Jump to content
Wanderers Ways - passion not fashion
Sign in to follow this  
Chris Custodiet

Who funded the building of the Reebok?

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

Don't be a dope. EB could have been pinned down all evening on unexplained financial issues. But she wasn't there for that reason and Lancaster Whites members hadn't turned up for that reason either.

But that isn't the reason you gave for not asking her the question. You'd said you didn't ask because she wouldn't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

What’s your best guess as to why? 

That's an interesting one isn't it, MK? Not suggesting anything untoward but I'm not sure I'd be sleeping too easily if Vlad's pal remained on the unpaid creditor list. And no I don't think RRF's suggestions  are  very likely for a whole variety of reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MickyD said:

But that isn't the reason you gave for not asking her the question. You'd said you didn't ask because she wouldn't know.

Has it ever occurred to you that someone might have more than one reason for doing or not doing something? Use your loaf, man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're explaining reasons for not doing something, don't stop explaining just before you get to the valid ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

That's an interesting one isn't it, MK? Not suggesting anything untoward but I'm not sure I'd be sleeping too easily if Vlad's pal remained on the unpaid creditor list. And no I don't think RRF's suggestions  are  very likely for a whole variety of reasons.

What 'suggestions' are unlikely?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

That's an interesting one isn't it, MK? Not suggesting anything untoward but I'm not sure I'd be sleeping too easily if Vlad's pal remained on the unpaid creditor list. And no I don't think RRF's suggestions  are  very likely for a whole variety of reasons.

But what's your best guess?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RoadRunnerFan said:

What 'suggestions' are unlikely?

Its a long story. I might save it for another day. But I'll give you a clue, leastways I think its a clue  and possibly a clue to solving much if not all of the riddle.

KA called a shareholders AGM in May 2018 for no obvious reason and at a not insubstantial cost to a company that was broke. Note the amount owed to Neville Registrars who provided the notices to over 6,000 shareholders.

Was that the act of someone who wanted to hide something or the act of someone who wanted to put something on the table and open to question? I suspect it was the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's a long story you obviously aren't Sluffy. He'd have told us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chris Custodiet said:

Its a long story. I might save it for another day. But I'll give you a clue, leastways I think its a clue  and possibly a clue to solving much if not all of the riddle.

KA called a shareholders AGM in May 2018 for no obvious reason and at a not insubstantial cost to a company that was broke. Note the amount owed to Neville Registrars who provided the notices to over 6,000 shareholders.

Was that the act of someone who wanted to hide something or the act of someone who wanted to put something on the table and open to question? I suspect it was the latter.

Chris if you have something to say just say it.

I for one would appreciate the digging you do on the paper trail if it didn't come served with all the cryptic and condescending asides. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few months into Ken's ownership he said that it was his job to attract investment into the club.He clearly failed as the club went into administration, perhaps this was one of his failed attempts to attract investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all honesty. Who gives a shit?

And by the way I’ve never been caught by a shark whilst swimming. So I can swim faster than a shark. But that’s not quite the full story. And I might let you know a bit more at some point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Chris if you have something to say just say it.

I for one would appreciate the digging you do on the paper trail if it didn't come served with all the cryptic and condescending asides. 

Indeed. Clearly, he or she thinks something is either not right or worthy of interest but when asked to state what that something is never takes the opportunity. I don't have either the time or the knowledge of accountancy procedures to make my own invesitgations or follow any paper trail. Neither do I have any intention to indulge a troll. Given most on here are probably in a similar position, if Chris isn't willing to be explicit about what exactly he or she thinks we should know, there's zero point in any of us engaging further.

Edited by Lt. Aldo Raine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Chris if you have something to say just say it.

I for one would appreciate the digging you do on the paper trail if it didn't come served with all the cryptic and condescending asides. 

As I said, its a long story that has to be taken step by step. I am also afraid that there are some comments that are so puerile that its virtually impossible to answer them  without some element of condescension.

But lets give you a starter for10.

If you take a look at page 24 of Appleton's statement it describes the £60K as 'Ken Anderson - Inner Circle'.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00335699/filing-history

Page 26 describes it as 'Inner Circle Sports & Media' (ICSM)

That tells us, or I think it tells us, that the £60K dates back to the time that KA owned ICSM. i.e January 2018 or earlier.

So there's £60K standing in the books that he hasn't drawn seemingly. So what's that £60K all about?

Wait for the next instalment. I'm off to make the missus a coffee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

As I said, its a long story that has to be taken step by step. I am also afraid that there are some comments that are so puerile that its virtually impossible to answer them  without some element of condescension.

But lets give you a starter for10.

If you take a look at page 24 of Appleton's statement it describes the £60K as 'Ken Anderson - Inner Circle'.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00335699/filing-history

Page 26 describes it as 'Inner Circle Sports & Media' (ICSM)

That tells us, or I think it tells us, that the £60K dates back to the time that KA owned ICSM. i.e January 2018 or earlier.

So there's £60K standing in the books that he hasn't drawn seemingly. So what's that £60K all about? Not necessarily 'standing' now though it appears at the point Appleton compiled his report. Wouldn't repayment terms have been agreed as part of the administration? Do you believe it has any relevance post takeover? 

Wait for the next instalment. I'm off to make the missus a coffee.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that following the papertrail of the £60K will lead us  to a £6m discrepancy between the amount KA said was owed to him (that he owed to the EDTrust), the length of the negotiations with KA and FV and the club starting this season with academy players and presently still under threat of further punishment for non-fulfillment of a  fixture.

Burnden Leisure, of course, is simply a holding company with no known expenses save for audit fees, company secretarial services and management services (KA).

Has the £60k been paid? I doubt it.

Edited by Chris Custodiet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

I think that following the papertrail of the £60K will lead us  to a £6m discrepancy between the amount KA said was owed to him (that he owed to the EDTrust), the length of the negotiations with KA and FV and the club starting this season with academy players and presently still under threat of further punishment for non-fulfillment of a  fixture.

Burnden Leisure, of course, is simply a holding company with no known expenses save for audit fees, company secretarial services and management services (KA).

Great. I'd assumed that was the crux of the issue in any case, hence the charge over the hotel, the separate administrators and alleged moving goalposts. We know what those delays led too. 

Are you bringing anything new to the table here or not?

Or have you just come back to have a strange dig at Traf and wind everybody else up? 

Edited by RoadRunnerFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the only thing of interest in this issue is why the Russian guy was involved, was he looking at investing in BWFC and if he was why didn’t it happen. 

Edited by Mounts Kipper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What has interested me for quite a long time is how newspapers and websites stir up passions by spreading falsehoods and distortions.  The Bolton News has been the worst perpetrator for the last four years but before that it was David Conn, firstly writing in the Independent claiming falsely that Eddie Davies was a tax exile. aka tax dodger.

After his move to the Guardian, Conn claimed that ED was exploiting BWFC by making loans at high interest rates when the truth was that ED was relieving the club of paying interest to banks whilst, barring a miracle, was never likely to see either interest or the capital ever again.

All this was followed by LOV claiming that ED was profiting to the tune of about £20m from player sales, a total fabrication. Later we had Sam Allardyce claiming, after ED had been largely responsible for making him a multi-millionaire, that ED was a ruthless business man.

I haven't finished yet but have to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

 

All this was followed by LOV claiming that ED was profiting to the tune of about £20m from player sales, a total fabrication. 

What is the exact figure of profit or loss on player transfers during ED's time then?

I know he started off by making a belting profit in 2000 selling Gudjohnsen, Fish and Jensen for getting on for £9 million and spending around £2 million

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Roger_Dubuis said:

What is the exact figure of profit or loss on player transfers during ED's time then?

I know he started off by making a belting profit in 2000 selling Gudjohnsen, Fish and Jensen for getting on for £9 million and spending around £2 million

ED was a minority shareholder in 2000 whilst the club needed to sell to survive.

If you want to find all the facts and figures you can get them from Companies House but it will take time to work it all out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chris Custodiet said:

Thanks for the trouble you have taken in making a detailed response.

You are, of course, correct that the debt position could have improved if debts had been written off but, if you compare the detail of the before and after position, its clear that that did not happen.

The debt position could also improve if a player sale exceeded the losses on running the club. That happened with three clubs in 2017/18; Hull City, Burton Albion and BWFC. Every other club in the Championship lost money, the average being £15m, with aggregate losses  growing for the third year running. Burton's resultant profit was small. KA said BWFC's was too and plainly would have been insufficient to make any inroads into debt reduction.

It was clear that there was no realistic prospect of BWFC surviving through 2018/19 without a significant injection of cash and that my estimate of expected losses in the region of £3m to £5m was probable with something approaching the latter figure being the more likely. That is exactly in line with the £4.2m shown by the management accounts, as reported by Paul Appleton.

So we are back to square one except that, according to media reports, there were a lot more debts than KA had told interested parties there were, effectively an accusation of KA attempting to pull a fast one. You also may remember that you were present at the mock Trial of the Unibol Four conducted by the ST chairman in April 2019 when Mr Rigby said, "due diligence found that the club was significantly more indebted than they were led to believe".

 

I'm going to leave it there for the moment but I am going to suggest to you that concerned supporters of BWFC weren't getting true and fair reports and hadn't been for a very long time and that , whatever other faults or failings there may have been, it  does not seem to be KA that was guilty of any inaccuracy in this instance.

As for your question, I'm no expert on natation but I did play football in the same team as Hamilton Bland when I was at school.

Fuck of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the fuck are we back here again? It’s like a time machine or summat and some fucker is punishing us and keeps sending us back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has it all gone tits again? There's some pretty long posts on here now which appear to be winding people up.

Can I rest easy or do I need to be fretting again?

Share this post


Link to post
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.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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