It's happening. 

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

Thank fuck

2 minutes ago, MickyD said:

Isn't the reason folk employ an accountant all to get rid of "carelessness rather than anything else"?

Yes it is but mistakes do happen and its not unknown for accountants  to be supplied with duff/incomplete information.

Ken's accountant filed a document that wasn' t accurate too but it was corrected 2-3 months later.

In the Holdsworth case there were two incorrect documents, neither were corrected and one was reported as having been signed by Dean himself.

 

35 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

In the Holdsworth case there were two incorrect documents, neither were corrected and one was reported as having been signed by Dean himself.

Maybe being a fairly average footballer qualified him to be good at sums and other accounting skills...

 

But I doubt it.

1 hour ago, anewman said:

You wouldn't listen to me about gartside and co 

To be fair, it wasn’t just that.

15 minutes ago, MickyD said:

Maybe being a fairly average footballer qualified him to be good at sums and other accounting skills...

 

But I doubt it.

He has been quite successful at garnering some large sums for seemingly doing  very little - and not just at BWFC from the looks of it.

 

Edited February 27, 20197 yr by Chris Custodiet

Aye the fucker made a million quid by wearing a flat cap and ringing wonga.com

15 hours ago, wakey said:

Maybe time for my vague, largely irrelevant and uncorroborated non-story about our finances ...

Here goes. A couple of years ago I was in a conversation with two blokes, one a former FD at a premier league club and one a former chairman / CEO, again at a PL club. They were nattering about 'football people' they knew (for them, 'football people' meant directors, investors, types they'd bump into in boardrooms etc). I wasn't really in the conversation as the names meant nowt to me. Then a name came up - sorry, absolutely no idea who, and didn't mean anything at the time. Ex-CEO turned to me and said "he had a look at buying your lot".

He then made some comment - and sorry, it gets vaguer still as I can't remember exactly how he worded it - but it was along the lines of too many skeletons in the closet.

Largely based on that snippet, i've always thought that a big part of how we ended up with Holdsworth and Ken was because Holdsworth's thick and Ken hadn't had chance to look under the bonnet before sticking his 50p in.

 

 

Holdsworth's thick is he? You might try taking a look at the filed balance sheets of Sports Shield Ltd and Sports Shield Investments Ltd  and ask yourself how someone thick could amass so much, for so little in such a short time.

As for vague recollections about some bar room chatter, sorry but I'd need a bit more to go on than that.

GWB?

In the early part of the ED era PG was Chief Exec of a company.

He then worked one and a half days each week on BWFC business, and the club compensated the firm by £150k pa. 

ED decided he wanted PG as full time chairman, so £500k pa was the appropriate salary. It was a price ED was prepared to pay to have the man he wanted available full-time, rather than skipping off on outside business trips to China, Australia, Belgium, etc.

As for Panorama I always held the view the Redknapp was the intended target, but his lawyers (funded by Rosie) caused them to recut the episode.

Allardyce and Gartside were unconcerned before the broadcast and stitched up within it. BBC never did supply the evidence requested.

44 minutes ago, MalcolmW said:

In the early part of the ED era PG was Chief Exec of a company.

He then worked one and a half days each week on BWFC business, and the club compensated the firm by £150k pa. 

ED decided he wanted PG as full time chairman, so £500k pa was the appropriate salary. It was a price ED was prepared to pay to have the man he wanted available full-time, rather than skipping off on outside business trips to China, Australia, Belgium, etc.

As for Panorama I always held the view the Redknapp was the intended target, but his lawyers (funded by Rosie) caused them to recut the episode.

Allardyce and Gartside were unconcerned before the broadcast and stitched up within it. BBC never did supply the evidence requested.

Spot on, Malcolm. Before this programme went out there was evidence of friction between Gartside and Allardyce over how much Allardyce was able to spend. This was  controlled not by Garty but by ED but Garty took  the flack.

ED is bound to  have been infuriated by the programme and determined that the club should be as  squeaky clean as it was possible to make it. But  another effect would have been that  Allardyce and Gartside's differences are likely to have  been temporarily put to one side in the face of the BBC's pitiful assault on their own and the  club's reputation.

The idea that Garty would have risked everything,  incuding imprisonment, to make a secret profit like 'the three amigos' at Derby County seems to me to be quite delusional.

Edited February 27, 20197 yr by Chris Custodiet

Especially given nobody seems to have defined, or has any evidence for, what Gartside was supposedly up to.

I get where the initial skepticism around Eddie came from (a man with a relatively small, reported, net worth was chucking tens of millions at us). But Phil was on a nice earner to begin with.

The friction was mainly caused by Gartside banning Craig Allardyce from the ground because of the BBC allegations .Big Sams wife stopped attending in protest & the rift deepened from there culminating in the BSA exit.

Yet Ken can't pay himself a similar salary to PG without there being uproar?

6 minutes ago, Traf said:

Yet Ken can't pay himself a similar salary to PG without there being uproar?

 

PG wasn't paying himself, players were being paid on time, we weren't signing players and then having them taken back, he never tried to score points by claiming he wasn't being paid.

Take your pick.

33 minutes ago, Traf said:

Yet Ken can't pay himself a similar salary to PG without there being uproar?

Ken paid himself 525K from a season in the 3rd Division when i believe our TV revenue was around £1.5 Million. Our Tv revenue was over £40 million a season when Gartside was receiving that salary in the final seasons in the PL.A huge difference .ED reduced Gartside's wages when we were relegated

.

30 minutes ago, Take Hunt Off said:

The friction was mainly caused by Gartside banning Craig Allardyce from the ground because of the BBC allegations .Big Sams wife stopped attending in protest & the rift deepened from there culminating in the BSA exit.

I don't think I knew about  the 'banning Craig Allardyce' stuff. If I did I'd forgotten  but it would make sense that the board and owner would want to make absolutely sure that they wouldn't be exposed to any similar nonsense and that Garty was given the job of breaking the news to Big Sam. Hope he put his shinpads on first.

But the rift was there well before all that happened. There were the little matters of Sam's  shares becoming worthless when ED took over, the row before the League Cup Final against Boro and later Sam blaming Garty for the FA preferring Umbrellaman to him as England manager

 

46 minutes ago, Tombwfc said:

 

PG wasn't paying himself, players were being paid on time, we weren't signing players and then having them taken back, he never tried to score points by claiming he wasn't being paid.

Take your pick.

At the same time racking up £180m worth of debt and sending the club to near insolvency and which we are still paying the price now.

You can spin anything you want to

Edited February 27, 20197 yr by gonzo

Yeah - the panorama stuff heightened growing tensions within the club. PG was under pressure from Big Sam and ED. ED wanted to return to previous spending levels having just stumped up for Anelka and Meite and not all that long before Diouf. Big Sam wanted to accelerate.

Sam offered his resignation the summer before panorama but PG talked him out of it - promised him money for a "striker" and persuaded ED. Anelka was bought. 
Then Sam wanted more money in December and ED's position was - at what point do I stop paying for the manager to stay?

13 minutes ago, gonzo said:

At the same time racking up £180m worth of debt and sending the club to near insolvency and which we are still paying the price now.

You can spin anything you want to

 

Not really. I'd refer all that to point one - PG didn't own the club. Whether he was good enough at his job, or worth his money, wasn't his call.

1 hour ago, Traf said:

Yet Ken can't pay himself a similar salary to PG without there being uproar?

He can, but he shouldn't then pretend for ages that he doesn't

Fuck me the moral nonsense written on here at times defies belief

PG rode the crest of a wave, spunked money left right and centre. We all know that. We’re still feeling the affects of that now. We also all know that. No one got any debts on here? Anyone had or know anyone who have had their houses repossessed? It goes on. People spend money the way they shouldn’t 

KA unfortunately for him inherited the shit PG left behind. Without having the financial clout to do so. Anyone paid their bills late? Anyone been in a situation where you’ve had to pay one bill before another? Again, it goes on. It’s fucking life. Whether it’s a bill at home / business or fucking football club 

simple fact of the matter is, the club is still here and fingers crossed starting an upward curve again. Would you rather the club still be here and go through what it has or not be here at all but other companies you have no loyalty, Affiliation or love for be nice and comfortable with Their money in the bank we gave them. To our detriment 

everyone knows the journey, the troubles, the near misses. Stop fucking wallowing in them and embrace the one small positive bit of news we have yearned for for years 

Irrespective of the league we were in, the club still needs running and Ken has been doing it pretty much singlehandedly.

PS What was Garty drawing in the Championship?

3 minutes ago, Traf said:

Irrespective of the league we were in, the club still needs running and Ken has been doing it pretty much singlehandedly.

which makes it all the stranger as to why he'd pretend (lie) that he wasn't getting paid for running it

not to be trusted that one

11 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said:

which makes it all the stranger as to why he'd pretend (lie) that he wasn't getting paid for running it

not to be trusted that one

Hes not been paid, the company he owns has been paid, they may look the same but they are not, so Bolton have not paid him ( truth) , now what nobody has asked him was how much the company he owns ( which was paid) paid him, that's the question you need to ask or try and find out

Edited February 27, 20197 yr by tyldesley_white

2 hours ago, Take Hunt Off said:

The friction was mainly caused by Gartside banning Craig Allardyce from the ground because of the BBC allegations .Big Sams wife stopped attending in protest & the rift deepened from there culminating in the BSA exit.

I thought he was knobbing his wife?

9 minutes ago, tyldesley_white said:

Hes not been paid, the company he owns has been paid, they may look the same but they are not, so Bolton have not paid him ( truth) , now what nobody has asked him was how much the company he owns ( which was paid) paid him, that's the question you need to ask or try and find out

you know that the official accounts clearly state he got paid?

"During the year K Anderson, via Inner Circle Sports & Media received £525,000 in consultancy fees"

and you know he then finally confirmed this himself in that email he sent to the fans?

"The Club did not pay me consultancy fees of £525,000 in 2017. This spanned 2016 and 2017 and included promotion bonuses."

so, I think that one has been cleared up, by the man himself (and his accounts)