Take Over

[DirtySanchez]

Just now, Mounts Kipper said:

It stopped him even trying, it put a red flag on him trying to sell the stadium, it kept the stadium (for now) in the control of the club. It was job well done. 

Think you need to read up on how ACVs work

It wouldn't stop him trying, just put a delay on it to give chance for a local group to raise the funds. Even without the ACV anybody like the trust could make an offer to buy it on the open market. And just like with an ACV in place, there is no requirement to accept that bid

If there was a planning application to demolish it and build shops, the ACV would be irrelevant in that as well

[bwfcfan5]

3 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said:

Think you need to read up on how ACVs work

It wouldn't stop him trying, just put a delay on it to give chance for a local group to raise the funds. Even without the ACV anybody like the trust could make an offer to buy it on the open market. And just like with an ACV in place, there is no requirement to accept that bid

If there was a planning application to demolish it and build shops, the ACV would be irrelevant in that as well

Clearly facts are not going to work here.....

[Tonge moor green jacket]

What's the point of an ACV?

If it doesn't benefit the trust, and ken wanted rid of it as it didn't benefit him, then it all seems a bit pointless.

Or is it a case of it affecting ken more than the trust, so they went for it?

[DirtySanchez]

Just now, Tonge moor green jacket said:

What's the point of an ACV?

If it doesn't benefit the trust, and ken wanted rid of it as it didn't benefit him, then it all seems a bit pointless.

Or is it a case of it affecting ken more than the trust, so they went for it?

In general, there isn't one.

Brought in under the guise of localism with the intention of saving the last pub in the village. But the reality is, if you've got a pub that you want to sell and you're more likely to get more cash selling it to a developer for say housing than to the local community as a pub, what would you choose?

All it does is delay the process, as I say Ken could still sell to whoever he wanted as he still has the right to accept any offer he wishes

I think they went for it more in the sense that it would frustrate him and maybe didn't really know how they work 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

Cheers. Trying to out-cunt a cunt!

[Casino]

23 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said:

In general, there isn't one.

Brought in under the guise of localism with the intention of saving the last pub in the village. But the reality is, if you've got a pub that you want to sell and you're more likely to get more cash selling it to a developer for say housing than to the local community as a pub, what would you choose?

All it does is delay the process, as I say Ken could still sell to whoever he wanted as he still has the right to accept any offer he wishes

I think they went for it more in the sense that it would frustrate him and maybe didn't really know how they work 

 

the problem we have have here, is that you know what youre talking about

meanwhile, mounts just 'believes' so it becomes truth

 

anyway, we will soon see the value of an ACV, in my opinion

worthless

[tkonion]

Is there any protection against a new owner winding the club up and selling off assets?

[Mounts Kipper]

48 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said:

Think you need to read up on how ACVs work

It wouldn't stop him trying, just put a delay on it to give chance for a local group to raise the funds. Even without the ACV anybody like the trust could make an offer to buy it on the open market. And just like with an ACV in place, there is no requirement to accept that bid

If there was a planning application to demolish it and build shops, the ACV would be irrelevant in that as well

I know how ACV works, and the fact remains ken wanted to get the trust to help remove the ACV, I’m sure if they had then Ken had a cunning plan that would benefit him and not BWFC, the ACV played a part in him deciding not to contemplate selling, refinancing against the stadium. Obviously that’s my opinion, the king ken crew obviously won’t agree. 

Edited July 3, 2019 by Mounts Kipper

[Mounts Kipper]

11 minutes ago, Casino said:

 

the problem we have have here, is that you know what youre talking about

meanwhile, mounts just 'believes' so it becomes truth

 

anyway, we will soon see the value of an ACV, in my opinion

worthless

You really are a silly billy. 

Edited July 3, 2019 by Mounts Kipper

[tomski]

Basran is a broker in his normal every day life, I suspect this was always the plan that he’d walk away once the deal is done.

 

[DirtySanchez]

43 minutes ago, Casino said:

 

the problem we have have here, is that you know what youre talking about

meanwhile, mounts just 'believes' so it becomes truth

 

anyway, we will soon see the value of an ACV, in my opinion

worthless

https://www.theplanner.co.uk/opinion/legal-landscape-whats-the-point-of-assets-of-community-value

[Blondi]

1 hour ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I’m hoping that his departure means someone new might have joined with FV and hopefully someone with financial clout.

Might be Nick Mason.

[Zico]

21 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said:

https://www.theplanner.co.uk/opinion/legal-landscape-whats-the-point-of-assets-of-community-value

"it only delays and annoys"

even if that's all it did, well done ST on that one

[Mounts Kipper]

32 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said:

https://www.theplanner.co.uk/opinion/legal-landscape-whats-the-point-of-assets-of-community-value

This is the interesting part of that article. "The only real impact of the ACV regime, therefore, is to temporarily frustrate developers by causing delay, without providing any obvious benefits for local communities"

The above would have been very important should Ken have gone down that route and would have made any sale of the stadium extremely controversial, possibly involving local council, MPs and national politics, hardly what a developer would want to wade through (and that might of played a part in him not attempting to sell the stadium). Anyhow its done and dusted for now, we have the stadium and hopefully new owners who have the interest of the football club and fans at the forefront of their business plan.     

[Roger_Dubuis]

54 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said:

https://www.theplanner.co.uk/opinion/legal-landscape-whats-the-point-of-assets-of-community-value

I think you are missing the point. As the article says " Unless the 6 months are business critical to the seller" 

In Ken's case the 6 month period was business critical to him.He had no short term plan for the club other than to sell anything he could to pay bills until he sold the club on.This would have been a money raiser for him to prolong his stay if the ACV didn't exist

Edited July 3, 2019 by Roger_Dubuis

[ProfessorWoland]

1 hour ago, Casino said:

 

the problem we have have here, is that you know what youre talking about

meanwhile, mounts just 'believes' so it becomes truth

 

anyway, we will soon see the value of an ACV, in my opinion

worthless

In the context of the stadium I think its of some value. The ACV prevents anything being done as a fait accompli. It guarantees that plans will have to be made public six months before the sake can occur. That's the time in which a fanbase can be mobilised, direct action can take place. etc. There are some organisations that wouldn't want that sort of exposure. The ACV period could dissuade them from getting involved. 

 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

1 hour ago, ZicoKelly said:

"it only delays and annoys"

even if that's all it did, well done ST on that one

Aye, no issues on that front.

[DomRepWanderer]

Playing Oldham 27th July in another friendly

[Zico]

1 hour ago, Roger_Dubuis said:

I think you are missing the point. As the article says " Unless the 6 months are business critical to the seller" 

In Ken's case the 6 month period was business critical to him.He had no short term plan for the club other than to sell anything he could to pay bills until he sold the club on.This would have been a money raiser for him to prolong his stay if the ACV didn't exist

so why didn't he wait 6 months then sell?

as DS said, the ACV wouldn't stop him trying to sell, it would just delay him at best. 

he was here 3 years, he had the time to wait 6 months if he wanted to sell the ground. the ACV appears to have acheived nowt.

(unless I'm missing something, which can't be ruled out)

[Sluffy]

4 hours ago, birch-chorley said:

Sluffy 

you are right, we have been running at a shortfall for many years, long before Ken came a long. however we had an owner willing to put his own cash in to prop it up for most of those years 

In rolls Ken, pissing and moaning about all the legacy contracts he inherited and a plan to balance the books. Three years later we have a wage bill (all signed by Ken) of £800k a month crippling us but this time with no owner willing to put his own money in 

Given Ken didn’t want to put the money in (which is fair enough), he shouldn’t have signed the playing contracts that he did as he had no way to pay for it 

Rank bad management, end of story 

I notice that your reply is being shown as a 'favourite' post today, so well done on that at least.

So, let me put your point back to you, as the clubs players came to the end of their contracts who would you have signed to replace them know knowing that we couldn't even afford the wages of players of the ilk of Andrew Taylor, Noone, Buckley, Donaldson, Wilson, and Grounds - and we certainly wouldn't have been able to afford to resign players such as Wheater, Beevers, Ameobi, and Alf, couldn't afford the loans for the likes of Connolly and Williams nor even dream of buying anyone like Magennis- as all of these players were signed by Anderson and cost too much!

Would you have preferred then that Anderson sign no one and simply play the youth team and those still under previous contracts such as Amos and Pratley for the last three years, which was probably they only way to bring the deficit down? 

Would that have got the attendances up, kept us in the League even?

Would the EFL have even allowed that to happen?

Even if the current (2018/19 season) wage bill is £800kpm (which is £9.6m pa) I believe it to be closer to £600kpm (£7.2m pa), I think it is widely accepted that the club had one of the smallest wage bills in the division.  It is widely accepted that the amount clubs pay on players wages equates to their success in the leagues, so if your answer to Ken's management was to pay monthly wages at a level equating to non league wage bills then what level of football would you expect the team to gravitate too? 

It's also estimated that the benefit from being in the Championship to the third tier in terms of broadcast matches to be in the region of £7m plus, per annum.

Obviously you know better than Ken, so what was his solution to slashing the wage bill since he took ownership of the club three seasons ago and how successful on and off the pitch do you believe it would have been?

I'm sitting comfortably waiting for your wonderful solution as it must be an obvious one if Ken is such a rank bad manager (end of story type!) and couldn't see it but you can.

[tomski]

7 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

I notice that your reply is being shown as a 'favourite' post today, so well done on that at least.

So, let me put your point back to you, as the clubs players came to the end of their contracts who would you have signed to replace them know knowing that we couldn't even afford the wages of players of the ilk of Andrew Taylor, Noone, Buckley, Donaldson, Wilson, and Grounds - and we certainly wouldn't have been able to afford to resign players such as Wheater, Beevers, Ameobi, and Alf, couldn't afford the loans for the likes of Connolly and Williams nor even dream of buying anyone like Magennis- as all of these players were signed by Anderson and cost too much!

Would you have preferred then that Anderson sign no one and simply play the youth team and those still under previous contracts such as Amos and Pratley for the last three years, which was probably they only way to bring the deficit down? 

Would that have got the attendances up, kept us in the League even?

Would the EFL have even allowed that to happen?

Even if the current (2018/19 season) wage bill is £800kpm (which is £9.6m pa) I believe it to be closer to £600kpm (£7.2m pa), I think it is widely accepted that the club had one of the smallest wage bills in the division.  It is widely accepted that the amount clubs pay on players wages equates to their success in the leagues, so if your answer to Ken's management was to pay monthly wages at a level equating to non league wage bills then what level of football would you expect the team to gravitate too? 

It's also estimated that the benefit from being in the Championship to the third tier in terms of broadcast matches to be in the region of £7m plus, per annum.

Obviously you know better than Ken, so what was his solution to slashing the wage bill since he took ownership of the club three seasons ago and how successful on and off the pitch do you believe it would have been?

I'm sitting comfortably waiting for your wonderful solution as it must be an obvious one if Ken is such a rank bad manager (end of story type!) and couldn't see it but you can.

You take it all too personally pal going on about likes and whether birch knows better than ken. I think ken will be glad he’s still got you though! 😂

[Sluffy]

27 minutes ago, tomski said:

You take it all too personally pal going on about likes and whether birch knows better than ken. I think ken will be glad he’s still got you though! 😂

What I'm trying to point out is the absurdity of what people say.

Of course if Anderson didn't sign any players the wage bill will drop - people are giving their +1's for such a post too!

But we still need players to field a team - and if the likes of the woeful ones who lost 30 games last season are too rich for our pocket then what level of player is it that we can afford - and what level of football will that inevitably lead us to and what level of support will remain in the club?

Is that what people wanted - non league wage equivalent and non-league type football accordingly?

It's no coincidence that other clubs such as Bury, Macclesfield and Notts County are struggling too with costs greater than their incomes.

No doubt Anderson took some decisions based on risk - is it better to sell a club in the Championship than say the fourth tier of football.  No doubt Eddie helped him out financially behind the scenes, and his untimely death precipitated the club collapsing so quickly.  No doubt he wanted to earn himself as much as he can (legally) from the company he owned - that's why people buy companies, to earn themselves money.

I'm just interested to see what answer I get back in reply as Kens rank bad end of story and we can't afford the shower of shite he signed that we called a squad in the season just gone so I'm looking forward as to what we should have done?

Edited July 3, 2019 by Sluffy
Grammar errors

[tomski]

If he had no intention of funding what he signed of course he shouldn’t of signed them. 

He had no intention of paying for Doidge the bloke and let the poor sod buy a house up here.

we would of been in L1 anyway just with the minus -12 so yeah I’d of preferred that. Also he should of stayed away if he wasn’t willing to put in.

You almost seem to praise him making a bit (legally as you say) while he’s run out of money to pay everyone else. I’m my eyes that makes him a turd.

 

Edited July 3, 2019 by tomski

[birch-chorley]

40 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

I notice that your reply is being shown as a 'favourite' post today, so well done on that at least.

So, let me put your point back to you, as the clubs players came to the end of their contracts who would you have signed to replace them know knowing that we couldn't even afford the wages of players of the ilk of Andrew Taylor, Noone, Buckley, Donaldson, Wilson, and Grounds - and we certainly wouldn't have been able to afford to resign players such as Wheater, Beevers, Ameobi, and Alf, couldn't afford the loans for the likes of Connolly and Williams nor even dream of buying anyone like Magennis- as all of these players were signed by Anderson and cost too much!

Would you have preferred then that Anderson sign no one and simply play the youth team and those still under previous contracts such as Amos and Pratley for the last three years, which was probably they only way to bring the deficit down? 

Would that have got the attendances up, kept us in the League even?

Would the EFL have even allowed that to happen?

Even if the current (2018/19 season) wage bill is £800kpm (which is £9.6m pa) I believe it to be closer to £600kpm (£7.2m pa), I think it is widely accepted that the club had one of the smallest wage bills in the division.  It is widely accepted that the amount clubs pay on players wages equates to their success in the leagues, so if your answer to Ken's management was to pay monthly wages at a level equating to non league wage bills then what level of football would you expect the team to gravitate too? 

It's also estimated that the benefit from being in the Championship to the third tier in terms of broadcast matches to be in the region of £7m plus, per annum.

Obviously you know better than Ken, so what was his solution to slashing the wage bill since he took ownership of the club three seasons ago and how successful on and off the pitch do you believe it would have been?

I'm sitting comfortably waiting for your wonderful solution as it must be an obvious one if Ken is such a rank bad manager (end of story type!) and couldn't see it but you can.

You’ve named about 20 players there, I’d bet we have had close to 100 go through here during Ken’s time, loads of which have barely got a look in (you’ll know exactly how many I’m sure) 

With hindsight, would we have been better served with a different approach, try and bring in half as many but give them a go (saving plenty of budget) 

How many like ALF & Otzumer just didn’t seem to fit Parky’s playing style and barely got a game? Surely another waste of limited resources 

Even if we had have reduced our wage bill by half it’s still way above non league, your just being hysterical now. Point being though, we might have actually been able to keep up with paying the wages and the associated tax bill, averting administration 

Would we have been relegated, most likely, but we’ve overspent and have still been relegated, losing over 30 games, it probably didn’t help that the players didn’t get paid and turned their cards in 

if you think that’s good business management and he didn’t have any other choice then I think your deluded! 

 

 

[birch-chorley]

Ken admitted player recruitment hasn’t been right in one of his notes....

I accept that l have made mistakes along the way and l have to admit that the player recruitment over the last two seasons has not been good enough, in so far, as many of the players recruited have not started, or even been included in the matchday squads this season. 

With hindsight, this should have been addressed earlier, but as they say hindsight is a wonderful thing.

https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2019/april/a-note-from-the-chairman4/