Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Take Over


Kane57

Recommended Posts

Just now, Ratwhite said:

1)Texan Billionaire
2) Xiang  Nyeng Corp.
3) Football Ventures featuring Jess Glynne 
4) Some old tramp from stoke
5) Mrs Dixon from Darcy Lever 
6) Dave Whelan, Mike Ashley, Shania Twain, Laurence Bassini and Crusty the Clown consortium

Football ventures features Pink Floyd shirley. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
1 hour ago, Burndens Bogs said:

Out of the 6 you would hope at least a couple of them have some serious money. I can’t help thinking it will be a locally based consortium that buys us, with financial backing from foreign sources. 

What would be great.

But, we're Bolton. It'll come out that two of the 5 unsuccessful bidders had "untold wealth" but the Admistrators favoured blah blah because EFL made more positive noises over their fit and proper test.......

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ratwhite said:

1)Texan Billionaire
2) Xiang  Nyeng Corp.
3) Football Ventures featuring Jess Glynne 
4) Some old tramp from stoke
5) Mrs Dixon from Darcy Lever 
6) Dave Whelan, Mike Ashley, Shania Twain, Laurence Bassini and Crusty the Clown consortium

Stelios is part of the consortium. Going about his business very quietly - I like it.

Edited by Jol_BWFC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chris Custodiet said:

The appointment of the administrators of Burnden Leisure and BWFC has still not been recorded on the Companies House register. However it seems safe enough to accept that, as reported in the media,, they were appointed by lawyers acting on behalf of the estate of Eddie Davies to recover amounts due to the estate by Ken Anderson.

Some months ago, Howard claimed that the amount was nearer to £8m than the £5m reported in the media. Howard made some speculations that didn't seem to me to hold water (particularly relating to Michael James) but he quoted the source of that piece of information as being the lawyers themselves. Unlike Howard, I have had no access to inside info but, in any case, the amount reported as paid to settle up Blumarble was not £5million but £4.4million. So, leaving aside the extra £3m, there's another £600k that might have been used, amongst other things, to help keep the hotel doors open a bit longer.

Both Ken Anderson and PBP have charges over the assets of the hotel, as security for money lent to other group companies, but it does not follow that either or both are owed money by the hotel. The more recent appointment of Quantuma by KA was registered at Companies House on 3 June 2019 and might imply that KA is owed money by the hotel that he may need to settle his debt to the Davies estate.

Its all a bit inconclusive really but not difficult to understand why all parties involved are trying to look after their own interests.

How much of an issue could it be if the owners of the club were not the owners of the hotel? I guess it depends on who owns the hotel, if not the new club owners. But if you own the hotel how much power does that give someone? Does it include access to the stadium or anything like that?

Don’t want some Coventry style situation where we’re not allowed in our own stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Burndens Bogs said:

Out of the 6 you would hope at least a couple of them have some serious money. I can’t help thinking it will be a locally based consortium that buys us, with financial backing from foreign sources. 

Id be more than happy having local folk at the helm, preferably not lobbing money about willy-nilly either.  A steady ship would be lovely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mantra said:

How much of an issue could it be if the owners of the club were not the owners of the hotel? I guess it depends on who owns the hotel, if not the new club owners. But if you own the hotel how much power does that give someone? Does it include access to the stadium or anything like that?

Don’t want some Coventry style situation where we’re not allowed in our own stadium.

Any mutual access would have to be be negotiated if separately owned. Another possibility is for the the hotel to be run as a joint venture, as it was for several years with De Vere Hotels.

Quantuma acted for Blumarble in liquidating Holdsworth's Sports Shield BWFC Ltd. Seemed to do a good job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chris Custodiet said:

Any mutual access would have to be be negotiated if separately owned. Another possibility is for the the hotel to be run as a joint venture, as it was for several years with De Vere Hotels.

Quantuma acted for Blumarble in liquidating Holdsworth's Sports Shield BWFC Ltd. Seemed to do a good job.

Surely the new owners of BWFC would want the Hotel also, for the obvious commercial potential tied to events in the stadium, my fear was that KA through Quantuma would hold the new owners to ransom, perhaps I’m wrong on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DLH said:

@Sluffy except the max value you pay as an investor buying the hotel now, and not as part of the club, per the last accounts is £5m net asset value. 

Assuming another 2years of those levels of losses that’s £4m now. 

Part of the club sale adds value from a commercial opportunity point of view. 

KA putting the hotel in admin with his mates at Quantuma smacks of one last fuck you or him trying to keep hold of the hotel, because from a purely getting the best value point of view it makes little sense

I think you are completely missing the point.

Anderson is not looking to own the hotel.

He simply wants his secured £5m back and the hotel his where he has his charge.

He wants the Administrator to sell the hotel and from the sale settle his £5m loan.

That's his objective.

It's the job of the Administrator to maximise the return on the sale of the assets for the creditors, so if he gets £5m or more for it (and James is happy with what he gets out of it - maybe turning his equity into ownership in the new company owning the hotel) then Anderson is paid in full and walks away and the new owners seek to turn the hotel in to a profitable business for themselves.

It's nothing to do with Anderson wanting ownership of the hotel or 'one last fuck you'.

The Administrator selling the club clearly stated that the £25m of funds he was seeking proof of included purchase of the hotel - it isn't his or anyone else's fault if non of the bidders wanted/could not afford to buy the hotel as a package with the club.

Personally I wonder if the £25m proof was for the club and an additional unstated amount of proof of say £8.5m could have secured the hotel too, as I had great trouble trying to contain a breakdown of costs/charges/needs required to balance to a £25m amount and a more realistic overall amount without the hotel would have been £25m (KA's secured charge of £5m would have not been contained within that amount for a start) and the hotel proof of funds and let's say £8.5m (where KA's and James charges) would have been contained.

If so it seems that nobody wanted to have £33.5m available to buy the club and hotel, whereas six consortiums seem to have the £25m for the club.

It seems reasonable to now assume that separate buyers will purchases the hotel from those who buy the club and that it is extremely unlikely that Mr Anderson's intent is take ownership of the hotel for himself (as some form of Machiavellian ongoing scheme to, in your words, do 'one last fuck').

As far as I'm aware the club is not reliant on the hotel, nor the hotel reliant on the club, to trade successfully.  I don't even think the original plans for the stadium even included a hotel but was added later as part of the planning consent terms(?).  There is no reason why separate owners for the club and hotel could not work together for their mutual benefit for both businesses in the future.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Moon boy said:

Thanks for taking the time to explain this in great detail, like you, I couldn’t see how KA would have a say in the hotel

The Administrators are the same ones who dealt with the KA/Holdsworth balls up at the start of this journey, obviously if KA did put £5mill of his own money into the Hotel knowing that he would definitely get it back, I presume he would only get back what he put in and not make much/ any profit on that? 

KA has shown that his main motivation is to make profit from his time at BWFC, obviously the new owners would want the Hotel as well, has KA put himself a position to make some money in a bidding war for the Hotel?

 

 

I'm not sure why you would think "I couldn't see how KA would have a say in the hotel" after just explaining things "in great detail" to you as to why he would?

Anderson like all other creditors would only receive settlement of his debt in full (as a secured one) or at a rate of a minimum of 25p in the £ as minimum as an unsecured one (as per EFL regulations to exit Administration).

Your questions above sound to me that you don't understand the function of Administration, which basically means a business can no longer pay its debts and can no longer carry on trading.  An Administrator is formally put in charge of the business (takes ownership of it) and the former owners of it (the shareholders) no longer continue to own the business.

So Anderson cannot profit from something he no longer owns - at best he will receive back any money he's invested in the business as a creditor to it.

There would be nothing to stop Anderson forming another company, or joining another consortium and bid for ownership of the hotel but in reality the hotel is not fundamentally crucial to the running of the football club (and visa-versa) and also I doubt there would be very little goodwill from the township to the hotel if KA did somehow end up owning it.

Anderson's exit strategy is for the hotel to be sold by the Administrator and his secured debt of £5m to be settled to his satisfaction.

Then no doubt he will be off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

I'm not sure why you would think "I couldn't see how KA would have a say in the hotel" after just explaining things "in great detail" to you as to why he would?

Anderson like all other creditors would only receive settlement of his debt in full (as a secured one) or at a rate of a minimum of 25p in the £ as minimum as an unsecured one (as per EFL regulations to exit Administration).

Your questions above sound to me that you don't understand the function of Administration, which basically means a business can no longer pay its debts and can no longer carry on trading.  An Administrator is formally put in charge of the business (takes ownership of it) and the former owners of it (the shareholders) no longer continue to own the business.

So Anderson cannot profit from something he no longer owns - at best he will receive back any money he's invested in the business as a creditor to it.

There would be nothing to stop Anderson forming another company, or joining another consortium and bid for ownership of the hotel but in reality the hotel is not fundamentally crucial to the running of the football club (and visa-versa) and also I doubt there would be very little goodwill from the township to the hotel if KA did somehow end up owning it.

Anderson's exit strategy is for the hotel to be sold by the Administrator and his secured debt of £5m to be settled to his satisfaction.

Then no doubt he will be off.

Once again thank you for going to the trouble to explain the situation, as I sense your rising irritability with trying to put sense where there is none, I have no further questions, at the moment, over and out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Moon boy said:

Once again thank you for going to the trouble to explain the situation, as I sense your rising irritability with trying to put sense where there is none, I have no further questions, at the moment, over and out

Please forgive me if my replies seem to come across as being somewhat irritable, that certainly was not my intent.

At the bottom of everything that has gone on from pre-Holdsworth take over - and the late team change as his 'business partner' from Michael Collins (you might find this link of interest)...

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/14900955.ex-business-associate-of-investment-firm-that-took-over-bolton-wanderers-jailed-for-part-in-loan-and-mortgage-fraud-racket/

...to his replacement by Ken Anderson, and including why Davies ended up selling the club to them and from everything there on, all have sense/reasons to them (mainly financial I would strongly suspect) but we obviously aren't aware what most of it is.

There is an old saying though that generally holds true and that is 'to follow the money'.

Generally speaking most from day one have taken a stance of dislike/mistrust/hatred of Anderson - mainly engendered in particular by the ST, and Iles, who were/are close to Dean Holdsworth from the beginning.  

There is another saying that people 'live up to one's expectations' of them, meaning if you perceive people to be good you tend to see their behaviour and actions to be good also, but if you perceive them to be bad, you are just confirming your expectations of them.  It is an emotional rather than judgement on what they are doing/behaving rather than an informed one.

I've simply tried to take emotional judgement out of the equation and tried to understand in financial terms what has actually been going on.

This has made me highly unpopular to a certain few on here and elsewhere for doing so.

I've never claimed Anderson to be free of sin but I've never cast him as Satan either.

If you take a view that Anderson is here on a mission to rape and pillage the club then I can see why people believe he is still trying to do 'one last fuck' by becoming owner of the hotel, however if you look at it from a financial view and follow the financial facts it become fairly obvious (at least in my opinion) that all he is doing is to recover his money from the secured loan on the hotel. 

(Having re-read the last accounts for the hotel it is valued at roughly £10.5m of which £5.5m is shown as an outstanding creditor to Michael James and £5m of capital assets.  The BM loan was secured on Burnden Leisure assets - of which the hotel is).

The charge was set against the hotel (indeed that was the reason BM were set to appoint an Administrator to take control of that specific asset) and once it was settled with presumably the money loaned by Eddie to Ken via his company - ICI Ltd. Once the debt was settled with BM, Ken put in £5m of his own money and secured it on the hotel assets to keep the club going, knowing full well that whatever happened he would always get it back.

Fwiw I don't post what I do to be controversial or argumentative just for the sake of being so but simply to understand and follow through the logic and facts of what is more likely to have/or be, happening, and sharing them with anybody else who may find them of interest as well, than simply following the ignorance and anger of the crowd - which I guess is the way people are expected to behave and embrace as the 'norm' on social media?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, lowcarbon said:

The sale of the Hotel would not have to fall under the EFL Administration rules??

You may be right, we simply don't know yet.

In fact when I first drafted out my post to which you refer I deliberately did not state a figure (25p) to the pound as the hotel is a separate entity to the club (although it falls under the umbrella of Burnden Leisure being the main company of the group).

But having done so I wondered if the sale of the club DID include the hotel then it would have to be at 25p in the £ to exit Admin as per EFL rules.

As it stands at the moment I thought it best to include the sale of the hotel with the club as was the clear hope/desire of the main Administrator, until we are informed officially otherwise - and thus added in the 25p.

As the hotels operating loss rose to £12.9m as stated in the last accounts and made a loss of £500k on trading in the year it really doesn't look good for non secured creditors of the hotel and I'm sure they will all have their fingers crossed that it does fall within the EFL regulations somehow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nantwichwhite said:

Do we definitely know the hotel isn't included, or are we guessing 

Nothing official.

Nixon is the one saying that the hotel is not included with the six bids received back -

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any confirmation that Ken Andersons "money" is secured against the hotel or is it just assumed that it is? The charge is against Bolton Wanderers as a football creditor when the club is sold doesn't it mean they would have to pay Ken off regardless as to what happens to the hotel? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dr Faustus said:

How do you find Twitter Sluffy? 

I very much appreciate the good part of it, namely the up to the second breaking of news from around the world but detest the part of it which gives every moron around the world a voice to post the most gross and abusive filth that they would never dare to utter to anyone in real life.

I appreciate the documentary that I link to below about the Warwick University Rape Chat incident is not about Twitter per se but it does illustrates my point perfectly about what and how some people (they are at university so must have some level of intelligence and probably from family's who no doubt are solid and supportive of them) must think is acceptable and normal social media behaviour in todays society.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0799fyb/the-warwick-uni-rape-chat-scandal

In general I find twitter and other social media populated in the main with people with nothing much of interest or value to say - but it doesn't deter them from saying whatever it is they feel they need to share with the world.

I tend to find that people seem to be so gullible and easily led these days - a symptom of being too lazy (or stupid maybe?) to find out things for themselves.  Many seem to believe as gospel every word which certain influencers post on social media - hence my many comments about the need for these 'influencers' to be free of bias or agenda themselves.  Whatever your views or opinions of Marc Iles are it is obvious to even those most blindly loyal to him that he was never even handed in his reporting - anyone able to find anything at all he's wrote about negatively about Holdsworth, or the ST (even when his colleagues at the paper were reporting on Roger Allanson legal practice being closed down and his professional body reporting that he should not be trusted with his clients money - ffs!).

With people following like sheep, often ill informed, with a general lack of even maturity (born out no doubt of the norm these days of people spending considerable amounts of their lives on social media/ social chat/ playing games such as Football Manager or Fortnite, or whatever happens to be the most recent craze, we seem to be producing a generation of 'man-childs' whereby we are seeing twenty and even thirtysomethings (now with family's of their own) who simply have yet to become grown up in a mental capacity.  Is it any wonder that some seem to behave and act as stroppy teenagers who become petulantly and abusively if they don't get their own way or if you dare to disagree with them.  

If that is how they want to live their lives then let them get on with it, troll to their hearts content, carry internet grudges for years, be abusive to seek reaction, in short seek the attention they aren't managing to achieve in real life or through their relationship with the people in their lives.

I don't doubt such loneliness and neediness was around in my generation too but at least there wasn't the means to broadcast it to the world nor the ability to act as someone who you are not on line and from the safety of being behind your keyboards.

Twitter and other social media seems to have given everybody a voice but unfortunately most don't seem to know the golden rule of communication, namely that it is much better to remain silent and be thought to be stupid than to speak and remove all doubt!

 

You didn't really expect a one or two word answer from me when you ask the question did you?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andy Gee said:

Is there any confirmation that Ken Andersons "money" is secured against the hotel or is it just assumed that it is? The charge is against Bolton Wanderers as a football creditor when the club is sold doesn't it mean they would have to pay Ken off regardless as to what happens to the hotel? 

BM charge was against the hotel.

There doesn't seem much other assets free of leverage anywhere else within the Burnden Leisure group of companies.

So when the BM debt was settled and the hotel became free from £5m of security for assets then what better place for KA (or anyone else) to secure their money against?

The charge is not as you state that of being a 'football creditor' but that of a secured creditor - which gives him first call to satisfy his debt in full before those of unsecured creditors such as HMRC, the Town Hall, or even the admin and catering staff at the club.

Once his secured lending of £5m is paid off in full, that's his interest in the club at an end.  

It could be that money is raised elsewhere to pay him and the other creditors and not sell the hotel but unless a white knight comes along it is virtually impossible to see how that could be achieved.

It looks to me that the agreed solution is for the hotel to be sold and Anderson an possibly also James as secured creditors paid off in full.

This would reduce the debt on the footballing side of the club that is left to more manageable measures.

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.