Take Over

[HomerJay]

Just now, birch-chorley said:

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/

damn the honesty. what a cunt.

[birch-chorley]

2 minutes ago, HomerJay said:

damn the honesty. what a cunt.

He was honest that he wasted money on players who barely got a look in

I guess he should have gone on to say that if they got a look in or not we still couldn’t afford the contract that he had given those same players 

But he decided to leave that bit out 

[bwfcfan5]

6 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

He was honest that he wasted money on players who barely got a look in

I guess he should have gone on to say that if they got a look in or not we still couldn’t afford the contract that he had given those same players 

But he decided to leave that bit out 

Ultimately there was no way to run the club to be self sustainable. So Ken had to gamble - or fund it with his own cash. He wasn't prepared to do the latter so he gambled on the onfield performance maintaining the value of the club and allowing him to sell it - it worked for two seasons but then I suspect was when he expected to sell it and they couldn't - and we went into the season with no money in the kitty and Ken choosing to publicly tell everyone it was ok whilst not paying more and more and more people.

I think Ken was more of a bastard behind the scenes than he'd want to be simply because the money wasn't there. But because he never came out and said "look we're in a mess - we need help" he kept trying to pretend everything was fine inspite of numerous and obvious public signs that things were very bad indeed. He could have won sympathy from players and fans and other creditors for our plight but his attitude made that impossible sadly. 

 

[Sluffy]

42 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

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! 

Thanks for the reply but you haven't answered my question - no one could, as the only solution is to cut the wage bill to below a sustainability level to below what the clubs turnover is, would be to sign players on non-league equivariant wages (and I think the EFL would have had something to say about that as we simply wouldn't be competitive in the leagues until we found our level - non league).

I might be many things but I know in life you get what you pay for. 

In order to keep within a wage ceiling the club can sustain based on its revenue and allowing for all other creditors and suppliers to be paid on time, then the players wages would have to be pitched at non-league level.

And the lower the club sinks down the leagues the lower the revenue it receives.

Clearly no one is going to do that - not even the new owners - as they have to provide proof of funding for the next two years to cover the clubs trading deficit!!!

Presumably you must think they are rank bad (end of story type) business managers too otherwise they would be running the club without overspending its income from day one?

 

Edited July 3, 2019 by Sluffy
Grammar errors

[birch-chorley]

Is there no way for the club to self sustain itself though? 

At the end of the day it was a relatively small winding up order from the HMRC that did for us. The majority of our debt was in the form of soft loans to ED and MJ

If we are bringing in circa £10m revenue a year then we should be able to compete at the top end of league 1 without having to risk the house

Championship is a different story of course but Ken has apparently gambled on staying up by overpaying on a squad that lost 30 matches, the overpaying has led to us going under 

This whole theory that he had no other option is complete bollocks 

 

[birch-chorley]

2 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Thanks for the reply but you haven't answered my question - no one could, as the only solution is to cut the wage bill to below a sustainability level to below what the clubs turnover is, would be to sign players on non-league equivariant wages (and I think the EFL would have had something to say about that as we simply wouldn't be competitive in the leagues until we found our level - non league).

I might be many things but I know in life you get what you pay for. 

In order to keep within a wage ceiling the club can sustain based on its revenue and allowing for all other creditors and suppliers to be paid on time, then the players wages would have to be pitched at non-league level.

And the lower the club sinks down the leagues the lower the revenue it receives.

Clearly no one is going to do that - not even the new owners - as they have to provide proof of funding for the next two years to cover the clubs trading deficit!!!

Presumably you must thing they are rank bad (end of story) business managers too otherwise they would be running the club without overspending its income from day one?

 

Apologies if I missed your question but your posts are painfully long and as such questions and valid points are generally missed 

This whole non league argument is bollocks, Chorley are in the Confrence with 20 lads part time, they get 1,500 on a week at best paying £10 

If you think that’s our natural level after fixed costs then I have to disagree 

It’s fag packet but if we are in League 1 bringing in £8m - £10m then we should be able to structure the business in a way that we have £4m - £5m to spend on playing staff, that’s League 1 level, not non league 

All opinion of course, as is yours although you like to pass it off as fact 

[bwfcfan5]

2 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Is there no way for the club to self sustain itself though? 

At the end of the day it was a relatively small winding up order from the HMRC that did for us. The majority of our debt was in the form of soft loans to ED and MJ

If we are bringing in circa £10m revenue a year then we should be able to compete at the top end of league 1 without having to risk the house

Championship is a different story of course but Ken has apparently gambled on staying up by overpaying on a squad that lost 30 matches, the overpaying has led to us going under 

This whole theory that he had no other option is complete bollocks 

 

Given we were said to be losing between 3 and 5M in the championship - with a squad with a bottom 2/3 budget at best. I'd say it was virtually impossible to be self sufficient. In league one we went up but still lost something over £3M. And lets remember we were selling players like Clough during that time. Whilst we had some big wages still - I think if you factor in the loss of a fee even if you took those wages out we'd still lose money. 

We definitely could over time have become self sustainable but the emphasis would have had to be radically different. Not signing players - selling any good prospects and ultimately settling for a lower league berth. In reality I do not think such a plan is workable at Bolton Wanderers. Rochdale fans get frustrated doing that - imagine what Bolton fans would be like. So you'd be forever losing income whilst trying to cut costs and it would be a downwards cycle. 

Then you have to factor in that the whole business is much larger so whilst it generates turnover it also has higher costs - and streamlining the football has a knock on effect elsewhere. If your crowds are dropping so are some of your other income sources....

In theory its easy to just cut and cut but in reality there were howls of protest when Ken sold Clough or Holding - imagine what that would be like if he was not only selling players but signing lads on a few hundred a week only and essentially trying to compete with Rochdale and the like...

[Roger_Dubuis]

2 hours ago, ZicoKelly said:

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)

I don't think he ever planned on being here for another 6 months, he was here to make a quick buck out of selling the club on.The ACV made it too long a period for him to be arsed with raising money that way.It would no doubt have taken longer for him to give 6 months notice and receive money from a sale.It was easier for him to get quick money selling players he inherited and begging off Eddie 

 

[Sluffy]

19 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Apologies if I missed your question but your posts are painfully long and as such questions and valid points are generally missed 

This whole non league argument is bollocks, Chorley are in the Confrence with 20 lads part time, they get 1,500 on a week at best paying £10 

If you think that’s our natural level after fixed costs then I have to disagree 

It’s fag packet but if we are in League 1 bringing in £8m - £10m then we should be able to structure the business in a way that we have £4m - £5m to spend on playing staff, that’s League 1 level, not non league 

All opinion of course, as is yours although you like to pass it off as fact 

Ok a few facts for you from the latest 2016/17 accounts when coincidently we were in Division 1

Turnover was £8.3m (of which £3.1m was gate receipts) and running the club (not including wages) cost £6.9m (cost of sales plus Administration costs) leaving a maximum of just £1.4m for wages.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00043026/filing-history

I think you need to get your fag packet out and start doing your sums again.

 

[Duck Egg]

So if we were such a basket case, why did Ken take us on? Nobody forced him to.

He CHOSE to take over the basket case. Pissed a lot of people and businesses off (except you obvs) & left us in a worse position than he found us. 

[Sluffy]

Just now, Duck Egg said:

So if we were such a basket case, why did Ken take us on? Nobody forced him to.

He CHOSE to take over the basket case. Pissed a lot of people and businesses off (except you obvs) & left us in a worse position than he found us. 

If we are even worse of a basket case following Anderson then why have five consortiums queued up to buy us and in the case of FV who looks likely to become our newest owners, CHOOSING to pay out for the clubs trading losses for at least the next two years as well?

Nobody are forcing them either?

Do you think both them (and Ken) see a potential to make money for themselves?

I think that is probably what the answer is - don't you?

[MalcolmW]

7 minutes ago, Duck Egg said:

So if we were such a basket case, why did Ken take us on? Nobody forced him to.

He CHOSE to take over the basket case. Pissed a lot of people and businesses off (except you obvs) & left us in a worse position than he found us. 

He thought he was buying half a club. Then he found DH couldn't afford his share.

What he has done since is certainly open to criticism, but it still remains true that without him the club may well have folded back then.

[birch-chorley]

19 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Ok a few facts for you from the latest 2016/17 accounts when coincidently we were in Division 1

Turnover was £8.3m (of which £3.1m was gate receipts) and running the club (not including wages) cost £6.9m (cost of sales plus Administration costs) leaving a maximum of just £1.4m for wages.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00043026/filing-history

I think you need to get your fag packet out and start doing your sums again.

 

Ok, so let’s assume turnover of £8m per season then surviving at league 1 level 

The big issue with that lot is £6.9m of non playing costs, ridiculous really, what is on that figure that can come down to get wages to £3m - £4m? 

I appreciate business rates are circa £1.5m but how much of that is down to having a hotel that brings in £6m turnover? The idea of the stadium was that we can hold concerts, have lounges for conferences etc. The stadium was meant to wash its own face from a cost perspective. If it doesn’t wash its face then shut the lounges and hotel down and get the costs down as well 

You can get business rates re assessed if you have substantial change of use for the business

[bwfcfan5]

12 minutes ago, Duck Egg said:

So if we were such a basket case, why did Ken take us on? Nobody forced him to.

He CHOSE to take over the basket case. Pissed a lot of people and businesses off (except you obvs) & left us in a worse position than he found us. 

Wouldn't you buy half a football club for £1. What's the worst that can happen? He took a few hundred thousand out at least and to our knowledge did not lose any money in the process. He bought it with the intention of selling it for a tidy profit. I think he found selling it harder and also probably fancied a continuous salary and status running the show under new owners.....

[Duck Egg]

3 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

Wouldn't you buy half a football club for £1. What's the worst that can happen? He took a few hundred thousand out at least and to our knowledge did not lose any money in the process. He bought it with the intention of selling it for a tidy profit. I think he found selling it harder and also probably fancied a continuous salary and status running the show under new owners.....

Exactly.  He fecked up and we're paying the consequences 

[Roger_Dubuis]

25 minutes ago, MalcolmW said:

He thought he was buying half a club. Then he found DH couldn't afford his share.

What he has done since is certainly open to criticism, but it still remains true that without him the club may well have folded back then.

So you are saying that you think Eddie Davies would have allowed the club to fold on his watch if Ken hadn't stepped  in?.

Edited July 3, 2019 by Roger_Dubuis

[birch-chorley]

8 minutes ago, Roger_Dubuis said:

So you are saying that you think Eddie Davies would have allowed the club to fold on his watch if Ken hadn't stepped  in?

This 

If I recall right, we were never in front of a judge back in 2016 

This time we were in front of the judge, then were back in front of them 3 or 4 times after that, yet still no liquidation 

No way on Earth would we have been liquidated back in 2016 

Edited July 3, 2019 by birch-chorley

[bwfcfan5]

6 minutes ago, Duck Egg said:

Exactly.  He fecked up and we're paying the consequences 

I wouldn't say he fecked up. I'd say things didn't pan out how he wanted. But he's found his ways to make money from us I'm sure. And whilst its not the millions he'd want its still not bad for £1. 

[tyldesley_white]

15 minutes ago, MalcolmW said:

He thought he was buying half a club. Then he found DH couldn't afford his share.

What he has done since is certainly open to criticism, but it still remains true that without him the club may well have folded back then.

Stop with the facts

[Sluffy]

11 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Ok, so let’s assume turnover of £8m per season then surviving at league 1 level 

The big issue with that lot is £6.9m of non playing costs, ridiculous really, what is on that figure that can come down to get wages to £3m - £4m? 

I appreciate business rates are circa £1.5m but how much of that is down to having a hotel that brings in £6m turnover? The idea of the stadium was that we can hold concerts, have lounges for conferences etc. The stadium was meant to wash its own face from a cost perspective. If it doesn’t wash its face then shut the lounges and hotel down and get the costs down as well 

You can get business rates re assessed if you have substantial change of use for the business

You think someone who is going to pay the Administrator for the Hotel something like £5m, then expect them to simply close it down, pay out thousands in redundancies and simply board it up, as soon as they have?

Really???

Back to your fag packet again I think.

[Morizio]

Stuffy doesn’t even go watching. 

Its easier to be ambivalent when not subjected to the shite that was on offer.

[birch-chorley]

23 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

You think someone who is going to pay the Administrator for the Hotel something like £5m, then expect them to simply close it down, pay out thousands in redundancies and simply board it up, as soon as they have?

Really???

Back to your fag packet again I think.

Clearly if the hotel becomes a complete separate entity and is sold to another party then it’s their problem, likewise they will be liable for some of the total business rates that we currently pay. The Hotel would no longer be relevant to this conversation 

Our club has existed for close to 150 years, we have a big enough fan base to survive in league 1 amongst the likes of Accrington, Burton, Lincoln and Rochdale. 

You seem to be of the impression that outside of the Premier League we cannot self sustain at any level, which is crazy! I appreciate our fixed costs are too high, we need to change our business model to reduce fixed costs then

If of course we can’t get the stadium to pay for itself (or go a long way towards doing so) 

[radcliffe white]

30 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

You think someone who is going to pay the Administrator for the Hotel something like £5m, then expect them to simply close it down, pay out thousands in redundancies and simply board it up, as soon as they have?

Really???

Back to your fag packet again I think.

Birch knows his shit 

and he’s got a big fuck off orangery 

[Tombwfc]

Took hundreds of thousands out while not putting any in, signed contracts and racked up debts he never had any intention of paying back, sold the EFL and everyone else a pack of lies and dragged everything out for as long as possible in the hope someone would give him a payday. Did not give the slightest fuck what happened to the club afterwards, or the penalties his brinkmanship would incur.

It was often said over the past few years that we could judge Ken when we see what shape he leaves us in, whether the ends justified the means. Well we have seen now and people are still wasting hundreds of words defending him.

'What more could he have done?' Jesus fucking christ.

[HomerJay]

Just now, tomski said:

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.

 

see this i have an issue with.

how can you say he had no intention? if we had big crowds, we get big gate receipts and payment problems go away (or at least ease). thats pretty much a fact, not an opinion.

plus, maybe he thought he could sell a "superstar ameobi" in january and subsidise any shortfall, if need be.

his mistake was that he thought we would win games, and folk would turn up.

plus he had big plans for non-football activities, which hasnt really worked that well. - know this because i had a official conversation with BWFC about that very topic.

 

ken handled shit badly, and did certainly did fuck up on more than one occasion. plus he is has the greasiest hair around. but this does not make him the fucking anti-christ.

 

Edited July 3, 2019 by HomerJay