Just got hold of the accounts for 2009

 

Loss of ?13.2m compared to loss of ?8.1m for 2008

 

Group Turnover ?59.3m slightly up

 

Football Operations Turnover ?51.3m (up 3%)

 

Gate receipts down ?5.2m

 

Corporate hospitality ?1.8m down 22%

 

Attendances 22,845 (increase of 8%)

 

?49 season ticket for children increase ST kids numbers by 53%

 

Average ticket price ?11.29 (?13.63 last year)

 

Players bought ?5,079,067 players sold ?9,648,730

 

 

Of note, and I'm not an accountant

 

"Going concern

 

In ensuring that the group has sufficient liquid resources to meet its liabilities as they fall due, the directors have reviewed in detail the business's cash flow projections....they show a shortfall in the current level of facilities. However, the directors are currently in discussions with lenders regarding the potential securitisation of future guaranteed broadcast revenues"

 

Duckworth pay ?483,000 (up from ?376,000)

 

More to follow

"As it stands we're fucked whatever happens"

 

I don't subscribe to this we're in the prem or its curtains for the club bollocks. The club is over 130 yrs old, and will still be going even if we where bottom of the northern prem.

 

I've not found much fromyou to agree with today, but I do hope you're right on that one.

 

I'd certainly hope we'd still exist. But I think that any more than one season outside the prem would mean administration.

I agree, there is a far bigger and more wide-reaching picture to consider.

 

I'm not sure if there is an answer, though.

 

maybe the answer, or at least what may be thought to be the answer by those who make the policy, is to invest in players whose value can appreciate, rather than the ageing superstar

maybe the answer, or at least what may be thought to be the answer by those who make the policy, is to invest in players whose value can appreciate, rather than the ageing superstar

 

Which is what seems to be happening, unlike the Walrus's term of office.

indeed

 

but gartside and megson don't know what they are doing...........

I've not found much fromyou to agree with today, but I do hope you're right on that one.

 

I'd certainly hope we'd still exist. But I think that any more than one season outside the prem would mean administration.

Well, yes,unless Eddie wants to/can keep it going

 

Or He's holding out for petrodollars a fuckin go go

Anything constructive to add?

Can't see it; so far so nowt

"As it stands we're fucked whatever happens"

 

I don't subscribe to this we're in the prem or its curtains for the club bollocks. The club is over 130 yrs old, and will still be going even if we where bottom of the northern prem.

 

Oh I agree in many ways, and I don't mean fucked as in dead, though then again if we end up plummeting and then languishing it might feel like we're dead (one reason myself and all them who went through it can put the rose tinted specs on when looking back at the 80s is that once we hit the bottom we didn't stagnate - pretty much every season from then on saw things improve).

But financially we are fucked it seems either way - we're damned if we stay in the Prem and damned if we don't.

Oh I agree in many ways, and I don't mean fucked as in dead, though then again if we end up plummeting and then languishing it might feel like we're dead (one reason myself and all them who went through it can put the rose tinted specs on when looking back at the 80s is that once we hit the bottom we didn't stagnate - pretty much every season from then on saw things improve).

But financially we are fucked it seems either way - we're damned if we stay in the Prem and damned if we don't.

 

Exactly, so fuck the premier league, and fuck the horse that murdoch rode in on.

 

ADMINISTRATION, might be a big word, but it means fuck all at the end of the day.

Exactly, so fuck the premier league, and fuck the horse that murdoch rode in on.

 

ADMINISTRATION, might be a big word, but it means fuck all at the end of the day.

 

 

Might mean nothing to you and me - but I think it might mean a great deal to Mr Davies who could lose possibly tens of millions of pounds of his own personal wealth if this was to happen.

 

So if Eddie (who OWNS the club remember) has a choice of surviving in the Premier - or being relegated and thus wiped out financially - but making you (and a few others) happy that we are no longer in the Premiership - which course of action do you think he might be more likely take?

Edited November 5, 200916 yr by Sluffy

Might mean nothing to you and me - but I think it might mean a great deal to Mr Davies who could lose possibly tens of millions of pounds of his own personal wealth if this was to happen.

 

So if Eddie (who OWNS the club remember) has a choice of surviving in the Premier - or being relegated and thus wiped out financially - but making you (and a few others) happy that we are no longer in the Premiership - which course of action do you think he might be more likely take?

You're missing something here.

 

If Burnden Leisure PLC goes into administration Eddie Davies will lose money. He's put some of his own money into the club.

 

But not all of it. Or anywhere near all of it. Stating that he'll be wiped out is melodramatic nonsense.

 

Look up the rules on limited liability.

You're missing something here.

 

If Burnden Leisure PLC goes into administration Eddie Davies will lose money. He's put some of his own money into the club.

 

But not all of it. Or anywhere near all of it. Stating that he'll be wiped out is melodramatic nonsense.

 

Look up the rules on limited liability.

 

Am I?

 

Who would be one of Burnden Leisure major creditor (to which they owe ?23 million to) if they did go into administration - non other than Moonshift Investments - which Davies owns!

 

I'm sure he'd be delighted that one of the businesses he bought - Burden Leisure had gone in to Administration and given another company he owns - Moonshift Investments a potential bad debt of ?23 million.

 

I'm sure this would not have any affect on his personal wealth at all!

 

I still don't understand how we lost ?8M+ on operations last season.

 

Yes I know its costs > income but what I mean is how can we ever hope to return to anywhere near break-even if in a season when we had a small squad with no super-star wages in it and Sky money once again resulted in an increase in turnover.

 

Its the bigger picture of Premiership football and finance that effets all clubs in the top flight, chasing the dream has ramped up to a ridiculous cost level over the last couple of years.

 

 

What the answer is, I really don't know.

Edited November 5, 200916 yr by YATESY

i've told you

 

we don't show ambition

 

thats the problem

Am I?

 

Who would be one of Burnden Leisure major creditor (to which they owe ?23 million to) if they did go into administration - non other than Moonshift Investments - which Davies owns!

 

I'm sure he'd be delighted that one of the businesses he bought - Burden Leisure had gone in to Administration and given another company he owns - Moonshift Investments a potential bad debt of ?23 million.

 

I'm sure this would not have any affect on his personal wealth at all!

 

Now you've changed your tune. You said before that Eddie Davies would be wiped out. Now he's merely having his personal wealth 'affected' - which is similar to what I said.

 

You've also previously advanced the theory that Moonshift Investments was merely a middle man between Burnden Leisure and some Bermudan Bank. Now Eddie Davies owns it lock, stock and barrel. Make your mind up.

 

I'd suggest getting your thoughts straight before patronising others. especially as your knowledge of the subject is patchy at best.

Wheres Alan Sugar when you need him?

Now you've changed your tune. You said before that Eddie Davies would be wiped out. Now he's merely having his personal wealth 'affected' - which is similar to what I said.

 

You've also previously advanced the theory that Moonshift Investments was merely a middle man between Burnden Leisure and some Bermudan Bank. Now Eddie Davies owns it lock, stock and barrel. Make your mind up.

 

I'd suggest getting your thoughts straight before patronising others. especially as your knowledge of the subject is patchy at best.

 

Is it?

 

Davies wealth is based on his assets.

 

He owns Burnden Leisure and Moonshift Investments

 

Moonshift Investments has 'borrowed' ?23 million from the Bank of Bermuda and 'lent' it to Burnden Leisure.

 

If Burnden Leisure went into Administration - Davies would -

 

a ) - Lose all the money he has personally invested in Burnden Leisure

b ) - Be responsible for all the loans to Burnden Leisure for which he is a guarantor (which it would seem would be all of them!)

c ) - Take a personal hit on his personal fortune as Burnden Leisure was part of his assets upon which his wealth is based.

d ) - have a potentially bad debt of ?23 million owing to his other company Moonshift Investments - which in turn may bring that company down - and thus lose all the money he has personally invested there, be responsible for any loans to Moonshift that he has guaranteed and again take a massive hit on his personal wealth.

 

The following is a comment made on another forum from someone who claims to have read a copy of the latest accounts available from Companies House -

 

"Some of this is guesswork but the debts are split across several loans, some are due in part within the next five years. Most of these debts have been in place for some time (pre-ED injection) although ED does now appear to be the sole guarantor and, as a result, further loans have been possible to aid cash flow (also set against PL/broadcast money to come)...that's all fairly routine.

 

The loans from ED himself or via his trust fund and other companies is in the form of a soft loan which will probably not be called in but has to stay on the books in case someone else buys the club (otherwise ED couldn't include it in the overall value). So the actual debt of the club is probably less than stated and we can cover all secured debts with the value of the squad plus the assets...quite easily in fact".

 

I guess he's being 'patchy' and 'patronising' too.

 

So if Burnden Leisure DID go into Administration, Davies would have a mighty lot to lose - and that doesn?t even take into account his liabilities he would have if Moonshift investments collapsed as a result of this too!

 

If you don't like my posts - then feel free not to read them.

Edited November 5, 200916 yr by Sluffy

I still don't understand how we lost ?8M+ on operations last season.

 

Transfer dealings?

Is it?

 

Davies wealth is based on his assets.

 

He owns Burnden Leisure and Moonshift Investments

 

Moonshift Investments has 'borrowed' ?23 million from the Bank of Bermuda and 'lent' it to Burnden Leisure.

 

If Burnden Leisure went into Administration - Davies would -

 

a ) - Lose all the money he has personally invested in Burnden Leisure

b ) - Be responsible for all the loans to Burnden Leisure for which he is a guarantor (which it would seem would be all of them!)

c ) - Take a personal hit on his personal fortune as Burnden Leisure was part of his assets upon which his wealth is based.

d ) - have a potentially bad debt of ?23 million owing to his other company Moonshift Investments - which in turn may bring that company down - and thus lose all the money he has personally invested there, be responsible for any loans to Moonshift that he has guaranteed and again take a massive hit on his personal wealth.

 

The following is a comment made on another forum from someone who claims to have read a copy of the latest accounts available from Companies House -

 

"Some of this is guesswork but the debts are split across several loans, some are due in part within the next five years. Most of these debts have been in place for some time (pre-ED injection) although ED does now appear to be the sole guarantor and, as a result, further loans have been possible to aid cash flow (also set against PL/broadcast money to come)...that's all fairly routine.

 

The loans from ED himself or via his trust fund and other companies is in the form of a soft loan which will probably not be called in but has to stay on the books in case someone else buys the club (otherwise ED couldn't include it in the overall value). So the actual debt of the club is probably less than stated and we can cover all secured debts with the value of the squad plus the assets...quite easily in fact".

 

I guess he's being 'patchy' and 'patronising' too.

 

So if Burnden Leisure DID go into Administration, Davies would have a mighty lot to lose - and that doesn?t even take into account his liabilities he would have if Moonshift investments collapsed as a result of this too!

 

If you don't like my posts - then feel free not to read them.

 

I like your posts, Sloughy

 

Anyway, apparently we have Andy Carroll and others lined up for Jan Sales;

 

Funded by:

 

Player sales

 

and/or

 

Eddie?

I still don't understand how we lost ?8M+ on operations last season.

 

Yes I know its costs > income but what I mean is how can we ever hope to return to anywhere near break-even if in a season when we had a small squad with no super-star wages in it and Sky money once again resulted in an increase in turnover.

 

Its the bigger picture of Premiership football and finance that effets all clubs in the top flight, chasing the dream has ramped up to a ridiculous cost level over the last couple of years.

 

 

What the answer is, I really don't know.

Sell Shittu and Nicky Hunt

I like your posts, Sloughy

 

Anyway, apparently we have Andy Carroll and others lined up for Jan Sales;

 

Funded by:

 

Player sales

 

and/or

 

Eddie?

 

I can see Riga, Big Dan and Nicky Hunt going in Jan

 

Players like Carrol Will be signed with Eddie gambling on a percentage cut of the resale ammount

 

eg we sign carroll for 4mil sell him on 3 yrs later, eddie gets back his 4mil plus 10% of the profit

Transfer dealings?

 

Nope.

 

The loss on transfer dealings is what takes the Operational Losses of ?8M to the total losses of ?13M.

Nope.

 

The loss on transfer dealings is what takes the Operational Losses of ?8M to the total losses of ?13M.

 

Maybe it's all Gardner's operations?

Maybe it's all Gardner's operations?

 

Balls to that it's JOB and VazTe funding Richard Steadmans retirement kitty

Edited November 5, 200916 yr by frank_spencer

Is it?

 

Davies wealth is based on his assets.

 

He owns Burnden Leisure and Moonshift Investments

 

Moonshift Investments has 'borrowed' ?23 million from the Bank of Bermuda and 'lent' it to Burnden Leisure.

 

If Burnden Leisure went into Administration - Davies would -

 

a ) - Lose all the money he has personally invested in Burnden Leisure

b ) - Be responsible for all the loans to Burnden Leisure for which he is a guarantor (which it would seem would be all of them!)

c ) - Take a personal hit on his personal fortune as Burnden Leisure was part of his assets upon which his wealth is based.

d ) - have a potentially bad debt of ?23 million owing to his other company Moonshift Investments - which in turn may bring that company down - and thus lose all the money he has personally invested there, be responsible for any loans to Moonshift that he has guaranteed and again take a massive hit on his personal wealth.

 

The following is a comment made on another forum from someone who claims to have read a copy of the latest accounts available from Companies House -

 

"Some of this is guesswork but the debts are split across several loans, some are due in part within the next five years. Most of these debts have been in place for some time (pre-ED injection) although ED does now appear to be the sole guarantor and, as a result, further loans have been possible to aid cash flow (also set against PL/broadcast money to come)...that's all fairly routine.

 

The loans from ED himself or via his trust fund and other companies is in the form of a soft loan which will probably not be called in but has to stay on the books in case someone else buys the club (otherwise ED couldn't include it in the overall value). So the actual debt of the club is probably less than stated and we can cover all secured debts with the value of the squad plus the assets...quite easily in fact".

 

I guess he's being 'patchy' and 'patronising' too.

 

So if Burnden Leisure DID go into Administration, Davies would have a mighty lot to lose - and that doesn?t even take into account his liabilities he would have if Moonshift investments collapsed as a result of this too!

 

If you don't like my posts - then feel free not to read them.

A lot of words. A pity that most of it unsubstantiated waffle.

 

And you still haven?t explained your previous ludicrous claim that Eddie Davies would be ?wiped out?

 

Moonshift Investments is based in Bermuda (as is Strix) where the standards of disclosure are much lower. You have absolutely no idea what arrangements are in place, or what Davies?s stake in the company is. Why pretend that you have?

 

I?ve also read the accounts, and they don?t come anywhere close to unravelling the finance. Nor would I expect them to. As your little friend on the Bolton News forum( ) admits. It?s guesswork.

 

While Eddie Davies has undoubtedly been good for Bolton, he?s also been cute in the way that he?s siphoned off money from Burnden Leisure. He?s not some benefactor in the mould of Mohammed Al Fayed who has loaned Fulham millions at zero interest.

 

The chances that Davies has exposed himself to level of risk you imagine is slim. That?s why he?s a multi-millionaire and you have a little leaflet distribution business in Slough.

Anyone know if the dosh for Anelka and Nolan was up front or staggered payments ?

 

Maybe we have some more dosh coming into the coffers