Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Take Over


Kane57

Recommended Posts

  • Moderators

Full statement here:

https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2019/july/statement-on-behalf-of-david-rubin--partners-administrators-for-bolton-wanderers/

We note with dismay the interview given by Laurence Bassini to TalkSPORT this morning.

The simple fact is, for several reasons, Mr Bassini was not the successful bidder under the process we have carried out to sell Bolton Wanderers.

His bid was not the best for the club. Moreover, he was not able to satisfy either the proof or source of funding to the satisfaction of the process or within the proscribed timeframe. That remains the case. 

Subsequently, Mr Bassini has sent a vast number of erratic and threatening emails and text messages, as well as making threatening calls, to the point where we have instructed lawyers to deal with them.  

We will be making no further comment about Mr Bassini or his claims.

 

Edited by ZicoKelly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, peelyfeet said:

Possibly, if it were to happen, and involved any element of the club, there would be restriction of his involvement. If it were just for the Hotel, then maybe not.

What concerns me most about the reappearance of Bassini, and his backing from Sullivan, is the knock on effect this may have on FV's bid for the club. 

It appears Ken Anderson is the largest secured creditor of the Hotel. If this is true, it means that he has the highest weighted vote, when voting for the proposed buyer of the Hotel.

I'm concerned that Anderson will go for any option that lines his pockets the most, regardless of any effect this may have on the sale of the club. Therefore, if the Administrators receive a better bid for the hotel from anyone (Bassini included)  how will this effect FV's bid for the club, will they still want to buy it without the Hotel?

The vote has nothing to do with the sale of the club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, peelyfeet said:

I'm on about the sale (and creditors vote) of the hotel, not the club. We haven't heard anything from the Administrators of the hotel yet. From what I can gather, it's the sale of the Hotel that is going to be the final hurdle. FV want the Hotel, and I'm assuming that the sale of the club isn't going to complete until an agreement about the Hotel is reached, because the owner of the Hotel is going to have a massive influence over the club's future structure. Marc Iles has advised that Ken is the biggest secured creditor of the hotel, and therefore he holds the heaviest weighted vote, which is worrying.

Where has Iles said that because he is clearly wrong?

Prescot Business Park (Michaël James) is the Primary Charge holder on the Hotel with an amount of £5.5m.

Anderson has a second charge on it from the £5m he put in to pay off the BM loan.

From what Benny has said previously, the Administrator believes the Hotel to be worth in the region of £4.5m to £5m.

If no buyers can be found to pay more than the £5.5m that James has a charge on it, then Anderson would lose his secured creditor charge on the Hotel.  In fact as I understand it James could simply accept the hotel from the Administrator as full and final settlement that being the case.

Anderson looks to be facing a significant/total loss on the £5m he's put into the club that he's secured on the hotel, which presumably is the quibble he's had arguing the toss that it was all secured on the clubs assets instead.  Even then EDT and Warburton have the Primary charges on the club (and land in respect of Warburton) so probably why the clubs Administrator only accepts £1.6m as secured creditor status and not the additional £5m other (or whatever he was) that he was claiming.

It's hard to understand what the scheme is with Sullivan/Bassini - presumably the £27m was to buy the club and his other so called £6/7m to buy the Hotel?  Presumably in order to develop the land in a similar way as one assumes FV plan is also?

That being so and with the Administrator not accepting Bassini's submission, then I can only think the intent is to attempt to buy the hotel as some sort of bargaining chip/ransom strip to force a deal with FV.

Can't see them wanting to buy a currently loss making hotel at more than market value and sit on it, if FV are prepared to simply sit them out and watch them lose money daily on the hotel.  However if FV can't wait, then maybe there is a deal to be done to pay them to go away perhaps?

I suspect most of the delaying tactics over the last few months are more to do with KA attempting not to lose the £5m of his secured assets (that in reality the actual value of the various assets don't seem to be able to support with others having previous claims and are before him in the queue to be paid) rather than the populist social media view that Ken is trying to shaft us for one last pay day for himself.

That's how I reason things anyway. 

Edited by Sluffy
Grammar errors
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Spider said:

I've heard a rumour that in amongst all this Machiavellian bullshit, a game of football is breaking out tomorrow.

Is that right?

Your source is also bullshitting you. (It's on Sunday.)

Edited by Lt. Aldo Raine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, TrickyTrotter said:

Best way to shut Bassini is to complete the deal, instead of spending more money we don't have on getting lawyers to send him threatening letters about the threatening letters he has sent the administrators.

Not being funny but I don't think the deal and its completion will be hastened because the admins are fed up of Bassini.

There is a reason or reasons why its not complete yet and likely quite complicated ones. Administration is a tricky process and you can't just snap your fingers and "do a deal". Though it is incredibly frustrating to see pre-season slipping away and our chances of next season being anything other than another horror show going. But ultimately if we are taken over by stable owners I can live with that for the longer term stability. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, peelyfeet said:

 

Hope you are correct, maybe I'm reading too much into it, just concerned that Ken could have influence. The hotel's administrator Quantuma LLP, were appointed on the 14th May, have we heard anything from them?, I though they were supposed to release their findings to the creditors within 8 weeks?

I'm fairly confident that I am correct and it certainly wouldn't be the first time Iles has been completely misinformed about financial matters.

I draw your attention to two things namely PBP's charge was registered in January 2016 specifically in relation to the hotel and in the PDF of the link I post below clearly shows under para 3.1.1 (Security) that he has 'full title...by way of first legal mortgage to the property.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03674979/charges/I38DzXLRGn7DrnH_m96r8kkHQiA

Anderson's charge was registered in September 2018 is registered against all the companies in regards to Burnden Leisure and those coming under its umbrella - and doesn't include such a specific reference to a 'full title' - because PBP already have secured it previously.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03674979/charges/WV3Q_QOTRrQOk2d8EelQQQkvqWk

 

The second matter being that if you look at the bottom of page 28 of the most recent accounts published by the hotel (June 2017) you will clearly see the PBP loan clearly stated as an outstanding creditor.

See PDF from this link (scroll down to 28 March 2018 / Full accounts.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03674979/filing-history

 

Unless Anderson has since that time renegotiated PBP giving up their first charge on the hotel - and why should they have? - then I suggest Iles is incorrect on what he said.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sluffy said:

Where has Iles said that because he is clearly wrong?

Prescot Business Park (Michaël James) is the Primary Charge holder on the Hotel with an amount of £5.5m.

Anderson has a second charge on it from the £5m he put in to pay off the BM loan.

From what Benny has said previously, the Administrator believes the Hotel to be worth in the region of £4.5m to £5m.

If no buyers can be found to pay more than the £5.5m that James has a charge on it, then Anderson would lose his secured creditor charge on the Hotel.  In fact as I understand it James could simply accept the hotel from the Administrator as full and final settlement that being the case.

Anderson looks to be facing a significant/total loss on the £5m he's put into the club that he's secured on the hotel, which presumably is the quibble he's had arguing the toss that it was all secured on the clubs assets instead.  Even then EDT and Warburton have the Primary charges on the club (and land in respect of Warburton) so probably why the clubs Administrator only accepts £1.6m as secured creditor status and not the additional £5m other (or whatever he was) that he was claiming.

It's hard to understand what the scheme is with Sullivan/Bassini - presumably the £27m was to buy the club and his other so called £6/7m to buy the Hotel?  Presumably in order to develop the land in a similar way as one assumes FV plan is also?

That being so and with the Administrator not accepting Bassini's submission, then I can only think the intent is to attempt to buy the hotel as some sort of bargaining chip/ransom strip to force a deal with FV.

Can't see them wanting to buy a currently loss making hotel at more than market value and sit on it, if FV are prepared to simply sit them out and watch them lose money daily on the hotel.  However if FV can't wait, then maybe there is a deal to be done to pay them to go away perhaps?

I suspect most of the delaying tactics over the last few months are more to do with KA attempting not to lose the £5m of his secured assets (that in reality the actual value of the various assets don't seem to be able to support with others having previous claims and are before him in the queue to be paid) rather than the populist social media view that Ken is trying to shaft us for one last pay day for himself.

That's how I reason things anyway. 

 

If all that was correct, wouldn't Ken have known all that when he secured his charge against the hotel? So why would he have done it?

First thing to always remember is that nobody knows anything. You can't become an expert on the ins and outs of the clubs finances based on Google and CH alone, as gets proven time and time again when new information comes to light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.