It's happening. 

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/17405193.bolton-wanderers-close-to-takeover-from-uk-based-consortium/

Thank fuck

7 minutes ago, Burndens Bogs said:

Basically what you’re saying is “Howard why are you giving us all this info?” 

No I'm not.  

Everyone is free to post whatever they want on social media (within the law of course) it isn't for me question why they do.

My post was an attempt to explain why someone like myself born before the world became enveloped by it, is more reserved about what they read on it, than perhaps the generations that have, do.

Also hopefully to defuse the little bit of needle that perhaps as crept into things earlier in the day.

 

Chris, I still use good old Anglo-Saxon vocabulary when I deem it appropriate - and of course 'words' never hurt you like 'sticks and stones' would, I merely attempted to explain that normal and somewhat understandable (at times) social media reaction may not be appropriate in certain individual cases.  

As for attempting 90 minutes on a pitch these days, I doubt I'd even manage those steps at Burnden leading up to the pitch, never mind play a full game!

Just now, Sluffy said:

No I'm not.  

Everyone is free to post whatever they want on social media (within the law of course) it isn't for me question why they do.

My post was an attempt to explain why someone like myself born before the world became enveloped by it, is more reserved about what they read on it, than perhaps the generations that have, do.

Also hopefully to defuse the little bit of needle that perhaps as crept into things earlier in the day.

 

Chris, I still use good old Anglo-Saxon vocabulary when I deem it appropriate - and of course 'words' never hurt you like 'sticks and stones' would, I merely attempted to explain that normal and somewhat understandable (at times) social media reaction may not be appropriate in certain individual cases.  

As for attempting 90 minutes on a pitch these days, I doubt I'd even manage those steps at Burnden leading up to the pitch, never mind play a full game!

Crikey Sluffy you must be older than me but I 'm still in the 'fuck em ' phase my brain cant take much more of this but fwiw I trust the Howard guy maybe because the narrative is favourable to our beloved club  although I do get fleeting images in my head of a gloating Ray Winston shouting 'you facking mugs!'

Howard,

On March 8 you said: 

Moonshift won’t budge on the £8M with KA, negotiable to a 3rd party though I imagine. 

He's probably classed as a football creditor as well as being secured and that means he has to be paid in full before EFL will allow administration.

 

However, March 15 you said:

For those asking questions of Alan Nixon on Twitter, these are facts

1) Ken Anderson is a secured creditor, not a football creditor, there are no football creditors. 

2) Administration will cost somebody £15-20M in up front cash and is therefore not a possibility for either Basran or Ken- this is due to the EFL rules and the level of secured creditors.

3) Davies family are not on-board with the Basran consortium, too busy with the other bidder.

 

What's with the contradiction between "He's probably classed as a football creditor" and "there are no football creditors."

 

Sorry to pull the debate back a few days, but while we're being skeptical...

 

Cheers!

To summarise, Howard came on a couple of weeks ago when it looked like basran was going to seal the deal on the Sunday, nixon and Iles seemed pretty confident this was going to happen. Howard said he didn't have the funds and it wouldn't happen. I thought bollocks who the hell are you, but he was right. He then said that a mystery buyer was dealing direct with the Davies family and he would probably step in the day before the court case or not long after. This also happened so for me he's doing quiet well. Let's try and be positive this is going to happen because personally I'm pissed off with the whole saga. April 2nd can't come quick enough for me. 

44 minutes ago, Eavesy said:

Apparently a lot went to the Wigan match and saw the potential in the club...

They can't have been impressed with anything they saw on the pitch.

Edited March 22, 20197 yr by Burndens Bogs

14 minutes ago, darrener said:

To summarise, Howard came on a couple of weeks ago when it looked like basran was going to seal the deal on the Sunday, nixon and Iles seemed pretty confident this was going to happen. Howard said he didn't have the funds and it wouldn't happen. I thought bollocks who the hell are you, but he was right. He then said that a mystery buyer was dealing direct with the Davies family and he would probably step in the day before the court case or not long after. This also happened so for me he's doing quiet well. Let's try and be positive this is going to happen because personally I'm pissed off with the whole saga. April 2nd can't come quick enough for me. 

Fwiw I think Howard knows exactly who's buying the club but I'm prepared to wait until it comes out, we don't want this jeopardising in any way. I'd imagine Howard is in someway connected to the Davies family but who cares as long as the info keeps coming. In Howard we trust 

4 minutes ago, darrener said:

Fwiw I think Howard knows exactly who's buying the club but I'm prepared to wait until it comes out, we don't want this jeopardising in any way. I'd imagine Howard is in someway connected to the Davies family but who cares as long as the info keeps coming. In Howard we trust 

I'd much rather not know for a couple of week and the takeover go through than the alternative. 

It’s hard not to get carried away with Howard’s posts, I was sceptical at first but he’s been proven right on a number of front.

 

Still a nagging doubt in my head that it he could be a Wiganer, or that Ipswich fan Zico pissed off, taking us all for a ride! 😂

5 minutes ago, darrener said:

Fwiw I think Howard knows exactly who's buying the club but I'm prepared to wait until it comes out, we don't want this jeopardising in any way. I'd imagine Howard is in someway connected to the Davies family but who cares as long as the info keeps coming. In Howard we trust 

I think Howard is definitely ITK more than he's letting on. Either that or his experience allows him to make very, very good guesses.

It's interesting that on the main media channels, this has been seen by many as KA holding out for as much money as possible, therefore delaying the deal. But on here, the narrative is that Ken wanted the deal done ASAP but Basran doesn't have the £££. 

That makes a lot more sense with the chairman's notes saying "I hope a deal can be completed next week." In other words, hurry up Basran or Moonshift are gonna boot me out.

An interesting moment was when Howard said "Hope Basran is bluffing." when we found out that the deal was "OFF".

Which makes me think maybe Howard isn't as close as some people suspect. Because it sounded like he wanted any deal done, to save the club from liquidation.

At other times though he's made it out that he would rather prefer Basran to fall short, in favour of a more wealthy buyer coming in.

 

The  fact that he predicted the Sunday takeover not happening, and the 14 day period is impressive, but he also predicted that it would be a 7 day period while a liquidator was appointed.

 

So I think Howard maybe is in circles where he hears whisperings about this deal, but nothing concrete.

Either that or you are an incredible bullshitter.

25 minutes ago, Mantra said:

What's with the contradiction between "He's probably classed as a football creditor" and "there are no football creditors."

 

Wouldn't that simply be explained as 'probably' isn't an exact statement (ie it includes the possibility that he might NOT be a football creditor) whilst Howards last statement being an exact one, a 'definite' (ie there are no football creditors even though I thought KA could have been a week ago but I now know that not to be the case).

That's how I interpreted it.

 

2 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Wouldn't that simply be explained as 'probably' isn't an exact statement (ie it includes the possibility that he might NOT be a football creditor) whilst Howards last statement being an exact one, a 'definite' (ie there are no football creditors even though I thought KA could have been a week ago but I now know that not to be the case).

That's how I interpreted it.

 

Wasn't sure if "there are no football creditors" meant "in this situation". Or "there isn't such thing as a football creditor."

Would seem a rather obvious contradiction for him to stumble over, so I imagine it is the former rather than the latter, but thought there might be some other explanation.

I have no clue on this sorta thing so just curious.

45 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Chris I'm a management accountant, I know next to nothing about m&a or insolvency but I do know the difference between a loan and share capital. 

The charge over the £5m effectively gives control of the share capital to moonshift as you agree above. 

Why go to the bother of a lengthy post to debate with Howard the finer details of the £3m which to my knowledge we have not seen evidence for yet?

The role of the accountant should be to simplify this stuff, not make it more complex. 

The role of the accountant is to make it simple because non-accountants aren't bright enough to understand the basics? I'm sorry but I've always worked on the basis that most folk are capable of understanding simple financial concepts when they are explained to them. You don't need to be Richard Osman to get your head round the difference between borrowing and equity or between a secured loan and an unsecured one. 

This is Wanderersways not the Beeno.

6 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

The role of the accountant is to make it simple because non-accountants aren't bright enough to understand the basics? I'm sorry but I've always worked on the basis that most folk are capable of understanding simple financial concepts when they are explained to them. You don't need to be Richard Osman to get your head round the difference between borrowing and equity or between a secured loan and an unsecured one. 

This is Wanderersways not the Beeno.

sometimes the Beano can explain it just as well ............

 

 

7 minutes ago, Mantra said:

The  fact that he predicted the Sunday takeover not happening, and the 14 day period is impressive, but he also predicted that it would be a 7 day period while a liquidator was appointed.

I don't have any problems with statements changing as the process is a dynamic one and the strategy as given has not changed but the tactics of how to achieve it may have.

Looking back in retrospect I guess purchasing the shares whilst awaiting the appointment of a receiver/cooling off period, then triggering the 14 day notice may not have produced such a certain outcome than purchasing the day before the court case and seeking a 14 day adjournment - because the two week notification would expire prior just in enough time to put the club in Admin (and thus force Ken's hand if required).  So the later thinking - and change of execution - was deemed the better way forward.

That's how I reasoned why things didn't quite go as Howard predicted them but it still fell within the strategy he's been predicting all along. 

2 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

The role of the accountant is to make it simple because non-accountants aren't bright enough to understand the basics? I'm sorry but I've always worked on the basis that most folk are capable of understanding simple financial concepts when they are explained to them. You don't need to be Richard Osman to get your head round the difference between borrowing and equity or between a secured loan and an unsecured one. 

This is Wanderersways not the Beeno.

No Chris the role is not to simplify because other folk aren't bright enough, it's to simplify because other folk aren't accountants and will have different areas of expertise. Same goes for law, medicine, the mechanic fixing your car and the electrician wiring your extension and so on....

1 hour ago, Mantra said:

Howard,

On March 8 you said: 

Moonshift won’t budge on the £8M with KA, negotiable to a 3rd party though I imagine. 

He's probably classed as a football creditor as well as being secured and that means he has to be paid in full before EFL will allow administration.

 

However, March 15 you said:

For those asking questions of Alan Nixon on Twitter, these are facts

1) Ken Anderson is a secured creditor, not a football creditor, there are no football creditors. 

2) Administration will cost somebody £15-20M in up front cash and is therefore not a possibility for either Basran or Ken- this is due to the EFL rules and the level of secured creditors.

3) Davies family are not on-board with the Basran consortium, too busy with the other bidder.

 

What's with the contradiction between "He's probably classed as a football creditor" and "there are no football creditors."

 

Sorry to pull the debate back a few days, but while we're being skeptical...

 

Cheers!

A clearer definition of a football creditor after 7 days. 

 

30 minutes ago, Mantra said:

I think Howard is definitely ITK more than he's letting on. Either that or his experience allows him to make very, very good guesses.

It's interesting that on the main media channels, this has been seen by many as KA holding out for as much money as possible, therefore delaying the deal. But on here, the narrative is that Ken wanted the deal done ASAP but Basran doesn't have the £££. 

That makes a lot more sense with the chairman's notes saying "I hope a deal can be completed next week." In other words, hurry up Basran or Moonshift are gonna boot me out.

An interesting moment was when Howard said "Hope Basran is bluffing." when we found out that the deal was "OFF".

Which makes me think maybe Howard isn't as close as some people suspect. Because it sounded like he wanted any deal done, to save the club from liquidation.

At other times though he's made it out that he would rather prefer Basran to fall short, in favour of a more wealthy buyer coming in.

 

The  fact that he predicted the Sunday takeover not happening, and the 14 day period is impressive, but he also predicted that it would be a 7 day period while a liquidator was appointed.

 

So I think Howard maybe is in circles where he hears whisperings about this deal, but nothing concrete.

Either that or you are an incredible bullshitter.

Said it last night just like Casino sussed too.

Howard is actually a female and none other than Kathy Lloyd.

Naked pics wearing just a Bolton scarf dangled in front of your Cornish Pasty will be greatly received by the chaps on here.

Thanks in advance.

 

31 minutes ago, Mantra said:

I think Howard is definitely ITK more than he's letting on. Either that or his experience allows him to make very, very good guesses.

It's interesting that on the main media channels, this has been seen by many as KA holding out for as much money as possible, therefore delaying the deal. But on here, the narrative is that Ken wanted the deal done ASAP but Basran doesn't have the £££. 

That makes a lot more sense with the chairman's notes saying "I hope a deal can be completed next week." In other words, hurry up Basran or Moonshift are gonna boot me out.

An interesting moment was when Howard said "Hope Basran is bluffing." when we found out that the deal was "OFF".

Which makes me think maybe Howard isn't as close as some people suspect. Because it sounded like he wanted any deal done, to save the club from liquidation.

At other times though he's made it out that he would rather prefer Basran to fall short, in favour of a more wealthy buyer coming in.

 

The  fact that he predicted the Sunday takeover not happening, and the 14 day period is impressive, but he also predicted that it would be a 7 day period while a liquidator was appointed.

 

So I think Howard maybe is in circles where he hears whisperings about this deal, but nothing concrete.

Either that or you are an incredible bullshitter.

Sir, you appear to have joined simply to try and discredit me,  please note that I won’t be answering any more questions if the answer is simply the semantics of the word ‘probably’

1 hour ago, Mantra said:

Why would they buy the Moonshift debt but not follow through on buying the club?

 

If Ken moved the goalposts to an unprofitable level?

Howard, was Allardyce involved in one of the consortiums, or is that a load of bollocks?

8 minutes ago, Boo said:

Howard, was Allardyce involved in one of the consortiums, or is that a load of bollocks?

I would doubt it

6 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

Sir, you appear to have joined simply to try and discredit me,  please note that I won’t be answering any more questions if the answer is simply the semantics of the word ‘probably’

Most certainly haven't, Howard. I apologize if my comments came across that way.

I just said "I think Howard is more in the know than he's letting on." If anything - that's crediting you. Also said your narrative makes more sense in relation to the chairman's notes.

As Sluffy explained, it is all well and good taking your word as gospel, but if we're not experts on the situation and something doesn't add up, then of course we're going to have questions and reservations.The only reason I'm finding contradictions is because I'm re-reading the thread to gain extra context of how things have developed. So if things change over the course of a week and therefore your comments are different, I'm going to ask why.

In my last post I was simply speculating on how close you are to the deal. Some think you're in touch with the Davies family, some think you're just making educated guesses. In all honesty, I haven't got a clue, but you've made the most sense out of everyone. I wouldn't expect that you'd let on to being close to the deal, which is sensible.

Whilst I accept it's probably frustrating for you to explain and re-explain things that probably seem very simple to you, it's not so simple for others.

15 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

If Ken moved the goalposts to an unprofitable level?

Can't see how that fits in with the current narrative. If KA is rushing to get a sale completed so he doesn't get booted out by moonshift, why risk it?

Anyway, thanks for the answers again. Signed up to the site to enter the conversation, not to discredit you. Does that mean I won't question what you say? No. 

On a separate note, would you expect many more twists and turns in these next couple of weeks, or do you think this is all settling down now with the Mystery Buyer?

Cheers.

Because he’s a greedy so and so 

2 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

Because he’s a greedy so and so 

And of that there can be no doubt...

59 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

I'm sorry but I've always worked on the basis that most folk are capable of understanding simple financial concepts when they are explained to them. You don't need to be Richard Osman to get your head round the difference between borrowing and equity or between a secured loan and an unsecured one. 

The first part of your statement is correct in so much as I understand borrowing, equity and secured/unsecured loans when it applies to my personal finances

What I cannot yet get my head around is when all this applies to a large business such as a football club and this myriad of companies (Inner Circle, Burnden Leisure, etc) and the web of loans, shares, etc

That said I’ve found that Howard’s replies are slowly making things clearer and I take the conclusions that he draws as valuable insights and conclusions that he’s come to rather than outright ITK statements

I wouldn’t expect you to understand the difference between a secondary-generalised or primary-generalised tonic-clonic seizure in epilepsy and why directing treatment at the AMPA receptor (particularly in the former) may be beneficial, even if you have a basic understanding of the genesis of epileptic seizures