Blumarble Capital Ltd.

It would seem this is the company that has put the money into Holdsworth bid in return for security of assets on the club and hotel - they are based in Essex.

Interestingly (or not interestingly at all unless you like stuff like this) Holdswoth signed the contract in his capacity as a Director of Burnden Leisure - but he is not yet shown as being appointed as a director - (probably just on the Steering Group then!)

The contract was signed on the 10th March.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


BluMarble Capital Limited is a UK domiciled company which focuses on advisory and trading solutions in the Equity Finance market. We offer investment solutions with the main focus on European equity derivative markets. Our extensive experience and flexibility provides a good foundation for BluMarble to deliver new and stimulating investment opportunities.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I'm just wondering what returns these investment companies are expecting. I envisage a period of serious austerity just for us to get back on an even keel so goodness knows how swingeing the cuts will have to be if they are expecting a ROI >10% per annum.

The plot thickens.....

None of this makes any sense to me.

How on earth can a third tier football club be viewed as an attractive investment opportunity?

Short of picking it up cheap, investing nowt and then selling anything that wasn't nailed down.

Odd....

Breadman wrote:The plot thickens.....

None of this makes any sense to me.

How on earth can a third tier football club be viewed as an attractive investment opportunity?

Short of picking it up cheap, investing nowt and then selling anything that wasn't nailed down.

Odd....

The only true way to make a good return is to invest and reach the first tier.

Does anyone know what percentage split of the ownership  does SS hold and how much by The Inner Circle Club?

Holdsworth and Anderson both have really weird faces.

Could this be significant in any way?

Does it make you feel uncomfortable?

inner circle   I picture some 2 bit cult who meet in a village hall.

"lifestyle.... coming soon"

wow can't wait.

One of the whispers I saw on the web recently was that we had defaulted already on the Blumarble loan but in keeping with the prevailing mood of many on here not wishing to hear negative speculation I decided to keep from posting it.

I note however this little snippet buried in the Stubbs not for manager story from Iles today -

Meanwhile, sources at the club have refuted claims the first payment on a loan taken out from BluMarble Capital Ltd during the takeover is now late.

The loan – which helped finance Sports Shield BWFC’s bid to buy the club from Eddie Davies – is secured against assets owned by Burnden Leisure Ltd and Bolton Wanderers Football and Athletic Company.

Ken Anderson and Dean Holdsworth have both given assurances the funding model passed by the Football League in March is sufficient to see the club through this season and next.

“We wouldn't have got through the Football League,” Anderson told The Bolton News. “The Football League asked us if we had enough to get through this season.

“Afterwards, before the approval, they wanted us to show where the funds were and prove those funds were available to get us through to next season.

“That puts us on level par with every other club – you're working one season ahead.”

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Breadman wrote:The plot thickens.....

None of this makes any sense to me.

How on earth can a third tier football club be viewed as an attractive investment opportunity?

Short of picking it up cheap, investing nowt and then selling anything that wasn't nailed down.

Odd....

Bredders, I won't blind you with science but the most attractive thing about the business are the tax losses.
If you own 75%+1 of the Ordinary shares you are a group for tax purposes and can transfer trading losses ( which are very substantial in BWFC) to other parts of the group (which are profitable) provided the tax loss making company continues to trade in the same business.
Tax law is seriously complicated but that is more often than not the reason for buying a business as apparently nonsensical as a football club

rammywhite wrote:

Breadman wrote:The plot thickens.....

None of this makes any sense to me.

How on earth can a third tier football club be viewed as an attractive investment opportunity?

Short of picking it up cheap, investing nowt and then selling anything that wasn't nailed down.

Odd....

Bredders, I won't blind you with science but the most attractive thing about the business are the tax losses.
If you own 75%+1 of the Ordinary shares you are a group for tax purposes and can transfer trading losses ( which are very substantial in BWFC) to other parts of the group (which are profitable) provided the tax loss making company continues to trade in the same business.
Tax law is seriously complicated but that is more often than not the reason for buying a business as apparently nonsensical as a football club

finally sense has been revealed ....
It's similar to groups of doctors buying strip mall here in America that stand empty for years...same with office buildings...they use them for tax write-offs against other profitable concerns.
No other theory to do with this take over makes any sense at IMO.

rammywhite wrote:

Breadman wrote:The plot thickens.....

None of this makes any sense to me.

How on earth can a third tier football club be viewed as an attractive investment opportunity?

Short of picking it up cheap, investing nowt and then selling anything that wasn't nailed down.

Odd....

Bredders, I won't blind you with science but the most attractive thing about the business are the tax losses.
If you own 75%+1 of the Ordinary shares you are a group for tax purposes and can transfer trading losses ( which are very substantial in BWFC) to other parts of the group (which are profitable) provided the tax loss making company continues to trade in the same business.
Tax law is seriously complicated but that is more often than not the reason for buying a business as apparently nonsensical as a football club

Yes, I can understand that but is Anderson's businesses paying what, say £6 million in a tax per year, to make his acquisition of Bolton worthwhile to do this?

A rhetorical question as I don't expect anyone to know his financial position.

Anderson has had a ban stopping him being a company director which has only recently been served and the only businesses he is listed as a director are the five linked BWFC businesses.

I know he has his own company Inner Circle and perhaps others too.

We know the club is making roughly £1 million per month loss until the end of June and let's say half a million per month for the next year (hence £6 million) so I don't know if or how he can transfer the loss to other parts of his 'group' and even if he could are they paying £6 million or more per year in tax to make everything worth his while?

He also resides in Switerland so I guess he does that for tax reasons more than liking of toblerone and would have thought he was already minimising his company tax liability as much as he could already.

I somehow can't believe he is already paying HMRC £6 million plus p.a. thus requiring him to take on a tax write off business such as our club.

You may well be right but it seems there most be easier controlled businesses to take over to do such a strategy than taking a punt on the car crash of a club such as we currently are.

Just my line of thinking.

I don't understand why they took us on either unless it's for the purposes of "asset stripping" for a quick buck then sell on what's left for a song, perhaps to sluffy's very favourite people

That may explain why the axe is falling so hard on backroom staff when they aren't the biggest overhead by a distance. We all know about the silly wage players we can't get rid of and it looks to me as if Ken and Dean are cutting costs everywhere else in a bid to fund those wages rather than try to find the money to simply pay them off. No, I don't pretend to know for sure if that's their motive but it seems pretty clear that they don't have the cash to truly trim the real deadwood and are having to cut elsewhere to compensate for it. I won't mention my personal bugbear, you all know what it is and why I think it's a bad thing.

However, if they're actually trimming down in a bid to simply steady the ship and they are actually looking to be here for the long term then this might just be the only way they can ride out the next couple of years without taking a massive bath or worse, sinking the club entirely in which case their approach may turn out to be the right one. I'm not optimistic on that front but think it's only fair to allow for the possibility.

Ken Anderson and Dean Holdsworth have fallen out (fact) the shit is not over yet.

Mr Magoo wrote:Ken Anderson and Dean Holdsworth have fallen out (fact) the shit is not over yet.

Shocking after a shotgun wedding at the courthouse!  Wonder what Deano's first investor who dropped out is thinking?

rammywhite wrote:

Breadman wrote:The plot thickens.....

None of this makes any sense to me.

How on earth can a third tier football club be viewed as an attractive investment opportunity?

Short of picking it up cheap, investing nowt and then selling anything that wasn't nailed down.

Odd....

Bredders, I won't blind you with science but the most attractive thing about the business are the tax losses.
If you own 75%+1 of the Ordinary shares you are a group for tax purposes and can transfer trading losses ( which are very substantial in BWFC) to other parts of the group (which are profitable) provided the tax loss making company continues to trade in the same business.
Tax law is seriously complicated but that is more often than not the reason for buying a business as apparently nonsensical as a football club

Am I not right in thinking that the principle behind group taxation is to fully utilise the tax allowances of the entire group?

If so, does that imply that Blumarble companies are not already fully utilising every bit of their allowance? That would be worrying in itself.

I suppose if you have a load of consultancy companies that work on high margins due to their relatively low cost base there would be room to pile some cost in, but is it really the case that trading losses in a football club can be ascribed to e.g. a tax consultancy? Wouldn't the tax consultancy have to demonstrate that they bought the crap players and therefore incurred the loss?

Or is it assumed that "the group" trades in everything and therefore can lose money wherever and however it likes?

wanderlust wrote:Am I not right in thinking that the principle behind group taxation is to fully utilise the tax allowances of the entire group?

If so, does that imply that Blumarble companies are not already fully utilising every bit of their allowance? That would be worrying in itself.

Blumarble has nothing to do with Anderson, they are the company that Holdsworth borrowed the money from to buy the club off Davies.

Anderson's private business is Inner Circle.

He doesn't appear to be a director in any company's in Britain other than the BWFC linked ones (Burnden Leisure, the hotel, etc).

In very simple lay terms (where I feel most comfortable operating for obvious reasons), the bit that's worrying me is as follows:

Our new owners needed to demonstrate to the FL that they had the funding in place to (A) acquire the club, (B) finance its daily running until the end of the season and (C) continue this through the summer, next season and beyond until August 2018.

The first bit is presumably complete - they bought the club. 

All well and good.

But.......

It appears that they did so with funding provided by Blumarble. (A mortgage against fixed assets.)

And it's now time to start repaying that loan.

But they're apparently struggling to meet their obligation and (if the rumours are true) are late with the very first repayment.

Hardly encouraging.

And when challenged about this by the BN, Anderson trots out a load of guff about how the FL are happy with the finances and wouldn't have sold the club to him if they weren't.

Yes, Kenneth.....you demonstrated that you had the initial capital to acquire the business but that's not the problem, is it?

Because you borrowed that money from Blumarble and are now struggling to repay it - that's the fucking problem, mate.

The FL's condition of sale that Anderson and the other fella whose name I've forgotten as a result of his apparent disappearance (Dean something, I think) provide ongoing monthly reports on the financial health of the club make even more sense now, in light of the fact that our new owners are in very real danger of defaulting on the very first fucking repayment.

But Anderson appears to think that sticking to the mantra that the FL are happy enough will reassure everyone, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Sluffy wrote:

rammywhite wrote:

Breadman wrote:The plot thickens.....

None of this makes any sense to me.

How on earth can a third tier football club be viewed as an attractive investment opportunity?

Short of picking it up cheap, investing nowt and then selling anything that wasn't nailed down.

Odd....

Bredders, I won't blind you with science but the most attractive thing about the business are the tax losses.
If you own 75%+1 of the Ordinary shares you are a group for tax purposes and can transfer trading losses ( which are very substantial in BWFC) to other parts of the group (which are profitable) provided the tax loss making company continues to trade in the same business.
Tax law is seriously complicated but that is more often than not the reason for buying a business as apparently nonsensical as a football club

Yes, I can understand that but is Anderson's businesses paying what, say £6 million in a tax per year, to make his acquisition of Bolton worthwhile to do this?

A rhetorical question as I don't expect anyone to know his financial position.

Anderson has had a ban stopping him being a company director which has only recently been served and the only businesses he is listed as a director are the five linked BWFC businesses.

I know he has his own company Inner Circle and perhaps others too.

We know the club is making roughly £1 million per month loss until the end of June and let's say half a million per month for the next year (hence £6 million) so I don't know if or how he can transfer the loss to other parts of his 'group' and even if he could are they paying £6 million or more per year in tax to make everything worth his while?

He also resides in Switerland so I guess he does that for tax reasons more than liking of toblerone and would have thought he was already minimising his company tax liability as much as he could already.

I somehow can't believe he is already paying HMRC £6 million plus p.a. thus requiring him to take on a tax write off business such as our club.

You may well be right but it seems there most be easier controlled businesses to take over to do such a strategy than taking a punt on the car crash of a club such as we currently are.

Just my line of thinking.

There are substantial tax losses at BWFC which have accumulated over many years and these are available for group relief now and also into the future. They're only ever lost if a business is wound up, ceases to exist so you can perhaps see why the club was 'rescued' an hour before it was declared dead in the High Court.. These tax losses could well prove to be the biggest asset the club has. Andersen's  personal position is actually irrelevant- the tax losses will go to any company which is part of a tax group- essentially the 75% rule. Andersen's group (or any group that he may in future sell to) don't have to use the losses immediately- they can be carried forward indefinitely  as long as the originator of the losses (that's BWFC) stays n the same trade. As long as they are a football club the losses can be used at any time. There is a flourishing market in loss making companies being sold for their accumulated trading losses which can be group relieved against the future profits of any corporate owner. So even if Andersen can't use them this year ,they can be used at any stage in the future but the rules indicate that you should use them as soon as possible, and it makes commercial sense to do so.
Sorry to be boring- but that's a major part of the financial jiggery-pokery that's others on here have alluded to in the past