Take Over

[Wanderlust]

1 hour ago, Moon boy said:

Iles is employed by the Bolton news, that’s his full time job, he has a wife and family, he probably gets gets a decent salary, it’s a job many people would love to do, watching/reporting on the club you support, why would he risk losing his job dishing dirt on players/management of BWFC

If he upset people within the Club his job would be come untenable, he will know players/ management personally and he will know exactly what’s going on, more than anybody on this forum, but he will have to keep his council 

The articles that appear in the BN are 24hours out of date by the time it goes on sale

His Twitter account is more of his thoughts and opinions but it’s obvious he would not be allowed to say what he knows.

The abuse he gets on here, imo, is unwarranted, he’s just another source of reporting that people can use along with Twitter, Forums, hearsay to form an opinion,

I suspect most of anti- Iles brigade on here have had a Twitter spat with said journalist and lost, it’s better to have Iles and the BN than not

I think that his reporting is out of date, often out of touch and occasionally opinionated which gives rise to criticism, however I think the majority of people are prepared to see past that and take from it whatever they want to take from it. Sure the reporting could be a lot better, but that doesn't make Iles evil and if he has an "agenda" he doesn't really have any influence where it matters so I totally agree the abuse he gets is unwarranted - and it's not really productive either.

[Benny The Ball]

50 minutes ago, RONNIE PHILLIPS said:

People are just frustrated with being fed snippets that the deal is close to completion when it seems obvious that it can't be until the hotel issue is sorted, especially the one hour from completion nonsense last week. 

     Whilst people wouldn't be happy I think it would be better if the admins kept it buttoned until its actually done & dusted. 

Is it all nonsense though ?

I honestly thought we would get an announcement of sorts yesterday - one way or the other in respect of FV - If they wanted it enough a deal would be done 

Heard rumours from two good sources that FV have walked / are on the verge of walking away - and I know others with good access to Information - including well respected posters on here are hearing the same thing 

Yesterday tickets went on sale for the Ipswich game - I find that worrying because If the deal was imminent  we probably would not be hearing that and would instead have  season tickets lined up to go on sale very soon 

I think we might now be moving into a new extended phase of administration and the administrator might be looking to ensure he has enough monies coming in to fund the club until the Bassini case is sorted 

Yesterday someone mentioned  about an unsecured creditor getting a phone call from Bassini offering him  100p in the £ 

Could Bassini or more likely his legal reps have approached ED trustees and offered them an Immediate settlement rather than a phased repayment as proposed to them by  FV - and  how attractive might that be ? 

And what of our beloved KA , what is now is best for him on a personal level - just go along with the deal which was so close a week ago that sees FV get the club and Hotel and him sued in court by Bassini 

Or would it be better to  frustrate FV enough so that they walk leaving it open to do a deal with Bassini and avoid costly litigation . 

Maybe I am taking conspiracy theories too far but I am convinced far more is at play than just  the Hotel 

[ProfessorWoland]

1 hour ago, Chris Custodiet said:

I think you mean unsecured creditors in 2019. They,  of course,  were dealing with a different owwnership than that in 2016 and at least some of them had the opportunity to decide whether they would continue supplying or not.

May I ask whether you have read BWFC's accounts since relegation in 2012 and noted how much costs were vastly cut year on year. May I also ask whether you have noted how much Championship clubs have been losing year on year despite the best efforts of the directors of most of them.

 2019 yes, apologies. 

I've read some of the accounts, family were shareholders, still are technically. I've stopped now, keep up on here but I'm sceptical about some of the information recorded therein due to conversations I've had which I won't post on here. 

I am however aware of average losses in the championship but the point stands. If the club truly was the beneficiary of the stated sums, then the situation was untenable long before the crisis point and responsible ownership would've been looking to take steps to reduce the exposure.

This has been a long time coming after all:

https://swissramble.blogspot.com/2010/11/why-bolton-have-so-much-debt.html

[Sluffy]

1 hour ago, Benny The Ball said:

Is it all nonsense though ?

I honestly thought we would get an announcement of sorts yesterday - one way or the other in respect of FV - If they wanted it enough a deal would be done 

Heard rumours from two good sources that FV have walked / are on the verge of walking away - and I know others with good access to Information - including well respected posters on here are hearing the same thing 

Yesterday tickets went on sale for the Ipswich game - I find that worrying because If the deal was imminent  we probably would not be hearing that and would instead have  season tickets lined up to go on sale very soon 

I think we might now be moving into a new extended phase of administration and the administrator might be looking to ensure he has enough monies coming in to fund the club until the Bassini case is sorted 

Yesterday someone mentioned  about an unsecured creditor getting a phone call from Bassini offering him  100p in the £ 

Could Bassini or more likely his legal reps have approached ED trustees and offered them an Immediate settlement rather than a phased repayment as proposed to them by  FV - and  how attractive might that be ? 

And what of our beloved KA , what is now is best for him on a personal level - just go along with the deal which was so close a week ago that sees FV get the club and Hotel and him sued in court by Bassini 

Or would it be better to  frustrate FV enough so that they walk leaving it open to do a deal with Bassini and avoid costly litigation . 

Maybe I am taking conspiracy theories too far but I am convinced far more is at play than just  the Hotel 

Interesting, thanks Benny.

How does Bassini gain though?

If FV walk and EDT paid up, then what is to stop the Administrator liquidating?

Certainly the football club can't continue in the league if there is no one able to show the EFL a financial plan of backing them for the season ahead - Bassini not yet having ownership of BL.

If Bassini has done deals with EDT, then who funds Administration continuing on the off chance he wins control of BL - he might not do.

Wouldn't Appleton be left with no choice but to put BWFAC straight into liquidation in that scenario?

In which case Bassini might eventually end up owning the shares in BL but by the time he does find the football club deceased and the stadium up for sale/sold.

The injunction having had BL struck from it, gives no protection to Bassini that such would not happen prior to him winning his case.

My guess is that nothing will crystallise before the judges findings are published and poured over due around the middle of next week and by then all the key players will probably wait the further fortnight to see what if anything comes from the 2nd September hearing.  

Anyway isn't the vastly more important point as to why the Administrator did not spend money, from his money tree, on strengthening the squad for Tranmere today!!!

Keep up the good work mate.

I think you @Escobarp and @Chris Custodiet are the only sane ones on here at times.

Edited August 17, 2019 by Sluffy
Grammar errors

[RoadRunnerFan]

24 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

 

I think you @Escobarp and @Chris Custodiet are the only sane ones on here at times.

Yourself and all of the above post sensible stuff on this issue, setting aside Chris' apparent expectation that sports journalists should also be finance experts.

Though you are doing a massive disservice to many on here with that comment. 

Ever wonder why you find yourself explaining the same thing repeatedly? That kind of stuff makes people stop reading imo. 

 

[Wanderlust]

9 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Yourself and all of the above post sensible stuff on this issue, setting aside Chris' apparent expectation that sports journalists should also be finance experts.

Though you are doing a massive disservice to many on here with that comment. 

Ever wonder why you find yourself explaining the same thing repeatedly? That kind of stuff makes people stop reading imo. 

 

Personally I thought it was very self-effacing and humble of Sluffy not to include himself on his list of sane people.

[Escobarp]

53 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

 

I think you @Escobarp and @Chris Custodiet are the only sane ones on here at times.

That is, as has been pointed, out a huge disservice to the majority in here. You also have to remember i know about this sort of stuff but know very little about mist other things  Sluffy. 

‘This forum is what it is because of the wide range of folk on here and the various jobs etc. 

‘Plus if you could see the state of me now after an all night bender that will extend until probably tomorrow morning at the earliest you would not class me as sane I assure you 

my advice would be lay off the digs at folk (unless of course they specifically target you first) and continue to share your passion and knowledge. I would maybe just moderate it slightly 

Edited August 17, 2019 by Escobarp

[Damocles]

The rumour that I have heard is that there is another injunction in the pipeline preventing the sale of the club, this is again from Bassini but is against the administrators, claiming his offer is better than FV. 

The contact with creditors has allegedly been to explain he offered full payment. The issue still appears to be his proof of funds, but I have to ask, if he didn’t have the funds would he go to all this trouble?

[Sluffy]

18 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Yourself and all of the above post sensible stuff on this issue, setting aside Chris' apparent expectation that sports journalists should also be finance experts.

Though you are doing a massive disservice to many on here with that comment. 

Ever wonder why you find yourself explaining the same thing repeatedly? That kind of stuff makes people stop reading imo. 

No massive disservice intended, more an exasperated comment aimed at a few who are consistently in denial of reality.

If I've offended anyone them please accept my apology.

[RoadRunnerFan]

1 minute ago, Sluffy said:

No massive disservice intended, more an exasperated comment aimed at a few who are consistently in denial of reality.

If I've offended anyone them please accept my apology.

No offence taken. 

You are completely right above, a tiny minority on here are in denial, most 'get it.' Even those folk just want to get back to normality really. 

In the original post you had it the other way round. 

Escobarp's response put it better than I ever could. 

[Escobarp]

Just now, Damocles said:

The rumour that I have heard is that there is another injunction in the pipeline preventing the sale of the club, this is again from Bassini but is against the administrators, claiming his offer is better than FV. 

The contact with creditors has allegedly been to explain he offered full payment. The issue still appears to be his proof of funds, but I have to ask, if he didn’t have the funds would he go to all this trouble?

Not aware of any mechanism whereby an unsuccessful bidder can be granted an injunction against the administrators. 

What hes doing is trying to get the creditors to cause a stink to put pressure on that way. A judge may grant one to the unsecured creditors en masse if they have proof that the offer is better and was better and deliverable. This is where Larry falls down and can be ruled out.  

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

3 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

Not aware of any mechanism whereby an unsuccessful bidder can be granted an injunction against the administrators. 

What hes doing is trying to get the creditors to cause a stink to put pressure on that way. A judge may grant one to the unsecured creditors en masse if they have proof that the offer is better and was better and deliverable. This is where Larry falls down and can be ruled out.  

I suppose the problem, though, is that if he can try, he will. Which will cause further delays, which causes us further problems.

[Sluffy]

2 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

No offence taken. 

You are completely right above, a tiny minority on here are in denial, most 'get it.' Even those folk just want to get back to normality really. 

In the original post you had it the other way round. 

Escobarp's response put it better than I ever could. 

I don't believe I had got it the wrong way round at all, I think you have simply taken the one line out of the context in which I had set it -

1 hour ago, Sluffy said:

Anyway isn't the vastly more important point as to why the Administrator did not spend money, from his money tree, on strengthening the squad for Tranmere today!!!

Keep up the good work mate.

I think you @Escobarp and @Chris Custodiet are the only sane ones on here at times.

For the record I did amend my original post but did so long before you or anyone else had replied and simply corrected a spelling mistake in any event.

I actually think you have done me a disservice I had, at least in my mind, clearly aimed the comment to just one or two posters consistently in denial of reality and not broad brushed the entire forum as you seemed to believe I had. 

Anyway my fault if I had not made myself completely clear.

[Damocles]

14 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

Not aware of any mechanism whereby an unsuccessful bidder can be granted an injunction against the administrators. 

What hes doing is trying to get the creditors to cause a stink to put pressure on that way. A judge may grant one to the unsecured creditors en masse if they have proof that the offer is better and was better and deliverable. This is where Larry falls down and can be ruled out.  

Assume it’s an injunction preventing the transfer of assets etc. If he had Fildraw’s backing (was Keir in court?) surely they as the appointer could remove the administrator or pressure them to accept the Bassini bid? 

If Bassini has offered 100% and has proven it to Fildraw, surely they would support him, and they have been ominously quiet.

 

Edited August 17, 2019 by Damocles

[Spider]

Bassini has the funds via Sullivan. 

If We are to assume (as everything is, let’s be honest) that FV are having second thoughts, then Bassini is the option.

People won’t like it, but we live to fight another day if FV pull out.

£25million sorts out a lot of problems.

He’s definitely mentle, but you have to be to want a football club.

 

[bwfcfan5]

Just now, Spider said:

Bassini has the funds via Sullivan. 

If We are to assume (as everything is, let’s be honest) that FV are having second thoughts, then Bassini is the option.

People won’t like it, but we live to fight another day if FV pull out.

£25million sorts out a lot of problems.

He’s definitely mentle, but you have to be to want a football club.

 

He doesn’t have £25M. Sullivan has offered to buy the ground and hotel for £12.5M and rent it back. Where does the money to run the club come from? Especially with the extra rent? The league have not approved that plan for a reason. A few reasons.

[Spider]

2 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

He doesn’t have £25M. Sullivan has offered to buy the ground and hotel for £12.5M and rent it back. Where does the money to run the club come from? Especially with the extra rent? The league have not approved that plan for a reason. A few reasons.

Sullivan has more money. Of all the shit Bassini has come out with, that much is true.

I think we underestimate his determination and potential.

wouldn't be my choice by a long stretch, but his race isn’t quite run yet I feel.

[Escobarp]

5 minutes ago, Damocles said:

Assume it’s an injunction preventing the transfer of assets etc. If he had Fildraw’s backing (was Keir in court?) surely they as the appointer could remove the administrator or pressure them to accept the Bassini bid? 

If Bassini has offered 100% and has proven it to Fildraw, surely they would support him, and they have been ominously quiet.

 

Flidraw are in this for themselves not for anyone else. They could apply for a change in the admins as they have a qualifying charge. But unless they can prove categorically that there is negligence or some other form of malpractice the court won’t intervene if that I’m sure. 

If your scenario was true why have they not acted? Either because it’s not happened or they gab insufficient legal leverage. 

‘This all relies on the predication that Larry has the money unequivocally  which is where the hypothesis falls down IMO

[Escobarp]

8 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

He doesn’t have £25M. Sullivan has offered to buy the ground and hotel for £12.5M and rent it back. Where does the money to run the club come from? Especially with the extra rent? The league have not approved that plan for a reason. A few reasons.

You do not know what plan Larry put to the efl none of us do. 

Sullivan has to common knowledge offered to support Larry to the tune of 25m. Of which 12.5 buys the ground. 

[Okocha10]

This is what I’ve heard from a person from who works at the hotel who got told this off the hotel manager could be all bullshit this so don’t class is a fact. Supposedly FV have made an offer for the hotel of £250k but Quantuma want £1m that’s including Micheal James debt he’s owed. Bassini has shown no proof what so ever of Sullivan’s money he’s rang up a couple of creditors saying he will pay 100% of what the creditors are owed. When the creditors has asked proof of this he was stuttering & kept saying give me time. Senior managers in the hotel are about to leave also 

[RoadRunnerFan]

27 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

I don't believe I had got it the wrong way round at all, I think you have simply taken the one line out of the context in which I had set it -

For the record I did amend my original post but did so long before you or anyone else had replied and simply corrected a spelling mistake in any event.

I actually think you have done me a disservice I had, at least in my mind, clearly aimed the comment to just one or two posters consistently in denial of reality and not broad brushed the entire forum as you seemed to believe I had. 

Anyway my fault if I had not made myself completely clear.

Let's imagine I am staying in Linton travel tavern. If I wish to watch the film 'Bangkok Chick Boys' when the option comes up to 'Watch Bangkok Chick Boys?' I tick the box that says 'Yes' , if I do not wish to watch this film I tick the box that says 'No.'  So if I tick the box that says 'Yes', I do not expect to watch 'Driving Miss Daisy' instead. 

If you say that you think only three posters 'are the only sane ones on here at times'  then by definition you think the others are not sane, at times. Though you say your inference of insanity is aimed at 'one or two.' So your reasoning doesn't stack up unless the forum only has five members, three sane ones plus the two in denial of reality, which is demonstrably horseshit. 

I'll leave it at that. 🙂

Edited August 17, 2019 by RoadRunnerFan

[wakey]

6 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

If I wish to watch the film 'Bangkok Chick Boys' when the option comes up to 'Watch Bangkok Chick Boys?' I tick the box that says 'Yes' , if I do not wish to watch this film I tick the box that says 'No.'  So if I tick the box that says 'Yes', I do not expect to watch 'Driving Miss Daisy' instead

did you get your money back?

[RoadRunnerFan]

4 minutes ago, wakey said:

did you get your money back?

Unfortunately not, though luckily the bill was disconcertingly vague. Though the kind young man from reception did show me how to operate the TV. I repaid his act of kindness by showing him 'the trick with the mirror.' 

[bwfcfan5]

31 minutes ago, Spider said:

Sullivan has more money. Of all the shit Bassini has come out with, that much is true.

I think we underestimate his determination and potential.

wouldn't be my choice by a long stretch, but his race isn’t quite run yet I feel.

Sullivan has zero interest in subsidising Bolton Wanderers. He wants his hands on the land. If Bassini gets anywhere near us we are dead anyway.

[wakey]

1 minute ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Unfortunately not, though luckily the bill was disconcertingly vague.

At least you didn't have to own up to watching Driving Miss Daisy