wh ... ppen-again" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2 weeks to save the club - efl statement

Bolton Wanderers: Suspension on notice of withdrawal lifted

Despite further exchanges with the Administrators over the course of the Bank Holiday weekend, and right up until today’s deadline of 5pm, a resolution to ongoing impasse in negotiations regarding a completion of sale at Bolton Wanderers has not yet been found.

The EFL Board has therefore taken the decision to lift the suspension on the notice of withdrawal, which was issued as per the EFL’s insolvency policy when the Club entered administration in May 2019.

As per the League’s Articles of Association, this will now give the Club 14 days (11.59pm on 12 September, 2019) to meet all outstanding requirements of the League’s insolvency policy or its membership in the EFL will be withdrawn.

In respect of the situation at Bolton Wanderers, the administrators now have this period of time to successfully conclude a change of control with a preferred purchaser, or provide sufficient evidence that they are in a position to fund the Club for the remainder of the 2019/20 campaign.

EFL Executive Chair, Debbie Jevans CBE, said: “Despite repeated assurances, we are extremely disappointed that we are still not in a position to reach a successful resolution with the sale of Bolton Wanderers and have therefore taken the decision to lift the suspension on the notice of withdrawal. I again urge all parties to finalise the proposed takeover.

“The reality of this action is that there are now 14 days to secure the Club’s long-term future, and I sincerely hope we can find a way through these challenging circumstances for the benefit of all those who have an association with the Club.”

14 days to complete the deal

ClaretTony wrote:14 days to complete the deal

Until the next 14 days. EFL keeps crying wolf.

It’s a disgrace. Just as I thought Bolton would be treated differently to Bury. So sorry for the Bury fans

14 days to complete the deal plus any extensions the league give on top of that

thatdberight wrote:Until the next 14 days. EFL keeps crying wolf.

actually it is probably the right way of going about it - there was a countdown, which was paused and has now come off pause

FCBurnley wrote:It’s a disgrace. Just as I thought Bolton would be treated differently to Bury. So sorry for the Bury fans

They haven’t been. Bury were given the same but are ahead of Bolton in time.

We will see what Administrator says in the morning as he said deal had to be done today. I assume Bolton’s match on Saturday will now not go ahead.

1HappyClaret wrote:We will see what Administrator says in the morning as he said deal had to be done today. I assume Bolton’s match on Saturday will now not go ahead.

I'd love to know he's justifying going on.

I believe the EFL, by giving 14 days' notice, is following strict protocol to ensure that there is no lengthy legal battle for years to come. Imagine the **** that would be flung at the EFL if they kicked a club out of the league having not followed its own rules.

1HappyClaret wrote:We will see what Administrator says in the morning as he said deal had to be done today. I assume Bolton’s match on Saturday will now not go ahead.

He’s backtracked a bit on that I think

ClaretTony wrote:He’s backtracked a bit on that I think

probably because his statement about liquidation was predicated on EFL kicking them out tonight

ClaretTony wrote:14 days to complete the deal

Perhaps the 14 days won't be quite as disruptive to the fixtures and the eventual outcome of the final league table as I feared, since I note that after this weekend's fixture at Gillingham, (which I suspect will be cancelled), the only other game they had scheduled was on the 8th against now defunct Bury.

It's bad enough that one north west professional club goes t1ts up, but two in one season is train smash.
Will reality bite and other similar size clubs lower their level of expectation, or will there be a shrug of the shoulders and carry on as you were attitude?

No Ney Never wrote:It's bad enough that one north west professional club goes t1ts up, but two in one season is train smash.
Will reality bite and other similar size clubs lower their level of expectation, or will there be a shrug of the shoulders and carry on as you were attitude?

What was the general consensus of the other league clubs when the two south eastern clubs of Aldershot and Maidstone went bust in 1992? I imagine a similar outcome this time around.

Bolton now on a footballing version of end of life treatment.