Traf Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 5 bidders remain in the hunt. Best offers including verification of funds by Wednesday, head of terms to be signed friday.
Tonge moor green jacket Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, Sluffy said: Gundi personally recommended Daniel Izza to the ST and who went on to be its Chair. Just saying like. Maybe. Don't care either way. But you're a ken sympathiser, so I'll take that with a pinch of salt
Mantra Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2019/june/statement-on-behalf-of-the-joint-administrators/
Tonge moor green jacket Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 1 minute ago, Traf said: 5 bidders remain in the hunt. Best offers including verification of funds by Wednesday, head of terms to be signed friday. Really? At least something seems to be happening.
Chris Custodiet Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, DLH said: @Sluffy what if Moonshift paid ICI the £5m... does that help your conundrum? The Moonshift loan was/is secured against ICI and BL assets, not the hotel. At the time of that loan, I'll hazard a guess that all assets in the hotel were borrowed against via PBP and BM. The Moonshift loan is secured against the assets of BL, probably as a second charge behind KA's charge. Moonshift also has a charge on the shares of ICIL which frankly seem to be worth very little. The charge however operated so as to limit the time allowed for repayment. Its a misconception to think that if company A has a charge on the assets or shares of Company B, it must be in respect of loans between A and B. That's not the case. To take one obvious example, Blumarble were granted security over the assets of Burnden Leisure, BWFC, Bolton Whites Hotel and every other member of the group in relation to a loan BM made to SSBWFC. i. e. No members of the group. What route did the money take in September 2018? Probably from Moonshift to Blumarble via the lawyers involved in a three-way transaction. Edited June 10, 2019 by Chris Custodiet
DomRepWanderer Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 10 minutes ago, Mantra said: https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2019/june/statement-on-behalf-of-the-joint-administrators/ Hopefully the one they've fucked off is Bassini.
tomski Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 12 minutes ago, Traf said: 5 bidders remain in the hunt. Best offers including verification of funds by Wednesday, head of terms to be signed friday. Fingers crossed we are at the end.
Popular Post gonzo Posted June 10, 2019 Popular Post Posted June 10, 2019 I really cannot wait for the day we don’t have to read the words moonshift, Inner fucking circle, blue bastard marble or any piece of shit word associated to this horrible draining 3 year bullshit saga.
RONNIE PHILLIPS Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 28 minutes ago, DomRepWanderer said: Hopefully the one they've fucked off is Bassini. Watch out for Bassini suing the administrators next...
Marc505 Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 BN saying a proposed 2 game trip to Germany pre-season has been shelved. Suggests someone's making at least tentative pre season plans in the background. (My bank account also says thank you)
Sluffy Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 46 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said: Maybe. Don't care either way. But you're a ken sympathiser, so I'll take that with a pinch of salt Believe what you want mate. This was his short bio under his picture when he was on the ST Board - "Daniel Izza is a qualified solicitor of over 20 years and set up his own commercial practice in 2010, after spending time as a partner in three Manchester-based firms. He was recommended to the Trust by former Wanderers captain Gudni Bergsson. https://www.burndenaces.co.uk/2016/07/12/bwfcst-announce-board-after-scrapping-election-process.html
Dr Faustus Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 If someone wrote it on the Internet it must be true! I don't care either BTW JSL
Sluffy Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Dr Faustus said: If someone wrote it on the Internet it must be true! I don't care either BTW JSL It was written on the BWFCST's official web site at the time. Izza's picture and bio has since been removed but the BA site copied and pasted what was there when the famous five were originally voted in elected. I don't care either way myself also, so that's the three of us - my point was more aimed towards hopefully getting the best person to do the job for us rather than some random ex-Wanderer who could kick a ball straight (but not necessarily shoot straight, obviously, as in the case of Mr Dean 'Wembley' Holdsworth). Edited June 10, 2019 by Sluffy grammar error
Eavesy Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 I do wonder what the scoring criteria is and what kind of proposal bidders are required to submit. is it purely financial? short term? Long term? is a ‘football plan’ required?
Matt Lofthouse Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 9 hours ago, NZtrotter said: This thread is more boring than rugby Which code?
Matt Lofthouse Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 8 hours ago, Boothy said: Genuine question, do people read those lengthy posts? Nope.
DirtySanchez Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Sluffy said: Gundi personally recommended Daniel Izza to the ST and who went on to be its Chair. Just saying like. A few years ago whilst on holiday in Iceland I met a bloke who was good mates with Gudni in our hotel The bloke knew loads about Bolton through Gudni. Showed me loads of pics of them all recent and not just a fan with his arm around him Let me ring him from his phone. Ace I thought. But it went to answer phone. I left a message but he never rang back
DirtySanchez Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 2 hours ago, sleepingindian said: maybe not. as i say though with backers players like stelios or davies. or youri. How much of a backer could Davies really bring to the table?
sleepingindian Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said: How much of a backer could Davies really bring to the table? well i did say IF they had big backers. i said with knowingly it being unlikely but just making a point kinda
MancWanderer Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 39 minutes ago, Matt said: Which code? Union obvs
DLH Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Chris Custodiet said: The Moonshift loan is secured against the assets of BL, probably as a second charge behind KA's charge. Moonshift also has a charge on the shares of ICIL which frankly seem to be worth very little. The charge however operated so as to limit the time allowed for repayment. Its a misconception to think that if company A has a charge on the assets or shares of Company B, it must be in respect of loans between A and B. That's not the case. To take one obvious example, Blumarble were granted security over the assets of Burnden Leisure, BWFC, Bolton Whites Hotel and every other member of the group in relation to a loan BM made to SSBWFC. i. e. No members of the group. What route did the money take in September 2018? Probably from Moonshift to Blumarble via the lawyers involved in a three-way transaction. You’ve put that a lot better than I did, but that’s the point I was trying to make badly... the cash from the loan could have gone anywhere... it’s just been secured against ICI and BL. I think the 3 way transaction is very likely different to what you are saying, but we can agree to disagree on that. For me, and this answers @Sluffy, the cash from the loan probably went to KA, and that is what he secured against bwfc assets. £5m moonshift to KA, then KA loans to BL, BL pay off BM... paying debt with debt, but only ever £5m.
Tonge moor green jacket Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Sluffy said: It was written on the BWFCST's official web site at the time. Izza's picture and bio has since been removed but the BA site copied and pasted what was there when the famous five were originally voted in elected. I don't care either way myself also, so that's the three of us - my point was more aimed towards hopefully getting the best person to do the job for us rather than some random ex-Wanderer who could kick a ball straight (but not necessarily shoot straight, obviously, as in the case of Mr Dean 'Wembley' Holdsworth). Random ex-wanderer? Not a proven leader, experience within a football club, and a career in law. Give us a break: ken has none of those and had criminal history. I know which way I'd go given a choice.
Sluffy Posted June 10, 2019 Posted June 10, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, DLH said: You’ve put that a lot better than I did, but that’s the point I was trying to make badly... the cash from the loan could have gone anywhere... it’s just been secured against ICI and BL. I think the 3 way transaction is very likely different to what you are saying, but we can agree to disagree on that. For me, and this answers @Sluffy, the cash from the loan probably went to KA, and that is what he secured against bwfc assets. £5m moonshift to KA, then KA loans to BL, BL pay off BM... paying debt with debt, but only ever £5m. Thanks again for the reply and I see what you are saying - in so far as you go - but please follow through your own explanation to the end. I'm happy that the £5m Moonshift loans pays off the BM loan - presumably that is the end of the line - if so I agree with you - but then where is this £5m that's been secured suddenly come from, which Ken is taking out of BL? It can't be the same £5m he put in to pay BM - because that £5m has been put into BL and spent - so how can he secure it, spend it, then withdraw it at a later date? It can't be the same £5m can it? Think of it this way, I hold a ww party at a pub and tell the landlord it is a free bar (stupid of me I know but probably the only way I could win over some off here to accept my more than 140 characters posts). Towards the end of the night I go to the landlord and ask him how much I owe him so far - and he tells me £5m. I've had a good win at the Bingo that night so together with it being my pension day, I delve into my trusty portmanteau and give him the £5m saying I'll put this in the pub for now. At the end of the night I go and see him again and he tells me that as everybody has been paralytic since I last visited him, that no one has managed to stand on their two feet to order another drink, so I've not incurred any other costs since I saw him last. Fantastic says I, I've settled my debt in full, I'll take the £5m out of the pub now too please, it's been a pleasure. What do you think the landlord would say, is it, 1 - Ah I see what you've done their Sluffy you old dog, you've done the BluMarble payment trick, you've put £5m into the pub, settled a £5m debt with it and are now taking the same £5m out of the pub, just wait a moment and I'll get your £5m for you, or would it be, 2 - Something much less polite? Answers on a post card to Sluffy Towers - each reply however must contain a minimum of 6 billion words. Being serious for a moment DLH I do understand what you are saying that Ken chucked £5m into the pot at the club and the money could have been used to pay for anything, Donaldson's bottle water or a new pair of Toblerone boots for Buckley for instance. What I'm saying though is what did he secure the £5m on though - if there were no assets to secure too? Maybe there was but I would have thought all assets would have been leveraged by then? If he hasn't secured the money against assets - because there wasn't any left - then doesn't that by definition mean he's put his (Eddies loan) money in as an unsecured creditor? If so and the money is already in the club, how after £5m has been spent to free up the assets that BM had secured against, can he suddenly seemingly register it as a secured charge? If he takes his £5m out of BL AFTER BM has been settled and puts it in again and secures it against those recently freed up assets - ok. If BM is paid BEFORE he puts the money - then again ok - he has assets to secure to. But for the life of me I can't understand £5m going in, clearing a creditor and releasing an asset to leverage against, THEN saying you've secured against that asset? You can't do it, the assets were already fully secured up to its book value at the time the money went into the pot. Can you see my point? Maybe there was £5m worth of assets laying around that hadn't been secured against or maybe you can secure unlimited billions on an asset with a book value of just £10.5m. I don't know, I'm not the expert but my common sense tells me something doesn't seem to be what it should. Maybe/obviously I'm wrong. I won't lose any sleep over it though - and perhaps in writing this I'll send half a dozen or more to sleep whilst reading this. At least some good will come from it then. Edited June 11, 2019 by Sluffy Post too brief, needed more words adding to it.
Recommended Posts