The Bolton section of the Football Finances site has been created.

 

The aim is to explain the club finances in as plain English as possible. Please have a look, and feedback any typos, or other mistakes.

 

There is more than the usual amount of comment on the site. Usually it is left up to the reader to make their own opinions. Howver as more and more clusb are examined and it becomes clear how poorly run some clubs are it has beceom less easy to avoid making comment !

 

Bolton Finances

Macbeth...................

 

Have you ever kissed a girl?

Macbeth...................

 

Have you ever kissed a girl?

 

It would turn you on probably. You assumed that I was the Lord Macbeth and it never crossed your mind I may be Lady Macbeth.

It would turn you on probably. You assumed that I was the Lord Macbeth and it never crossed your mind I may be Lady Macbeth.

 

 

Belting, HBAYT?

From the few posts I've read

 

You're not a Bolton fan?

 

You have stated incorrect FACTS

 

yet YOU are telling US to question OUR clubs directors after the most succesfull period in 50? years

 

I don't think you should question your directors while you are successful. Newcastle supporters never did, Leeds supporters never did, Portsmouth supporters never did. Why should I expect you to be any brighter than those people ?

 

Be like them and wait until you're relegated.

 

If I stated incorrect FACTS then I apologise, I chose soccerbase as a source, others chose Wiki, or what the club said. That none of these match up with what the club then reported in a legal financial statement is of course irrelevant.

 

Love ya

Belting, HBAYT?

 

not as upstanding as they used to be, but they do

 

what about you ?

I don't think you should question your directors while you are successful. Newcastle supporters never did, Leeds supporters never did, Portsmouth supporters never did. Why should I expect you to be any brighter than those people ?

 

Be like them and wait until you're relegated.

 

 

I think this proves you really don't know much about how BWFC goes about it's business.

I think this proves you really don't know much about how BWFC goes about it's business.

 

Absolutely didn't.

 

I didn't know that the club had an income from "bums on seats" of 5.2m in 2009, putting you an par with Watford. Or that Bolton paid their players ?40m. Or that they made a collective loss of 40m over the last 9 years (while selling a football ground, and selling the naming rights to a training facility for a total of ~6m). I didn't know the club had reported debts of 72m in their accounts. I also didn't know that the club had players on their books collectively valued at 35m, or that the club spent a further 13.5m bringing in new players since June 2009. I also didn't know about Mr Davies.

 

Obviously as a fan you would know all this cos you are closer to it then me.

 

To me it was a shock, to those of you living with it all the time I can understand why you can be blas? particulalry after 9 years in the top division.

Absolutely didn't.

 

I didn't know that the club had an income from "bums on seats" of 5.2m in 2009, putting you an par with Watford. Or that Bolton paid their players ?40m. Or that they made a collective loss of 40m over the last 9 years (while selling a football ground, and selling the naming rights to a training facility for a total of ~6m). I didn't know the club had reported debts of 72m in their accounts. I also didn't know that the club had players on their books collectively valued at 35m, or that the club spent a further 13.5m bringing in new players since June 2009. I also didn't know about Mr Davies.

 

Obviously as a fan you would know all this cos you are closer to it then me.

 

To me it was a shock, to those of you living with it all the time I can understand why you can be blas? particulalry after 9 years in the top division.

 

 

Is that blas? or bias? If it's blas?, then any fan from any club outside the big 4 who ever feels like that about their Premiership status is a tool.

 

Edit: apologies, it appears that the upgrade has created a ??? frenzy. So we'll just say blase shall we?

Edited January 14, 201016 yr by no balls

I think everyone here is aware that ED owns the club, if he pulls out or we go down then it's game over. Unfortunately there doesn't seem a way out of that so what else can we do? No amount of analysis will alter the fact we've gone past the point of no return.

not as upstanding as they used to be, but they do

 

what about you ?

 

Mansize, have you ever had your shed robbed?

Is that blas? or bias? If it's blas?, then any fan from any club outside the big 4 who ever feels like that about their Premiership status is a tool.

 

Edit: apologies, it appears that the upgrade has created a ??? frenzy. So we'll just say blase shall we?

 

it was blase, and I went out of my way to have the "acute" on the e

 

mayeb blasay would have been better still

it was blase, and I went out of my way to have the "acute" on the e

 

mayeb blasay would have been better still

 

Are you still here, who actually gives a flying f?ck about what you are saying? eh! eh!

Sadly I missed that one although our bridesmaid does actually give that course in London

 

I really want peopel to question what their club's directors are doing, and not let them get away with high pay, low performance, "chasing the dream" management. Of all the clubs I've looked at there look to be two, maybe three, who are well run businesses. Al the others the directors seem to think the money will keep coming and they are honour bound to give it the players in higher and higher wages.

 

Think you have overlooked the obvious here though.

 

Eddie Davies owns more or less 95% of the club (more accurately Burnden Leisure).

 

As the only shareholder of any note - he will appoint the board / sack the board.

 

I doubt that any significant decision is made without his prior knowledge and approval.

 

Eddie Davies IS Bolton Wanderers - he can do with the club what he likes - it's his money that will be lost if the club cannot pay its way - Mr Davies underwrites all the debt of the club.

 

I don't really think it is relevant what you, me, or anyone else thinks as to how Davies invests / pisses up the wall, his money on how he runs the club - as long as he doesn't do anything illegal he is free to run the club as he sees fit.

 

If the club fails - Mr Davies will lose a large chunk of his personal wealth - so I don't think he has any plans of letting that happen!

Think you have overlooked the obvious here though.

 

Eddie Davies owns more or less 95% of the club (more accurately Burnden Leisure).

 

As the only shareholder of any note - he will appoint the board / sack the board.

 

I doubt that any significant decision is made without his prior knowledge and approval.

 

Eddie Davies IS Bolton Wanderers - he can do with the club what he likes - it's his money that will be lost if the club cannot pay its way - Mr Davies underwrites all the debt of the club.

 

I don't really think it is relevant what you, me, or anyone else thinks as to how Davies invests / pisses up the wall, his money on how he runs the club - as long as he doesn't do anything illegal he is free to run the club as he sees fit.

 

If the club fails - Mr Davies will lose a large chunk of his personal wealth - so I don't think he has any plans of letting that happen!

 

Thats what I thought !!

Absolutely didn't.

 

I didn't know that the club had an income from "bums on seats" of 5.2m in 2009, putting you an par with Watford. Or that Bolton paid their players ?40m. Or that they made a collective loss of 40m over the last 9 years (while selling a football ground, and selling the naming rights to a training facility for a total of ~6m). I didn't know the club had reported debts of 72m in their accounts. I also didn't know that the club had players on their books collectively valued at 35m, or that the club spent a further 13.5m bringing in new players since June 2009. I also didn't know about Mr Davies.

 

Obviously as a fan you would know all this cos you are closer to it then me.

 

To me it was a shock, to those of you living with it all the time I can understand why you can be blas? particulalry after 9 years in the top division.

 

Mate, you're talking bollocks in some areas. I think you're falling into the trap of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. You clearly had fuck all understanding of Premiership club finances before you started getting Account's info, otherwise it wouldn't have come as a shock to you.

 

Is Bolton's debt any worse in comparitive terms than Chelsea's should Abramovich decide to up sticks? Is it a more worrying situation than United who are putting out a Bond issue? City losing ?92m last year? They're all situations bought about at the whim/behest of the owner.

 

Rather than just quoting random figures from the Accounts, what is the point you're trying to make? Is there one? Or you just want to show that you can buy Burnden Leisure's Accounts from Companies House (like any other fecker can)?

 

I see from your website that it all started out with Newcastle. Dunno if it's correct to draw the inference that you are a Newcastle fan from that, but when we're talking about fans not being able to see a good thing in the middle of a bad one, Newcastle fans are top of the league. Obviously Premier League status should be governed by how many deluded bastards you can cram in to hear some fat bloke singing (or owning) your team. The site also seems to make the contention that all Newcastle Revenue is effectively income generated by the fans. In the case of Bolton, you appear to be making the point that actually that's not true - the revenue largely comes from Sky - which is correct, but in the Newcastle section, you argue that it's fan generated. Which way do you want it arguing?

 

When it comes down to it, many teams are owned by an individual or a couple of individuals. If that status quo changed, they'd be in the shit. The idea to float clubs as going concerns on the market failed miserably because no one in the business world could see a reason to invest in something that largely they'd have to pump money into.

 

Bolton's financial model isn't sustainable unless Davis wants to continue financing it. Neither are many other Clubs financial models including Newcastle's, City's, Chelsea's, Villa's (?) when you consider that Bolton's payroll has yet to exceed Newcastle's 2003 figure and in the intervening period before Newcastle were relegated, Bolton finished above them in 3 of the 6 seasons - twice by over 10 points - and fairly close to them (within 3 points) in another 2. So who made the really shite investments? Bolton or Newcastle?

Mate, you're talking bollocks in some areas. I think you're falling into the trap of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. You clearly had fuck all understanding of Premiership club finances before you started getting Account's info, otherwise it wouldn't have come as a shock to you.

 

The shock was the state of Bolton's finances. I knew nothing about Bolton, if I'd been asked I'd have said they were run okay, as I still have the "small club, well-run" view in my head that came from the Big Sam days. I'd missed the fact that the club now overspent so much on transfers and salaries. I also had no idea that the money from gate receipts was in freefall, down nearly 50% in 4 years. Those were the "shocks".

 

 

Is Bolton's debt any worse in comparitive terms than Chelsea's should Abramovich decide to up sticks? Is it a more worrying situation than United who are putting out a Bond issue? City losing ?92m last year? They're all situations bought about at the whim/behest of the owner.

 

No different, doesn't make it the right thing to do

 

Rather than just quoting random figures from the Accounts, what is the point you're trying to make? Is there one? Or you just want to show that you can buy Burnden Leisure's Accounts from Companies House (like any other fecker can)?

 

There was no point I was trying to make. Most clubs fans have no idea and love the fact that some one has dumbed down the accounts to the level they can understand. The random figures are the ones that most fans ask about - where does the money come from, where does it go? I accept there will be people who understand more than me, of course there are. I hadn't realised how aware the Bolton fans were, I can only apologise for underestimating you all.

 

I see from your website that it all started out with Newcastle. Dunno if it's correct to draw the inference that you are a Newcastle fan from that, but when we're talking about fans not being able to see a good thing in the middle of a bad one, Newcastle fans are top of the league. Obviously Premier League status should be governed by how many deluded bastards you can cram in to hear some fat bloke singing (or owning) your team. The site also seems to make the contention that all Newcastle Revenue is effectively income generated by the fans. In the case of Bolton, you appear to be making the point that actually that's not true - the revenue largely comes from Sky - which is correct, but in the Newcastle section, you argue that it's fan generated. Which way do you want it arguing?

 

I wrote the Newcastle one in 2006. At that point, when I was trying to justify to myself what was happening, I did have the view that the money did all come from the fans. Be it directly at the turnstile or through them paying Sky subscriptions. Since then my view of the Sky money has changed. I now feel the total dependency of the Premier League clubs on one other company is horrendously dangerous. Partly this comes from seeing the mess the SPL clubs got themsleves into through signing up to Setanta (and before that OnDigital). If Sky stoped upping the ante every year, and even went back and reduced their bids by 20% say then teams would be stuffed. Generally the teams have their players on long, high-payign contracts. If Sky went back to the previsou level of contract, and took 12m out of Bolton's budget it would make a huge hole. The sam efor most of the Premier League, not just Bolton.

 

Newcastle supporters are clearly stupid, who is ever goign to argue otherwsie ? Newcastle were well run up to 2003 though. At that point the board lost the plot, believed that Champions League football was easy, started to pay over the top for average players, and paid them huge salaries, while takign out huge dividends (from a successful business) for themselves.

The fans diudn't believe the CL stuff, even if they did enjoy it. I'm guessing it is the same with Bolton. Most of you will be old enough to stil be viewing the Premier League as a bonus.

 

When it comes down to it, many teams are owned by an individual or a couple of individuals. If that status quo changed, they'd be in the shit. The idea to float clubs as going concerns on the market failed miserably because no one in the business world could see a reason to invest in something that largely they'd have to pump money into.

 

Bolton's financial model isn't sustainable unless Davis wants to continue financing it.

 

I think it was sustainable while Big Sam played the Bosmans/free transfers game so well, everything changed when he left. Bolton then became the same as every one else, and started paying daft transfer feees, and high salaries for not very good palyers.

 

Neither are many other Clubs financial models including Newcastle's, City's, Chelsea's, Villa's (?) when you consider that Bolton's payroll has yet to exceed Newcastle's 2003 figure and in the intervening period before Newcastle were relegated, Bolton finished above them in 3 of the 6 seasons - twice by over 10 points - and fairly close to them (within 3 points) in another 2. So who made the really shite investments? Bolton or Newcastle?

 

Not sure that is a valid comparison. The 2003 Newcastle pay came from them playing in the second phase of the CL. That it was maintained at that level was madness, but that particular year the club made a profit as the pay was bonus driven. Newcastle were appallingly run under Hall and Shepeherd, but they were hardly ever criticised as they played the "we're Geordies, ya knaa" card. No one cared that they were taking huge dividends cos the club were doing so well on the pitch, and over-achieving in Europe. In much the same was as no one will criticise the running of Bolton while you're in the Premier League. The site changed the Newcastle fans view though. It got 100,000 hits over a couple of years and the crowd began to make it very uncommfortable for Shepherd in particular (Hall didn't give a toss, and didn';t even go to games). The legacy of the previous lot remains though.

Ashley gets huge abuse for not investing/gambling in players, and refusing to pay over the top wages to them. Even if they get promoted he won't get any brownie points. He is doing the ritgh thing though, and it is very hard pill to swallow, when all you have known for the last 20 years is name players, on big salaries.

 

And without a doubt Newcastle made bad investments, some were appalling, you'll not find any Newcastle supporter who'd argue otherwise. Trying to look at it dispassionately I'd have to suggest that the net ?50m that Bolton have spent since Big Sam left hasn't been that well invested.

 

Bolton's payroll, all other things being equal, should never be higher than Newcastle's, nor Newcastle bigger than ManU, but they should both be bigger than Rochdale's . In 2008 Newcastle had an income of 99m, Bolton had 51m, there has to be more room for Newcastle to pay bigger wages, even if the players don't deserve it. I'd expect Newcastle to have bums on seats income of ~20m-25m this season, Bolton to maybe be under 5m. Financially no comparison, footballingly Newcastle would have swapped the Championship for the Premier Leage any day. And may well do.