Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Take Over


Kane57

Recommended Posts

Just now, Casino said:

You dont think the gap between the ins and outs has been greatly reduced?

In cash terms yes, as a % of turnover probably not as big as you’d think as we had parachute payments when he came in didn’t we? A lot of the high earners contracts were up anyway the first year of his reign anyway 

Besides, that’s not cash flow is it? Based on the fact we continually seemed to struggle to pay wages and other bills on time it would suggest to me that we have had very poor cash flow over his three years in charge 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

I’m not sure you could say that Ken has stabilised the clubs cash flow 

Course it has. He’s renegotiated deal after deal. Absolutely shed Loads that hasn’t made the public domain. 

We are losing less money now than we were. 

We might still struggle to pay the bills and have to rob Peter to pay Paul just get through week to week, but that’s not his fault. He could’ve gone down the austerity route and sold everything he could and not reinvested and single penny and kept the club running that way. But between him and his lad they’ve managed to assemble 2-3 squads that gained relative success.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Find it difficult to believe that ED would have had us liquidated before Ken and Deano took over 

I’m basing that on the fact he still ended up bank rolling Ken over the next three years 

That just doesn’t make sense 

Any road, how big is this war chest 

Huge difference Birch in ED bankrolling the club with no hope or sight of getting it back. Which he stopped doing in the end. To loaning an amount to someone on a strict condition it was paid back in a relatively short time frame (ie; the impending £5m) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Without looking at the accounts, you’d expect the massive increase in activity at the stadium and reduced wage bill to have achieved that?

Both our income and outgoings have reduced considerably in his time granted 

But I am of the impression that a key indicator of good cash flow is being able to pay your bills on time, we were constantly getting in mither for paying late, that indicates poor cash flow to me 

Ken pulled forward income to stay a float, granted it’s what we had to do but it’s poor from a cash flow perspective surely? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Course it has. He’s renegotiated deal after deal. Absolutely shed Loads that hasn’t made the public domain. 

We are losing less money now than we were. 

We might still struggle to pay the bills and have to rob Peter to pay Paul just get through week to week, but that’s not his fault. He could’ve gone down the austerity route and sold everything he could and not reinvested and single penny and kept the club running that way. But between him and his lad they’ve managed to assemble 2-3 squads that gained relative success.

 

He said he’s renegotiated deal after deal, I’m not convinced myself and if he has it would not surprise me if any reduction was paid directly to him. Regarding him not selling everything he could I think he did sell everything he could, Madine, Holden and clough. I’m not yet convinced one little bit about Anderson’s tenure. 

I am worried we will find skeletons in the cupboard. Hope I’m wrong. 

Edited by Mounts Kipper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mounts Kipper said:

He said he’s renegotiated deal after deal, I’m not convinced myself and if he has it would not surprise me if any reduction was paid directly to him. Regarding him not selling everything he could I think he did sell everything he could, Madine, Holden and clough. I’m not convinced one little not about Anderson’s tenure I await skeletons in the cupboard. Hope I’m wrong. 

Getting £9.5m+ for clough and Madine is the best piece of business in the history of the football club. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Both our income and outgoings have reduced considerably in his time granted 

But I am of the impression that a key indicator of good cash flow is being able to pay your bills on time, we were constantly getting in mither for paying late, that indicates poor cash flow to me 

Ken pulled forward income to stay a float, granted it’s what we had to do but it’s poor from a cash flow perspective surely? 

Depends on the other options.

There weren't any so it was the least worst option, sad as it has been to see our name dragged through the mud. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Getting £9.5m+ for clough and Madine is the best piece of business in the history of the football club. 

 

Was good business, just replying to your comment about ken not going down the route of selling everything he could sell. If he could of made 5 million with player sales in January he’d still be holding on to ownership. 

Edited by Mounts Kipper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m honestly baffled that a fella who has done more than most over the last 20 - 25 years to make the club as self sufficient as possible is not getting an ounce of credit in some quarters 

he’s made the unsellable sellable. If someone can come in and do a better job then great but no one did so beforehand 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RoadRunnerFan said:

Depends on the other options.

There weren't any so it was the least worst option, sad as it has been to see our name dragged through the mud. 

Of course, no issue with it 

I just don’t think you could say Ken has sorted our cash flow out given all the late payments, we’ve clearly had some very big issues at the club 

Granted he took over some crazy player contracts but most of them were up in the early part of Ken’s reign. You’d have to assume that 90% + of our current outgoings are deals signed by Ken himself so it’s on him now 

Ve glad to have all this shite behind us anyway, fingers crossed the new lot have lots of dough they are happy losing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Casino said:

I bow to your knowledge of accounting terms

Not at all

in essence it’s just For cosmetics and would make the accounts look better and if it’s been removed as we expect then it’s irrelevant. In all likelihood it is unlikely to have been triggered anytime soon and would expect it was time limited anyway rather than open ended 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
Just now, Escobarp said:

Not at all

in essence it’s just For cosmetics and would make the accounts look better and if it’s been removed as we expect then it’s irrelevant. In all likelihood it is unlikely to have been triggered anytime soon and would expect it was time limited anyway rather than open ended 

I wasn't being funny

I dunno what it's called and was happy to be corrected. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Was good business, just replying to your comment about ken not going down the route of selling everything he could sell. If he could of made 5 million with player sales in January he’d still be holding on to ownership. 

Fortunately for us all our entire playing squad isn’t worth 5m so ken gets paid out and we get new owners. Everyone’s a winner 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Both our income and outgoings have reduced considerably in his time granted 

But I am of the impression that a key indicator of good cash flow is being able to pay your bills on time, we were constantly getting in mither for paying late, that indicates poor cash flow to me 

Ken pulled forward income to stay a float, granted it’s what we had to do but it’s poor from a cash flow perspective surely? 

The failure to pay bills was an inevitability once the parachute payment and ED safety nets were removed though, regardless of who the owner was. Even if KA was in a position to chuck money in to cover those bills then all it would have done was paper over the cracks until we hit the same problem with the next bloke. 

The concerts and rugby won’t bring in millions (it would probably just about scrape in to six figures overall), it does at least show a willingness that has been missing for a decade or more to put the club’s facilities to use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tyldesley_white said:

if it just been Holdsworth, we would now be an ex football league club

 

Have any football league clubs ever gone to the wall? 

Also, if we're giving Ken credit for convincing Eddie to get back involved, does that mean Deano is a legend for bringing us King Ken?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Escobarp said:

Not sure it sits on the books. It’s a contingent liability so whilst it may be recorded in the notes it shouldn’t show on the balance sheet when we finally see an upto date set of account. 

If we are talking about the same thing, its in the balance sheet as a debt in the last audited balance sheet. See note 21 here:

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

Seems likely to me that there were further discussions on this when Ken asked Eddie to stump up the money to pay off Blumarble. Probably more discussions with Eddie's trustees as part of the takeover negotiations.

It would only have been a contingent liability if had first been written off with the rest of the loan balance and that is not what happened.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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