Kenny has come out with another one of his columns.

Again he’s asking for 20k crowds.

 

This time, he says it can help add 3 million to our budget, for the transfer window.

 

A bit bonkers isn’t it ?

 

 

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/wanderers/15701428.Ken_Anderson_asks_for_fans__39__help_to_add___3million_to_Wanderers__39__January_spending/

Edited January 7, 20197 yr by Horwich

5 minutes ago, tyldesley_white said:

The who is Patricia Ellen Anderson then ?

How do you say ‘woosh’ in Switzerland?

Edited October 9, 20187 yr by Boby Brno

2 minutes ago, Boby Brno said:

How do you say ‘woosh’ in Switzerland?

Bit too vague for me today  ,

2 minutes ago, tyldesley_white said:

Bit too vague for me today  ,

No problem. Commonly known as a spoonerism. 

 

9 hours ago, Marc505 said:

Saw that, I notice they only very very rarely publish a letter in that way (they must get loads, surely?) and they're usually absolute nonsense like that.

It’s like they’re drawing to draw the club in to making a statement about something - anything - even if it’s addressing the comment about having a family-friendly area as if there hasn’t been a family stand for 30 years. 

1 hour ago, Boby Brno said:

No problem. Commonly known as a spoonerism. 

 

Or a moonerspism 

 

That story at the bottom will trigger Casino

Be them two scruffy ray guns that were outside the reebok today 

Stephen feckin Ireland

Something different. A bit of a gamble. But this is the market we operate in. Could be decent 

2 hours ago, ZicoKelly said:

I think with all this guesswork you'll sway one way if you are pro KA and the other if you are anti KA

I'm KA skeptic, so question it either way

it would be good to know what the split of those directors fees was last year- KA goes so far as saying there were other directors paid, but doesn't specify further, but there were only 2 - I am sure if DH had helped himself to a big wage (in addition to the alleged chunk of the BM loan he pockted), KA would be quick to point the finger

also note that DH sold his shares to KA in March.  So he must've got paid handsomely for 3 months - and I doubt that the sale of shares would  be covered by directors wages, but they might be, am no expert. 

I'm also inclined to think that once the shares were signed over, KA isn't going to be paying DH such a significant amount and not take anything himself or his wife.

all guess work and mostly questions though, I admit, but I'm not convinced DH took all or even the lions share of directors wages/fees for 2017 given he was bought out in March and officially gone by August.

I think what will be interesting is the comparison when the next accounts/figures are released in relation to consultancy fees paid to his companies, and directors fees which now would only be paid to him, or his wife

 

 

How do you know the £525K wasn’t the pay off for his disputed director of football role? Perhaps agreed finally as part of the shares deal? 

2 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

 

How do you know the £525K wasn’t the pay off for his disputed director of football role? Perhaps agreed finally as part of the shares deal? 

I don't

Some of it probably will have gone to Deano

I'd be very surprised if he pocketed all or most of it though to be honest, and at a guess reckon a good chunk was paid to his mrs

Wish I'd gone to the Q&A now so we could've cleared it all up

39 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said:

I don't

Some of it probably will have gone to Deano

I'd be very surprised if he pocketed all or most of it though to be honest, and at a guess reckon a good chunk was paid to his mrs

Wish I'd gone to the Q&A now so we could've cleared it all up

You realise there is absolutely no need to add his missus on to pay that £525K to himself don’t you? The payment has to be declared and was. We don’t know who to. But he doesn’t need his wife to do that. 

Shrotland is arguing that he added Pat on to allow him to make two payments below the £200K threshold, therefore not needing declaration in the accounts. But there is no proof for that claim. Just a conspiracy. Because payments below £200K don’t need to be declared. That’s his claim but he’s just guessing. 

Generally, when challenged, these twats can't back anything up but there's plenty retards take their shite as gospel

Shorthand, Firth, that nob from Horwich, bower et al could all come on here and make a case but they choose not to

I know why

 

The internet generally makes smart people smarter and stupid people stupider.

7 minutes ago, Casino said:

Generally, when challenged, these twats can't back anything up but there's plenty retards take their shite as gospel

Shorthand, Firth, that nob from Horwich, bower et al could all come on here and make a case but they choose not to

I know why

 

Because they'd get fucking destroyed?

13 minutes ago, Casino said:

Generally, when challenged, these twats can't back anything up but there's plenty retards take their shite as gospel

Shorthand, Firth, that nob from Horwich, bower et al could all come on here and make a case but they choose not to

I know why

 

They won’t be challenged. 

The pricks just instantly block anyone that engages in a reasonable debate.

 

1 hour ago, bwfcfan5 said:

You realise there is absolutely no need to add his missus on to pay that £525K to himself don’t you? The payment has to be declared and was. We don’t know who to. But he doesn’t need his wife to do that.

Aye

He says he didn't pay himself and the fee went to other directors 

I'm just curious who they are

According to the link you posted the other directors were his Mrs and Deano

So that makes me guess they both got paid

Nowt wrong with that

If it all went to Deano I'm sure he'd have said so, why wouldn't he?

So I'm just wondering who the other directors he's referring to are, there might be a reason why there was another director paid who was not in that link you posted

 

1 hour ago, bwfcfan5 said:

You realise there is absolutely no need to add his missus on to pay that £525K to himself don’t you? The payment has to be declared and was. We don’t know who to. But he doesn’t need his wife to do that. 

Shrotland is arguing that he added Pat on to allow him to make two payments below the £200K threshold, therefore not needing declaration in the accounts. But there is no proof for that claim. Just a conspiracy. Because payments below £200K don’t need to be declared. That’s his claim but he’s just guessing. 

The latest set of accounts are up to 30 June 2017, his wife was a director from 31 August 2017 to 8 September 2017 (the date he acquired Deano’s shares), therefore it has no bearing on those accounts anyway, unless it was in the subsequent events note which it isn’t.

Oh, Edward

You and your facts

21 minutes ago, Eddie said:

The latest set of accounts are up to 30 June 2017, his wife was a director from 31 August 2017 to 8 September 2017 (the date he acquired Deano’s shares), therefore it has no bearing on those accounts anyway, unless it was in the subsequent events note which it isn’t.

What's in notes 27 to 29 that Fred referred to

8 hours ago, Eddie said:

The latest set of accounts are up to 30 June 2017, his wife was a director from 31 August 2017 to 8 September 2017 (the date he acquired Deano’s shares), therefore it has no bearing on those accounts anyway, unless it was in the subsequent events note which it isn’t.

Good point. So in fact the only directors in the period were Ken and Dean. 

8 hours ago, Casino said:

What's in notes 27 to 29 that Fred referred to

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00043026/filing-history

1 hour ago, bwfcfan5 said:

Good point. So in fact the only directors in the period were Ken and Dean. 

She was director of Burnden Leisure for a week

She was director of Bolton Wanderers for several months from December 2016 to September 2017

The accounts are for Bolton Wanderers, which show KA, PA and DH as directors

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00043026/filing-history/MzIwMTM0ODM0OWFkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0

The note 28 referrerd to say Deano got 50k and Athos Consulting got 125k in consultancy fees

There's also reference to a loan from Brett Warburton which is still due a payment

I can't see anything on a directors fee for 525k but it might be referenced elsewhere

 

Edited October 10, 20187 yr by ZicoKelly

But see we are here again aren’t we? 

Picking over the bones of whether Ken deserves to pay himself anything. I think the common view is, yes he is the debate is the value of those payments. Some will say it’s justified others will say it’s not. Ultimately it’s his gig so he can do as he pleases as long as he doesn’t jeopardise the position of the club. In my mind he isn’t. 

Its all well and good attention seekers publishing these reports painting KA as some immoral owner in comparison to others who have taken next to nothing. The other 23 chairmen haven’t had 1% of the shit to deal with that Ken has over his 2 and a half years so it’s a completely redundant point 

added to that, half of these clowns somewhere have links to or have participated in work for the ST at some point. How long did they last getting paid fuck all for going to a meeting every now and again and whatever “work” that consistent of? 5 fucking minutes. That’s how long 

if they really want to challenge Ken stump up the money to buy him out. Otherwise fuck right off