Chris Custodiet Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Mounts Kipper said: Presumptions and assumptions that look to be based on facts, I’m no Iles fan but he’s called it correct on Anderson and current events are proving that Iles was correct to bring it into the public domain. Whether that causes him to lose his job is neither here nor there, it’s his duty to report the facts. Come off it Mounts. Iles hasn't reported the facts in the TWELVE years he's been in Bolton. Apart from the selective ones that is. Fitted in like a glove at the BN from the day he arrived and hasn't changed a bit.
Mounts Kipper Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 (edited) My comments were on the general opinion Iles had of Anderson. Think in the main seemingly being proved correct. Edited March 18, 2019 by Mounts Kipper
Chris Custodiet Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 9 hours ago, Mounts Kipper said: My comments were on the general opinion Iles had of Anderson. Think in the main seemingly being proved correct. The facts are that two chancers took over BWFC three years ago for a quid. One was a useless lump after a fast buck and with nothing to offer. The other was a hardened and experienced operator who was willing to work at trying to manage a tough situation, stem the haemorrhaging of money, reduce the losses and, then the hardest bit, earn something for his time and trouble.by handing it over in bettter shape to someone with deeper pockets. It ain't over yet but if you prefer journalism laced with prejudice and half-truth, its the Beeno for you.
Mounts Kipper Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 1 minute ago, Chris Custodiet said: The facts are that two chancers took over BWFC three years ago for a quid. One was a useless lump after a fast buck and with nothing to offer. The other was a hardened and experienced operator who was willing to work at trying to manage a tough situation, stem the haemorrhaging of money, reduce the losses and, then the hardest bit, earn something for his time and trouble.by handing it over in bettter shape to someone with deeper pockets. It ain't over yet but if you prefer journalism laced with prejudice and half-truth, its the Beeno for you. When this is all over you’ll see the truth about Anderson, of that I’m sure.
Chris Custodiet Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 (edited) 56 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: When this is all over you’ll see the truth about Anderson, of that I’m sure. I can assure you that I have few illusions about Ken Anderson or Marc Iles, Mounts. And btw a few days ago, I heard Marc Iles say that the AGM Ken Anderson called last year wasn't well-publicised. It was completely untrue, of course, which he knew because he was there but just another small example of how obsessed he is in his attempts to discredit KA. And in case you might think this didn't happen, I can tell you that there were about fifty witnesses. Edited March 19, 2019 by Chris Custodiet
Roger_Dubuis Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 26 minutes ago, Spider said: It’s all going to be fine Aye, In 3 or 4 years we'll have a ground on the old college on Manny Road regenerating the bottom end of Bradshawgate in the process.We'll be thanking Eddie for selling it to Ken for 50p then
Okocha10 Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 Sorry if this is sounding daft but what is the difference between Portsmouth going into administration with 70 mill of debt plus owing HMRC at least £8m. Surely they wouldn't just liquidate us if this is the case see the links below: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/16943651 https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/feb/26/portsmouth-premierleague
Dr Faustus Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 7 minutes ago, Okocha10 said: Sorry if this is sounding daft but what is the difference between Portsmouth going into administration with 70 mill of debt plus owing HMRC at least £8m. Surely they wouldn't just liquidate us if this is the case see the links below: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/16943651 https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/feb/26/portsmouth-premierleague Please see pages 8-162
Dr Faustus Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 Or read Sluffy's summaries... Though I'm not sure which is quicker
Guest Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Kane57 said: We're running out of time Indeed. Sleepwalking towards extinction here. And still on twitter there are people more interested in sacking the manager than the fact that within a week we very well could have no football club.
freds dad Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 Iles reporting that the hotel is being run on a cash only basis as credit facility has been withdrawn.
Howardroark Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 14 minutes ago, Okocha10 said: Sorry if this is sounding daft but what is the difference between Portsmouth going into administration with 70 mill of debt plus owing HMRC at least £8m. Surely they wouldn't just liquidate us if this is the case see the links below: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/16943651 https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/feb/26/portsmouth-premierleague A wide variety of reasons; This type of administration (CVA) isn’t allowed any more by the EFL (golden share rule) unless there are proven funds to come out of administration- £20M Administration requires 3 months of running costs to be available, provided by either the owners or a creditor. This is the 6th HMRC WU in 3 years. Essentially, Portsmouth had buyers/investors in place and were far more attractive a proposition, had guaranteed funds coming in and a lot of the debt was owed to owners, note in the report it states £2M owed to smaller creditors. They also had the funds to pay for administration.
Guest Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 6 minutes ago, freds dad said: Iles reporting that the hotel is being run on a cash only basis as credit facility has been withdrawn. Wonder where the cash is going?
Rubberkex Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 Hello boys and girls...pie eater here. This is now beyond rivalry and should give nobody any pleasure. Living local I know Bowton fans ( mostly decent although 1 or 2 knobheads ) and they are going through shite. Take this or leave it but I wish you well on this subject and hope it can be sorted.
Okocha10 Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 3 minutes ago, Howardroark said: A wide variety of reasons; This type of administration (CVA) isn’t allowed any more by the EFL (golden share rule) unless there are proven funds to come out of administration- £20M Administration requires 3 months of running costs to be available, provided by either the owners or a creditor. This is the 6th HMRC WU in 3 years. Essentially, Portsmouth had buyers/investors in place and were far more attractive a proposition, had guaranteed funds coming in and a lot of the debt was owed to owners, note in the report it states £2M owed to smaller creditors. They also had the funds to pay for administration. Thank you for explaining this, maybe the EFL would give us special dispensation if something come on long, very much doubt it though.
Howardroark Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, Okocha10 said: Thank you for explaining this, maybe the EFL would give us special dispensation if something come on long, very much doubt it though. They wouldn’t as they’d have to do it for everyone who got in to this situation.
Howardroark Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 Just in respect of Marc Iles’ comments on twitter regarding administration; None of the secured debts are in default, Ken is in default to Moonshift but that only means that Moonshift can put ICI in to administration, not BWFC. They would also have to fund the administration of ICI which includes monthly payments to Ken & Lee..... The only administration option is a CVA but that requires Ken to provide 3 months running costs and will require £20M upfront cash to get out of. Basran doesn’t have £20M upfront and so wouldn’t do a deal in administration, it’s cheaper for him to buy now for £8-£10M and do deals with creditors.
Howardroark Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 Hotel being cash only- is this literally ‘cash’ only, or do they just mean ‘no credit accounts’? If the former then suggests either their merchant services (card processing) have been withdrawn or they simply can’t wait the 48 hours for funds to clear. My guess is the withdrawal of merchant services as they were factoring card payments.
Recommended Posts