Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Anderson pay off


Mounts Kipper

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

Someone had to. None of the other accountants who contribute to WW seem to have noticed that the debts according to the administrators were £3m less than the debts according to the auditors two years ago and that the club had lost three or four million in the meantime.

Without published accounts, that is speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Traf said:

Which, all finance talk is. 

So let's leave it until we've facts to discuss.

 

The administrators had all the facts, no? Which is why I'm confused as to how they're being painted as liars (indeed, if some old bloke on an internet forum could see through their scheming, Ken would've had a field day).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sluffy said:

I did say it was an estimate so I hope people aren't taking it as fake news.

I know you believe the figure to be less than the £2m (of which I include the money he took out to purchase Holdsworth shares) and to be honest. of which I'm more than willing to accept your professional judgement about - you've been proved correct in your financial views on the club countless times in the past - but for the sake of balance I looked to see what someone else who is in the financial world and is a known anti-Anderson protagonist believes the position to be - and simply stated somewhere in between in an attempt to present my post as impartially as I could.

The point I was attempting to make at the time was that even the most ardent of Anderson's detracts who had known financial expertise were not suggesting that he had plundered ten's of millions from the accounts as many believed and some no doubt still do.

As for the £1.6m - wouldn't that be what Rubins believed he had secured in BL and BWFAC, with the remainder to have been shown under the hotel's secured assets?

As I'm on I'd like to point out another thing that hasn't seemed to have been mentioned.

The hotel sold to FV apparently for £7.4m

The group will pay around £10m for the club side of the deal and a further £7.4m for the hotel.

Which I would suspect meant PBP received their £5.5m in full and that Anderson received £1.9m as the secured creditors(?)

As the Hotel Administrator was going to pay 15p in the £ to non secured creditors I assume that would no longer be the case?

Also and part of the same Nixon article he reports this -

The ruling Davies family started off by asking for £17.4m when the club went into administration but will settle for around £5m paid over the next three years.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/9815835/bolton-wanderers-saved-football-ventures/

IF this being so - remember it is Nixon - I'm wondering if the presumed £1.9m to Anderson for the hotel has been offset somehow?

No doubt it will come out in the wash eventually.

I'll attempt again to withdraw discreetly from posting on the finances (I only did so this time to clarify to Chris Custard my thinking on my original post) but would like to thank those who have spoke kindly of me since my previous post.

Very much appreciated.

Sorry Sluffy but I suspect you may be going round in circles a bit.

Its perfectly clear that Eddie lent KA c.£5m in September 2018 mainly to repay Blumarble just days before he died. That £5m was therefore owed by BWFC/BL to Ken who in turn owed it to Eddie and following his death to the EDT. That £5m seems to have been excluded from Rubin's statement thereby misstating the debts of BL by £5m or more and leaving KA wholly exposed to claims from EDT without reliance on the security he obtained when making himself (and possibly his wife) personally responsible for repayment.

There's then a further £2.5m. I've explained what I believe happened on a number of occasions but I'll have another go.The 2017 balance sheet showed that the club, despite promotion, would be starting its next financial year with unsustainable debt and significant expected losses and any amount of financial plate-spinning was unlikely imo to see the club through to Christmas without some new funds. I didn't know what had happened or where funds might have come from until Howard provided a strong clue early this year, that they must have come from Eddie via a loan to Ken.

At the end of January 2018, Gary Madine was sold to Cardiff for a surprisingly large fee of c.£6m. It was enough to repay some pressing debt, but nowhere near all of it, and an opportunity for Ken to take back some of the £2.5m loan in lieu of fees. Remember that he had claimed that the £525K fees for the previous year were justified by achieving promotion. I think it was a red herring. They weren't and there simply wasn't the money to pay them, so I suspect that all that really happened was a bookkeeping entry was made in the sum of £525K and that was sufficient to avoid unaffordable tax charges relating to payments out of club funds for Holdsworth's shares.

This is supposition, but I think it very possible that the £1.6m reported by Rubins was the £2.5m from Eddie's loan less any amounts taken out by KA but without making any allowance for any KA fees for 2017/18. Although these accounts have not been signed off by the auditors they have probably been supplied some time ago to the EFL and KA's claim that they will show a small profit fits in perfectly with all other known factors.

Thanks for copyying the Sun article. This provides some interesting detail which, if correct, puts a rather different colour on the stridency of Paul Appleton but does not explain what has happened to the £1.6m.

Now the club has been saved from the present threat, I expect most will have no appetite for any inquest but I do think an inquiry is needed and should be done independently at the behest of the EFL, a key stakeholder. If KA or anyone else has been guilty of any serious wrongdoing they should be held to account and important lessons need to be learned from both the Bury and BWFC difficulties.

Anyway good luck to the new regime.They've got off to an excellent start. I hope they can keep it up.

Edited by Chris Custodiet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

Its perfectly clear that Eddie lent KA c.£5m in September 2018 mainly to repay Blumarble just days before he died. That £5m was therefore owed by BWFC/BL to Ken who in turn owed it to Eddie and following his death to the EDT. That £5m seems to have been excluded from Rubin's statement thereby misstating the debts of BL by £5m or more and leaving KA wholly exposed to claims from EDT without reliance on the security he obtained when making himself (and possibly his wife) personally responsible for repayment.

zzzzzz

Is it correct that BWFC/BL owed £5m to Ken for paying off the blue marble loan? 

As I recall, the blue marble loan wasn’t taken out by the club or burnden leisure. Wasn’t it Sports Shield? Holdsworth used the club’s assets to secure the loan, but it wasn’t the club’s debt.

I’m no accountant, but I don’t see why Ken discharging the blue marble debt (and releasing the security over the club) would automatically generate a £5m debt owed from the club to Ken.

I expect the administrators must have taken the same view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

Sorry Sluffy but I suspect you may be going round in circles a bit.

Its perfectly clear that Eddie lent KA c.£5m in September 2018 mainly to repay Blumarble just days before he died. That £5m was therefore owed by BWFC/BL to Ken who in turn owed it to Eddie and following his death to the EDT. That £5m seems to have been excluded from Rubin's statement thereby misstating the debts of BL by £5m or more and leaving KA wholly exposed to claims from EDT without reliance on the security he obtained when making himself (and possibly his wife) personally responsible for repayment.

There's then a further £2.5m. I've explained what I believe happened on a number of occasions but I'll have another go.The 2017 balance sheet showed that the club, despite promotion, would be starting its next financial year with unsustainable debt and significant expected losses and any amount of financial plate-spinning was unlikely imo to see the club through to Christmas without some new funds. I didn't know what had happened or where funds might have come from until Howard provided a strong clue early this year, that they must have come from Eddie via a loan to Ken.

At the end of January 2018, Gary Madine was sold to Cardiff for a surprisingly large fee of c.£6m. It was enough to repay some pressing debt, but nowhere near all of it, and an opportunity for Ken to take back some of the £2.5m loan in lieu of fees. Remember that he had claimed that the £525K fees for the previous year were justified by achieving promotion. I think it was a red herring. They weren't and there simply wasn't the money to pay them, so I suspect that all that really happened was a bookkeeping entry was made in the sum of £525K and that was sufficient to avoid unaffordable tax charges relating to payments out of club funds for Holdsworth's shares.

This is supposition, but I think it likely that the £1.6m reported by Rubins was the £2.5m from Eddie's loan less any amounts taken out by KA but without making any allowance for any KA fees for 2017/18. Although these accounts have not been signed off by the auditors they have probably been supplied some time ago to the EFL and KA's claim that they will show a small profit fits in perfectly with all other known factors.

Thanks for copyying the Sun article. This provides some interesting detail which, if correct, puts a rather different colour on the stridency of Paul Appleton but does not explain what has happened to the £1.6m. I really don't know if any of its going to Ken and if it isn't, all Ken's had for his efforts is £240K less some hefty legal bills. Superagent's probably come out with more but I expect KA is breathing a huge sigh of relief. I've no doubt at all that he's extremely hard to deal with but I cannot see how he could have afforded to back down on this.

Now the club has been saved from the present threat, I expect most will have no appetite for any inquest but I do think an inquiry is needed and should be done independently at the behest of the EFL, a key stakeholder. If KA or anyone else has been guilty of any serious wrongdoing they should be held to account and important lessons need to be learned from both the Bury and BWFC difficulties.

Anyway good luck to the new regime.They've got off to an excellent start. I hope they can keep it up.

Fascinating stuff as always Chris, thank you again for your professional insight on to all of this.

So if I understand you correctly the £1.6m stated by Rubin's is nothing at all to do with the £5m secured by Anderson from the 'BluMarble' bridging loan and relates to the vaguely understood £2.5m element of the £7.5m EDT claim owed to them by Anderson secured on his personal wealth.

This £2.5m is further discounted by the £525k book entry (and presumably now the taxes set aside to pay) the purchase of Holdsworth's share plus the tax - leaving the £1.6m stated as a secured creditor in BL/BWFAC.

As for the £5m, IF the BM loan was secured against the hotel (I recall reading somewhere that they were about to crystallise their defaulted loan and take possession of the hotel), would not then the £5m be showing on BL's other arm of business, namely the hotel, and thus be stated by the hotel Administrator and not Rubins?

How could Rubins state the £5m as security for Anderson when they don't control all the assets there belonged to BL and which I would have assumed would have been more logically placed against Bolton Whites (Hotel) if the security was set against replacing a previous security for the hotel that the £5m had just cleared?

Wouldn't the issue be more why didn't Quantama show Anderson as a £5m secured creditor rather than why Rubins did not (well added it to the £1.6m they had already stated)?

I'm out of my depth again and more than happy to bow to your knowledge and vast experience on such details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said:

Is it correct that BWFC/BL owed £5m to Ken for paying off the blue marble loan? 

As I recall, the blue marble loan wasn’t taken out by the club or burnden leisure. Wasn’t it Sports Shield? Holdsworth used the club’s assets to secure the loan, but it wasn’t the club’s debt.

I’m no accountant, but I don’t see why Ken discharging the blue marble debt (and releasing the security over the club) would automatically generate a £5m debt owed from the club to Ken.

I expect the administrators must have taken the same view.

Mate, no offence, you're really wide of the mark here, I'll try a explain in one liners as otherwise it would be a long post explain everything even for me!

Holdsworth/SSBWFC takes BM loan secured on Burnden Leisure asset, the hotel

Holdsworth defaults BM come for the hotel

KA renegotiates, takes on the BM loan on the hotel, and negotiates £1m off the debt owing.

BM chase up Holdsworth for remainder leading to SSBWFC being liquidated.

Only asset SSBWFC was Holdsworth's half ownership shares that Anderson buys for something like £400k (I can't remember the exact figure off the top of my head).

Andersons renegotiated BM loan then falls into default.

BL/the club, has no money to pay the debt off.

BM takes out Winding up petition.

Davies agrees a £5m bridging loan to Ken secured on KA's personal wealth.

KA puts this money into BL and secures it again assets.

The money is the used to clear BM loan

Ken still owes Eddie the £5m

Club/hotel go into Administration.

Club Administrator states the £5m secured from Ken doesn't fall into his part of the Administration (Chris Custard explaining above that he thinks the Administrator as made an error about that?).

The hotel Administrator is not showing it as a £5m secured on his part of the Administration either (he states simply 'uncertain' amount.

Bottom line is that Anderson has put £5m into BL, secured it on assets.  

The club/BL spent that money (NOT Anderson) to pay off the BL loan.

Anderson/ the Administrators look to see who have put money into the company BL/BWFAC/BWH, what assets they have and how best to secure the best deal for these secured creditors

Looked like KA didn't get his £5m secured money back at the moment and hence why Custard queried what happened to the £1.6m the Administrator of the club said he had already secured (which is separate to the £5m for the BM loan) and my query as to if the hotel was sold for £7.4m and James (PBP) had first claim and KA had second, then what happened to the £1.9m balance.

Hope this helps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Mate, no offence, you're really wide of the mark here, I'll try a explain in one liners as otherwise it would be a long post explain everything even for me!

Holdsworth/SSBWFC takes BM loan secured on Burnden Leisure asset, the hotel

Holdsworth defaults BM come for the hotel

KA renegotiates, takes on the BM loan on the hotel, and negotiates £1m off the debt owing.

BM chase up Holdsworth for remainder leading to SSBWFC being liquidated.

Only asset SSBWFC was Holdsworth's half ownership shares that Anderson buys for something like £400k (I can't remember the exact figure off the top of my head).

Andersons renegotiated BM loan then falls into default.

BL/the club, has no money to pay the debt off.

BM takes out Winding up petition.

Davies agrees a £5m bridging loan to Ken secured on KA's personal wealth.

KA puts this money into BL and secures it again assets.

The money is the used to clear BM loan

Ken still owes Eddie the £5m

Club/hotel go into Administration.

Club Administrator states the £5m secured from Ken doesn't fall into his part of the Administration (Chris Custard explaining above that he thinks the Administrator as made an error about that?).

The hotel Administrator is not showing it as a £5m secured on his part of the Administration either (he states simply 'uncertain' amount.

Bottom line is that Anderson has put £5m into BL, secured it on assets.  

The club/BL spent that money (NOT Anderson) to pay off the BL loan.

Anderson/ the Administrators look to see who have put money into the company BL/BWFAC/BWH, what assets they have and how best to secure the best deal for these secured creditors

Looked like KA didn't get his £5m secured money back at the moment and hence why Custard queried what happened to the £1.6m the Administrator of the club said he had already secured (which is separate to the £5m for the BM loan) and my query as to if the hotel was sold for £7.4m and James (PBP) had first claim and KA had second, then what happened to the £1.9m balance.

Hope this helps!

The above I follow and thanks for explaining - I just don't recall seeing that the BM loan (which wasn’t taken out out by the club) had then been assumed by the BL/the club. I didn’t realise that was part of the renegotiation by Anderson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That isn't the complete statement but the bit I'm most interested is the last line that is shown in the copy of the tweet above namely

"… I also forgave my secured debt to enable the deal to complete".

I think that answers the question Custard and I raised above about the respective £1.6m and (presumed?) £1.9m from the club and hotel sales.

Wonder if he wanted that £3.5m and EDT's £7.5m written off as well?

If so I guess he most have blinked first in the end then because he didn't get both.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

That isn't the complete statement but the bit I'm most interested is the last line that is shown in the copy of the tweet above namely

"… I also forgave my secured debt to enable the deal to complete".

I think that answers the question Custard and I raised above about the respective £1.6m and (presumed?) £1.9m from the club and hotel sales.

Wonder if he wanted that £3.5m and EDT's £7.5m written off as well?

If so I guess he most have blinked first in the end then because he didn't get both.

 

Thats a link to the entire tweet, all you have to do is click on it.....

Edited by marcx666
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, marcx666 said:

Thats a link to the entire tweet, all you have to do is click on it.....

I'd already seen it complete on Nuts first, thank you.

(Not inferring it was a race between the sites or anything, merely that that was where I saw it first and it happened to be in full).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

I'd already seen it complete on Nuts first, thank you.

(Not inferring it was a race between the sites or anything, merely that that was where I saw it first and it happened to be in full).

No clue what nuts is, I found it on LOV as soon as it appeared pretty much, so thought some people, as much as they want to forget the slimy cunt, might want to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Ken isn't a c*nt, it was all Marc Iles fault"

"Fascinating stuff Chris. Thank you for your insights. Remarkable"

Ad feckin infinitum.  I've just lost 5 minutes of my life scrolling through that shite.  As a historical equivalent it's akin to watching De Gaulle marching triumphantly into Paris and two locals, I'll call them Le Sluff and La Custard, shouting out how it was so much better under the Vichy government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Duck Egg said:

"Ken isn't a c*nt, it was all Marc Iles fault"

"Fascinating stuff Chris. Thank you for your insights. Remarkable"

Ad feckin infinitum.  I've just lost 5 minutes of my life scrolling through that shite.  As a historical equivalent it's akin to watching De Gaulle marching triumphantly into Paris and two locals, I'll call them Le Sluff and La Custard, shouting out how it was so much better under the Vichy government.

Pair of Quislings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, marcx666 said:

No clue what nuts is, I found it on LOV as soon as it appeared pretty much, so thought some people, as much as they want to forget the slimy cunt, might want to know.

Substantially smaller and far quieter Bolton football forum.

Usually free of trolls such as the two posters above.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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