It's happening. 

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

Thank fuck

Ken says no administration 

14 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

I think it’s 50/50 at this stage 

Do you think a deal will be done before next court date though Howard

Can't see that anyone else has posted this.  It is worth a read about what new owners are letting themselves in for.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47691385

Rovers lost £17.5m in L1 last season

17 Championship clubs who have reported so far have losses totalling £366m,  with Fulham, Sunderland, Sheffield Wednesday, Brentford, Derby and Bolton still to report 

Were ok, KA said we're set to make a small profit

2 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said:

Were ok, KA said we're set to make a small profit

After expenses....

58 minutes ago, Chrisj said:

Do you think a deal will be done before next court date though Howard

Yes

5 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

Yes

Howard I asked earlier do you know who the bidders are ? 

And is UK based accurate ? 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47691385

look at bristol city .. 

no ones querying their future once their owner goes away. the words bristol city arent even mentoned in the article. amongst all the bar graphs and total lack of top flight football in the recent past. 

fucking hell its only five minutes ago when people were bucket shaking for brighton (at doncasters expense , who BTW were being fucked over by a crook at the time) because they got to an fa cup final once. 

Also wanna put this here-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_(British_football) 

look at the amount of teams . 

I'm not really sure what my point is , but this focus on bolton seems funny, when theyve slept on (or cheerleaded for) the likes of brighton , bristol city at various times in the past. 

bolton have been in the shit moneywise for ages now, why these various economic thinkpieces now ?

I didnt give a fuck when Jay Jay were strolling round everyone , dont really give a crap now, sudden scaremongery from various quarters must mean a billionaire is coming.. 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, Ani said:

Howard I asked earlier do you know who the bidders are ? 

And is UK based accurate ? 

I think Howard is getting a bit sick of answering that question, if he /she knew I don't think it would be wise to disclose at this stage 

2 minutes ago, darrener said:

I think Howard is getting a bit sick of answering that question, if he /she knew I don't think it would be wise to disclose at this stage 

Eh ? 

16 minutes ago, Ani said:

Howard I asked earlier do you know who the bidders are ? 

And is UK based accurate ? 

The people that need to know; know 

Yes UK based is accurate

7 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

The people that need to know; know 

Yes UK based is accurate

Cheers. 

1 hour ago, TrickyTrotter said:

Can't see that anyone else has posted this.  It is worth a read about what new owners are letting themselves in for.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47691385

Rovers lost £17.5m in L1 last season

17 Championship clubs who have reported so far have losses totalling £366m,  with Fulham, Sunderland, Sheffield Wednesday, Brentford, Derby and Bolton still to report 

Thanks for pointing this out - just had a read 

Just looking at the graph of Bolton players costs as a % of income is pretty scary stuff  

 

 

We may be lucky and get  bought out just in time , but there are only a finite number of  people with the means to invest in football clubs and the wider this  income divide between premiership and championship clubs grows , its surely only  a matter of time before some club goes to the wall 

From our perspective a couple of years in league one might prove to be a godsend  in the long run 

 

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

Edited March 26, 20197 yr by Chris Custodiet

4 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

I've read some mental things from you in the past but you've reached a new level with that

6 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

 

Because this is where the true believers hang out?

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/17526317.bolton-west-mp-wades-into-wanderers-ownership-issue/

44 minutes ago, Kane57 said:

I've read some mental things from you in the past but you've reached a new level with that

I was really thinking about takeover negotiations but if I change the word usually to frequently would you like to expand on any other bits you think are incorrect?

Edited March 26, 20197 yr by Chris Custodiet

38 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

Maybe he doesn't do Facebook or Twitter? 

As we're all guessing, maybe Howard looked at Facebook, Twitter and a load of other forums, before deciding this was the most balanced/reasoned?

Even when people disagree on here, they explain why. (before offering a straightener, of course)

57 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

Well, why the fuck are you on here??? There must be a reason. You left once but decided to return - why was that? I think it may be because yes, there are conflicting views about everything that's going on but there aren't the mindless levels of shite that you find on FB/Twitter. There are also many reasoned comments amongst all the tits & banter that you'll find wherever guys congregate, whether they be accountants, PR's, teachers, brickies etc. So fucking patronising of you...

Ww is what, 20 years old? Please don’t come on here after all these years and tell us how to run our site. If you don’t like it, log off and head elsewhere.

1 minute ago, Carlos said:

Ww is what, 20 years old? Please don’t come on here after all these years and tell us how to run our site. If you don’t like it, log off and head elsewhere.

Interesting that we're still on rude words being auto-changed. 

Fuck

Fuck

No, maybe not. 

1 hour ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

I guarantee that once the takeover saga is complete, we’ll hardly ever hear from you.

You chose WW to vomit your nonsense onto, I assume because you’ve clocked that the debate is fairly level headed and reasonable, and you got a bit sick of the us va them mentality of twitterbook.

 

1 hour ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

If you are asking why someone would not use Facebook or twitter to have a debate you are not as clever as you think you are. 

This site has extremes but as a result is overall balanced I think. Plenty have disliked KA from day one. Current view seems to be he was the only option but as something else is on the horizon he can move on and won’t be missed. 

Same probably applies to you.