jules_darby Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 13 minutes ago, Kane57 said: I think what Ian the leaflet man is trying to say is that he doesn't have a clue any more than we all do. Something might happen. It might not Leaflet man? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 15 minutes ago, Kane57 said: I think what Ian the leaflet man is trying to say is that he doesn't have a clue any more than we all do. Something might happen. It might not Cheers, our Kane, AKA Mr Praisee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Just now, Mr Grey said: Struggling on that acronym Happy Bastard and Habitual Twat ??? How Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 1 minute ago, Mr Grey said: Got a 'U' grade in acronyms No, I’m giving you the first word! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sluffy Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 1 hour ago, jules_darby said: Leaflet man? When I left local government employment some years ago it gave me the benefit of becoming financially secure for the rest of my days, however I soon got bored in effect retiring from work too early and ended up via a series of circumstances setting up my own delivery business. I've no idea where Manning has gained this information from or why he's posting personal information of me on here, or any other form, of social media and would have though such action was strictly against the rules of this site? He's been trolling me so much he recent weeks on both here and Nuts that its becoming unpleasant to post much. If his aim his to drive me off from posting any more on this site, then he has succeeded. I have no wish for any nutjob such as him to make it his mission to follow me around, finding personal information and posting it up in the public domain - presumably because I've said or done something on an internet footy forum many moons ago, that he once didn't like and turned it into some real life vendetta. As Kane57 has many times identified himself as Chris Manning - and some even refer to him as Chris on here - I do not see it as ironic nor the disclosing of any private information about him by referring to him as Manning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rizlar Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Just now, Sluffy said: When I left local government employment some years ago it gave me the benefit of becoming financially secure for the rest of my days, however I soon got bored in effect retiring from work too early and ended up via a series of circumstances setting up my own delivery business. I've no idea where Manning has gained this information from or why he's posting personal information of me on here, or any other form, of social media and would have though such action was strictly against the rules of this site? He's been trolling me so much he recent weeks on both here and Nuts that its becoming unpleasant to post much. If his aim his to drive me off from posting any more on this site, then he has succeeded. I have no wish for any nutjob such as him to make it his mission to follow me around, finding personal information and posting it up in the public domain - presumably because I've said or done something on an internet footy forum many moons ago, that he once didn't like and turned it into some real life vendetta. As Kane57 has many times identified himself as Chris Manning - and some even refer to him as Chris on here - I do not see it as ironic nor the disclosing of any private information about him by referring to him as Manning. Dont let him get too you I find your posts informative and everyone is entitled to an opinion so carry on posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jules_darby Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 8 minutes ago, Sluffy said: When I left local government employment some years ago it gave me the benefit of becoming financially secure for the rest of my days, however I soon got bored in effect retiring from work too early and ended up via a series of circumstances setting up my own delivery business. I've no idea where Manning has gained this information from or why he's posting personal information of me on here, or any other form, of social media and would have though such action was strictly against the rules of this site? He's been trolling me so much he recent weeks on both here and Nuts that its becoming unpleasant to post much. If his aim his to drive me off from posting any more on this site, then he has succeeded. I have no wish for any nutjob such as him to make it his mission to follow me around, finding personal information and posting it up in the public domain - presumably because I've said or done something on an internet footy forum many moons ago, that he once didn't like and turned it into some real life vendetta. As Kane57 has many times identified himself as Chris Manning - and some even refer to him as Chris on here - I do not see it as ironic nor the disclosing of any private information about him by referring to him as Manning. Hmmmm I’ve known a few other Bolton supporters doing this sort of thing to their own recently on other internet sites just because their opinions don’t match. The fuck is wrong with folk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leebwfc Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 13 minutes ago, Sluffy said: When I left local government employment some years ago it gave me the benefit of becoming financially secure for the rest of my days, however I soon got bored in effect retiring from work too early and ended up via a series of circumstances setting up my own delivery business. I've no idea where Manning has gained this information from or why he's posting personal information of me on here, or any other form, of social media and would have though such action was strictly against the rules of this site? He's been trolling me so much he recent weeks on both here and Nuts that its becoming unpleasant to post much. If his aim his to drive me off from posting any more on this site, then he has succeeded. I have no wish for any nutjob such as him to make it his mission to follow me around, finding personal information and posting it up in the public domain - presumably because I've said or done something on an internet footy forum many moons ago, that he once didn't like and turned it into some real life vendetta. As Kane57 has many times identified himself as Chris Manning - and some even refer to him as Chris on here - I do not see it as ironic nor the disclosing of any private information about him by referring to him as Manning. Post what the fuck you want, I don't come on here to read little snipy posts and pointless put downs, I like reading all your posts, interesting points, fairly balanced view and actually educating at times. These muppets are just in it for the drama, the clicks whatever it is. Same as that shortland and smurf on twitter, endless shitty wank replies to every tweet about #bwfc, its like they can't stop. Fucking drones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Take Hunt Off Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 7 hours ago, Sluffy said: My view for what it is worth is this. As far as I understood things the £15 million loan that remained on the books after Davies had written off the rest that was owing to him, was left there to deter any possible attempt by the new owners to asset strip - ie the £15 million (plus as well the Michael James and Warburton loans) was secured as a charge against assets - which in effect made them unable to be sold or disposed of until the debt was settled by agreement of both parties. Part of the conditions of the loan was the 'windfall' payments if the club became successful again to be promoted within (what I thought was a specific time frame - I had five years in my head for some reason - with next season being the fourth of the five - but I may be wrong about that). I also was under the impression that at least the initial quoted asking price for the club in the 'taster' document was for £25 million with all loans being settled - which would have included the £15 million Davies loan and its attached 'windfall' payments. Therefore to my way of thinking is that if the current prospective buyers are seeking a change to the attached terms to the £15 million Davies loan, then clearly they aren't paying off this loan in full and buying the club debt free, so consequently are going to take on some debt in the club - I guess the question would be how much? Now as I've mentioned above the Davies loan charged against assets prevented anyone intending to 'strip' the club, so I guess a decision would have to be taken from the Davies (Moonshift) position as to how 'hard' the £15 million loan is to them - do they want it paid in full, happy to just write it all off and forget about it, or something in between the two positions - and if they are happy to write the loan off (or a large chunk of it), then what protection is there to prevent anyone now selling off the clubs assets that had been secured against the debt? Maybe selling off the stadium even (the ACV only delays a sale, it doesn't prevent one). In fact I'm not even sure if or how the ACV would effect this sale going through quickly as presumably the ownership of the stadium will pass from Anderson to the new owners? I know that some/many perceive me to be a supporter of Anderson (I'm not, nor for balance do I dislike him either) but it seems to me the clubs assets would be in more danger of disposal if the Davies loan is reduced or written off, than at anytime under the Anderson regime to date. It also worries me that Basran's partner in Football Ventures (Whites) Ltd - which I for one assume is the business that will take control of the club (just like KA's Inner Circle Investments control it now) is someone by the name of Sharron Brittan, who (if it is the same person as this Bloomberg biography) seems to be vastly more orientated to property than football. Ms. Sharon Brittan serves as Non-Executive Director at UKCloud Limited. During a career spanning more than 25 years Sharon has completed multiple real estate development projects and now advises on investment and asset management. Her achievements included co-founder and CEO of Britannia Row Business Centre, an award-winning property offering flexible workspace solutions; CEO of One Alfred Place, a private members business club in the West End of London which offers stylish, flexible work and meeting facilities where entrepreneurs and professionals combine to form a unique community; and CEO and Investment Director for a family office managing a portfolio of property, lifestyle and technology investments. First and foremost Sharon is the proud mother of four children. She is also passionate in her support for initiatives that give children the best possible start in life. https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=403818188&privcapId=263905652&previousCapId=263905652&previousTitle=UKCloud Limited https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11761052/officers All just idle speculation on my part though but it does sound to me that the deal if it did go through as discussed above, it would mean the new owners still having to carry debt in the club, which presumably would need to be addressed sooner or later down the line? Carry on posting mate its sometimes hard going but I for one was confused about the residual 15m debt & its reason for being. Pretty objective as well .....unlike some on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowball Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 36 minutes ago, Sluffy said: When I left local government employment some years ago it gave me the benefit of becoming financially secure for the rest of my days, however I soon got bored in effect retiring from work too early and ended up via a series of circumstances setting up my own delivery business. I've no idea where Manning has gained this information from or why he's posting personal information of me on here, or any other form, of social media and would have though such action was strictly against the rules of this site? He's been trolling me so much he recent weeks on both here and Nuts that its becoming unpleasant to post much. If his aim his to drive me off from posting any more on this site, then he has succeeded. I have no wish for any nutjob such as him to make it his mission to follow me around, finding personal information and posting it up in the public domain - presumably because I've said or done something on an internet footy forum many moons ago, that he once didn't like and turned it into some real life vendetta. As Kane57 has many times identified himself as Chris Manning - and some even refer to him as Chris on here - I do not see it as ironic nor the disclosing of any private information about him by referring to him as Manning. Seems i was right in my first impressions of Kane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Kane57 out save our Sluff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Custodiet Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 44 minutes ago, Sluffy said: When I left local government employment some years ago it gave me the benefit of becoming financially secure for the rest of my days, however I soon got bored in effect retiring from work too early and ended up via a series of circumstances setting up my own delivery business. I've no idea where Manning has gained this information from or why he's posting personal information of me on here, or any other form, of social media and would have though such action was strictly against the rules of this site? He's been trolling me so much he recent weeks on both here and Nuts that its becoming unpleasant to post much. If his aim his to drive me off from posting any more on this site, then he has succeeded. I have no wish for any nutjob such as him to make it his mission to follow me around, finding personal information and posting it up in the public domain - presumably because I've said or done something on an internet footy forum many moons ago, that he once didn't like and turned it into some real life vendetta. As Kane57 has many times identified himself as Chris Manning - and some even refer to him as Chris on here - I do not see it as ironic nor the disclosing of any private information about him by referring to him as Manning. Afraid I have to agree with you about Kane57, Sluffy. He's the main reason I stopped contributing to Nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HR Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 7 hours ago, Sluffy said: My view for what it is worth is this. As far as I understood things the £15 million loan that remained on the books after Davies had written off the rest that was owing to him, was left there to deter any possible attempt by the new owners to asset strip - ie the £15 million (plus as well the Michael James and Warburton loans) was secured as a charge against assets - which in effect made them unable to be sold or disposed of until the debt was settled by agreement of both parties. Part of the conditions of the loan was the 'windfall' payments if the club became successful again to be promoted within (what I thought was a specific time frame - I had five years in my head for some reason - with next season being the fourth of the five - but I may be wrong about that). I also was under the impression that at least the initial quoted asking price for the club in the 'taster' document was for £25 million with all loans being settled - which would have included the £15 million Davies loan and its attached 'windfall' payments. Therefore to my way of thinking is that if the current prospective buyers are seeking a change to the attached terms to the £15 million Davies loan, then clearly they aren't paying off this loan in full and buying the club debt free, so consequently are going to take on some debt in the club - I guess the question would be how much? Now as I've mentioned above the Davies loan charged against assets prevented anyone intending to 'strip' the club, so I guess a decision would have to be taken from the Davies (Moonshift) position as to how 'hard' the £15 million loan is to them - do they want it paid in full, happy to just write it all off and forget about it, or something in between the two positions - and if they are happy to write the loan off (or a large chunk of it), then what protection is there to prevent anyone now selling off the clubs assets that had been secured against the debt? Maybe selling off the stadium even (the ACV only delays a sale, it doesn't prevent one). In fact I'm not even sure if or how the ACV would effect this sale going through quickly as presumably the ownership of the stadium will pass from Anderson to the new owners? I know that some/many perceive me to be a supporter of Anderson (I'm not, nor for balance do I dislike him either) but it seems to me the clubs assets would be in more danger of disposal if the Davies loan is reduced or written off, than at anytime under the Anderson regime to date. It also worries me that Basran's partner in Football Ventures (Whites) Ltd - which I for one assume is the business that will take control of the club (just like KA's Inner Circle Investments control it now) is someone by the name of Sharron Brittan, who (if it is the same person as this Bloomberg biography) seems to be vastly more orientated to property than football. Ms. Sharon Brittan serves as Non-Executive Director at UKCloud Limited. During a career spanning more than 25 years Sharon has completed multiple real estate development projects and now advises on investment and asset management. Her achievements included co-founder and CEO of Britannia Row Business Centre, an award-winning property offering flexible workspace solutions; CEO of One Alfred Place, a private members business club in the West End of London which offers stylish, flexible work and meeting facilities where entrepreneurs and professionals combine to form a unique community; and CEO and Investment Director for a family office managing a portfolio of property, lifestyle and technology investments. First and foremost Sharon is the proud mother of four children. She is also passionate in her support for initiatives that give children the best possible start in life. https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=403818188&privcapId=263905652&previousCapId=263905652&previousTitle=UKCloud Limited https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11761052/officers All just idle speculation on my part though but it does sound to me that the deal if it did go through as discussed above, it would mean the new owners still having to carry debt in the club, which presumably would need to be addressed sooner or later down the line? Idle speculation maybe but you would think anyone with a vested interest in property would be more interested in Mike's car parks than the ground itself. Maybe Mike James's pension pot holds quite a few cards after all if the intention is to complete the retail horse shoe. The £15m payback thing is quite curious, if an investor thinks it will cost say £50m to gain promotion, the £15m payback would be a drop in the ocean against a £200m+ reward. All unless say the soft £15m payment has got a little firmer. This guessing game is quite easy when no one actually knows fuck all. Hold the bells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Sluffy said: When I left local government employment some years ago it gave me the benefit of becoming financially secure for the rest of my days, however I soon got bored in effect retiring from work too early and ended up via a series of circumstances setting up my own delivery business. I've no idea where Manning has gained this information from or why he's posting personal information of me on here, or any other form, of social media and would have though such action was strictly against the rules of this site? He's been trolling me so much he recent weeks on both here and Nuts that its becoming unpleasant to post much. If his aim his to drive me off from posting any more on this site, then he has succeeded. I have no wish for any nutjob such as him to make it his mission to follow me around, finding personal information and posting it up in the public domain - presumably because I've said or done something on an internet footy forum many moons ago, that he once didn't like and turned it into some real life vendetta. As Kane57 has many times identified himself as Chris Manning - and some even refer to him as Chris on here - I do not see it as ironic nor the disclosing of any private information about him by referring to him as Manning. Don’t be a massive bender. Stay involved ffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MancWanderer Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Aye. WWays is mumsnet in disguise. Come on Sluffy, we'll give you a great big cuddle on here you big tart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escobarp Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 2 hours ago, Sluffy said: When I left local government employment some years ago it gave me the benefit of becoming financially secure for the rest of my days, however I soon got bored in effect retiring from work too early and ended up via a series of circumstances setting up my own delivery business. I've no idea where Manning has gained this information from or why he's posting personal information of me on here, or any other form, of social media and would have though such action was strictly against the rules of this site? He's been trolling me so much he recent weeks on both here and Nuts that its becoming unpleasant to post much. If his aim his to drive me off from posting any more on this site, then he has succeeded. I have no wish for any nutjob such as him to make it his mission to follow me around, finding personal information and posting it up in the public domain - presumably because I've said or done something on an internet footy forum many moons ago, that he once didn't like and turned it into some real life vendetta. As Kane57 has many times identified himself as Chris Manning - and some even refer to him as Chris on here - I do not see it as ironic nor the disclosing of any private information about him by referring to him as Manning. Wee bit lengthy at times but informative and balanced so keep on posting pal don’t let one Bawbag stop you surely he will get bored eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthonyj Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 S.O.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boothy Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 8 hours ago, anthonyj said: S.O.S. Struggling with that acronym! Slippery old sausage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Faustus Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 9 hours ago, Escobarp said: Wee bit lengthy at times but informative and balanced so keep on posting pal don’t let one Bawbag stop you surely he will get bored eventually. This. Fuck him Sluffy. Yeah, the post which triggered his latest jibe was impressive by your own standards, but still no need for the passive aggressive response. FWIW, I always read your posts in a Desmond Llewellyn stylie; keep going Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc505 Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 9 hours ago, anthonyj said: S.O.S. Stop (being) Over Sensitive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthonyj Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, Marc505 said: Stop (being) Over Sensitive? Save our Sluff........yes he goes on a bit, and uses 100 words when 10 would do......but generally posts intelligent, well informed essays! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Supporter Spider Posted February 19, 2019 Site Supporter Share Posted February 19, 2019 If what Sluffy is saying Kane has done is true, then he’s a cunt. Plain and simple. but, Sluffy, don’t be such a tart. Crack on fella. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kane57 Posted February 19, 2019 Author Share Posted February 19, 2019 (edited) Hey Sluff you revealed it to me a while ago during one of our friendly phases over on your site. Didn't realise it would upset you so much, given your liking for revealing PI about others but seeing as it seems to bother you I'll be sure not to use it again Edited February 19, 2019 by Kane57 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger_Dubuis Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 16 hours ago, DirtySanchez said: Can someone surmise that into a few lines? Ken Anderson has never done anything wrong at Bolton, his past transgressions are irrelevant and everybody else linked with a takeover of the club is a dodgy cunt.This basically surmises every post from Sluffy on this subject Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morizio Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 16 hours ago, DirtySanchez said: Can someone surmise that into a few lines? Blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts